I wouldnt say propaganda so much as spin.  Notice that the BBC concentrates on one data set and not the one from the CRU.  Nobody is saying warming is impossible, or at least I am not saying that; I am rather saying that the proponents of AGW have attempted to stifle debate and marginalize dissent.  If nothing else that is intellectually dishonest.  That is why the revelations from the hacked emails are so important.  They represent a “got you” moment, some of the most prominent GW proponents just got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and now they are trying to say well, my hand was in there but I wasn't going to take anything.  I would not believe my kid and I dont believe them.I would be curious to know how they deduce temperature from air bubbles in Antarctic ice?  I would guess it has something to do with the size of the bubble.  Another problem I have with GW is that the levels of annual change they are talking about are within the probability of error of their models yet they want us to spend trillions to fight what could very well be a statistical flaw.  I don't understand that either.  There is anything but finality in the realm of climate science.  Actions as highlighted in this email scandal show that the skeptics were right to be skeptical all along.  The onus is not on the dissenters to prove righteousness in this case it is the GW proponents to show it.

Good, before we give up the technological advances and prosperity we have achieved; their should be no question of whether the books have been cooked.  The emails indicate that there is a possibility of fraud, it should be investigated.  The GW crowd is asking us to drastically alter the way we live and now we find out that the data they base their predictions on may have been manipulated.  I don?t think we should do anything until this scandal is cleared up.Would you buy a house if you just found out that the contractor may have been using toxic materials because they were cheaper?  A better analogy is contemplating investing a large proportion of your income in an investment fund that you have just discovered may be a ponzi scheme.  Is either a smart thing to do?The GW crowd is counting on their “sky is falling rhetoric” to get everybody to drive off the cliff without due diligence.

This is hilarious: Tempers Flare In Climate Change Flap  Be sure to watch the video clips, very funny.This story is pretty good too: UN climate chief: hacked e-mails are damaging

I like how they dismiss the “Medieval Warm Period”, most climatologists attempt to ignore it because it does not into their models.  There is unequivecal evidence that it happened though.  If i were faced with an “inconvenient truth” in Al gore's memorable phrase I would try to downplay it too.My argument stands, before we commit to spending trillions we dont have lets have a FULL and OPEN debate.  We have not had one yet.

EPA regulation of exhaust gases as a public health risk under the Clean Air Act is a back door way of imposing caps because they know it will not pass Congress or if it does there will be some congressman looking for work.  I honestly think that cap-and-trade scares Congress because I really do thin it will damage the economy if implemented.  Nobody wants to be that congressman that voted to essentially eliminate jobs from their home district.  If anything we need to strengthen the economy and cut spending to get federal debt under control.

I am going to have to dig up a “the polar bears are all going to die” article to counter that with. ;DSpeak of the devil, this is what Google came up with

Results 1 – 10 of about 11,300,000 for polar bears and climate change. (0.27 seconds)

  This one is good: Climate change driving polar bears to cannibalism, the ice is not just going to melt and destroy their habitat, it will melt, destroy their habitat, and drive them to cannibalism.  Can it get much more alarmist than that?