How will we tell?
That's because you're a creationist
Your statement is one large fallacy: Post hoc ergo propter hoc "It came after therefore it was caused by"
The CO2 changes in the atmosphere are neither rapid nor unprecedented. Also, the clear witness of ice cores is that rises and falls in CO2 in the atmosphere are a centuries delayed response to climatic warming and cooling. Since 97% of CO2 is from natural sources, the man-made contribution is tiny compared to the natural evolution of CO2 from our oceans which originated in the Medieval Warm Period.
Using Henry's Law only works if there is carbon dioxide equilibrium between the ocean and the atmosphere. There isn't.
It's a shame no-one noticed but me.
We see the problem right there in that statement.
As we announced a few days ago, we are very sorry to let you know that Springpad will be shutting down on June 25th. Unfortunately, we were not able to secure additional funding or scale to become a self-sustaining business. As part of closing our business, a portion of our team is joining Google. At this point, our priority is to help you move forward with the data you have stored in Springpad. Today we are releasing an export tool that gives you a few options including a full Evernote migration, a viewable HTML data backup, and an importable JSON file for other services to use. Read more below about each of these options, or go to springpad.com/savemystuff to start migrating your data now. You will have until June 25th to continue to access your data and complete your migration. At that point Springpad.com will no longer be available, all online and sync features of the mobile apps will stop working, and your personal data will no longer be stored on our servers.
Link to Original Source
But clearing the underbrush causes CO2 to be produced causing temperatures to rise...
"Ah, nothing like quoting an anti-AGW blog as if it were the equivalent of a published article"
Ah nothing like quoting Skeptical Science or Real Climate or DeSmogBlog or HughPickensDOTcom, because those are outlets of pure unvarnished truth that no sane man may object to.
In fact the WUWT article points to an article in "The Australian" and quotes the NSIDC.
I assume you get your answers from Genesis because you like things handed down as Holy Writ, probably because its easier than thinking. Climate alarmism is deeply religious and very much creationism without all of the messy stuff about Cain and Abel.
Like "The West Antarctic Ice Sheet is 50 below zero, so how is it melting?"
But that's for people who understand science and critical thinking, something you're not capable of.
Why bother allowing people to comment if you're going to insult them with reference to Holocaust Denial?
Alternatively, exactly who died that a claim of climate modellers about future events became Holy Writ that may not be challenged or questioned?
That's right, because before 1950 climate was stable.
"Motivated reasoning" - the new phrase for "Possessed by the Devil"
Refusing to invest in coal industries does not help reduce carbon emissions and pollution one jot. If there's ever a polluting industry it would be the so-called renewables which use rare earths and cause massive pollution.
Can't post. Playing Dota 2 in a coffee shop