Could Brazil really be the cause of the problem?

To the Editor:

This letter is for Al Gore and all the people who believe in global warming.

From 1860 to 1960 (100 years) every ship, train factory, home and power plant (in the world) used coal for power, energy and heat. From 1900 to 2000 (100 years) the internal combustion engine (using gas) started powering cars, trucks, planes, replacing coal used in trains, ships, and power, energy and heat in homes, factories, etc.

Question, why did global warming start now instead of 140 years ago when fossil fuels was being used in abundance? Animal rights activists and the United Nations blame global warming on many animals (our food) in the world, they claim that too much CO2 comes out of one end and methane out the other.

From about 1870 and back the buffalo population (in the U.S. alone) was estimated to be in the hundreds of millions. Now, add them to herds of deer, elk, moose, antelope, caribou, all the animals of Africa, combined with 140 years of fossil fuel use, and the high CO2 levels should have killed all living things on earth.

My question, why didn't it? In school I was taught that all green vegetation (trees, plants) gave off oxygen and took in CO2, and all creatures gave off CO2 and took in oxygen, so in my opinion start protecting all of the worlds forest lands.

I am not a scientist but could the increase in destructive tornadoes (only in the U.S.) be the result of Brazil cutting down vast acres of rain forest and replacing them with sugar cane fields for ethanol be one reason for the weather pattern changes in America?

Dellmer Mouse
Cumberland