My feelings on this matter are conservative.
There are many facts, and many presumptions on this matter, many of which are fueled by political gains.
I feel that given the potential gain and the potential loss associated with either side of this debate being right, it would only be prudent to begin looking for cleaner and more efficient ways of interacting with our planet as a species.
Also looking at the samples taken from surface readings the past 150+ years, samples taken from the ice at the poles dated thousands of years ago, there is a lot we don't know about the weather patterns of our entire solar system, let alone our planet.
Seeing as how our recorded history on this subject only goes so far, we have to take into account some unknowns. How many ice ages have there been in the last 100 million years for instance? How many thaws? what were the temperatures prevalent on the surface of the planet before for 100 years, and after for 100 years of these ice age events?
Might what we are seeing as human created global warming might be a natural shift by a 10th of a degree from the planet in its position relation to the sun? Perhaps one that happened before recorded history? (This is just a for instance.....)
There a lot of possible scenarios for the visual recorded trend of warming in the last 150 years or so, including a natural solar cycle.
The point being, why are we pointing fingers? We should be mathematically calculating if the current technologies and resources on the planet can save us from a severe shift in one direction or another in time, or can't they?
I don't care whose right in the debate, just want all of us to be right for a solution. One major change in anything, and our delicate system goes splat. So while figuring out the answers, please keep that in mind.
