The environmental impact of industrialization is the primary cause of earth's current warming trend.

Timothy Ball has himself convinced that global warming is not real. Perhaps it's a matter of pride... it's human nature to want to be right, and I don't hold it against him. However, his opinions as stated in the article, are not supported by scientific data, and in some cases he's just plain wrong. According to Mr. Ball's article: "No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don't pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?" Mr. Ball's writing in this paragraph is poorly structured... Which statement did Yuri A. Izrael actually confirm? That "there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change"? I highly doubt that. I seem to recall that the IPCC was created to investigate global warming and determine if there was any evidence supporting the human caused global warming theory. The thing of it is that the IPCC just recently came back with results supporting the idea that human (anthropomorphic) sources are a primary cause of the warming trend. An exact quote from the IPCC's 2007 report: "Most of the observed increase in globally-averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations. It is likely there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent (except Antarctica)." (this report is available at http://www.ipcc.ch...) Does the vice president of an organization that has confirmed climate change to be real actually dispute his own organization's opinion on the matter? Or could it be that Mr. Ball is cleverly attempting to dupe his readers into believing that his opinion is supported by the vice president of an international scientific research agency? Again, Mr. Ball's article: "Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling." Global temperature did indeed dip between 1945 and 1976, but that dip was merely a hiccup in a larger trend. (a graph of average surface temperature change on earth over the past century is available here http://en.wikipedia.org...). In addition, Mr. Ball's assertion that "the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling" is patently ridiculous. Global temperature has consistently increased over the past 31 years, and shows no signs of stopping. In addition, Mr. Ball would like his readers to believe that the scientific community has not yet reached a general consensus supporting global warming. He is wrong (http://www.logicalscience.com...). Further on in his article, Mr. Ball makes reference to Richard Lindzen, a professor at MIT who is well known for claiming there isn't a consensus on global warming. An analysis of Lindzen's claims can be found here: http://www.logicalscience.com... In this debate I have provided evidence that releases of Carbon Dioxide from industrial sources have been responsible for an increase in atmospheric carbon. I have made the connection between Carbon Dioxide and the greenhouse effect, and I have shown that the greenhouse effect is primarily responsible for regulating earth's global temperature. Therefore, I have shown that industrial releases of Carbon Dioxide are primarily responsible for Earth's current warming trend. I commend my opponent for her bravery in taking a difficult position on this subject, and await her concluding remarks.