Scm, I'm curious how you decide what's a credible source and what is not. You obviously do a ton of research on the web. How do you decide that the staff at sites like preventdisease.com, scottthong.com, whatsupwiththat.com, and the naturalnews.com are credible while others are not? What criteria do you use to reach the conclusion that climatologists or NOAA are liars? This isn't meant to sound snarky. I'm genuinely curious how you decide that website X has it right while the others are part of a conspiracy.

By the way, the topic of climate change and your argument get muddled when you (and others) bury the thread with references to food supply, oil supply, magnetic fields, democracy vs. a republic, etc.