MAY I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION!!

Originally posted by SRC_ROLLTIDE law of conservation of matter... says matter cannot be created or destroyed.  Fact CO2 is a greenhouse gas.  Fact burning fossil fuels releases CO2.  So when we fire up the factory, all those byproducts (ie CO2) don't disappear into Bunnyland.... At that point all those billions of tons of CO2 and other greenhouse gases we put up there every day stay there.  If people can walk on the moon, a cleaner energy source can be found and utilized.

Your statement is accurate, if we add  the following segment after destroyed: "in chemical reactions."

Several nuclear processes destroy matter, converting it into energy - Fission, Spontaneous Fission, Fusion, and Annihilation.  These do not violate the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, also called Law of Conservation of Energy, energy can neither be created nor destroyed only changed in form.
http://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/chem30_05/appendix/glossary.htm

Regardless, you central point remains the same; CO2 is being created at an unprecedented scale, effectively accumulating in our atmosphere.
Total CO₂ emissions per day from all the coal fired power plants in India was 1.1 thousand tons per day in 1997-98 and annual emission has been computed to be 395 million tons.
http://www.osc.edu/research/archive/pcrm/emissions/thermalemissions.shtml

Didn't Al Gore say we already pa**ed the point of no return?

Rolltide, you say you don't recycle because it is essentially pointless. Why isn't your belief of the global warming folklore met with the same apathy?

Originally posted by LOL-i-ZER 1) It is not a Theory: hundreds of reports and analysis prove that there is a global warming going on.... worst then the worst theory has predicted. 2) Exxon , Total... and other companies like this try to make people doubt about it, for their own benefit.

1) Discrepancy?  If it is not a theory, then is it a law?  A scientific law must always apply under the same conditions, and implies a causal relationship between its elements.  Climate Change models can't pa** these stringent conditions.

2) This is 1 of the 7 signs of pseudoscience - The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or work.
[URL]http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2008/01/the_seven_signs_of_pseudoscien.php[/ULR]

Can you show me 1 ad from either of these firms against anthropogenic climate change?

The everyday use of the word theory does not mean the same thing from the the word theory in science: Wikipedia

A theory, in the scientific sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of empirical observations. A scientific theory does two things:

1. it identifies this set of distinct observations as a cla** of phenomena, and
   
2. makes a**ertions about the underlying reality that brings about or affects this cla**.

Take evolution for example.  It is a theory in the sense that the causes of it are not totally understood.  We know evolution does occur by looking at fossils, bacteria becoming "immune" to antibiotics, even by the way every breed of dog came into existence (they all came from wolves).  So to explain this, a HYPOTHESIS is gathered to support the findings.  Such is the case in how natural selection explains evolution.
With global warming, you have a theory in that the world is warming.  The evidence is there no matter how you slice it (ice core sampling, the correlations of CO2 and temperature, etc.).  The greenhouse effect is a natural phenomenon.  It is why Venus is the hottest planet (its atmosphere is primarily CO2).  It is also why the earth is a perfect temperature to support life.  However, the equilibrium has been put into a tailspin because of the excess of CO2.  The hypothesis is that man is much to blame for this excess CO2 (about 25 billion tons a year).

And Cokk, nowhere did I say I didn't recycle because I do.  I said recycling really is not as good as people make it out to be.  It still takes energy (although less) to break down those recycled items into their components for reuse.  It is good from the sense of keeping it out of landfills.  But, the long term answer is finding cleaner ways to make energy. 
And as far as what Al Gore said, let me pose this question to you.  God forbid you or a loved one is told you have some ailment and are given, say, 3 months to live.  Are you going to do everything in your power to fight and live, or are you going to go home to die?
My central idea has not waivered one bit.  Even if this is crying wolf, the benefits of finding cleaner energy will pay for itself in the long run.  Not even the most of critics can deny that.

The earth has been warming for 50 years? How do you explain the "global cooling" scare of the late 70's?

Also, the earth has come out of 7 previous ice ages. How did Exxon warm the earth on those occaisions?

Originally posted by COKKENBALLS The earth has been warming for 50 years? How do you explain the "global cooling" scare of the late 70's? Also, the earth has come out of 7 previous ice ages. How did Exxon warm the earth on those occaisions?

Global Warming-Yes
Man Made Global Warming-Not really!
The Earth is Ma**ive, and you believe what we have done in 100 measley years will effect how this planet will change, a planet that was here for billions of years! Imagine the size of your room, not very big huh? Now imagine the size of your room but make the ceiling 6 miles high! If you want to stop the change of our climate (like a mosquito swapping engine in your car) go kill a few million cows! Ever seen a cow in the wild? How many more cows do you think there are today as opposed to 200 years ago? Ever heard of warming periods? Ever heard of the ice age?

