Herbert, in answer to your questions:

"1. How do YOU know that it is warming? A lot of evidence has emerged in recent times showing that much of the 'wsrming' is actually due to unexplained 'adjustments' to the temperature record."

-The "Adjustment" is called homogenisation of data and it is necessary to account for instrument degradation and changes to the areas surrounding stations. All station data needs "adjustment" to make the data usable for forecasting and longer term climate monitoring. The science has *not* been impacted by homogeneity adjustments. If it were there would be outrage by climate scientists at such shoddy work.
What you are actually mentioning here is the failure of "sceptics" to understand the very basics of climate science.
As for the other evidence: Animal migration, ice loss, tropical convergence zone expansion and last but not least: temperature measures from oceans, air and ground.
BTW. Ask the Russians how they "know" the climate is changing!

...cont

"2. How do YOU know that anthropogenic carbon emissions are causing warming, if it is occurring? The science says that a doubling of CO2 (if it were to happen) would lead to around 1 deg C warming. Any warming more than that relies on assumptions of positive feedback which are by no means proven."

The best theories say that CO2 + feedbacks are relevant and provide specific predictions as to how the warming should proceed. Evidence backs this theory up and has eliminated all the viable competing theories. Sun output, cosmic rays and clouds, various periodic theories as well as less likely theories have all had their predictions compared with CO2...and CO2 is the last one left standing. As for "unproven" feedback: Satellite measures are in accordance with these theories, as is all terrestrial data collected over last decade.
Sorry, but amongst climate scientists there are no viable competing theories, and the predictions of CO2 are being matched so well that no one qualified is doubting it much...A bit like discarding electro-magnetism for "ether theory": not necessary, not rational.

"3. The IPCC has been thrown into disregard through numerous overstatements and inaccuracies in recent months. The Climategate e:mails affair has revealed that many climate scientists have been engaging in advocacy and cutting corners on the science."

It has been thoroughly investigated and found to be a beat-up. No misbehaviour has been found, just that scientists get stroppy if they are constantly hounded by those wasting their time. (who wouldn't?)
Of the IPCC's thousands of submissions they found 3 or 4 statements that were more hyperbole than fact. the rest of this international summary document has been found to be essentially accurate. How many company annual reports could be said to be that accurate?
Read the New Scientist review of the IPCC beat ups if you actually want a balanced report.

Bob Brown should pay more attention to the electoral research run by both Labor and the Liberal of which he must have gleaned some hints.
Power bills have gone through the roof in recent years. Up 40 per cent since 2007 (compared to about 8 per cent for inflation generally). Very little of that increase has to do with green power but any suggestion of adding further to power bills through an impossibly expensive remake of the entire Australian grid is poison at the moment, even if it was technically possible which is doubtful. On a par with suggestions for increasing immigration. Why do you think the Libs have been harping on about power bills? Why do you think the CPRS got deferred? And never mind the technicalities and talk of moral challenges. Even if Brown gets into coalition with Gillard he will have extreme difficulty in getting even moderate proposals up, if it means increases to power bills.

TCM “By putting forward a war-chest of options, the ZCA sets out the possibilities. I believe it is our responsibility to take action by doing what we can. At the least we will reduce the rate of depletion of fossil fuel reserves.”

Well you do that TCM

But I insist on opting-out of your “responsibility”

“And in terms of over-consumption and materialism, this comes down to education. People can learn to be more responsible with their choices”.

Imho I acquired sufficient “education”, although my wife is insatiable but only in her quest for greater knowledge and qualifications.. but we are both “responsible” in our choices already, they being all within the limits of our income budget...


Re “People don't want to give up their big 5-room, energy-sucking mansions 40km away from where they work.”


You might not agree with what are our personal choice of 54 sq, 6 bedroom house, complete with ballroom, music room, 3 spas (two in. One out), four toilet and four showers and a few lounge rooms, where my wife and I choose to live but, just as I do not seek to influence your private choices, you do not get to determine how much we earn nor how we choose to spend it

But on the enviro-plus side, I mix between a 10km road trip and telecommuting, whilst my wife has her clinic in our double garage (converted for the purpose).



Hasbeen ” Their whole program is now in collapse. Much of it now lies abandoned & rusting because it just won't work.”

Sounds like the UK Nationalised industries, immediately before dearest Margaret sorted the hulks out..

The outrageous squandering of taxes on schemes of collectivist “nation building”

I have no problem with “alternate energy”, happy to invest in what might work but

it has to pay-its-own-way and not rely on tax-payer subsidy or regulation to curb the effectiveness of traditional, competetive processes,

Nor by the draconian regulations demanded by the emotionally twisted zealots of any political camp

*But I disagree that what Australia does is irrelevant. Australia has had a big impact in the world of medicine by leading the way in research over the years.*

TCM, there is a difference here. It's fine for Australia to
do some research in these areas. That is quite different to
what Bob is proposing, ie rush headlong into building huge
projects which globally have yet to be proven over time.

So build a demonstration project, test the technology.

Now that US Venture capital is entering this industry
in a big way, what we know today could well be out of
date tomorrow, or available cheaper and better.

Somebody has to pay for Bob's grand schemes and it will
either be taxpayers or consumers. Given what he is
proposing, the cost is enormous, the risk enormous.

The actual benefits in terms of effect on climate?
Nothing.

Perhaps we should learn to walk properly, before we
decide to run as Bob proposes, throwing megadollars
at yet another scheme that sounded like a good idea
at the time. History shows that the law of unintended
consequences, invariably kicks in and things don't
land up quite as envisaged. Only the huge Govt debt
left by these schemes, takes generations to pay off

Stern, the house sounds lovely. WOW!

I spent many years living in the 20Ft by 7Ft 11 inches of my yacht that you could reach without crawling. My carbon foot print was so small that even a crazed greenie could not have found it.

I believe I now deserve such a home, but could not face the cleaning.

Trashcanman, the GFC was caused by ridiculous lending policies forced onto the banks by crazy socialists lending policies coming from the Clinton White House.

Spain's misguided investment in wave power for example failed because it didn't work.

Any generation technology which requires any kind of subsidy, or forced percentage of use, [still a subsidy] is a failure, & has no place in a free country. It is most unfair that many ordinary Spaniards are now paying for greenie lies, & excesses. As green garbage doesn't work it should be scrapped.

Ozandy, you sound like a reasonably well educated person. Please do us the courtesy of recognising that many of us are also reasonably well educated, & stop pushing your unbelievable propaganda. No one, with out a vested interest in AGW such as yourself, could even to pretend to believe it.

For those misguided folk here, who have some emotive reason to pay excess for their electricity, I say good on you, go for it. I also say, mind your own business. I have no such misguided reason, & have no interest in joining you in your foolishness.