1. 

Very important in showing that current theory's of man made causes of global warming are flawed.

The data doe's not show a spike in warming for the industrial revolution or the huge increase in manufacturing for both world wars.

The past 15 years has seen no warming and the icecaps are at record size this year.

Since 1750, the estimated amount of heat forcing from human greenhouse-gases is 3.234 watts per square meter (see CDIAC link). Seems like a lot? In perspective, that is .0024 (less than a quarter of a percent) of Earth's 1347 watts per square meter average heating. And it didn't go uncompensated. At another source, it is estimated that heating is up .6 W/sqm, but the uncertainty is 17; the uncertainty is 28 times greater than the amount! (see excellent explanation by Bob Tisdale http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/18/da...

To place blame on . Luddits were unhappy machines were doing some jobs faster and making things cheaper for the regular person .

Man does not have the power to alter the climate. Our Creator built it very solidly.

Does anyone thing that an all knowing God would make the earth so flimsy that mere man could destroy it environmentally?

of course, CO2 increased, but a feedback effect was industrialization allowed greater wealth and increased population. More people=more demand on many resources, including energy.

Well the first step was the increased burning of coal to power industry. As new industries sprang up, that further increased the burning of coal. To this day we are still burning coal which is the largest cause of CO2 among fossil fuels and it is a horrible pollutant which causes a great number of respiratory conditions

.

In addition coal became the primary heating source for residences in the cities do to scarcity of wood..

I'll make this the shortest answer in history of Yahoo.

If industrial sector will ignore global warming, you and your kids will walk day to day in health masks. On daily basis. Let's not forget about our already unstable mother nature. Hurricanes,tornado,earth quakes, so on so forth. this planet is about 5B years old, it took us about 200 years to ruin it.

About like the importance of the American Revolution to the Constitution of the United States.

http://www.oceanfdn.org/newsroom/oceans-...

Roger Revelle and Hans Suess (1957):

"Human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future. Within a few centuries we are returning to the atmosphere and oceans the concentrated organic carbon stored in sedimentary rocks over hundreds of millions of years. -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_...

European Science Foundation (2007):

"There is now convincing evidence that since the industrial revolution, human activities, resulting in increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases have become a major agent of climate change."

U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record...

“Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems.”

“Choices made now about carbon dioxide emissions reductions will affect climate change impacts experienced not just over the next few decades but also in coming centuries and millennia…Because CO2 in the atmosphere is long lived, it can effectively lock the Earth and future generations into a range of impacts, some of which could become very severe.”

“The Academy membership is composed of approximately 2,100 members and 380 foreign associates, of whom nearly 200 have won Nobel Prizes. Members and foreign associates of the Academy are elected in recognition of their distinguished and continuing achievements in original research; election to the Academy is considered one of the highest honors that can be accorded a scientist or engineer.”

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycl...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument...

http://www.newsweek.com/2007/08/13/the-t...

http://jcmooreonline.com/2013/01/31/engi...

Pretty important. Without the industrial revolution, we would not have a large-scale need for electricity (and high-temperature fires for metalurgy). Without the large-scale need for electricity, we would be doing very little mining and burning of fossil fuels. Without the burning of fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2 levels would not have increased ~40%. Without increasing CO2 levels, we would actually be (very slowly) cooling by now.

If you want more information, try here:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/

http://aip.org/history/climate/summary.h...

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...

http://www.realclimate.org/

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;... (a while back, I asked people to post links to sources at various experience levels)

As usual, the warmists are not quoting any data or references. Allow me to assist.

The dates for the Industrial Revolution are in the Wikipedia article - I always use 1750-1830.

The temperature is noted in the attached document.

So no discernable effect.

(Note to self - remember to remove tongue from cheek after hitting Submit.)

???????????????????????????????????????... ????????????????????????????????????????... ????????????????????????????????????????...