Here you are again, ant, with no science and full of stupid questions.

You have found another qualified liar, on Q&A, who makes a baseless assertion of human induced global warming.You have found plenty of them, but when are you going to give a reference to science which supports your assertion of the AGW fraud?

Here is what a competent, honest scientist, Robert Carter, says:
"However, our most accurate depiction of atmospheric temperature over the past 25 years comes from satellite measurements rather than from the ground thermometer record. Once the effects of non-greenhouse warming (the El Niño phenomenon in the Pacific, for instance) and cooling (volcanic eruptions) events are discounted, these measurements indicate an absence of significant global warming since 1979 - that is, over the very period that human carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing rapidly. The satellite data signal not only the absence of substantial human-induced warming, by recording similar temperatures in 1980 and 2006, but also provide an empirical test of the greenhouse hypothesis as understood by the public - a test that the hypothesis fails."
://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=ZUVPX02KD1UHZQFIQMGCFFOAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/04/08/nrclimate08.xml&page=2

We just don't need to grow the population to grow the economy!
We just need to attack and remove poverty, wherever we find it.
Without immigration we don't grow; and because of the asinine tax collection methodology, some very simple folks, who are only able to think inside very small circles of ideas, believe the only way we can grow the tax base, is to grow the population!
Why would you do that, when we are shucking jobs, as we innovate and automate.
If we were not lead by asinine ideologues, we would have reformed the tax act eons ago, so that the amount collected, was a percentage of a growing economy, even as population numbers shrink!
China did exactly that!
And we can create just such a model by progressively attacking and removing poverty!
We just don't need a pool of poor, to get people to work for sweet FA!
What we need is a single stand alone and very low expenditure tax, and the cheapest energy in the world.VERY DOABLE!
Those two in combination, will see the high tech manufacturing, beat a path to our door, along with millions of cashed up retirees, and entrepreneurs!
And all of them, adding their expenditure patterns to a massively growing tax pool!
Sure it's hard, but only because our parliaments are filled to the gunwales, with recalcitrant ideologues, only interested in polishing the treasury benches, rather how they can best serve Australia, and Australians.
As for climate change, why don't we wait until the sea levels are up by around 3 metres.
Chances are that'll ruin the deniers, or drown them, and the 30% that's left, will finally be free from the fetters of the deniers, who simply cherry pick their evidence, self evidently, to serve the conformation bias?
Rhrosty.

Leo, you stated they are "stupid questions" , thats because you are not able to provide answers to the empirical data that lies behind them.
Lawrence Krauss is a physicist; not a climate scientist, and he says the climate scientists have it right in relation to CO2 impacting on climate. There are controlled experiments that can be conducted to show the warming characteristics of CO2. The reference is on another thread.
The origin of CO2 can be identified by scientists (C12, C13, C14).
It doesn't matter a jot what Professor Carter says, the empirical evidence shows warming of the planet is taking place. Lots of papers have been written about how volcanoes are not having any major impact.
The lack of warming since 1998 is a myth; BOM have just indicated that we have had a warm Autumn in Australia. In January 2014, there was a spike in the number of deaths in Australia due to heat stroke; the same has occurred this century in other countries. The trend line of temperatures taken over decades shows an increase in temperature. The same happens when temperature is aggregated over decadal periods. Many temperature records have been broken since 1998.
Leo, firefighters have stated in California that fighting fires was once seasonal, now it is a year long need. What do you suppose is happening?

There have been many significant papers that have been published already in 2014; including the NCA paper (utilizing over 3,000 references) that says climate change is a fact.

Leo, your day is done; there is empirical evidence to support climate change. You may have a belief that it is not happening, but beliefs do not stack up against facts.

Ant I will confine myself to just one rebuttal. California is experiencing it's worst drought in 200 years. Trouble is that man has only been there that long. Will Rogers said "Never ask your barber if you need a haircut", it is the same with firefighters. They just want to double up numbers and have even less to do at even greater cost as they want better conditions. So suprise suprise its a holocaust, we are all going to die!
You blokes want it all ways. When there is a big freeze or floods you chime in "Climate change!". Refer my previous comments. You want it matey you pay for it. Less population in Australia check out the airline schedules.

JBowyer, Australian firefighters are saying much the same thing as their Californian colleagues. When you get away from politicians and politics; there are people out in the community who actually have integrity and describe things as they are.
Not only are there more fires in California; scientists are able to go back further than 200 years to gain a view on the incidence of fires and their ferocity. Even the former Governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger has acknowledged that wildfires are now year long events.
In January 2014 (winter) there were a couple of wildfires in Norway which did a lot of damage; caused by the anomalous dry conditions and sparks from power lines. In very early Spring there was an unexpected small wild fire in Alaska.
In April 2014 there were wildfires in Siberia months before the expected time. It has been since the mid 2000s that wildfires have become a major problem in Siberia (noted in the past for permafrost).
Bushfires are just one area of many that provide empirical evidence of anthropogenic climate change.

FOUND SOME ANT POOP?

<<..Bushfires are just one area..of many..>>

NAME THEM

<<...THAT provide empirical..'evidence'..>>

<<..of ant-hropogenic..climate change.>>

ITS ALL JUST CLASSIC ANT SHHH IT...BUT HOW TO EXPLAIN TO IT
mandind hasnt been burnig off like we have done forever[and thus the accumulated 'load'..when it burns BURNS HOTTER AND LONGER[THUS SETTING THE CANNOPIES ON FIRE THEN THEY SPEAD OUT OF CONTROL DOING 'WILD FIRE'

these so called p[roofs are the result of mankind not burning it off
nor clearing the accumulated fuel..but how would a du,b ant be expected to know that sort of common sense

MORE FUEL..HOTTER FIRES..ISNT PROOF OF WARMING..
ant nut...its proof greenies been setting this up for decades.

whinge about burnoffs..not enough gets burnt
hotter fires are the cost..[and still you ant brains build in the forrest

mate what you ants got for brains?
sawdust?....no.. your brains pans filled with c02.