I believe generally global warming as its known is mainly mother nature doing her thing although clearly humans are not helping. The statistics can be twisted to suit any viewpoint, in my view it is as much about big businesses trying to make money by exaggerating the problem. As for the carbon footprint its a load of twaddle. The folk that take recycling serious are being conned as most councils dump it all on one landfill site

There has always been climate change and there will always be climate change and this is due to many natural factors such as position of the earth relative to the sun, the earths tilt, our position in the universe etc etc I could write pages of natural causes and variations.

However, most mainstream scientists (not the fringe loonies on both sides of the debate) agree that when you analise the trends of natural change there is an anomaly. They suggest that this anomaly is the difference made by the activities of man.

Some agree, some don't but having done lots of research on this I'm in the camp that agrees. Man has affected climate change.

This is quite interesting
rlhttps://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/climateexperiment/rl

I am not disputing mas has not contributed to climate change but am saying it will or would have happened albeit at a slower pace.

The oil companies are over inflating petrol prices etc and increase profits so they can invest in greener projects, this is all just a way to try justify them ripping folk off. Lets assume we all use electric car energy in the future the oil companies will not survive in my view which is why I believe they are mainly posturing.

I just wish that polititians would stop pussyfooting around this issue.

The reason we have this problem is because the world has far too many people and not enough resources.

The only way we're ever going sort climate change out is to get a worldwide agreement on curbing population growth, which globally is expected to 9 billion by 2050.

This may sound drastic but I'd start by sterilising women after they have a second child.

You would have to do the same to a man as well.

Good point.

How do you know this?

I would suggest it is quite possible to feed the population of this planet.

The technology exists for it to happen.

[sizeGREED![/size ensures it wont happen.

You wouldn't because funnily enough only women can have kids.

Food is only one example of a resource.

What about more finite resources like Oil and Gas?

What about us tearing this planet apart for Wood, Stone, and Metals.

Not to mention more and more farming land in developing nations being used to produce bio fuel for developed nations instead of food for themselves.

As I said, we are the problem because there are far too many of us, although that said I do agree with you on the greed part.

You have a very good point, but its no good controling population if we don't also change our behaviour.

Its interesting that "big business" including oil companies, not only denied climate change existed but "paid" scientists to say so.

Its even more interesting that now they have been backed into a corner they try to gain favour by developing Bio fuels and probably making a lot of money out of doing so. If they could get away with charging 50p or even a pound more per litre of petrol they would do. As someone has said, some businesses are just greedy and appear to feel very little moral obligation (until they are exposed).

Attitudes do need to change.

As individuals we have an awful lot more power than we think we have in order to change things.

Stealth Comic I agree with your idea that as individuals we have power but not as much as would change things dramatically.

When you see these protesters at for example the present summit or g20 the idiots with only violence in mind undermine the rest to the point of being sterile.