Arjay, what does "hide the decline" mean?

why don't you tell us bonmot since you're always demanding everyone provide explanations which you then deride, and we do notice, you never provide anything .. just vague allusions to having done so.

But no one remembers you doing so .. please enlighten us with your vast knowledge, and spare us the bile for a change

I don't need to provide evidence of why I'm skeptical, I'm not claiming we need to change anything,you are.

I am also skeptical of water divining, but do not have to provide a means of actually finding water underground to prove my skepticism surely?

Thus yours and many of the alarmists claims that anyone who is skeptical must provide an alternative to what is causing AGW is undone.

You claim the world is going to hell, prove it .. without the smarmy attacks or dodging , just for once, stick to the questions.

Why should you answer, because you constantly demand it of others, not to answer would be hypocritical surely, or is that acceptable in the "faith".

Peter Mac "Anyone with an IQ over 100 and some experience in data analysis knows that you can generally fashion data to support your own argument. Hence, one man's hero is another man's charlatan, and visa versa. This is why there will be no resolution to this discussion."

I do so agree.

In this instance we unfortunately live in a democracy and

and IQ of 100 is the average of that democracy....

It is not the electorate with +100 IQ and the ability to see through the argument

it is the voting trends of the electorate with an IQ of less than 100 (the other half) who concern me

It's a familiar and silly argument, that denialists don't have to prove anything; that it's up to the scientists to prove their point. It demonstrates a rather poor understanding of the scientififc process.

It also ignores the fact that climate scientists have delivered a theory which is accepted by most researchers, which is based on observation and measurement, and which is continually being improved. This complex theory has been extensively published in the scientific literature, and has been refined but not refuted.

rpg says: "I don't need to provide evidence of why I'm skeptical, I'm not claiming we need to change anything,you are." This is of course true, insofar as rpg isn't obliged to provide evidence about his own thought processes. But if rpg refuses to provide evidence (about the science, not about his own thinking), he can hardly be expected to be taken seriously.

And (for the umpteenth time) if you want to know about climate science, go to the climate science literature. That is where climate scientists publish their work, for all to criticise or praise, refute or reinforce.

nicco "And (for the umpteenth time) if you want to know about climate science, go to the climate science literature. That is where climate scientists publish their work, for all to criticise or praise, refute or reinforce."

Many people who can "reason", "analyse" and "consider" are looking at the forecasts and prophecies of "Climate Science" and finding fault with them

All the theory of Climate Science is focused on what will happen several decades out.

Today it is Warming, back in the 1970s it was Nuclear Winter and freezing.

Skeptics are skeptics because they, like me remember the false prophets of the past and how thier predictions failed to eventuate.

The point with all this is now

the speculative prophecies of climate science are about to be used to shift economic resources, through taxation and subsidy, on a massive scale.

That choice, by this Australian government, goes beyond the test-lab into my and every one elses living room.

I do not give a rats that some scientific theorist thinks global warming means the end of mand kind as we know it. I am apllowed to disagree and ignore him

I am big enough to allow such scientific fantasists to coexist on this planet with me

What I do not accept is a government has a devine right to thrust climate science fantasies down my throat and out of my pocket, especially when I see the hand of the socialist "levellers" behind all this climate change rubbish.

So, I am big enough to live and let live..... I expect climate scientists to respect my right to dissent with their view and to stop trying to hamstring me to their theory without the right of skeptical counter analysis to the "J" curves and other twaddle and down right lies they have so far presented as "undeniable fact" .....

Oh come on nicco, & the rest of you authority merchants.

How long ago was it known that stress caused stomach ulcers.

When you have a bunch of dills, spouting that which they were taught by a bunch of even bigger dills, you get orthodoxy. Sometimes called climate science

Now add in some smarties using the dills, & you get a rip off, & that's definitely called climate science.