Well John J....I did not think I'd see the day when I agree with you :)

but for this:

AGW is the last hope of governments that want to whip up public hysteria for their own ends -- i.e. nearly all governments, including our own.

You deserve a hi 5!

Love your list of ‘climate scientists’ Jon J - TV weathermen, meteorologists etc. Guys like David E. Wojick et al - never having published in a peer-reviewed journal on the subject of climate change. And all those retired irrelevant old codgers, signing anything to get attention? Oh the hilarity of it but there’s always a few retards around to swallow the spin-doctoring.

Alas for the spin-doctors, and according to researchers from the Stanford University, the harsh, glaring reality is this:

Publishing Climate Scientists:

1. CE = Convinced by the evidence on climate change
2. UE = Unconvinced by the evidence on climate change

Only 2% of the UE group were in the top 50 of climate researchers as ranked by expertise (number of publications)

Only 3% of the UE group were in the top 100 and only 2.5% in the top 200.

97% of self-identified, actively publishing climate scientists agree with the tenets of anthropogenic climate change: Oooops!

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html

No problems Jon J because bearing false witness is mandatory in your camp and you’re in good company with minx, Teresa Platt who makes obscene profits from the practice of anal and genital electrocution of fur-bearing animals, including mink, foxes, chinchillas and rabbits. But keep it quiet and try not to excite the camp followers!

Naturally there remains other slaughter methods for her industry, like neck-breaking, gassing, poisoning, clubbing, stomping and drowning.

Anway I’m sure Teresa knows best since she ran a public relations firm specializing in fisheries and other resource-based industries and had a 20-year involvement in the over-fished tuna industry, including many years as operations manager for her family's 1,000-ton seiner.

She’s also had 25 years' experience in public relations, marketing, government affairs, administration and management, with a strong background in resource-based industries working internationally.

Wow - bludging off the environment is profitable and indeed, for the banks that fund them. Violence, greed and ignorance look so good on Platt too (and indeed Palin) while they pimp for the fascist element in the party who are, by fair means or foul, ‘born to rule.'

Protagoras...

I hate to burst your bubble there but such figures as you presented don't really mean a lot. You can structure such things to make a case for anything, and then you can also mock and ridicule those outside your personal comfort loop... (have you formed a club with Pericles and CJ morgan ?)

ClimateGate was real.. is real.. and will continue to be so.

As the wonderfully down to earth Weather chanel founder explained "You have a living.. bills to pay.. you want to do research.. you need grants.. the LAST thing you are going to do is bite the funding hand that feeds your life by trotting out politically incorrect results"

Now.. u know as well as I do that the science is not settled.

You also know there are huge gaps in the data.. "climategate"

But even if it was a fact.. how MUCH of a fact? dodgy sensors.. yada yada...

But let's say we have to DOOOOO something ?

Ok..Professor Joel Rogers (one of Obama's wise oracles) claims

"If we shut down EVery power station... took EVery car and truck off the road...in fact if we wrecked the whole economy.. it still would not bring us down to 60% CO2 emmissions"

So.... I guess were are doomed which ever way we go :) Are you prepared for that moment?

Just avoid voting Green or Labor of anyway which results in Carbon TRADING!

"I hate to burst your bubble there but such figures as you presented don't really mean a lot."

No indeed not AGIR - they mean nothing at all to the aliterate, the illiterate, the ignorant and those who bear false witness.

Incidentally, why don't you practise what you preach pastor?:

"As for the children of men, it is God's way of testing them and of showing that they are in themselves like beasts. For the lot man and of beast is one lot; the one dies as well as the other. Both have the same life-breath and man has no advantage over the beast, for all is vanity. Both go to the same place; both were made from dust and to the dust they both return. Who knows if the life-breath of the children of men goes upwards or the life-breath of the beast goes earthward?" Ecclesiates 16:18-21

Here's one for you, Boazy. Read it and weep:

<< Greens offer Gillard deal on carbon tax

Greens Leader Bob Brown says he has written to Prime Minister Julia Gillard offering a solution to the impasse on the emissions trading scheme.

Senator Brown says if Labor is re-elected the Greens would help the Government pass a carbon tax through the Senate within three months of polling day.

Senator Brown says the Greens deal would hold off on setting targets for emissions cuts until there is a global agreement on climate change, but would place a $23 per tonne price on carbon.

Senator Brown says the plan is similar to the idea put forward by the Government's former top adviser on climate change, Professor Ross Garnaut. >>

Full story at http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/29/2939558.htm

Sorry to let mere facts get in the way of a good "scream/yell/brain_hemorrhage(sic)".

Hi Prograg.... not sure what your hermeneutical angle on that pasaage is there.. mind elaborating ?

CJ.. I don't quite weep..but I do get motivated. Just out of curiosity.... do you really in your heart of hearts see 'carbon trading' as the solution ? Why not something much simpler like a small 'co contribution' by us all to facilitate a lower carbon footprint by supporting Solar renewables in Australia ?

Is it possible that the 'real' reason for the 'trading' bit is that it fits a much broader socio/political agenda ? Hmmmmm...

A price on carbon is ok... as long as it translates into something in and for Australia, and is real and fair.

If it translates into 'development projects in the 3rd world'..then sorry.. zero interest.

So.."yes" or "no" to Carbon "TRADING"?

Yes or no..to 'looking after our own carbon footprint in non commercial ways' ?