Shall I take the words "Bullshit removed" to mean that you don't have a suitable counter argument? The things that you first commented on are basic facts. Everybody in the developed world should know that without the greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere the earth would be uninhabitable. At the same time everybody should know that if the concentration of greenhouse gases, particularly methane, was greatly increased the earth would get too hot to sustain life. The question is what happens for somewhat smaller changes, or looking it in another way, what change in greenhouse gas is sufficiently large?

The comments on political choice under uncertainty by no means common knowledge but are by no means "bullshit".

As far as who should make the decisions on what actions should be taken, it unfortunately comes down to a political choice. Our politicians should be making choices based on some reasonable understanding of the issue at hand. That choice consider the economic case by examining the stochastic cost of greenhouse gas emissions and the cost of action. Obviously Al Gore should not have decision making power given the nature of his stance on the issue.

I don't understand the "get to work" comments. There are a number of complicated processes that we have a limited understanding of. Certainly even an economist's understanding of economics is quite limited. At the same time I am willing to bet you have made comments about economic topics. By the same token you should devote your whole life to the study of economics until you understand it completely.