Bill,

I'm sure you'll tell me if I'm wrong, but the "Inconvenient Truth" speculation about rising sea levels goes something simply like this:

If all ice on the globe was melted, the seas would rise by X.

But then, nobody is calling for all the ice on the globe to melt.

The movie also implies through its video editing that the rise would be tsunami-like. It does this by showing video of huge breaking waves crashing in on an unprepared land-mass.

But even if I allowed that all the melt would occur and cause the predicted rise -- it would not happen in tsunami-like manner, rushing down and up from the poles instantaneously. The melt would occur (as what has happened so far) over such a period of years that rise would be gradual.

A gradual rise wouldn't have made good, dramatic film footage, nor good propaganda.

Furthermore, the notion that all the ice would melt is not what science is predicting anyway. I don't know any science that has concluded that the warming that is occurring is going to result in ALL the ice to melt -- no cold poles -- summer vactions at the Antarctic beach house.

But even if it did, again, not all of it would rush to the sea -- not even on the Antarctic. Much of the water would still likely remain land-locked much as our glacier-made lakes in N. America.

And you can't have it both ways. If we are the principle cause of global warming, then our contribution will not remain a constant. Our use of hydrocarbon fuels would necessarily decrease with a warming.

But, again, pointing out that probablilty didn't fit the political agenda of the movie.

Bill, which of the scientists is predicting that we will become another Venus as Don suggests? Because unless you agree with Don, I'd like to see some of your outrage directed his way in your demand for "science".