That is a lot of great information! It opens me up to several questions. I wonder if we get a couple ideas mixed up. One main line of thinking is "hey we are emitting all this carbon, we are effecting the planet badly so we should stop or ice meltage will burry coasts underwater. So things like chem trails and weather modifications are justified to fix the problem

But in the past when humans had no industrialization there was so much carbon in the atmosphere that plants and animals were very large! This was good for the plants which breath carbon dioxide. The land masses were also much larger being above water in the past in many places long covered. This shows us that this worry we have and are blaming on our carbon use, has happened before without industry. This planet has gone through warming tropical weather supportive of vast expansive immense creatures and plant life. It has also gone into ice age which we have been melting out of for thousands of years.

Now if effort should be made to save lives if people on coasts, that's another matter but should we be trying to change nature to save human life. Or preserve nature and adjust our selves accordingly?