Here is a link that gives a good summation of the sceptical view:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
Again, this site seems to aim towards clouding the waters moreso than it clarifies. Though I understand that when water vapor is factored in, the percentage of actual harmful material released in the form of air pollution seems to be incredibly small, but again, this focuses attention on the wrong statistics. When one scrolls further down the page, to see the actual ratios of human produced waste compared to what's naturally present, even the numbers the skeptics provide are pretty scary. We as aquarists are used to discussing things in parts per million, and occasionally even parts per billion, so why is it hard to grasp that a 3% increase in co2 production would have a very significant impact. Additionally, it bears repeating that keeping the earth's natural balance assumes a much higher load of forested land than currently available. Beyond that, to assume that increasing methane output by nearly 20% and cfc output by almost 70% has no noticeable effect is pure silliness. The author of that particular page seems to have an issue with the tendency to remove water vapor from the statistics, but I can see how that makes perfect sense. Our water vapor output may make up for 90%+ of airborne emissions, but on the global scale, it is insignificant. The measurements of other substances emitted however, especially when compared to what nature emits, are much more statistically relevant. So far I'm seeing quite a bit of bad science and sensationalism on the skeptic's side as well. Just look at this tasty passage that may produce strong feelings, but really doesn't stand up to close scrutiny or a logical thought process.
Ways to stop producing carbon dioxide
Stop breathing - When you exhale you release carbon dioxide
Dont drive - We all know how bad driving is
Don't live in a house/apartment/condo or any building that uses gas or electricity - Homes produce 2-3 times as much carbon as cars.
Don't wear shoes or any sort of clothing produced in a factory. Grow a cotton field and make your own clothes by hand.
Quit school - Those school buildings produce more carbon in a year then you do in 20 years.
Eat meat raw - Whether you're using gas or electric both produce carbon dioxide.
Turn off this monitor and computer - You hypocrite.
Don't use toilets, go in your back yard.- The water to your house is cleaned and sent to your house using pumps that use electricity.
Stop exercising - Increasing your heart rate increases the amount of oxygen you take in and turn into carbon dioxide.
Die - Dying younger means you will do all of the above less. Living one year less means you will save the earth 8.4 tons of carbon dioxide every year you're not here!
Yes... I get it, our presence, in its current state is not good for the earth. If anything, this passage is more of an impetus to change our way of living down to its most fundamental level, not an argument for why curtailing emissions does not matter. Salaciously sensationalist as the above passage is, it again adds no relevance to the discussion.
opcorn:
