>>>A popular misconception, implied in the movie An Inconvenient Truth, is that global sea levels will rise 20 feet by the end of the century.
>>>
>>>Fortunately, that isn't even remotely true.
>>
>>I think they mentioned "could".
>
>And yet, they really can't. At least not by the end of the century. Yet they wanted to leave that impression in people's minds.
>
>I dislike scare tactics. Especially scare tactics that aren't based on science.

But it seems to me to be real tough to base it on science as it is known.

For example, it is well accepted that the planet has had numerous cooling/heating cycles in the past. But do we know the rate of those changes... guesses at best.
There's little doubt in my mind that the number of cars/trucks, as just 1 example, is higher than the population of dinosaurs was at any one time. Else we'd find dinosaur fossils everywhere we looked. So what happens to these natural cycles when their former dis-equalibrium is radically changed? How do we know that .0002% increase in CO2 isn't a huge impacter? The models seem to suggest it has impact different than raw numbers would lead to.
Do you trust models as "science"? If not, why not... weather reporting is getting better because of models, way back in 1980 or so the space shuttle flew and LANDED based on models, Mars landings happen because models are so good, etc.

What part of the clamour is not based on science?... Or do you mean science that you choose to differ with and so call it something else (voodoo?)?