Sure, I didn't provide proof that many polluters scoot around regulations (though the Climax mine outside of Leadville, Colorado has maintained a skeleton crew to stay open despite mining operations being dicontinued in the late '80s because maintaining a skeleton crew is cheaper than the clean up required by regulations set by the EPA - which just is a political tool more than an effective organization anyway), but you can't deny the logic of my statement about potentialities of not acting to stop or slow global warming. Either way, you and I are no experts in the fields of climatology, glaciology, biology, or probably any other -ology. I'd rather, in this matter with so very much at stake, play it safe and live on a cleaner planet, then live as though climate change isn't happening and then decades from now find out that I was wrong. What kind of legacy would that leave about us for our descendents? What kind of world would we be leaving them? And just ask yourself: what possible motives do scientists have to claim that global warming is happening? Wealth? Fame? Really, because most of them are professors or research scientists, and even when they write a book about their research they don't make much money nor do they become very famous. Can you name a scientist that would fit that example, cause I can name thousands that don't. And what possible motives do oil companies, Saudi and other Arab businessmen, Republican and corrupt politicians, among many others whose livelihoods and wealth are connected with the fossil fuel industry have to deny it? Stay wealthy. Stay in business. From my perspective their interests are enough to rationalize the possible permanent harm they are doing to our planet and each of us and our descendents. It wouldn't be the first time that an industry has denied any part or responsibility in the harm its caused just so it can continue to generate wealth.