The chart Tino posted is of the industrial age onward, which is said to be the period by which man started unnaturally adding CO2 to the air, on top of Earth's natural CO2 rise (or decline). Here it is again.
While this certainly is an alarming rise, the poster below Tino and Kim are saying is that this upward trend may, indeed, be Earth's natural cycle, which fluctuates up and down every 25,000 years - said to be based on the wobbling of Earth's axis.
Indeed, when we look at the past 400,000 years, we do see such a fluctuation:
However, look closely at the tail end of that chart.
We should have been, by now, a few thousand years into a COOLING trend, but are not.
Here is a closeup of the last thousand years:
Notice that, up until right before the industrial age, we were indeed, on a cooling trend that was in line with the overall 400,000 year fluctuation chart above it. But then once, the industrial age hit, we sharply reversed upwards, and have been bucking natural levels since. Hence the "cluttered" look at the end of the 400,000 year chart.
Not only that, scientific studies shows us that the natural rise in CO2 that comes with warmer climate periods does NOT coincide with the rate of CO2 that has been emitted from humanity in the past 100 years. Such natural increases, as shown from geological evidence, which comes from the ocean, volcanos, and the biosphere, occur over a MUCH more gradual span of time and rate.
This is why 98% of scientists (the experts) strongly support that WE are the cause of the current uptick, and not nature. And I am sure not 98% of scientists are liberals or Democrats. Heck, it would be even more than 98% if some were not "bought" from special interests groups to cater the statistics to show otherwise.
So, why this is STILL a political issue is beyond me. It doesn't have to be.
Teddy Roosevelt, our first president who acted out of concern for the environment, was a Republican.