Originally posted by StarrmanNo, I was comparing the relative use of certain technologies which, at the onset, are touted as being the best things since sliced bread. This was in response to the Luddite post, of course, and needs to be taken in light of that post.
You're not seriously comparing social networking sites to climate science are you?
There is a continual ebb and flow of real climate change which has extremely little if anything at all to do with the absolute most that man can muster. In the 1940's tankers full of oil went down during the various battles of WWII. Within less than six months, the areas where the sinkings occurred showed no sign of the original impact.
Areas impacted by volcanoes show revitalization within the first six years*, despite the fact that such natural devastation is pretty much king when it comes to forces known by man to wreak havoc.
The point is, while man is quite capable of effing up a great deal, he is certainly not the source of Al Gore's alleged woes.
*=http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~kuzera/kuzera_rogan_eastman_1.pdf