Without going into any of the theoretical arguments I want to posit a simple question:
Is it reasonable or unreasable to believe that man having cleared about 40% of the earth's land area for farming, grazing and habitation would have a significant effect on the temperture of the planet?
Then a pair of follow up questions please:
If 40% clearance is not significant, would 90%-100% be significant?
Given the current birth patterns in the world is there a logical limit to how much land will eventually be cleared (if you think 100% is not a problem then this question is moot)?
Recent discussions in the Science forum
|Horizontal Gene Trasfer vs. Evolution||5||6 hours ago|
|California Braces for Unending Drought||167||14 hours ago|
|Tesla deliveries, and lost money on every one!||729||1 day ago|
|Knowledge||7932||1 day ago|
|Peer Review Scam||1||1 day ago|
|Science in Harmony with God||9458||2 days ago|
|Right, got to get to Mars! More waste of taxpayer monies.||30||2 days ago|
|This sort of thing takes place all too frequently! i.e. Race running deaths.||3||3 days ago|
|There they go again! More debt for a Money Pit.||36||3 days ago|
|Theranos Inc., next phase.||23||3 days ago|
|Archaeology Plus Other Fohrbidden Sciences.||2245||4 days ago|
|Cash flow is everthing. Useless appliance, so what.||4||4 days ago|