The case for globalism/globalization is made in the open all the time. Capitalists make the economic case, and people like me make the political case. I think we both are right. I'm for international cooperation and free trade. They work best together.

The global warming debate is pretty much over from a scientific perspective. There's always the possibility that the scientific consensus is wrong, but it seems highly unlikely at this point. The scientists are telling it like they see it; your view that they're all lying because they're closet Communists is wacko. The very few dissenters are honest too; I just think they are mistaken. There is certainly no financial incentive to side against the oil industry, so we can discard that screwy theory.

The political GW debate is really just beginning. Now that we know it's happening, what, if anything, should we do about it? I'm not one of those who thinks we're all doomed if we don't listen to Al Gore, and that if we do, we're saved. If you read the IPCC report, you can see that even reducing emissions radically (and that's not going to happen) will not stop warming. Doing nothing at all about the issue means a much warmer Earth, but hardly an inferno. For sure, there will be changes that humanity will endure due to climate change, even if greenhouse gases have nothing to do with GW. The question for today's governments (and only government can deal effectively, if anything can, with problems like this) is what to do about it? The IPCC and I think that we ought to try to do what we reasonably can to limit greenhouse gas emissions, because that will slow GW a little bit. This is just intelligent energy policy anyway, because we'd be conserving fossil fuels and limiting pollution. No one is asking for actual reductions in standards of living, so your prattling about making people poor and miserable is just hysteria.

The second thing we need is to prepare for the disasters and benefits that GW is likely to promote. The slow relentless rise in sea levels will displace tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of people, in places like Bangladesh, New Orleans, China, Indonesia, and all over the world. With time and cooperation, we can handle this without massive loss of life. Tropical disease vectors are already spreading north. Rainfall patterns are changing, some for the better and others for the worse. There is reason to hope that vast tracts of steppe and tundra could become productive farmland. Maybe we'll finally get that Northwest Passage that explorers were always looking for. There will be a hundred other challenges, and humanity will be able to meet them better if it can cooperate.

I understand your fears that cooperation will mean a partial loss of sovereignty for the US and other nations. I don't think this loss will be significant enough to cause any hardship here, and the cooperation it allows may save a lot of lives here and elsewhere. The benefits to us will outweigh the costs. If it proves otherwise, we can always withdraw from the treaties or agreements.