Emily - what's the point of the article? Rather than rehash, yet again, the climate debate we should look at practicalities. Is it now possible to reduce emissions sufficiently to avert this crisis, be it real or imagined? No - at least not according to the theory. The doom is upon us. In any case a firm international agreement on limiting emissions isn't possible. The best that can be hoped for is a series of voluntary targets for each country - the Paris meeting later this year, will probably decide this. But without a firm, enforceable hard-target agreement, any local attempt to limit emissions is a serious waste of time.

So why not dump the pleas to limit emissions, accept that climate will change (assuming it will change in the expected way) and think about adaptation measures. The advantage of these is that they can be tailored to what actually happens, rather than what is forecast to happen - and save us from long, rambling articles.

If 97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real, what does it matter what the geologists, biologists and or paleontologists (other scientists) think?

Albeit in the case of the latter, knowing what actually happened before under similar conditions, is the best guide to what would happen when we replicate them!

And given we know what happened when these conditions were virtually replicated; the time for endless debate is over; to be replaced by action, none of which need to impact negatively on the economy! In fact, just the very opposite.

We have enough cheaper than coal, thorium to run the world for 700 years; or all our own industries for thousands for half what they pay now, if retained as our principle (export) industrial power source!

And the average household power bill can be reduced by around 75% just by turning our waste into bladder stored methane; and then using that in ceramic fuel cells; to not only power our homes 24/7, but provide endless free hot water!

The waste products from this application more than suitable to also support large scale algae farming, and following that, an arable land, food and energy imputation free, equally large ethanol industry.

Some algae are up to 60% oil and two types currently being trialed produce naturally occurring and virtually ready to use diesel and jet fuel.

Some industry experts are on the public record saying; even with a fuel excise imposed, these fuels could be retailed for less than 44 cents a litre.

All of the above are vastly cheaper options than that currently available, and just happen to also be either carbon free or carbon neutral; as are solar thermal arrays, now able to produce competitive base load power 24/7! Thanks to recent technological advances/economies of scale!

Solar thermal heat can be used to SAFELY create endless very low cost hydrogen, for just a few cents per cubic metre; using the older catalytic water molecule cracking method.

Are so dumb as to need proof beyond any doubt whatsoever, just to accept and use vastly cheaper energy?
Rhrosty.

Sweaty you started out looking like you were going to actually say something. Then you faded out to a clever bit of bumph, which said nothing at all.

6 for clever 4 for content.

You can do better.

The reason that a lot of people have lost interest in climate change is that they have concluded that it is only a symptom of a much larger problem which the media is committed to ignore. This problem, is, of course overpopulation, which we are not allowed to even discuss anymore, as the only thing that George Bush, the Ayotollah, and the Pope agreed on was that nothing must be done to limit human population. Coupled with a conviction that climate change was a disguised way to justify higher taxation and give more aid to the third world, which is currently the chief offender in the population department, many people just switched off.

Quick off-topic prediction:

When the drug smugglers are executed, Abbott will respond by stopping foreign aid to Indonesia.

This will please EVERYONE.

The lefties will like it because they oppose capital punishment, and those on the right will like it because it will mean wasting less money on foreign aid.

'if you live on Planet Earth and absorb mainstream media, there’s a high chance you’ve been confused by climate change activists and the denialists and'

actually Emily you are very kind to call the alarmist 'climate change activists' and paint those demanding evidence instead of pseudo scientist as denialist. The denialist are those who still can't come up with any evidence except their scare nonsense in order to keep the funding coming.

‘morning Emily,

Welcome to OLO. You appear young, pretty, intelligent and much is going for you. Unfortunately, like so many in your age group, you are also profoundly confused.

You ask “what is going on?” The answer, it’s going backwards.

You work in media, you are socially active on your blog and on social media and yet you cannot convince yourself to step outside your self referential world, to seek an explanation for your confusion.

When you can begin to do your own research and question what you have been told is an unquestionable truth, there may be hope for you.

A great many people have been dragged into their beliefs by their parents, circle of friends, educators, media, politics and social networks. They come to believe in a great many absurdities they later find impossible to accept. By the time they're able to start thinking about discarding what they know full well to be a lie; they have expended a great deal of emotional energy and are unwilling to admit to themselves that they have made a costly mistake. Such is human nature.”

Don’t leave it too late Emily.

"There are three forces, the only three forces capable of conquering and enslaving forever the conscience of these weak rebels in the interests of their own happiness. They are: the miracle, the mystery and authority".
F. Dostoyevsky The Brothers Karamazov

Sadly, your beliefs in AGW have all the elements of the miracle, the mystery and authority, it’s up to you to reconcile these or stay exactly where you are, confused because you refuse to question!

Best wishes for your future.

Climate change: what is really going on?
The question is easy to answer green house gases slow down the rate at which the earth cools, we have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by at least 40% and as long as we continue to burn fossil fuels in massive quantities and clear forests the level will continue to rise. If the earth continues to receive the same amount of heat from the sun and cools more slowly we will see a steady increase in global temperature over several decades. Thats all we need to know as far as the science is concerned.

There are two problems which people face to get their head the question, the first is a massive disinformation campaign by the fossil fuel industry, which is incredibly profitable, and has reserves worth many trillions of dollars. The second problem is peoples fear of a decline in their living standards, should they have to reduce or eliminate the use of fossil fuels. The result is a large number of people who are both badly informed and suspicious that their living standards are going to be eroded.

There are serious practicable problems in changing the economy to low carbon emissions, but without a plan to deal with the excessive emissions of CO2 and an eventual shortage of cheap liquid fossil fuels, the future will be very bleak for future generations

It is not hard to ascertain that the assertion about 95% of climate sciebtist believe in climate change is nonsense. It comes from the deceptively named Skeptical Science site which idevoted to promotion of the “global warming” lie.
http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/a-climate-falsehood-you-can-check-for.html

The fact is that there is no science to demonstrate any measurable effect of human emissions on climate.

With no science to back the assertion of human caused climate change, the assertion is fraudulent.

We need a Royal Commission to ascertain by whom, and how this fraud is able to be promoted

97% of scientists etc etc etc.
Turned out not to be true. When studied turned out to be 55% I think it was.
Anyway, it doesn't matter whether true or not.
Oil's ERoEI is now down to 10 and coal's down to about 30.
So we have to do something about energy.
Wind & Solar can't do the job unaided. So what do we use for backing
it up ? At present there are not many choices, coal, in Australia, but
not elsewhere, nuclear, geothermal if it can made workable and some
of Rhosties suggestions.
Do you see any action along those lines ?
No the greenies have backed everyone into a solar & wind only solution
but because of the ERoEI that won't work.
Actually, I think nothing will be done until the power goes off
while dinner is being cooked.
If you live above the third floor I would sell out and let some
other mug look at the 10 floor walk down because he doesn't risk the
power going off and he has to sit in the lift until the sun comes up.

If you think that is fanciful, just look at the pressure on the owners
of coal fired power stations and mines.
What on earth do you think will happen if all that boycott and
investment bans on coal mines and power generators takes off ?
Are those people just stupid ?

Of course, nothing matters...

Fossil Fuels raised taxes to pay for civilisation but now the externalities are coming home to roost. My uncle put together a 1922 Model T the other day and told me battery technology hadn't really changed for the bulk of the 20th century: why store electricity when you can use mother nature as an infinite garbage can and just burn more fossil fuels to make endless 24-hour spinning reserves of it?

This is year 11 economics- government intervention in the marketplace.

Fossil Fuels were given the subsidised and regulated attention they deserved to build society and now their job is done: it's simply the law of diminishing returns!!