In response to your earlier comment, I thought that I'd explain a bit more about what my talk will cover.
Primarily, I'll be discussing the multiple benefits that increasing energy efficiency, a switch to low-carbon energy, and…"
As a Holocene sedimentologist, who has seen the record of the past before my eyes, I can't accept that any changes occurring now are significantly different, and certainly not more severe, than changes that have happened long before the first oil well was drilled in Pennsylvania.
One discussion I don't hear is what is better for the world, a warmer general climate, or a colder general climate. If you look at human history, periods of warmer general climate were the most productive, whereas the colder periods were frought (sp?) with dispair.
If the National Academy of Science is so convinced of man's effects, then why hasn't the rate of global sea level rise (which has been rising, along with global temperatures, for the past ~18,000 years) increased during the past 50 years? (and I'm talking about the RATE of rise; temperature and sea level have both been rising; the media and other AGW proponents love to talk about global warming and sea level rise as if it's a new thing that MUST be due to man) Global sea level is the best indication of global temperature, since sea level responds to both melt water input from melting ice caps, and thermal seawater expansion. Both of these factors should have dramatically increased during the past 50 years, if the man-caused global warming theory is correct. Why do you think they cry about "climate change" now? It's all too obvious it's political/financial/power driven.
Everyone is for reducing energy use, and decreasing air pollution. What I, and millions do not appreciate, is the false fear mongering associated with the virtually disproven "man-made global warming" theory. As I said in my earlier comment, it is no accident that "man-made global warming" has been changed to "climate change", or just "global warming" (which, as I reminded everyone earlier, has been happening for ~18,000 years). What really bothers me is that science used to be about seeking truth (which is why I earned a PhD). But now, just as journalism has strayed from "reporting the truth", and changed to "reporting what we want you to know, or reporting in a way we can alter your views", science has also strayed, with politics and philosophy (religion when speaking about "global warming/climate change") controlling much of the "science".
Fortunately for the internet (at least when not censored), the truth is getting out about this, and a whole host of left-wing efforts. The recent election is just the start of a turn toward the right, and what is right, and what is true.