That may be true, since you have the urban heat island effect. But since the vast majority of scientists claim that man made pollution is a causing global climate change, the sensible thing is to err on the side of caution, as the saying goes.
What would be worse? Attempting to fix a system that was not broken? Or not fixing a system that is, but is still functioning?
That is where we are at. And the arguement of the "vast majority" is a red herring. As the "vast majority" of scientists in the 15th century KNEW the world was flat.
If we fix something that is not broken, we run the very real risk of making it worse and really breaking it. The false premise is that Man is doing it. If we are not, and we actually do something that will affect the climate, we run the risk of making it worse.
It is the junk science that we are yelling about. The Junk science that wanted to cover mountains with aluminum foil to reflect the heat of the sun. Junk science that told us we were headed for an ice age in 1975. Junk science that says a flea can make a dog do its bidding.
Thank god that there are those who are not lemmings headed for the cliff, and stop and ask real questions (that are quickly drowned out with cries of Heretic and Denier - kind of like the salem WItch trial of 350 years ago).
I have no problem, and indeed encourage clearning up the planet. I have a big problem with erradicating the last 100+ years of progress because some clowns are crying wolf.
