Amicus
I know all parties oppose when in opposition and that more often than not they do so for the sake of living up to their opposition status.

What has been missing up until very recently is the organisation of those protests by elements of the media and the dangerous vitriol contained in the messages they broadcast and or publish. They forget that they are often preaching to some people with very low intellect and that area easily aroused into anger.
That is where the hysteria I speak of emanates. By comparison, Labor when in opposition sounds just as banal as the coalition but are nowhere near as dangerous and hysteria producing in their rhetoric.

I never said that the RW don’t believe in climate change. But IAM saying that is what they say. They couch their arguments by mentioning one or two professors’ names and that impresses those people mentioned above. They fail to mention that for every scientist that say no there are probably 6-7 that say yes, there is a hug
e problem and we have to do something about it.
They then tell those some people this is going to ruin them financially when they know that if we are to do anything at all to comply with our bit of effort towards solving or delaying this issue it is going to cost regardless of the scheme.

What I re-iterate is that the RW changes and bends the truth to appeal to those people I speak of. They are mainly over 50 and still think she’ll be right mate.

As for you Amicus, the tone of your reply indicates you view me as a Labor or left wing supporter. I am neither nor, obviously am I a right wing supporter. What I am in my humble opinion, is someone who thinks, rightly or wrongly, as you might think. However, I am not, as many with those placards I am sure are, apt to be told what to think and then follow those instructions blindly

CLIMATE CHANGE - HOW CAN "THEY" EVEN DOUBT IT?

How, Rubens?

As Amicus rightly notes, the issue is not whether the planet's climate changes; it's about CAUSATION, about what precisely drives the changes over time.

This internal ALP strategy paper shows how desperate the government is to justify imposing its - NOT CARBON, but CARBON DIOXIDE - tax. It's using the same tactics, spin and dishonesty as its ex-NSW colleagues and will suffer the same fate: http://www.quadrant.org.au/Labor's%20tax%20strategy.pdf

Here's how and why "they" doubt it. An informed deconstruction by Bob Carter, Alan Moran & David Evans is here: http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2011/04/climate-change-facts

If the government is so confident it's right, let's have (i) an election on the issue NOW; and (ii) a Royal Commission into the whole farce, including the CSIRO, its politicised climate scientists and the "storylines"/"predictions" of its dodgy models; the integrity of national databases, etc, etc.

The OZ public deserves much better than Professor "1,000 years" Flannery's stage-managed Travelling Alarmist/Salvation Show (aka The Climate Commission).

Alice (in Warmerland)

Jeezus, Alice, Quadrant? – Is that your source of information? –

You might as well say America’s Tea party movement is the repository of all knowledge and what is good in the world. Further, you could add that it also happens to be your most reliable source for current information

Here is a chance for you to educate yourself. Take a surf through these websites… They are NOT political.
Just the facts, Maam!

http://reg.bom.gov.au/climate/change/amtemp.shtml

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/index.html

RubensSydney,

Other than touting the labor line have you anything real to offer.

The coalition fully understands that climate change is happening, and that something needs to be done. Also that a carbon tax is an effective tool if this is reciprocated amongst the major trading countries.

However, the carbon tax in Australia alone will have almost zero effect on world wide emissions at a huge cost to Australian small business and families.

P.S. Radio is faster than fibre optic, as light slows down in glass, and also does not travel in a straight line. It is no faster than electrical signals in wire. The issue is bandwidth not speed.

Also land line phones are far cheaper with better calls, but most calls go via mobiles that absorb 90% of expenditure. Why is that? wireless internet grew 50% last year, and is not slowing down.

P.S.

http://resources.news.com.au/files/2011/04/05/1226033/691891-110405-newspoll.pdf

Looks as though federal labor is on the nose with the carbon tax and NBN.