I do not deny that man DOES add some carbon to the mix. I DO deny that it is significant enough to change the climate. Compared to a volcano, for instance, man's contribution is minuscule. The DIFFERENCE in what man adds,by changing fuels and such, is ridiculously small. The savings realized over years, can be negated by a good forest fire. I figure forest fires and volcanoes have been doing their business a lot longer than man has, and to much greater effect. We are operating under the assumption that carbon drives temps. THAT is debatable. If it does, it is logical to assume that more is worse than less, but it really has to be significant enough to be responsible for any change. I am not sure that is provable in a single lifetime.
