Some of you people need to go back and read my posts again and stop inferring what my positions are. I am not , repeat not, in favour of the governments carbon tax. It won't do anything to reduce emissions. It is aimed at the wrong targets. Having said that, something must be done to rein in our profligate use of resources.

I agree that there is a possibility of some natural warming taking place, but because of the large input by humans, there is more than a possibility of there being an anthropogenic effect as well. I cannot see any possibility of this effect being reversed until the world population is reduced. We may well run out of resources before this happens at some time in the indefinite future. Current forecasts of a slowing of the population increase seem a bit nebulous, but it doesn't appear to be happening just yet. The birth rate is slowing, but modern medicine is increasing the survival rate. Please note that I don't advocate any deliberate killing of anyone just to accomplish this.

Despite what Runner believes, nature, not God, might well intervene and the survivors will be those who adapt best to the changed environment, as has happened in the past in the evolution of homo sapiens. Evolution is a continuing process, it has not stopped and we may well turn out to be just a blip in history. There is a distinct possibility that ultimately the species homo sapiens may become extinct as did our predecessors. If we follow the advice of Lord Monkton and do nothing, we will just hasten the event.

David

The whole CAGW-CLIMATECHANGE-CARBONPOLLUTION-CLEANENERGYFUTURE-(...x?...) is a damnable spectacle.

Latest Climate Gate 2.0 emails expose the depth of the corruption of institutional science. Scientists so easily bought to provide the fig leaf the governing class need. Multiplying of bureaucracies, fanatical tax and spend, regulatory control over every energetic movement in society - and the goal? impregnable power, creation of a kind of hereditary caste. And the war they wage is against us, in whom they've bred apathy, disengagement, and atomistic disempowerment - especially by allowing a sickening flood of sexual pollution, state dependency, regulatory attacks on fatherhood and marriage, free speech and our Christian tradition. Non-liberal threats to liberal dominion.

They know how to assure their own survival and that of their family and friends.

Lawless and arrogant they've become utterly disconnected from reality e.g. Wall Street http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/2011/12/10/the-cult-of-wall-street/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-cult-of-wall-street

And the various public broadcasters and their group think? of their statutory obligations? they haven't hesitated to wed themselves to the public scandal. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/08/the-bbc-and-climate-change-a-triple-betrayal-ho-ho/#more-52709

There'll be a reckoning, and I wonder if they don't know it deep down which is why they're in so much of a rush - they don't have much time.

Father M’lord, you have made my Christmas >>

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/a/u/1/9K74fzNAUq4

Followed by;

http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/a/u/0/1xx5h1KNMAA

Ergo, the “Monkton Manoeuvre” - with 12 days to go, you gotta laugh!

It makes you wonder from what mental illness the good lord is suffering. His acolytes must be similarly affected. He seems to be quite adept at continually shooting himself in the foot. However, it is nearly Christmas so we must be charitable.

David

VK3AUU David writes

'Despite what Runner believes, nature, not God, might well intervene and the survivors will be those who adapt best to the changed environment, as has happened in the past in the evolution of homo sapiens.'

The nation of Israel which was much smaller in number than many others throughout history makes a mockery of your theory.

I have little time for the denialist brigade who think because they can equivocate over the ultimately uncertain causes of global warming they may continue business as usual. But I'm getting even less tolerant of those who accept the science of AGW--even the scientists--but refuse to look critically at the economics of the carbon tax. I've posted again and again that a carbon tax is untenable because it's based on economic growth, and economic growth means increased carbon emissions. This is not rocket science! So why are so many adherents of action on AGW uncritical of an unviable method? Just as the deniers deny for the sake of business as usual, so do the adherents of global warming and a carbon tax base their stance on business as usual. Neither side wants to acknowledge the need for RADICAL change.