>> That such warming is occurring is a hypothesis which can be tested against the last ten years of data, which are: carbon dioxide increase – +5%; temperature decrease – -0.05O C. <<

That’s where I lost interest.

It was not so long ago that the inimitable Professor championed the 'global warming stopped in 1998' meme.

Then it was 2005, then 2009, then ... you get the drift (sorry, I mean trend).

Carter's not stupid - he's got quals in marine stratigraphy after all - and is an adjunct professor to boot. He even trots out his opinions in a book he totes around the country-side, also in a boot.

Reminds me of Ian Plimer (another geologist with mining interests) doing the Australian road show - with the Lord himself, Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount of Brenchley – pin-up boy of the Science & Public Policy Institute, right-wing think-tank extraordinaire.

Margaret Thatcher (rip) must be cringing in her grave, given her strong stance on addressing global warming – but that’s another story, as the current UK government is well aware of.

Whether Carter understands time series trend analysis (or not) is really not at issue. What is at issue is that Carter prefers to trot out deliberate distortions to an unknowing public based on his own vested interests.

What else can a pin-up boy of the Lavoisier Group and the Heartland Institute do – except maybe getting published in Quadrant, writing articles for the conservative press, or appearing for that radio shock-jock, Alan Jones?

Hang-a-mo … wasn’t Bob Carter saying “don’t listen to the shock jocks on carbon”?

I don't think Carter said that at all (more like an OLO editorial missive).

Perhaps instead, Carter really does want the unknowing public to get their 'education' from shock-jocks and the so called 'denial-o-blog'.

I see Bob Hawke has come out in support of Gillards blatant lying....

Well, what would you expect from an arrogant, adulterous narcissist and drunk

Next Keating will be out, defending Gillards orchestrated slow down (= crash and stall) of the national economy (see current reports on slowdown) as just another "Recession we had to have"

Of course, Socialism will lie and steal from your pocket to justify their abominable policies of stupid equalization (lets face it their cousin, communism does the same and adds mass murder to the list of disgusting non-values).

Why would anyone vote for any new, pointless tax, designed to remove the incentive of reward for personal action?

If, Like the despicable Bob Hawke, they claim it is to "make a better world for your children" - then that is just another lie.....

because, at the rate the socialists are going.....

You will not be able to afford to have children

Right Col, got it ... it's all a communist plot by:

blatant lying, arrogant, adulterous, narcissist, drunk, stealing, abominable, stupid, mass murderering, disgusting, pointless and despicable child haters.

Umm, Col, seek help. Seriously, your paranoia has gone a tad too far.

yes bonmot, so unlike the chicken little tax that the world will end if we don't pay tax now (for no discernable effect.)

I see that all the alarmists are now locked in the war against the great plot and conspiracy by Murdock media .. now there's a conspiracy for you .. oh, you're part of it, sorry, carry on with your war against the right, the shock jocks, Murdock, blog sites that disagree, bloggers who have their own TV show now and doing famously.

And if we do pay the tax, what do you reckon will happen? Very shortly it will be a mess with the wrong people being compensated, a huge government department to manage it, then the tax will have to go up to cover the increasing cost of managing the system .. still no discernible good being done but lots of activity.

Who gets the money? I imagine some of it will end up in general revenue, like it's not meant to.

The government want a win, and look at all the stops being pulled out for this, all the useful idiots lining up for their parts, do you think the BS detectors are not going off in people's minds? Or are you one of the people who think opinion is only influenced by "shock jocks"? How sad if you do .. Australians are not that stupid and are clearly rejecting this tax and the principles it is laid on .. otherwise, why bother with a media campaign, and all the hate troops on the internet marshalled for the attack on fellow citizens.

You also run the huge risk that paying this tax, will be the end of anyone caring about the environment, why should they .. they are paying a tax to the government to care for them.

Win a battle, lose the war. Your call.

But please go on attacking anyone who disagrees, it seems obvious you enjoy that now more than the possible beneficial effects.

Anger is quite a motivator, isn't it bonmot?

bonmot "Umm, Col, seek help. Seriously, your paranoia has gone a tad too far."

Hardly, Please identify what part of my statement is wrong

Bob Hawke was notorious for his adulterous philandering and drinking...

indeed some reports suggest from the time he came to power until Keating relieved him, Hawke never experienced a hangover because he was PERPETUALLY DRUNK!

and the way he cheated on Hazel is just more of the public record.

Again Keating gave Australia "The Recession it had to have" and according to the national statistics, Australia has just had the worst economic contraction (forewarning of recession), for any quarter in 30 years

Likewise... increasing the family budget by $1,000 per year, er Pro Climate Theorists - which means several time that amount is probably closer - will make affording to support children less possible

as for my reference to communists - again FACT -

Communists and Socialists are "fellow travellers of the Left" and communists are noted for their mass murders... Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mugabe... the filth who run North Korea, Mao Tse Tung and the communists behind the Tienaman Square Massacre - to say nothing of the Russian Tanks rolling into Hungary and Czechoslovakia

So Tell me -

Which part of my comment suggests Paranoia?

and what part of your comment does not suggest a complete denial of historic facts?

[Deleted for abuse.]