|
I don't understand the last sentence at all, but....
This is certainly something under contention. I think it makes perfect sense that the average temperature of the Earth has fluctuated, historically, and there's no reason to think it would be stable now.
At the same time, human input into the ecosystem can't be having NO impact. There's been lots of research to demonstrate that our pollution is contributing to global warming.
Then you have to wonder about the anti-warming camp's political motives. It seems clearly economical in nature. Big business wants to deny that global warming is happening, or that it will have the impact that it is alledged to have, because that would render them vulnerable to lawsuits and liability and force them to change to less profitable products and means of production. They've pumped lots of money into their buddies in Washington to keep the nation's official head in the sand. So I'm automatically skeptical about anything that bucks the standard, scientifically accepted understanding of warming and its causes.
|