Er, Protagoras, warming is but one of several theories to explain the Permo-Triassic extinction, and not the most satisfactory, so making the categorical statement that the Permo-Triassic extinction was due to 'great warming' is more than a little disingenuous.

After all, it's not good science to take an unproven hypothesis and state that 'the science is settled', is it?

Clownfish... in view of your comments, I hope you and everyone else will dig their heels in against Cap and TRADE laws.. which are intended to benefit political/corporate networks more than fix the planet.

Are you aware of that vast and well connected network ?

Don't vote Green
Don't vote Labour

For Australia's sake.

Clownfish – who are you to hypothesise? A nobody! Who am I to hypothesise? Nobody, and that’s why I glean my information from the world’s most eminent palaeontologists. I suggest you do likewise since the most recent hypotheses emerging from today’s extensive research implicate carbon perturbations in past extinctions.

Only industry deviants, industry parasites, creationists and ignoramuses would trivialise the current unprecedented rapidity of atmospheric carbon emissions from human activity:

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/april/prehistoric-mass-extinction-042710.html

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/about/shortcourses/shortcourse08.php

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050223130549.htm

http://filebox.vt.edu/artsci/geology/mclean/Dinosaur_Volcano_Extinction/pages/studentv.html

“There are toooo many vested political interests in that pie.” Algoreisrich - What you actually mean is that carbon mitigation might impede your selfish vested interests!

The debate on climate change is the result of the environmental and white collar crimes committed by industrial and financial barons (the clones of Charles Ponzi) in the ‘free’ market, the think tank whores that support them and the bribery of corrupt politicians.

But 'free' markets for whom? The industrial and multi-national corporations who are bludging off the environment by means of corruption, fraudulence, vandalism, cruelty, graft and unscrupulousness!

A few come to mind – guilty of crimes against the environment and humanity:

Bernie Madoff and the rest of Wall Street, BHP Billiton, Exxon, Rio Tinto, Barrick Gold, Chevron, Allan Hawkins – Equitorp, Brian Burke, Alan Bond, Christopher Skase, Monsanto and Dow Chemicals et al (crimes against humanity and biodiversity), Don Blakenship - Massey Energy, BP, Shell, James Inhofe, Steve Milloy (fake scientist), CEI, and Professor Patrick Michaels (sucking off the oil teat).

Then there's the American Petroleum Institute, Steve McIntyre, Marc Morano (professional douche bag), Bjorn Lomborg (serial liar), Fred Seitz, Fred Singer, Heartland Inst. (all tobacco shills sucking off the corporate teat), Ian Plimer,(remorseless fraud), the hysterical Toad of Toad Hall (aka Monckton) and more.

The industrial barons and industrial whores have had every opportunity to cease the carnage they commit yet they resort to fraud, unscrupulousness and chicanery.

A ‘command and control’ regulatory system and the ‘polluter pays principle’ needs to be enforced or the frontline cadavers, their greed-induced parasites and the rest of humanity will have to pay for it one way or another. Get it?

Protagoras,
I've been staying out of this one, but I'm cheering you on the sidelines!

A great effort, on gratuitous, pointless, vilification and lies, Protagoras.

You conveniently overlook the fact that all that is required from you, or any of the alarmist backers contributing baseless nonsense to this thread, is a reference to one peer reviewed study from reputable scientists giving a basis for asserting that human emissions contribute in any measureable way to global warming.

If you cannot do that, then stop wasting everyone’s time, making a fool of yourself, talking about everything but the topic, and giving irrelevant references.

There is no scientific basis for the assertion of AGW.

The past grubby and futile efforts of Naomi Oreskes are well known, and seeing her name on the article should make you aware that, to be correct and honest in your view, you simply have to align yourself with the opposite of what the article says.

Leo Lane,
maybe take a look at this link: http://www.skepticalscience.com/Empirical-evidence-that-humans-are-causing-global-warming.html

it should be dumbed-down enough even for dip-sticks, such as your good self, who just can't find the good oil.

Of course you know damn well that science acknowledges all, even miniscule, doubts about it's findings, which you lot represent as flawed data. As though anyone can guarantee even that the sun will come up tomorrow! Science has to deal with empirical probabilities in the absence of absolute knowledge. This is shrewd economics compared to the reckless, indeed cynical, gambling of the house you lot are engaged in.
I look forward to the next IPCC report, and the next campaign from you lot to discredit it. He who laughs last will have nothing to laugh about!