 I was down in Washington not that long ago talking to the staff of an important congressional committee. Which committee? Which party? Doesn't matter. The bright young lawyer looked at me and said, I didn't take science in college. I don't know science. I don't like science. But I know that you're wrong about your science because global warming is based on a hockey stick and it's broken. The hockey stick she referred to is a history of climate change showing recent rapid warming that's been confirmed multiple times and really isn't broken, nor is it the basis of global warming. And so my answer to her was no. Actually global warming is based on physics. It's physics that's been known for more than a century. It's physics that's confirmed every day and it's physics that was really worked out by the Air Force right after World War II. Not for climate, but for things such as sensors on heat seeking missiles. And in some real sense if you deny the warming influence of the CO2 from our fossil fuels, you're claiming that the Air Force doesn't know what kind of sensor to put on a heat seeking missile. The discussion we had after that was absolutely fascinating. Now it's certainly true that not all aspects of the global warming story are as solid as those physics of radiation in the atmosphere. So let's go look at the parts that are solid and see where they start to get speculative or where they start to get arguable.