discussions on weather and climate change once made for those mundane, boring generalities that adorn undistinguished conversations. For the cognoscenti today, however, talking about climate change is savvy. But it is certainly much more than just an important item on the intellectual menu. It figures prominently on the agenda of scientists, politicians, industrialists and environmentalists.

The science of climate change is frustratingly complex and still uncertain. Proponents of global warming may seize upon events like the breaking off of a huge iceberg in Antarctica as unambiguous warming signals, but these do not really allow for an unequivocal interpretation. The unusually severe winter in the us last year has been cited as an example by both proponents and opponents of global warming as evidence supporting their contentions. Besides, debates at international fora easily show that one reason behind this matter becoming bitter is that climate change is also a political issue: at the end of the day, it will boil down to the affluent Northern countries making drastic changes in their lifestyles and paying up for their past activities if the proponents of global climate change are proved right.

With more evidence pouring in, the dissenting voices are becoming feebler. The scientific jury seems more or less persuaded that much of the current warming is engineered by human-generated greenhouse gases (ghg). The Geneva-based Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ipcc) , a un body set up in 1988, has argued that current warming "is unlikely to be entirely natural in origin' and that the "balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate'.

Whether the globe is really becoming warmer is a fundamental doubt that will only be cleared with more evidence