After the Second Wold War, during the post-war economic boom, temperatures, in theory, should have shot up, but they didn't, they fell; not for one or two years, but for four decades. In fact, paradoxically, it wasn't until the world... economic recession in the 1970's that they stopped falling. CO2 began increase exponentially in about 1940 but the temperature actually began to decrease in 1940, continued to about 1975 so this is the opposite relation. When the CO2 increasing rapidly but yet the temperature decreasing then we cannot say that CO2 and the temperature go together. Temperature went up significantly up to 1940, ...when human production of CO2 was relative low, and then in the post war years, when industry... and the whole economies of the world really got going, and human production of CO2 just soared the global temperature was going down. In other words: the facts didn' fit the theory. Trusted time when, after the Second World War industry was booming, CO2 was increasing and yet the Earth was getting cooler... and starting off scares of a coming Ice Age, it made absolutely no sense, it still doesn't make sense. Why do we suppose that CO2 is responsible for our changing climate? CO2 forms only a very small part of the Earth's atmosphere. In fact we measure changes in the level of atmospheric CO2 in tenths of parts per million. If you take CO2 as a percentage of all the gases in the atmosphere --the Oxygen, the Nitrogen and Argon and so on-- ...is 0.054 percent and it's an incredibly small portion and then of course you've got to take that portion