Global Warming and Climate Change} Mankinds dilemma !

Mankind is the most advanced species on the planet, most species that exist do not try or attempt to try and change their environment, some plant species can alter the soils so that they are more likely to benefit their own species, Many pine trees do this by making the soils more acidic then other plants can tolerate. Many animals make burrows and den's so that their young have a better chance of survival and for protection from other animals. In my view, beavers do the most to change their environment, not just to improve their young's survival but they dam rivers and streams so that wet and dry years have less of an effect on them. Even many species of ants, keep other insects so that they may have a continuing supply of food. Only mankind completely changes the environment that surrounds them, and without fire, we could not survive. Even if it is an electric fire! I am not a philosopher, I work with my mind and hands I do not ask why I am here. I build to make life easier for myself and others. I teach others how things work, to pass on knowledge to others and the next generations. I understand why so many people need to believe in a higher being, or wanting to know why we are here. I do not think that there are answers to that question unless it is a driving need to find reasons for unexplainable events. How did we come to be such an unusual species on this planet If there is a plan, which I personally doubt, perhaps it is to save all life on the planet. If we are so locked into one cause that we can not see other views, and at least give thought to them, how can we change? We do not have to embrace everyone's belief system, but we should be understanding that much of one's own beliefs are culturally influenced, If mankind was put here on this planet, at this point in time, Could it have been to intervene and prevent all life from becoming extinct! Mathematicians would be quick to point out that for a planet to have supported life for over 3 Billion years and mankind in any recognizable form has only been on this planet for maybe 1 million of those years, (yes let's say that the planet is 4.5 Billion years old) and that I am saying that the planet only has around 1000 years of carbon dioxide left, the chances of mankind development in the waning years of "life" on the planet, would be highly unlikely from a purely mathematical point of view, as only mankind would have the ability to add the necessary carbon dioxide back into the environment! Reach me in the USA at 402-890-7946 or by e-mail if you must@ < danielkadavy212@gmail.com >  So it comes down to why mankind came to be on a planet that needed a thinking and acting species, that would be able to prevent the death of the vast majority of carbon-based life on an otherwise doomed world? Mankind by our very existence, altered this planet long enough to prevent it from entering the next and never-ending ice-age, our own personal needs, un-intentionally speed up the carbon-cycle as soon as our numbers required us to change from a hunter-gather society, to an agricultural-based society, freeing carbon from mid-term storage into the fastest carbon-cycle on the planet, yearly growth, and decay from plantlife. This action by mankind did not stop carbon sequestration from happening on the planet, it simply allowed mid-length carbon storage mainly in the form of tree life to re-enter the atmosphere as carbon dioxide helping to keep levels high enough to maintain the status quo! Only in the last two hundred years did mankind's personal needs for survival, start to actually replace more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, then was being removed by natural carbon sequestration. Had mankind entered the scene several million years early when then were few arid and semi-arid areas on the planet, the extra increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would not have affected the climate of the planet nearly as much as it does now because the temperature regulating ability of the planet caused by cloud cover and the accompanying rainfall would have been much more active, and able to maintain the temperature extremes of the planet with-in a range that would not help foster extreme weather. Dan