Kes responds

Thanks for the reply.
I would like to point out a few more things to you though.
"I never got from Timothy Ball that there is no need for concern."
Once again I would like to point out his organization is making radio commercials saying it's ok to pollute (they claim C02 isn't harmeful). Do you not find this even a little bit irrisponsible? Especially for an organization claiming to want to better our enviroment?
"I am sending you some other information regarding solar warming of other planets etc."
Here is some great information on the sun and it's solar output: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html
"While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues."
I found it interesting that a lot of reports that point out increased solar activity as a likely cause for global warming show data that ends in 1980. Why? Because after 1980 there was a decline in sunspots on the surface of the sun and a decline in solar output.
More information here:http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4CF1-4202-1508-820283414B7F0000http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm
In regards to other planets one must take into account all planets and moons in the solar system not simply point out a few planets and one moon that could possibly be warming. I think it's important to point out that we know far less about the geological makeup of the other planets in our solar system then we do our own.
More information can be found here:
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn11642http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/070404-mars-warming.html
"These should be two different arguments. What is causing Climate Change? And how should all of the rich people of the world be proactive in reducing the levels of pollution and polluting activities?"
I disagree, the vast majority of our wealth is in the hands of a few. It's not a few that are going to make a change it's the masses. It is the consumer is the one who ultimately holds the power with there buying dollars. Why are the major north american car makers in deep trouble? Because they failed to see the growing demand for more efficient less polluting vehicles where as the Japanese manufactures did. The irony of this is one of the main reasons the Japanese automakers put so much effort into cleaner vehicles and new hybrid technologies is due to some of the strict laws that were passed in California. I would like to recommend watching a move called "Who killed the electric car".
"Just because the herd is following doesn't’t mean it is necessarily right. Back in the 1400’s most of the civilized world thought the earth was flat and if you went past the horizon you’d just fall off."
Once again I disagree. :) Back in the 1400's people didn't go to school, you were burned at the stake if you didn't believe in what the church said and the internet and other forms of modern communication did not exist. I think that we have progressed considerably in our views on sharing information and making informed decisions based on the most accurate information we have at our disposal.
"Lobbying to have your data recognized is no more biased than having a multi million dollar organized movement headed by a high profile politician(Al Gore ) that makes a movie supporting only 1 point of view and then try to proliferate that point of view in ways such as trying to deliver it into the hands of the public school system for mass consumption as completely factual and true."
I was waiting for this. :) Al Gore... Have you seen his movie? Do you know anything about his story? I think you should at least view his movie before making claims against his cause. The only other thing I will say about this is no matter what his motivation he seems to at least have some concern with what is happening on our planet and the gross over consumption that is going on in the US; which is more then can be said about most politicians. His movie isn't about spreading fear, if you've seen it you should know that. He is trying to educate people or at least bring up the subject of global warming to people who otherwise might think twice about it. Right or wrong at least he is making people aware and asking questions; the first step in solving any kind of problem. Even if he is set to make some money off this wouldn't it be nice to see some GREEN companies making some coin other then all the oil companies? Aren't we tired of throwing $20 bills out our window as we drive down the road?
"Even today its pretty common scientific knowledge that domesticated animals are one of the largest contributors to green house gasses on the planet. Did this planet become so overrun with giant animals that the earth shutdown in its ability to support them or did some humongous cosmic event occur that wiped them out and created this incredible energy supply in the ground?"
I am aware of the theory on animals being a contributor to green house gasses. A few interesting stats on cattle in the US:
Fifty percent of the wetlands, 90% of the northwestern old-growth forests, and 99% of the tall-grass prairie have been destroyed in the last 200 years.
Eighty percent of the corn grown and 95% of the oats are fed to livestock.
Fifty-six percent of available farmland is used for beef production.
Kind of scary isn't it? The forests and wetlands that act as C02 sinks and remove carbon from our atmosphere are being destroyed for more farting cattle.. Maybe we should be eating less fast food?
You are correct, a huge cosmic event did wipe the slate clean so to speak and create the vast amount carbon based resources we have in the ground. The big thing here is that these resources took millions of years to develop and we are now using them up as fast as we can find them. So lets just say it takes 3 million years to produce x amount of carbon resources through natural processes and we then release these same carbon resources back into the atmosphere in 1,000 years isn't pretty easy to conclude it might have some adverse effects?
Also I think you might be missing my point on population. Never before in the history of our planet have the inhabitants created pollution outside the natural processes with the exception of man. So if cattle can have an effect on our environment isn't it reasonable to then think that human waste and pollution will as well?
Its a radical point of view that after however many thousands or millions of years there has been life on this earth that we suddenly have a few hundred scientists who say we have 20 years to save the world. Its much more realistic to think they have a bigger political and economic agenda than a real concern to encourage the global community to be more thoughtful in its stewardship of the vast resources we have at our disposal on this planet we call home.
A few hundred scientist? 160 countries have ratified Kyoto, I would think that each of the governments in these countries have more then a few scientist studying climate change and have be providing their governments with information. We are talking about some of the smartest science institutes in the world! NASA? They put men on the moon and have developed the vast majority of the technology that has allowed us to even begin to understand the effects we have on our planet and what is happening around our solar system. How can we just simply disregard something as someone out to make a quick buck when so many different countries and people of all religions, ages and ethnic backgrounds seem to think something is so important. On top of all that the facts are there, cold hard data that show some very scary trends on how we are impacting the plant.
Isn't it better to error on the side of caution when it's our planets future that could be at stake?
I will leave you with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxpEqln5EdQ
Love,Kes