cohenite,

"I despise the term actually..."

Well aaccttuuaallly....that's the pot calling the kettle black. Your lot delights in referring to the other side as "alarmists" or "climate extremists" or "warmists" or whatever, to name a few, but it seems you all feign a confected sensitivity to being described by the eminently accurate term "denier".

Interesting.

Just once, Poirot, can you make a comment of substance and refrain from these cute little asides which you obviously think are so witty?

<< the evidence that it is bad science is now incontrovertible. >>

No cohenite, all the science is not incontrovertible, and your 'evidence' that AGW isn’t happening is certainly not incontrovertible.

<< 100's of billions of dollars have been wasted. >>

Probably right. An awful lot of money has been spent on trying to deal with the issue, but it has been dismally unsuccessful. To that extent, yes it has been wasted.

So what should we do? Bloody well try harder! Basically efforts to date have been piddling compared to the magnitude of the issue.

Re: sustainability, I just get sick of defining something which everyone should have a handle on by now. I’ve done it a zillion times on this forum.

OK, here’s the zillion and oneth…

Sustainability – the capacity to endure. We need to balance supply and demand, rather than continuously and rapidly increasing the demand for all manner of resources, goods, services and infrastructure, which is what is happening in Australia. We need to look at the supply capability of all our essential resources, and where that is tenuous we need to plan for alternatives and/or for a capping of the demand. We need to look at the negative impacts of all manner of things that we do, and strive to remedy them and certainly to not continue to increase the causal factors. Etc.

I hope you get the picture.

.
Thankyou for not denying your despicable antics on the other forum.

And burned it on a bonfire of their vanities.

“despicable antics on the other forum.”

I don’t know what you mean; are you just having a cheap shot?

“the capacity to endure”

Enduring is good but just enduring can be a bit tedious. I prefer Nietzsche: ““That which does not kill us makes us stronger.” That’s the human condition: improving. Read up on ‘The Will to Power’.

“balance supply and demand”

No. Read Says Law. After all there was no initial demand for immunisation, computers or flush toilets once or any of the technology and lifestyle products we enjoy today; your statement is merely a form of Ludditism.

Decreasing demand and your waffle about what is essentially consumerism is straight out of the Clive Hamilton thesis about “Growth fetish”, which is reviewed here:

http://www.cis.org.au/images/stories/policy-magazine/2003-spring/2003-19-3-andrew-norton.pdf

Basically your comment is a mishmash of Malthusian principles and misonewism or what Toffler called Future Shock.

All wrapped up in an unhealthy dose of pessimism. Are you a pessimist?
I mean, what are you on about? Your definition is very muddled.

What is sustainable depends entirely on technology and ideological interpretation of what technology is appropriate or acceptable.

For instance are you opposed to Thorium power?

Are you opposed to GM?

Do you think human population must be cut, drastically or otherwise?

Are you against space exploration, which is the natural extension of the human condition, or are you one of these misanthropes who not only want humans not to leave Earth but to become extinct to save Earth from humanity’s destruction of nature?

cohenite,

I forgot you're an enthusiast for the proposition that humans should leave the earth and colonise other planets.

It's a shame we've evolved to exist on this one - and with our advancing ingenuity we don't even possess the wisdom to get that right.