Yeah, I've heard the global greening argument before. It went something like this:

CO2 is a green house gas.

Yes, we humans are responsible for it.

Yes, it is warming the planet.

But, it is also greening the planet. Plants sequester CO2 and release O2.

Seems like a good argument.

Micah's post reminds me of an idea I was throwing around last year:

http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/000434.html

A part of Micah's point that I think you're discounting here Stephen is that carbon extraction ought to be pursued as a self-funding venture (ie: a business) rather than as a taxpayer funded, government bureaucracy managed virtual planetary charity effort (see: Kyoto Treaty).

I won't repeat here the points I raised relative to that in his comment section, but I've been reading the Speculist long enough to feel certain where both of you would allign yourselves on that issue (which may account for your seeming assumption regarding that aspect of his position).

Will:

Actually one of the few areas where Phil and I differ is global warming. I acknowledge that it's happening, I have some questions as to the causes BUT accept that human activity is part of the picture.

Further, I think (regardless of the cause) that there may be a tipping point where global warming could get away from us.

I probably shouldn't speak for Phil (I'm sure he'll jump in if I'm mischaracterizing his position) but...

Phil sees global climate as very complex. So complex that there isn't even 100% agreement on whether the Earth is about to warm or cool.

To the extent that there has been warming, solar energy fluctuation may have something to do with that (see retreating Martian icecap as proof).

Phil accepts that human activity has caused an increase in green house gasses, but that may actually be helping either via global greening or holding off an impending ice age.

Well, I don't see how adding tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere year after year couldn't have some effect. The question is, how much? We know with certainty that the climate has warmed up and cooled off numerous times over the eons. Outside of the global warming debate, scientists admit that climate results from an incredibly complex set of interactions and is inherently very difficult (if not impossible) to predict. So I'm skeptical not as to whether global warming is occuring -- it appears to be -- or even whether our behavior is contributing to it -- logically, it seems that it ought to be. I'm skpetical as to whether we have any idea as to how much our behavior really is contributing to it.

BTW, it's not just Mars. Jupiter is growing a new red spot, apparently as a result of global warming. (The atmosphere is heating up as much as 10 degrees F in places, causing new storm activity.) That's three planets in a row.

Sure, that could be a coincidence. Mars and Jupiter might be warming up at the same time we are due to completely independent internal forces. But then again, our increase in carbon emissions and the warming of our planet could also be a coincidence.

Interestingly, if I assert that the first set of circumstances is a coincidence, nobody has a problem with that. If I assert that the latter set of cisrcumstances is a coincidence, I will be accused by many of taking a political stand.