'morning warmair,

Thank you for confirming that the EU has proposed further reductions in emissions but that they are indeed contingent upon the major emitters signing up for mandatory targets. Isn't that what I said?

I don't need you to confirm what I said, you need to refute it.

You failed to mention the German government statements on their plan to abandon their 40pc target and what that means to any hope of a new Kyoto. Nor did you address the fact that the U.S. cannot sign Kyoto, that China has pulled the pin until 2030 or that Russia and India will refuse to sign.

This means that the resurrection of Kyoto in Paris and any new targets for the EU are off the table.

I say again, if you think that the Paris round will agree to get new targets, then show how? If not then Tom Switzer is spot on and TA will look a genius.

Cobber the hound

feel free to stay with the dumbed down group think. You obviously are very young or a very slow learner.

'morning runner,

You are being very kind to Cobber when you suggest that he/she/it is either very young or a slow learner, as are the rest of those whose God has foresaken them, like Robert LePage, mac, James O’Neill, Rhrosty and Ross Gittins.

They are currently struggling with the reality of the evidence with which they were presented. Hence their absense in response.

Young and naive doesn't seem to cut it somehow. Four simple statements from official government sources and much coverage by European media has them stumped. That is what happens when your religion abandons you.

God bless the righteous for they shall inherit the truth. Or to be more precise, those who speak bull dust will end up with bad breath.

It seems to me that one of the best summaries of the evidence is provided by Michael Klare in his new essay on Tomdispatch The New Congress & Planetary Disaster. An essay which, to my mind at least, proves that the mad-monk is definitely not a genius.

One thing "reported" in the news was re how the mad-monk wasnt particularly interested in what may happen in 16 years time. If this is so it shows how myopic his short term (lack of) vision truly is.

By contrast, as far as I know Chinese thinkers and strategists instinctively think and plan their present-time actions and strategies on a long term/time basis.

Speaking of long-term thinking and vision why not check out this website: http://longnow.org

It really has come down to those who discount AGW being rightly regarded as fools. I'm not sure this means we can totally discount everything they say but it reveals a mental defect that makes it very difficult to give any of their pronouncements any kind of veracity or regard.

When one of these people is my representative, and speaks for me on the international stage, he/she becomes and embarrassing fool - most certainly cringeworthy.

And when they roll out that tired, hackneyed phrase - 'In Australia's best interest' when they really mean in the interests of the mining oligarchs of our country they cement themselves and depressing, embarrassing fools.

Interesting post SteeleRedux. You sere that is exactly how I feel about those who are simple enough to still believe in the fraud.

I find it difficult to understand how anyone of average intelligence, who has looked into the scenario, can still believe it now. I wonder if anyone promoting the whole thing are actually gravy train riders, obtaining some benefit, or have some agenda to use it for some misguided social purpose.

Every bit of "evidence" the promoters have ever presented has ultimately been found to be wrong, or a con job. Every projection has had to be reduced, now to nothing.

Yep, Tony will be long remembered as the first senior politician to have called the fraud for what it is.