OP:Ok, not sure what to make of that last post. You still offer no evidence that CO2 levels were higher during Ice Age periods, which is what I asked for. As far as that link you posted, I looked at the list of petition signers and the first guy is pretty questionable at best. He is a bible thumper that still believes in Creationist theory, not exactly who I would trust for "science". http://forums.techguy.org/civilized-debate/545322-solved-global-warming-295.html. The petition is bogus anyway. Any scientist who took the time to research ANY of the data would have to agree that at a minimum, human land use has had a change on our climate.

*That post made little sense to me, either. I lot of assumptions there that he is projecting. He has this image of some mythical “liberal tree hugger” that he can’t seem to shake.
As far at the 31,000 “scientists”; It’s bullshit; less than .5% have any sort of actual qualifications, like climatologic or atmospheric science. Medical doctors are not “scientists”. The “petition” is absurd.

If you are into numbers, I have a website that has 80,000 PAYING SCIENTIST that think human caused climate change is going on. I will do the math for you and say 80,000 > 31,000.

*You might have to simplify that. Skippy might not know what “>“ means.

http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2009/03/in-profile-union-of-concerned.html

And since you are so into numbers, why don't you join this website... http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm. They have 3,000 members who think the Earth is flat. Maybe you could take a long trip and be the first one to fall off.

If I can get 31,000 people to agree that you are a douche, will you believe them? Or will you accept a lower number?

*I’ll sign that petition.

Al Gore is not my hero. I never voted for him or Clinton. I have been a believer in human caused global climate change since the mid 80's, well before Al Gore and the media were all over it.

*Me too. As soon as mankind had enough power to effect significant change on the environment, it was found, over and over, that his actions could have a powerful effect on it. It started long ago, (where are the Cedars of Lebanon?) and there have been repeated experiences where a seemingly benign action has had far reaching consequences. Opening the St. Lawrence Seaway, and introducing the lamprey into the Great Lakes. DDT. Trans-fats. Chloroflorohydrocarbons. Asbestos, etc.

*Imagine a group of scientists suggesting that we try an experiment; We take millions of years worth of sequestered carbon, and release it into the atmosphere until we had increased the CO2 levels to the highest level in a million years. While we are at it, lets cut down as much of the rainforest as we can. Just to see what happens. No sane person would say “good idea”, would they?

I will still be waiting for the answer to the higher CO2 levels during Ice Age periods (which I still doubt you can prove, heck, I will take any website that shows me the data, I don't want it in a quote for somewhere) and why this is the first global warming event where CO2 has gone up before temperatures did.

*I’m waiting for the source of his “facts” too. I’m happy to discuss facts. He has an opinion, and opinions should be based on facts. Not somebody elses opinion.

• it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests