Wat does this prove about the cause? Nothing really
Wrong. This proves that whatever is causing global warming is still here.
many such climate changes prior to mankind having the ability to cause it
Yes, and each time it lead to massive disruption in the way life was organised on earth. You suggest we do like the dinos and go 'meh' so in 100 million years our bones are dug up by giant intelligent insects who will be thinking what "natural disaster" caused us to disappear (warning: dramatised).
Wat is apparent that certain parties r using theories of a correlation to force change upon the masses which amounts to control
I feel like a repeat of history. Remember back in the days when it was just "mad/fearmongering scientists" who claimed tobacco and asbestos were cancerous while the nice, honourable and moral industry said everything was hanky dory and we should continue to use their products. Now when people/economies are hooked on fossil fuels, ONLY the oil industry is trying to convince us that everything is hanky dory and we should continue to use their products.
Unfortunately we do not have hundreds of thousands of planets to test/prove the theory statistically like was done with lung cancer.
There r some who r aligned in such a way to profit greatly from forcing these changes upon us
Like whom? Independent scientists all over the world are in agreement. Who gains from NOT buying/burning oil and reducing our fossil energy consumption? Perhaps you should turn around the question. Who is losing when we change our ways. At which side of the argument are they and how many (truly) independent supporters do they have?
We have absolutely no idea whether we r causing this and absolutely no idea whether there is anything we can do to stop it
When we burn oil/coal/... it is a fact that heat and CO2 is released in the atmosphere. Although I doubt the amount of energy dissipated by heat will make such a great impact, the issue with CO2 is that it traps energy in the atmosphere which would otherwise be dissipated into space. The real problem with CO2 is that its effect is compounded and amplified. When more CO2 is released in the atmosphere, temperature will rise, when temperature rises, there will be more moisture in the air which is also a greenhouse gas. On top due to the higher temperature, the polar caps are melting releasing CO2 trapped in the soil. Adding more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. Additionally, since snow/ice is white, it reflects most of the light/energy. Reducing the amount of ice covered surface will increase the amount of energy the water/soil will absorb. More energy means more heat, more heat means ... it is a vicious circle.
Whether you think we caused it or not, we are DEFINITELY contributing to the problem.
Analogy: When there is a famine coming and some scientist say, there will be famine because we are eating our sowing crop and we should stop wasting food and grow alternatives. You say: there were famines before, rations and less food means economical harm for restaurant holders.
stop things which ARE causing real harm
Like floods are not causing harm or hurricanes or blizzards? Droughts? Lack of fresh water? Dying bees (no pollination)?
real and significant issue for our future is simply the limited supply of worldwide oil
So how can we make sure we can go longer with our current supply? Maybe by reducing our usage of oil? Oh, wait, that is EXACTLY what everyone else is saying. No matter how you look at it, we should reduce our CO2 emissions (less burning of fossil fuels). It makes economical sense, it makes ecological sense and it makes strategic sense.
So I support any rational or irrational behaviour that leads to alternate energy research
So you endorse those "certain parties using theories ...", regardless if they are nut-cases or respected scientists?
I just mean to say that simply because we can show the earth was warmer last year does not prove that we r the cause of it. And I feel those who focus on global warming r the real one with their head in the sand
1) Irrespective if you think humans are the cause of global warming or not, you can't but agree that we are contributing to the problem (even if it is only 0.1%).
2) No matter what you think about global warming and the causes. Everyone against global warming is for less dependency on oil/coal/... and is for a sustainable energy supply.
You claim those people have their heads in the sand for short term problems (which you call realities), yet their suggestions are perfectly compatible with any solution for the short term energy crisis we might be facing. Btw. I have high hopes for the fusion reactor (hopefully operational by 2019).
Yet it seems you have your head in the sand with regards to the climate change (what if you are wrong?). Even if technologies are now developed for the wrong reasons in your opinion like renewable energy for global warming, it may still be beneficial for you and humanity as a whole. (examples are ample: explosives for mining operations, radar for aviation, GPS, Internet, ...)