The similarities between the anti-evolution movement and the forces of climate-change denial increase by the day. The latest example comes from the South Dakota Legislature, which has called for a "balanced" approach to state teaching about climate change. It's obvious that some state legislators are abusing notions of fairness to advance an unbalanced view of the enduring scientific consensus on climate change.

"Carbon dioxide," the resolution declares, "is not a pollutant." Someone should tell that to the Supreme Court -- that bastion of unhinged crunchy-granola types -- which instructed the Environmental Protection Agency in 2007 to find that carbon dioxide is just that.

South Dakota schools, the resolution continues, should instruct students that "global warming is a scientific theory rather than a proven fact" and that a number of factors, including "astrological" ones, can "effect (sic) world weather phenomena."

A healthy sense of doubt is important in any scientific inquiry, particularly when it comes to predicting precise climate outcomes resulting from very complicated Earth systems. But it's the big picture that matters -- and the big picture is pretty concerning, with high probabilities of serious, if not finely predictable, consequences if we do nothing. Even many skeptics of the scientific consensus won't dispute that the Earth's climate is changing, often arguing instead about what's to blame.

On that second point, the arguments many make often revolve around small-bore distractions, such as the "Climategate" e-mail controversy or the recent questions over very particular predictions in the International Panel on Climate Change's 2007 climate report. Yet there is no argument that rising levels of carbon in a finely balanced atmosphere won't affect climate.

The resolution amounts to a smoke screen meant to confuse South Dakota students into doubting the science more than is warranted by the small chance the science is wrong.