Like it or not that’s what your hero Bush treats science like, along with a significant portion of the Republican party.

A claim of certainty implies a claim of exactitude. I’m not aware of anyone who claims that for any climate model. Secondly, you claim a whole lot of scientists disagree on the existence of AGW. Really? How many is a lot and who are they? How many do they number compared to those who do agree that AGW is taking place? Someone who posts with a nom de plume and makes bad arguments on a hyper-conservative web site like American Thinker just isn’t that persuasive. His entire post is nothing but generalized BS. The basic physics that he made fun of is in fact basic physics that then feeds into a complex system. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It helps the Earth retain heat. We are pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. Measurements show that CO2 levels are increasing. Measurements also show a warming trend. Heat is energy. It will affect the climate while it continues to increase due to what we are doing to the planet. Not only are we adding CO2 to the system but are affecting the ecosystem in multiple other ways. What do you think all those miles of nice dark roads do to the planet’s albedo? Building roofs made of dark material? Deforestation? Producing dead zones in the ocean?

It’s also amazing how poor the skeptics’ reading skills are. The key sentence in the article that Tully links to is completely ignored by both the blogger and Tully. It is “This growth signals a temperature increase in that region, she said.”. The examples they cite as proof of global warming on other planets are in fact regional changes, not global ones. Big difference.

The problem arises in that once you have cleared out a forest you have in addition to cutting down X number of trees you have also defoilated all the underlying brush and vegetation as well which also burns co2 and reoxengenates the planet.

Simply planting new trees is like putting a bandaid on a severed artery. It might slow the bleeding but in the end the patient is still gonna bleed to death and die.

No the actual solution to this problem is not for the USA to make more and more sacrifices while the rest of the world smogs us out of existence. (Im all for the USA to continue to try and prevent more green house gases from entering the atmosphere) I know some would have us believe the USA is the lone culprit in this scenario but in actual fact its China, India, The former USSR and the cutting of the rainforest in south America that will be the ultimate demise of this planet.

And as I posted in another article here on this blog addressed to those who are content with Blaming ONLY the USA for all the worlds environmental woes.

The world of pollution has changed drastically but your arguments have not.

you get this: look here!

but anyway I quoted from an article written by NASA.

The article can be found here:

http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/global_warming_worldbook_prt.htm

Green plants absorb CO2 from the atmosphere as they grow. They combine carbon from CO2 with hydrogen to make simple sugars, which they store in their tissues. After plants die, their bodies decay and release CO2. Ecosystems with abundant plant life, such as forests and even cropland, could tie up much carbon. However, future generations of people would have to keep the ecosystems intact. Otherwise, the sequestered carbon would re-enter the atmosphere as CO2.

quoted here from:

Methane release is also very important. Check this article and post out (I’ll use the same claim Jack at peakoil.com did when he posted the article):

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic26163.html

Rapid deforestation means a lot more dead vegetation to decompose its carbon dioxide off into the atmosphere. Also, in places that are cold enough–like Siberia–dead plants freeze and do not decompose. If Siberia were to thaw, there’d be a sudden release hundreds(?) of years worth of sequestered carbon.

Efforts to find new ways to sequester carbon are ongoing.

The Wikipedia page on the carbon cycle is HERE. And the Wikpedia page on carbon sequestration is HERE.

I hope that helps.

The reality as I posted earlier is global warming will change the tidal currents, moving the warm tides farther south causing what I described above. So in essence Global warming will in effect be this planets FIX.

MAN will suffer and survive and be along for the ride while the planet fixes itself. Ie it will kill off those evil green house producing plants and bury them under vast amounts of snow preventing them from releasing their gases into the atmosphere.

It will also bring to a screeching halt the vast offenders of the the biosphere……the USA, Europe, China and the former USSR. So while mankind is forced to readapt the world will be cleaning itself and going thru what I predict will be a several hundred year cleansing and rebalancing act.

Man is no match for mother nature. The Global warming going on today is Mother Natures alarm clock going off. She is sending us Emails but we arent opening them.

There are two sources of greenhouse gases. MAN and decaying dead plant life.

What scientists are finding is that plant life that dies now decays at a certain rate. However that plant life is now decaying at a far slower rate because the plantlife is filled with excessive amounts of co2.

Decaying plant life releases co2 into the atmosphere and because they are being forced to absorb more and more Co2 as a result of more and more green house gases in the air, they have more co2 to release when they die and decay.

Its a vicious cycle and the simple planting of more trees will not solve the problem, but the deforestation of the planet will certainly hasten the effects of global warming.