parsing palin's language

Palin offered a few more clues last night on her position on climate change, although she spoke so generally as to not really say much at all.
In response to Gwen Ifill's question, Palin first acknowledged that the climate was changing. Then she said she's "not one to attribute every man -- activity of man to the changes in climate." (Isn't that backwards?) "There is something to be said also for man's activities, but also for the cyclical temperature changes on our planet," Palin said.
Biden was more direct. "The cause is man-made. That's the cause. That's why the polar icecap is melting," he said.
Taken simply at face value, I bet most scientists would be more comfortable with Palin's conclusion -- at least here in Alaska, it's pretty clear that cyclical patterns are playing a significant role in the recent warming. But in the context of the climate "debate," Palin's language signifies skepticism of the current scientific understanding while Biden's signifies trust in it.
Palin also echoed the idea she offered to Katie Couric, namely that the causes don't matter so much as the solutions. But those solutions don't make sense without an acknowledgement of the causes, and Palin's subsequent statements demonstrated that she at least sees human activities as a factor in climate change. Palin said she supports capping emissions of greenhouse gases and wants to ensure that other countries are also subject to caps. "We've got to reduce emissions," she said.
Andy Revkin at the NY Times had some good points on the vagueness of both candidates' comments on cap-and-trade legislation and "clean coal."