"Meanwhile evidence of climate change mounts, for example hereabouts autumn was 1.5C warmer than average."

Link please Taswegian.

Meanwhile:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/02/coldest-spring-in-england-since-1891/

In fact no evidence for AGW at all, and considerable evidence against according to my friend David Archibald:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/03/cet-cooling-in-line-with-solar-model-prediction/

cohenite,

This is for your own good.

What'swiththewattsupwiththatlinks?

It's a veritable blizzard.

No wonder you think it's getting colder.....

the Australian public is showing by voting intentions what they think of the total foolishness and deceit of the warmist. Imagine all the wasted billions pocketed by the warmist fraudsters was spent on cleaning up our environment and feeding the poor. Instead those involved in the fraud fly around the world with abandonment to love feasts, indoctrinate the young and dream up names for those exposing their fraud. And to think this is all done in the name of science. Talk about blind foolish faith which still some gullible hang on to.

You have to realise that cohenite is paid to say what he does and you can see that from his reference to the same old discredited web site that is also paid for by the fossil fuel industries.

You will never see him post on a credible climate change web site as he will be put in his place quick smart

That web site he keeps referring to is a site of deniers with their anti-science, misinformation and cherry picking, and blocking anyone that questions what is written. The moderators even post under pseudonyms to bolster the site.

This is nonsense.
Only those interested in reaping in the unearned billions, a projected 140 billions as carbon brokerage fees for basically shuffling paper, are still trying to flog highly flawed ETS's.
Tony Abbott once remarked, if we need to put a price on carbon, then it should be a tax.
By the time we pay the brokerage fees and for the brand new army of overpaid bureaucrats to police it, we will have to collect around $63.00 a ton just to price carbon at around $20.00 a ton!
What would work far better, would be a cap and tax system.
First you establish and apply a cap.
Today's emission levels, then you apply a sliding scale that progressively lowers that cap over time.
Then only ever tax that emission actually exceeding the imposed upper limit, with a similar sliding scale tax, that becomes more and more punitive over time.
Many industries are already discovering, it just makes good commercial sense to reduce their carbon footprint, and indeed, convert some of that emission to power part or all their enterprises.
Things that would assist include, thorium cheaper than coal; and locally invented ceramic fuel cells; that convert NG to electrical energy and pristine water.
The energy coefficient of the solid state ceramic fuel cell, is around 72%, making it far and away the very cheapest source of carbon free energy!
Which is arguably portable enough to power trucks, trams, trains and family wagons, for a fraction of the price we currently shell out for our independent or public transport options.
There's no need to return to medieval options, when tomorrow's beckon!
Rhrosty

PeterA you're liar; noone pays me.

Who pays you?

The disproportion between the money the pro-AGW liars get and the sceptics receive is obscene:

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/05/does-climate-money-matter-is-a-monopoly-good-for-a-market/#comments

The fact about Anthony Watts, who is a very decent person, is that he doesn't write most of his posts; he will link to the latest data or a paper and then invite comments. He is not to blame for the fact that the AGW science is shot to bits and the best of AGW scientists are either fools like Flannery or behave like fools like Karoly:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/did_warmist_david_karoly_actually_read_the_paper_he_told_the_abc_was_wrong/

Of course there was no retraction from the abc after giving Karoly prime exposure to speak his rubbish.

Perhaps PeterA would like to comment on that.