Volcanic eruptions and their effects don't dissipate within a couple of years. Without volcanic eruptions and volcanisms, we would have no atmosphere. We would have no oceans. We would have no life on this planet (most likely). The effects of volcanic eruptions are what afford us the air we breathe and the water we drink.

After all, the greenhouse effect is a good thing. We couldn't live without it.


And while a single large eruption may cool the recorded temperatures on the ground, that is due to ash blocking solar radiation at the surface. Surely the huge amounts of carbon dioxide and water vapor that also are emitted must be of concern to the global warming proponents? Surely, without those huge amounts of carbon dioxide and water vapor, the "cooling" effects of the ash would be even greater. How is it that those gasses just dissipate, while the ones produced by humans don't?

The real issue (or at least a primary issue) going on here is land use. We need to be careful about how we're using the land...urban sprawl, etc. That's what's really causing the temps to rise...they're rising artificially because of the land use around the recording stations (to a large degree anyway). I know Radmanly will provide us with IPCC (ha!) charts to show otherwise, but I encourage anyone to look at a "city" temperature and a nearby rural temperature at the same time for themselves, at any point, any day and compare. I guarantee the difference is more than the .05 degrees C I believe he referenced before. Also, as the cities expand, the difference is getting greater. For example, the cooling country breezes that set up in the evening due to pressure differences between the city and country are removed even farther away from city center. Surely this adds at least a little uncertainty to the recorded numbers.