[sercomdj01]

Global warming is a theory. There is no right or wrong answer. The whole thing rests upon the individual scientists opinion. Its like gods existance. No one can be sure either way. Its just the whole point of global warmin is that if we are to blame, then we need to do something about it. They're can't be 100% conclusive proof either way. Then it would be a law or fundermental and not a theory.
The arguement is do we rest on the side of causion or do we go with the cheeper option. Where do you stand on that Q?
I personaly beleive we are likly to be causing a speeding up of the global warming process. I read 2 scientific weeklies and many journals on the subject, and though evidence points in both directions - the main body of evidence suggests we are effecting the process.
I choose to read directly from scientific sources than how the media deals with a subject. Though everything in that documentary has factual basis, the cleaver editing and use of emotive phrasing can mislead and misappropriate many of the sources. But isn't that what the media does? Its politics now and is treated as such by the media.

Sorry to go all physicy on you all. But a good parable type idea to compair global warming is the big bang theory.
The history of the universe is based on infinate mathmatical differences that account for the entire makeup of the universe. Each one is different in a tiny way, just a number or constant. Of these only a finite small amouth actually have a big bang. So statistically and in veiw of probability there is less likly to have been a big bang.

BUT! Why do we go with the big bang theory so much? Well without the big bang the universe never started. And if the universe is infinate and has been around for ever, there is no creator. No god.

So despite the fact that the big bang theory isn't the best. People side with it as its not "ungodly". In other words there are politics and person beleif behind every scientific theory.