So Hand...you're telling me that if you had never been to earth, and you got a birds eye tour of the globe, volcanoes would be the most noticeably influencing thing?? Not the reforestation, not the big cities, smog and smoke stacks, not radioactive lakes, not billions of people, not all the airplanes and cars.....but volcanoes....have you ever seen a volcano erupting in person? Have you ever heard of a volcano erupting in your lifetime in your country? Mount St. Helen's...name another.

One would hope an earth visitor would be intelligent enough to notice the climate changes on all the planets in our solar system for millions of years. It's the sun not exxon or cow farts.

Thanks for proving my point...you completely avoided the question with a statement that doesn't disprove human influence.

[quote]Rather than post the exact same thing in two places, let's have this debate back in the terror forum.

A one world government to be created through global warming!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5dOgbu40

We are trying to destroy democracy and freedom anyway we can!!

"an earth visitor would be intelligent enough to notice the climate changes on all the planets in our solar system for millions of years."

- an interstellar traveller would know that the sun doesn't cause rapid change over a century...that visitor might look at other contributing factors such as a rapid increase in the level of greenhouse gases over the same period

Does it matter what caused the warming?

One would have to have been born in Utopia(nonexistent place) in order to assume that mankind will unite to save the world and set aside personal agendas :Canadian: :pointedly: :green toke:: : ? Selah....pause, and thiink about that.

Than lets hope we don't get visited by stupid interstellar travelers that have never seen a flash frozen mammoth complete with tropical plant food in mouth.

Deep sea core samples confirm rapid climate change at the end of this period. A global cataclysm is sometimes used to explain the presence of ubiquitous grave sites of mammoths in Siberia. Curiously, mammoth carcasses fall into two major chronological groups; one dating from about 45,000 BC to 30,000 BC and the other from 14,000 to 11,000 BC. These represent periods of sufficient freezing that preserved the carcasses until modern times. Pole shift theorists such as Immanuel Velikovsky proposed they were flash frozen after their grazing lands were suddenly relocated to an arctic climate. Critics dispute this. They say that parts of the mammoths revealed slow decay on extraction. For example, when the famous Berezovka mammoth found in Siberia in 1901 was exhumed, it gave off a terrible stench from its partially decomposed condition. The well preserved grass in its mouth and stomach to me indicate it perished suddenly. Some claim without further ado that the undigested grass proves it was flash frozen. But an unfrozen mammoth specimen was also discovered in Ohio, USA containing preserved grass in its entrails. At any rate, it's fair to assume the Berezkovka mammoth was grazing the moment it died, and that it suffered several large fractures and copious blood loss. The pathologist Herz who examined the beast believed it fell down a crevasse and landed in a struggling upright position. There was also one other useful clue to its death: it’s penis was in an erect position (!) This could suggest it was shocked or suffocated from oxygen depletion in the immediate airspace. I envisage massive earthquakes that occur after the crust stops shifting caused a chasm or crevasse to open up under the spot the mammoth was standing on. The mammoth may have not been aware the crust was moving until the earthquakes struck and the temperature plummeted. Thus it fell down in fright and died from blood loss or suffocation. Sceptics of such grandiose explanations argue that ‘natural events’ may have decimated mammoth herds. But it’s interesting that carbon dating of the most recent specimens closely coincide with the end of the last ice age in North America and Europe where mammoths weren’t found in abundance at the same time. It’s also assumed that the mammoth was predisposed to a cold climate, given it had a woolly coat and three inches of fat under its skin. But it's difficult to determine how tolerant of the cold the mammoth was, because its hair was short and lacked sebaceous oil glands that protect the hair of cold climate animals such as the polar bear, moose, etc. In my opinion it more likely inhabited a temperate region with occasional cool winters. To reinforce this, the mammoth shared its habitat alongside other large mammals not known to be suited to the harsh cold, including the Bison and Sabre tooth tiger. The bones of these mammals have been found intermingled together at prehistoric grave sites. They could have well faced the same fate and were swept up to their final resting place. Others say the close proximity of various animal remains of different species confirm the widespread hunting of these beasts by early humans. Some even say the mass extinction of Pleistocene animals was exclusively due to hunting.