In a day and age when the majority of news casts, political debates and personal conversation involve some type of Global Warming talk, be it based on believing or discrediting the entire idea, I have often wonder if it really matters if its real or not. Should we, as responsible people, simply lower our consumption to insure that the human species can continue to thrive?

With the rising fuel prices, it would seem logical to slow our use of the product to make sure that we can continue to heat our homes, commute to work and travel internationally.

Not to mention that a decrease in consumption and the subsequent cut back on emissions would immediately have added benefits: less smog, more transit systems, lower inflation rates, less debt, etc.

Add in the fact that Global Warming, although far from 100% accurate, just might be occurring. If any of the so called alarmists are correct, we would actually be taking the first step to preventing the current fears of widespread climate change, airborne disease and starvation.

On the chance that we continue the status quo and the world manages to right the weather and climate anomalies that it has been experiencing without widespread problems, as forcasted by the "Alarmists" we would simply be proving them wrong. The unreasonable natural resource management would, on the other hand, undoubtedly create more out of control inflation, lower standards of living and widespread fuel shortages.

War would likely continue. Its hard to imagine that countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and even Canada would not become the focus of several oil seeking nations as supplies wear thin around the globe.

So, I am curious why so many people continue their quest to prove the global warming alarmists wrong, when the suggested changes we must make to our lifestyles would likely only increase standards of living around the globe?