The thing that amazes me the most is that people are willing to gamble that there is nothing wrong with the planet because of a lack of tracking the needed data accurately over extended periods of time. The capabilities of science and the common perception of nature did not permit the collection of important data until relatively recently in terms of the earth's age. That there are not data files form 327 BC should not be a reason to doubt that man has had and is having an impact on the environment.
Of course, there may be nothing amiss. Then again, there might be. Are we so willing to take that chance?
Texas A&M researches have found an increase in storm power due to pollution:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070306/...808pMQG4kPLBIF
Antarctica is melting away:http://edition.cnn.com/2007/TECH/sci...eut/index.html
Do waves have to cover the Rose Garden before more people take the problem seriously?
If we work to lesson the perceived impact and there isn't one, then what do we lose? A little hardship and a little money.
If we don't work to lessen the impact and there is one, then what do we lose? Everything.