Originally posted by SP61gTSupra The Earth is Ma**ive

45.01 people per square kilometer on the earth, using a 2007 estimate.  
The earth is not as ma**ive as you think....

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population+of+world%2F148%2C300%2C000+square+kilometers
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/DanielChen.shtml

Originally posted by LOL-i-ZER Originally posted by COKKENBALLS Most of the people that support the theory (yes, it is a theory),    The effect man has on the earth's core temperature is about the same effect one fly landing in the Atlantic would have on ocean levels.   First: it is not a Theory: hundreds of reports and analyses proove that there is a global warming going on. Exxon , Total... and other companies like this try to make people doubt about it, for their own benefit. I work with a lot of scientist working on global warming. I can tell you that every 3 years, they are astonish to see that the changes have gone worst then the worst theory has predicted.   Second: you look to be a great person, as you do a lot in order to lower your environmental impact on earth.  But I can tell you that the effect of man is huge on temperature. When we talk about global warming, people think about temperature rising up to 10 or 20 degrees. But its not the case. Keep in mind that the difference between ice age and now is just 2 or 3 degrees (average on the year long). 6 degrees it's the level of species extinction.   last: the proble of global warming, is that as always, the rich countries will not suffer much. Only the poors one will be destroyed. We pollute, they die. always the same story.   conclusion: I personnaly think it is too late for man kind. What we are curently observing is just the start phase of a very complicated process, that will drive the world to a major change. We have to be realistic: throughout the ages, Earth has changed dramaticly. lots of species have disappeared; new ones have rosen. Our time has come. I don't think I will see it, but I think my kids will.   tw: have you watched the movie "HOME" on youtube ? have a look, it's beautifull and interesting

Lolizer you're being far too pessimistic.  Even IF the earth were to heat up such that most of the population were to die off,  then wouldn't this so-called man-made global warming stop?!? You say the poor countries are done for, well that's a pretty sizable chunk of the earth's population.  Therefore, most of these pesky humans will be gone (according to your doomsday scenario) and presto no more man-made global warming.

Originally posted by SP61gTSupra Global Warming-Yes Man Made Global Warming-Not really! The Earth is Ma**ive, and you believe what we have done in 100 measley years will effect how this planet will change, a planet that was here for billions of years! Imagine the size of your room, not very big huh? Now imagine the size of your room but make the ceiling 6 miles high! If you want to stop the change of our climate (like a mosquito swapping engine in your car) go kill a few million cows! Ever seen a cow in the wild? How many more cows do you think there are today as opposed to 200 years ago? Ever heard of warming periods? Ever heard of the ice age?

You make a good point with the cows.  The deforestation to hold these cows, not to mention the process just to get a hamburger at the local fast food takes so much energy (I'm guilty here).  100 years may not be that great on the time scale of Earth, but what you are seeing is the BEGINNING of something much larger.  Also when you take into account of all the space in the entire universe that life can live, Earth is pin-head.  Watch that Pale Blue Dot in this same section.

Originally posted by SP61gTSupra   Hope you didnt buy that focus as a fuel saver in hopes to 'Save the Earth'! If you did, guess what, a small division of motorsports just consumed what you saved in 10 years! Millions of teenagers just got there first car! You essentially cut 1 blade of gra** in your yard, but 50 blades just grew in its place!

Originally posted by LOL-i-ZER Originally posted by SP61gTSupra   Hope you didnt buy that focus as a fuel saver in hopes to 'Save the Earth'! If you did, guess what, a small division of motorsports just consumed what you saved in 10 years! Millions of teenagers just got there first car! You essentially cut 1 blade of gra** in your yard, but 50 blades just grew in its place! Of course I did ! that was the family car with the lowest fuel consumption, and the lowest CO² emission 119g/km. And yes I agree, it's just a water drop effect in an ocean world. But think to that: it's that kind of water drop that is making the global warning: the behaviour of all single man on earth has an effect. So why can we try to make a change, individually? But you, the king of discussion we are having right know explain why I'm so pessimitic: the house is burning, and we are discussing if we should open the window because it's getting hard to breath !   here is a link   http://www.ipcc.ch/   that's the group that unite all the expert in the world, and that analyse all the study in the world on global warming (under United Nation, and World Meteorological Organisation supervision). Look at what they say. It's not me.   here is the last report:   http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/a**essment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf

Lolizer,