Over many months, I have consulted actively researching and publishing climate scientists. One such is Gerald Meehl, PhD., at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

Meehl led other scientists from Climate Central, the Weather Channel, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in research published just last December. Using data from 1,800 stations from 1950 through 2009, they charted record high and low temperatures in the U.S. for each decade. The continental U.S. comprises about 1.7 pct. of the planet's surface, but what the study found may surprise those who thought recent cooler weather here refuted global warming.

In the 1950's record-setting warm days were only slightly more common than record setting cold days. In the 60's and 70's record cold days dominated warm days by about 20 percent. However, beginning in the 80's a significant shift toward more record setting warm days was clear. For the decade ending in 2009, record warm days outnumbered cold ones more than 2 to 1. Climate Central's Claudia Tebaldi, one of the co-authors, predicts that "we will keep setting more record highs."

Do remember that global warming and weather are different. Weather focuses on short term phenomena.

"One of the messages of this study is that you still get cold days," says Meehl. "Winter still comes. Even in a much warmer climate, we're setting record low minimum temperatures on a few days each year. But the odds are shifting so there's a much better chance of daily record highs instead of lows." Overall, the trend is a warmer planet. The study is published in the peer-reviewed journal Geophysical Research Letters.

How'd it get so political? A good headline might be "Denier bull works to gore Al." The former Vice-President, Academy Award and Nobel Prize winner has a handicap. He's not a credentialed climate scientist; he's a politician and a famous Democrat. All of that makes him a handy target for denialists and slick anti-regulatory corporate think tanks.

I telephoned Texas state climatologist, Dr. Nielsen-Gammon . I saw he had reviewed Gore's "Inconvenient Truth." in the Geojournal (Feb. 2008). But first, as a dedicated Jayhawk, I offered condolences for KUs nail-biter basketball win over the Aggies this season . "Next time we have to shoot better," he chuckled.

Then I asked him point blank, "Well, what about the over-whelming scientific consensus that global warming is here, related to human activities, and a significant problem. Is that consensus 'unraveling' among climate scientists--as economics professor Walter E. Williams, front man for anti-regulatory Koch Industries, alleged in his Feb. 24 column?"

'No," the State Climatologist with a PhD from MIT said, "I'd say it has stayed pretty steady."

Of Gore's film, Neilsen-Gammon had written, "The main scientific argument presented in the movie is for the most part consistent with the weight of scientific evidence, but with some of the main points needing updating, correction, or qualification." The film, he said, may have omitted some data "...perhaps because such information would be difficult for a lay audience to grasp, believe, or connect with emotionally." Public ignorance and political bias open wide the door to junk propaganda.

In "An Inconvenient Truth" Nielsen-Gammon found "widely accepted and scientifically valid" the following: (1) human activity can affect global climate, (2) CO2 is increasing "relentlessly" because of human activity, (3) global warming is visible in melting glaciers, (4) rapid Artic warming clearly indicates global warming, (5) the rate of warming could increase rapidly through ocean currents, and (6) ecological systems are changing--one effect of which facilitates the spread of disease organisms. In addition to his role as state climatologist, Nielsen-Gammon is also a research scientist in A&M's Dept. of Atmospheric Science.

The editors of the journal summed it up: "...Al Gore's campaign [is] to educate citizens about global warming and inspire them to take action. The [reviewers] in GeoJournal agree that ["An Inconvenient Truth"] does an excellent job of raising public awareness of man-made global warming and explains why increased atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases lead to warming."

Next, I'll be reviewing Univ. of Calif, San Diego Prof. Naomi Oreskes' new book, "Merchants of Doubt" connecting the dots to expose those behind the denial campaign. Readers with broadband internet can view a brief presentation by Oreskes here. I recommend also the website www.skepticalscience.com which pokes holes in the most common denialist claims.

Barring the arrival of a gigantic asteroid, the planet will certainly survive global warming; we arrogant humans, however, are likely to face big problems.