i'm not sure what to say.. you cant use those kinds of "common sense" arguements to dispute actual science.

Since i assume you havent read the various papers, reports, studies, etc, I dont see how you can even begin to understand the issues at hand. Why do people assume that they are qualified to judge a scientific theory if they really know nothing about it? This is same problem with creationists.

There are indeed scientists who dispute some aspects of the climate change theories, but they do so by using more science. There are some doubts too about the extent of climate change caused by artificial means, but not because "New York looks so small on a map"...this is silly.

Its not about how big the city is, its about the volume of emissions released over time. There is no question that the global climate is becoming warmer, and that human activities are partly responsible. The question is how much..