There is no nice way to say this so I will be blunt. Your statistics are completely flawed.
I cannot argue that there is or is not global warming, it would be insane to. The fact is we have about 50 years of valid statistical data on the temperature trends of the earth. If you go back farther than that the statistics are not comprehensive enough or are to inaccurate to be statistically valid. Add to that detailed data has only been collected for about the past 20 years on global temperature changes.
It takes 5 years of data to make a valid extrapolation of 1 year into the future for simple cyclical systems. You're looking at extrapolating 100 years of data from 50 at best! You would need another 450 years of data to make that assumption. And weather is not even a simple cyclical system, it many orders of magnitude more complex. When these statistics are used to look 10 years a head, the limit of their conceivable accuracy, you see only about a tenth to a quarter of a degree increase at the upper bounds of the margin of error.
There has also has not been an attempt to isolate human interaction from natural cyclical events like the activity cycle of the sun. The sun reached the peak of its multi year cycle during this past year. Its energy output has been on the rise for many years now. Most models of global temperature don't take into account the increase of solar radiation over the past years. (Hey there ecologist not astronomers =) With the peak of the solar cycle past solar radiation will reduce over many years till the cycle starts over. But that is not included in current models so as solar radiation drops, and the extra heat that produces on heart drops proportionally those models will diverge from the true temperature.
Any so called expert that can claim to predict the temperature change for the next 100 years is either guessing wildly, ignorant, or plain lying.

Did you know that many of the leading scientists that are crusading to stop global warming today were crusading about 'global cooling' in the 1970's? It amazes me that they have gone from claiming that the temperature of the earth is going to drop by 5-10 degrees over the next 100 years to it's going to increase by 5-10 degrees over the next 100 years. They even proposed to congress that we burn more fossil fuels and spread ash over the arctic ice pack so it will absorb more light from the sun!

The forest (and other natural preserves) and farm land in the US already consume more CO2 than the US produces. How can you say that it would take "tens of millions of years to put all this CO2 out of atmosphere" when the US is already not producing any net CO2?

Hybrid cares are a nice idea but since there is no clean energy source that can provide the volume energy to run a passenger car the point is moot. The electricity for that hybrid car has to be made some where, and most of the power in the world is still made by burning fossil fuels, that still produce CO2. While electric and hybrid cars are better than pure internal combustion cars the miles per gallon statistics are usually very misleading, as they don't include any power requirements out side the gas.

Don't take me for some lets destroy the earth freak, I believe seriously in protecting the environment. But there are better things to do than worry about problems that don't exist.