The problem with AGW is that although there is a known mechanism for blocking of outward radiation by CO2 the extent of blocking depends on concentration and path length, neither of which can be specified along the path out from the earth. Blocking may cause 6 degrees warming in a century or it may cause only a fraction of a degree. Other natural forces (e.g. Google “Svensmark”) may also cause these variations, or cooling, as they have already done throughout known time.

A dud philosophy of science, widely adhered to in a basically authoritarian culture and promoted by the AGW industry, is the elitist Wittgensteinian view that propositions claiming to be scientific can be evaluated on a head count, weighted for individual importance, of an appropriate "scientific community". Along with some other sceptics including close scientific colleagues I am repelled by three main interrelated aspects of the application of the elitist philosophy to climatic predictions:

*The AGW campaign tactics having all the hysterical, pejorative characteristics of a quasi-religious "bum's rush"
*The appalling history of the same elitist philosophy foisting eugenics on the unsuspecting world until the Nazis brought it to its logical conclusion. (See Edwin Black's "The War Against the Weak" - an eye-opener)
* Philosophical elitism ("Sir says") having been amply shown again and again to lead humanity up the garden path, often catastrophically.

The precautionary principle mandates measures in proportion not only to the worst-case scenario but also to its probability. Scientists can make measurements, but attribution of causes and consequent predictions become increasingly speculative and assertive with distance from the present moment. There are ample good reasons for curbing carbon combustion without buying the AGW industry’s bum’s rush and throwing history into reverse.

What Gillard should have said was, "we do know that over time as a result of the continued absence of actual climate change we are going to see more extreme lying events”.

The author is an "energy campaigner" at Greenpeace Australia Pacific.ie a paid pest who is apparently unable to think any of his ideas through to their logical conclusions. The community is now smarter and better informed and Greenpeace are struggling to stay relevant and appear sane.

Atman,

"The community is now smarter and better informed..."

Or you could say that the community has access to more information. It doesn't follow that the information is accurate - as in the case of the plethora of non-climate scientists blogging away to their heart's content on the subject of climate science.

These warmist idiots make me laugh, but they are persistant. Religion gets people that way. No proof but they still believe, even though their highest bodies were shown to be fiddling the figures, their projections are all wrong and no warming for 16 years dispite record amounts of CO2 being put out.

Now we have a couple of hot days and they are jumping up and down. Forget that hundreds of people in Russia and nothern Europe have died from record cold, and in china too where ships are ice bound from the cold. In the USA snow covers a record of 67% of the country.

Oh well, no matter the religous zealots wont change their minds no matter what. They just ignore what doesn't suit them.

Remember Tim saying seas would rise to cover 8 storey buildings and some scientist in UK saying kids would not know what snow was.

Banjo,

Ooops, the climate seems to be acting up...or do ya think the increased frequency of unusual and extreme events should mean it "just" gets hotter everywhere?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_0JZRIHFtk&feature=player_embedded

http://skepticalscience.com/16_more_years_of_global_warming.html