Wow, ad hominem argument and appeal to absent authority from a global warmist - how amazingly persuasive - and how unusual.

The fact of the matter is, the entire belief system that we face catastrophic man-made global warming rests on the underlying belief that the globe is in fact warming. It isn't, and it is common ground that it hasn't been since 1998.

So the warmists fall back to an assertion that the general trend is warming, and that the argument still holds good, notwithstanding the suppression of data, fraud, vested interests, etc.

However this argument in turn depends on what time is taken as the starting point of the analysis. You'll get a different general trend depending whether you take as your starting point 40 years, or or 400 years, or 4,000 years, or 400,000 years, or 4,000,000 years or 40,000,000 years, or 4000 million years. The choice of starting times is not supplied by the science. The significance is a matter of interpretation. It is arbitrary.

However the abysmal defects of the climatological argument are the least of the warmists' problems. As I have pointed out repeatedly, and no warmist has dared to reply to - except with ad hominem argument - the climate science does not and cannot supply value judgments. Even if we assume - very much in the warmists' favour - that there is no issue with their shamanistic gizzard-lore, they still will not have got to square one in establishing an argument in favour of any policy measure whatsoever. The fact that they don't even seem to understand this point is the most frightening aspect of their born-again sack-cloth and ashes totalitarianism.

Well Kevin Rudd certainly could do with being more positive and clear on the issue, he seems to have slipped into an election based focus and for some reason is behaving like he is fighting for his life. I would have to call this article the biggest load of ignorant rubbish i have read in years.
Why has this all slipped away? Because we the Australian public have lost momentum on the subject. We have made it clear that we are not prepared to pay the price for fixing the problem we created. We are against rising power bills, we are sucked in by Toni Abbott and the "big new tax" CON.
The general public are like smokers, we are polluting the lungs of the world but we want someone else to pay the health bill.
The delay is non existent really. Three years when the truth is even if the government pushed on now the earliest it would probably pass would be June 2011. This is probably a delay of about 6 months in real terms a delay that would not be needed if the country were not so in love with the sceptics that are holding back the process.
In the future when the world is ecologically on its knees and we live in artificially sustained environments, the climate change sceptics and the battle to save the environment will be remembered with the feeling of tragic failure that the allies have over the holocaust. "we knew but we didn't know it was that bad", rubbish the world knows how bad the situation is they are just lost in a selfish society of have it all now and tuff for the future.
If you want to see change for the better, stop being entertained by the Neanderthal that calls himself the opposition leader and take responsibility for the future, say you are happy to pay double for power and fuel. Accept the cost of saving the environment and think about your great grandchildren not the new 3D plasma screen that you have to have.

qanda

You oddly requested "proof" of something AGW people like yourself have been saying for a long time, but have been proven wrong and are now acting as if you now never believed it; That is that much of Australia was in drought and this would continue to worsen. I'm not sure now why you are pretending never to have believed this?! Probably because the largest amount of water in a long time has flooded inland Australia and you are embarrassed by it.

Its cold weather that ties up water in glaciers not warming! The world is driest during cold periods not warm periods. Antarctica is the worlds driest continent.Warming releases water,isn't that basic to the whole AGW hypothesis?

But anyway, seeing you have suddenly "forgotten" and you want proof that people in your camp believed this here is a link below. I know how sensitive you are links which are not to pro-AGW people or organisations and how you are prone to dismiss them without reading them so I guess I better link to your own people. This quote in particular is quite telling.

http://www.climatechange.com.au/tag/drought/

"If you ask Australia’s national science agency, the CSIRO, about climate change, the outlook is bleak. By 2030 rainfall on the major capitals (except Hobart) could drop by 15 per cent. According to the 2001 report, Climate Change Projections for Australia, Perth could loose up to 20 per cent of rainfall. At the same time, rising temperatures will increase evaporation, further reducing water supplies in dams, rivers and reservoirs."

Also

http://weatherforecasting.suite101.com/article.cfm/indian_ocean_controls_climate

"Southeastern Australia has experienced almost continuous drought conditions"

And Peter Hume

Do you really know who funds climate change research? Here is a list which might be of interest to you.

http://www.iigcc.org/membership.aspx

Also Peter, the question is not about throwing away the Hadley data its about why Jones failed to supply it even to non skeptics then suddenly "lost it" when put under pressure to produce. His explanation of this is at a the level of a schoolchild who hadn't done his homework yet you seem to believe him.

Peter Hume

Apologies, my latter comments were accidentally directed to you but should have also been directed to qanda

qanda
Do you really know who funds climate change research? Here is a list which might be of interest to you.

http://www.iigcc.org/membership.aspx

Also the question is not about throwing away the Hadley data its about why Jones failed to supply it even to non skeptics then suddenly "lost it" when put under pressure to produce. His explanation of this is at a the level of a schoolchild who hadn't done his homework yet you seem to believe him.

A good post Atman and its reference to the investors in CC,which of course includes the Nobel prize winning shonks such as Gore and Pachauri..which are not looking too good, after all.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/al_gore_is_lying_low_for_good.html

It would be delightfully poetic for Gore and his shonky mates to lose the lot.

Pity the heaterist scientific fraternity that have remained silent for so long in regard to Gore etc, were not also called to account.

Kevin promises much but delivers little. He has become a joke.

I wonder if he's anything more than a human talking machine.