JKJ,

"Look at Tony, David and Poirot, all desperately trying to pretend as if their belief system hasn't been totally demolished."

As far as I can see, Tony and David aren't bothering with your twaddle at all...and even Poirot only dropped by to save you the ignominy of talking to yourself.

But, by all means, carry on.....

When the IPCC announced some time back that they would produce science to show the “hot spot” which would be the “signature” for human caused global warming, a huge effort with an outlay of at least a billion dollarswas made to produce the promised science. The result was that it was demonstrated that the human effect is so trivial that it is not measurable, and does not have the significance necessary for scientific notice. The IPCC now baselessly asserts human caused warming.

Any-one who supportst AGW is ignorant or dishonest. There is no other basis. None of the group here, even Poirot can claim ignorance, so their dishonesty is proven. They are not fools, they are knowingly supporters of a fraud.

Poirot

What would you accept as disproving your beliefs in support of global warming policy?

Assuming that all issues of climatology were conceded in your favour - (which they aren't):
- how have you established that the ecological consequences of AGW would be worse rather than better? How have you compared the human evaluations of the status quo you want to change, to the situation you want to achieve? Show your workings.
- how have you established that your policy proposal will produce a net benefit, rather than a net detriment, in terms of the human evaluations of all affected persons now and as far into the future as you claim to be concerned with. Show your workings.