One candidate denies the reality of global warming, the other agrees it's important but not top priority. I want them to specify what would have to happen or what would they have to find out that would make them realize it is top priority. If no amount of evidence would do it, then they need to admit this, because that would mean that they place short term political gain over even the most enormous tragedy.

2. Climate Change. The Earth’s climate is changing and there is concern about the potentially adverse effects of these changes on life on the planet. What is your position on the following measures that have been proposed to address global climate change—a cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax, increased fuel-economy standards, or research? Are there other policies you would support?

Since most Americans will now finally admit they believe in global climate change. The issue has now moved to, why is the climate changing? Is it simply part of the earth’s natural cycle of warming and cooling and nothing can be done to reverse it? Or is it somehow related to human activity and can be reversed, if it is not too late? Either way the change is happening. Do we just fend for ourselves and hope insurance companies will pay for flooded property on the inundated coasts, tornadoes in the Midwest and all other unforeseen disasters.

Global warming has historic precedents (a few ice ages, etc.,). So, It's probably not fair to suggest that the current global warming trend is entirely caused by human action. Still, the growth in population and creation of pollutants by man's activities in the last century have been significant. It is difficult to believe, then, that no part of the current global warming trend is not caused by man's activities.

The point is, of course, that by preferring the views of amateurs on global warming to those acquired over decades of research by 98% of the world's climate scientists, many of our politicians are effectively opting for the plumber.