If the critics are right, how does it hurt the environment to lower our greenhouse gas output; if they are wrong and we don't lower our output, we are killing off the only planet we have. What will we tell our children if we listen to global-warming critics and do nothing?

Mark Lawson is right: there is little point in trying to argue with the majority of people, who blindly accept the ‘human cause’ theory of climate change. The majority are just sheep who have, for so long, circled around in front of the dogs, bleating, because they don’t know how to do anything else.

When they find out that they have been sold a pup; when the power bills go through the roof, and the climate is still going its own way, they will be amazed and horrified. Too late to do anything then, of course, and they will continue their even more costly blunder through life, waiting for the same bullies who have brought them the greatest con of the 21st century, to lead them by the nose through the next ‘crisis’

Wrong Mr Right.

“The majority of people DO NOT blindly accept the human cause theory of climate change.”

“The majority of people are NOT sheep who have, for so long, circled around in front of the dogs, bleating, because they don’t know how to do anything else.”

Wrong Mr Right, why don’t you take your ideological blinkers off and constructively contribute to solving a global problem.

What the heck, why don’t you even sign up with George W Bush, you might learn something from his new policies and strategies in dealing with climate change – seen his press release today have you?

No? Then try a Google.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jJbf8oA_G6zwKdTKlJJNq_G_g8RQD9037TB80

Oh … how do you expect to garner support for your way of thinking by debasing anyone who may disagree with your point of view?

IMHO … grow up.

The sad part about this is that many gullible people vote for the Greens believing that their scaremongering somehow has a scientific basis. Still if you swallow evolution you are going to swallow the multitudes of lies associated with it. Man made GW is just one of many that the earth worshippers have even convinced themselves of. Mr Howard did himself a great discredit when he caved into acknowledging man made global warming which is being shown more and more to be a fallacy.

“The sad part about this is that many gullible people ...”

think addressing the issues of climate change is based on their political belief.

GW alarmists and denialists are not constructively addressing the issues.

This guy is:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/27/catholicism.religion

Runner, you may wish to have a word with the Pope, he’s got the ear of George as we speak.

As to your claim, “man made global warming which is being shown more and more to be a fallacy.”

Could you please tell us where you get this information?
At least cite your source.
Thanks

This 'cooling' trend is a bit of a statistical contrivance if you start with hot years like 1998. Start the next sequence with 2007. If we wait another decade to clarify the long term trend (which I'm sure will be up) then the horse will have bolted. I think you only have to look at the hardship experienced by irrigators along the Murray to see that something is seriously amiss.

One saving grace of a carbon cap as opposed to a tax is that if recession causes fossil fuel usage to fall below the cap then it is no longer binding. A tonne of CO2 is then worth zero as we are within prescribed limits. If that doesn't happen perhaps we could afford the price increases after all. Some claim that the recent explosion in market prices for coal, oil and gas is a sign that their effective depletion is nearer than we think and that warming might be limited to only 2C. Note however how tough things are getting with 0.6C of warming. If as seems certain that supplies of water and energy are more volatile in the future that is a harsh legacy for todays children. Either way the transition to low carbon is inevitable and it seems unlikely that vested interests will make that path any smoother.