Brutha,
First of all I personally said that I thought humans may be "CONTRIBUTING" to global warming however we cannot conclude by the basis alone that because its warmer outside that this is be-all end-all fact that humans are the
sole contributors to global warming.
Could it be that both are right? Could it be that part of the increase in temp is caused by nature's natrual fluxuations and that man caused global warming is also responsible for some portion? I guess we can't even discuss or look at this because then nobody's political agenda gets served. So lets just not even discuss it.
The link I provided acknowledged that some in the scientific community have spoke out against this but it seems you are selective of what you read. It also had a link to wikipedia as well speaking of the disputes:
Global warming controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It also mentioned that there were serious reprocussions to any scientists who did not agree with the mainstream's outcome:
"But there is a more sinister side to this feeding frenzy. Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis."
Certainly you can acknowledge that there are conflicting theories within the scientific community and certainly there should be no political motivations behind people's fact finding missions.
Surely people who do research can try to do so objectively. Am I asking too much?
To me it appears you are franticly grasping for any and all data that will support your theory and blockading any other discussions that may give evidence to the contrary.
OK I've got it, you're mind's made up and you don't need to hear any more. I'm simply stating that to me the jury is out. I respect your decision on the subject and I hope you'll respect me maintaining objectivity.