And fifth, even if AGW theory is correct -- a most unlikely assumption -- what actual difference will gouging an extra $2000 per annum out of every Australian make to global average temperatures in, say, 100 years' time? .02 of a degree? Given that the ambient temperature fluctuates daily by around six degrees and yearly by around ten degrees, just how much improvement in their quality of life are my great-great-grandchildren going to get for my $40 per week?

Geoff. The key prior questions (which to my knowledge haven't been answered) are:

1. Is there really warming happening? If so. How much? There is a lot of evidence that the temperature record has been manipulated/adjusted. Anthony Watts has shown just how few stations comply. Further, why is it that so many stations have been dropped? And why is it that all of the "adjustments" serve to exaggerate the warming?

2. Second. If there is warming, to what degree is it due to anthropogenic causes? This is a key question, that is never answered. The answer is (based on my researching anyhow) is that natural causes are very important. Land-use issues are next. CO2 is a minor factor.

3. Third. The sensitivity to CO2 increasing is a big question. Not satisfactorily answered. No PROOF that CO2 is causing warming.

4. Lets say that CO2 IS a problem (in spite of the lack of evidence). So what do we do? What action can we take that makes any difference at all? Clearly, nothing we can do can make any difference.

I don't know about you, but I am sick of being LIED to about all these issues.

1. CO2 is NOT a pollutant.
2. It is not demonstrated that CO2 is causing global warming.
3. Australia reducing CO2 emissions will make NO difference at all.

Demand that Julia et al answer these questions. Demand that our politicians go to the skeptic websites and USE their intelligence to form a view, rather than just accept what they are told.