We need to understand what the consequences of CO2 pollution (by this, I mean, humans introducing something undesirable which wouldn%26#039;t exist there otherwise) are -%26#039;before%26#039; potentially doing any further damage (should that be the case).

So any measures to reduce CO2 from fossil fuels should be a matter we should seriously consider.

Now that we understand that the CO2 we%26#039;ve added to the cycle from chemically altering fossil fuels is not the same as CO2 we breathe out. This is how the feedback loops play a role.

Feedback loops from CO2 works like this...

CO2 green house gasses increase significantly over a short but sustained period of time (200 years). Whether that be from a sudden influx of constant volcanic activity (assuming there%26#039;s no ash, soot, debris to add to the mix, just CO2), disturbances in a billion year star cycle (fluctuations of sun spots and solar flare radiation from our sun) or that some intelligent species in staggering numbers, burn up enourmous amounts of fossilized, ancient sunlight energy deposits thus transform them into huge quantities of green house gasses... that, for ...some ...reason, dramatically increased more and more every year for the 200 years which gives us the current CO2 levels we are recording... also a fact (but leaving out how there) ...or how this really occurred (now what we also is mainly upheld to be true), and that is, we humans raised it.

Just trying to first establish, taking our scenerio; CO2 is higher, it increased since the Industrial revolution and we can easily attribute man made burning of fossil fuels.

Now back to feedback loops...

The point being, more CO2 equals, more GHGs, and that equates to, the earth%26#039;s atmosphere, absorbing more heat to which the result is, the earth%26#039;s temperature rises. And evidently, the rising temperature, is much more pronounced at the poles, than elsewhere, i.e. the equator.

This is how a feedback loop comes into play... the increase temperatures at the poles, cause and increase in ice melt, the ice melting ALSO releases CO2 and other gasses (i.e. methane, which we%26#039;ve contributed to that from burning fossil fuels as well) from the trapped gasses within the ice.

In the vast places where permafrost exists, which is also closer to the poles, is also increased melting... thus more gasses, not too mention, also, gasses trapped %26#039;beneath%26#039; the ice, are no longer trapped and release as well, thus, increasing the amount of CO2 which is released even more.

All this extra GHG release, combined with our already out of control GHG contribution, only further accelerates the effects of the increased GHG levels, that primarily being, escalated increasing temperatures. The result of which, causes ice and permafrost, to melt even faster, so on and so forth. And when more and more ice melts each year, more land and ocean is exposed.

Snow and Ice have extremely important %26#039;reflective%26#039; properties when it comes to the suns energy and bouncing it back out to space. Oceans on the other hand have a very low-albedo (ice has a very high-albedo). Which means, oceans %26#039;absorb%26#039; much more of the sun%26#039;s energy. This for example, contributes to the warming of the oceans directly in itself. Warming oceans and other bodies of water... can also lead the rise of CO2 and methane as a result, the worst being... melting methane hydrate deposits.

Anyway, that%26#039;s what feedback loops basically are. They exist because again, we%26#039;re in a peak warm period anyway, and we are doing something which may seem small and insignificant, but enough to put things over the edge to the point that feedback loops like these can cause an out of control chain reaction.

Many Scientists have concluded, we may have already pushed the envelope too far and have already reached, a point from which we can%26#039;t return.

Many more scientists remain optimistic there is still time for us do something about reducing GHG levels, at least, enough that we can buy ourselves more time to deal with whatever comes.

And a small minority of scientists... say, this is all being blown out of proportion, we don%26#039;t understand enough about global warming and CO2, etc. So we shouldn%26#039;t make a big deal out of it like the Kyoto Protocol for example.

Where you fit into this... that%26#039;s your business, but to believe it is all NOTHING to remotely worry about... I%26#039;m just glad not everyone shares your opinion on that, because I think it is better to be pro-active about this than to be in denial over it altogether and just continue with %26#039;business as usual%26#039;.


[Edit]
Per your comment to me aceking52…

The cycle in which positive and negative climatic feedback loops eventually works itself out, but now is very different. If you think of our planet as an ecological biosphere, it has found a sort of equilibrium which has lasted millions and millions of years. But until now, this had only included all natural variability. Again… at a point in earth’s consistent rhythm of cycles in-between ice ages and interglacial periods, and the warm periods like we see today, we are at the warmest peak at any point of it.

The only time in earth’s history in the last 55 million years that we know the earth has gotten warmer than what it is now… is never. The only time CO2 levels have been as high as they are now, for at least, the last three ice ages on the planet, is now.

These are facts that may explain why a very rare phenomenon known only as global warming, is occurring. It is not the fault of nature; nature merely got us alllll the way up to this warm point, at the tippy-top of the warm-temp cycle.

I%26#039;d go on, but it is not possible to put any more text into this answer and response. I just hope you%26#039;ll eventually understand, this is something we can%26#039;t ignore any more.

• Answer hidden due to its low rating

  co2does%26#039;nt have anything to do with the cause of global warming. it decipates long before it gets to high.