Once upon a time the Pope prevented free speech. Now it is the gw High priests trying to defend the indefensible. You can protect people who use union credit cards for prostitutes and PM's who make a habit of lying but don't call into questions those who manipulated data and has everyone laughing at them for their ridiculous predictions. Talk about the blind trying to dictate to those who can see through this religious farce.

I have never stated any support for AGW, what I have stated is in support of Climate Change, both mutually exclusive. Most of the rebuttal here relates to weather not climate, a big difference.

As in all rebuttal, one only has to look at the long-term history of scientific denial, first it was rebuttal and pseudo-science trying to debunk, the dangers of smoking, acid rain, ozone depletion, passive smoke dangers and now climate change. The people attempting to debunk climate science are from the same ilk.

I will stick to the peer reviewed facts, supplied by experts in their own field and organisations with excellent track records of honesty and integrity.

Geoff, I can see I have taken you too seriously; you claim not to support AGW but "climate change"; presumably by that you mean NATURAL climate change.

Yet you say this:

"The people attempting to debunk climate science are from the same ilk."

How can people be "deniers" of AGW when you agree it is not occurring?
How can these people be grouped together with the usual suspects, smoking, ozone, acid rain when AGW is not happening yet smoking is plainly harmful and acid rain did exist? You can't group people who argue against something which is a scam with people who argue against some things which are real and harmful. That is just dumb.

No one is debunking climate change.It has always been thus,climate has always changed.Nothing remains static in our universe.

The argument is about the influence of CO2 and there is nobody who can define the exact parameters of this gas.CO2 has never in the past been the over riding influence of temp.It has always followed temp increases by some 800 yrs.The ice core data supports this.

Arjay, yet another half-baked conspiracy guff:

" CO2 has never in the past been the over riding influence of temp.It has always followed temp increases by some 800 yrs. "

CO2 can both lead, and lag, temperature change.

I suggest you resist getting your science from your favourite conspiracy blog sites.

Here's a tip, read up more on glaciation/de-glaciation, and Milankovitch cycles.

"CO2 can both lead, and lag, temperature change."

When there is a discernible correlation between CO2 levels and temperature, and that is rare, CO2 is always the dependent variable which means it does not cause temperature movements but vice-versa.

But no need to worry, no doubt the redoubtable Finkelstein QC is on top of the CO2/AGW conundrum and will make decisions for the benefit of us all, as befits his superior station in life.