Dave wrote:

I'm sorry if I've touched a nerve here. This is a subject which
requires serious debate, and firm adherence to scientific method.
Faith, emotion and excuse me, propaganda will not do.

Try empircism.

No, widespread acceptance is not proof, regardless of the credentials
or peer status of those accepting.

So far so good.

Nor is proof in the gathering or display of data. Proof is different.
It is demonstrable, repeatable, and consistent.

No, proof is absolute, as in mathematical.

As for my grip on reality Gentlemen, it's one thing to prove the
thermodynamics of CO2 in the lab,

Please feel free to point out where thermodynamics has been proven.

quite another to extrapolate the
results to the entire globe and follow by scrapping the internal
combustion engine (in case that's what we're really talking about).

Sure, we are talking about electrolysis and catalysis, and the
demonstrated circumvention of Carnot efficiency restrictions.

Once upon a time classical mechanics was 'proven' to be absolute.

Then came 1905. Now it's 2005. Heat engines are so passe'.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../electrol.html

http://cosmic.lifeform.org