Soooo...Aragorn Eloff is quote: " a director of the Seff Efrican Vegan Society..."

So much to offer as do many green thinking, altruistically minded people. But like the tin foil hat brigade, I sincerely believe some doom-sayers have lost the plot.

Sure, in my childhood I lived on a Pacific island and my old classmates from those days send me photographs of the ocean now literally lapping at their doorway - no doubt the sea levels have (and continue to) rise.

What are the causes ? Certainly mankind has, since the burning of coal began in earnest during the Industrial Revolution, accelerated the addition of C02 and ODP gases into the various 'spheres' and this contributes to the warming of the planet. Today I ask, is it a cyclical event on a planetary scheme of things?

In the 12 years I resided in Darwin NT I noticed a marked change in the weather patterns and indeed the severity of the tropical cyclones as they formed each year from around 2003 onwards. Similarly here in Perth where I now live, the weather patterns have changed from when I resided here in the early 1980's. Events like tornadoes, severe cold cells and rapid formation of cold fronts off the coast wreaking havoc for longer periods than the Winter weather used to do. The intensity of the 'Fremantle Doctor' likewise has lessened during the Summer months.

One has to ask why the previous government under Fuhrer Abbott went to the extraordinary length of getting the BOM to destroy records on meteorology going back to the 1800's. This tells me something, and it runs in accord with what the climate change deniers espouse...oil is good, coal is good and renewable is bad !

When the very last litre of crude oil/lump of coal is auctioned off on prime time TV, or on E-Bay at some ridiculous figure. Then and only then will I believe that mankind and its masters have finally (perhaps) realised that fossil fuels have had seen their time.

Hard to know where to start in an article that attacks so many things in such trite, flippant, factless summaries of denialism.

Let's start with that tired old canard of "Those climate madmen predicted an ice age in the 70's, and now they've changed their minds!" Sorry, but I have to add some *facts* to this typical, cliche, tired old denialist claim.

1. The majority of 1970’s peer-reviewed papers actually predicted warming, not cooling.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XB3S0fnOr0M

2. Climate science had already leaked out into the mainstream culture, and the video above also contains classic sciences from the 1958 Bell Telephone company Science Hour which detailed rising sea levels and classic old animation of a glass bottom boat skimming over the drowned buildings of Miami. There’s even a scene from the 1970’s Sci-Fi thriller, Soylent Green, in which they bemoan global warming and the effects on the economy.

3. The same sheeple who just rattle off “They predicted an ice age!” don’t even know what *causes* an ice age. Do *you* know what causes an ice age? The scientists tell us that (apart from super-volcanoes or a nuclear winter) the main natural cause is ‘wobbles’ in the Earth’s orbit and tilt which changes the direction of incoming sunlight. According to these Milankovitch cycles, we’re not even due for an ice age for 50,000 years! “No declines in 65° N summer insolation, sufficient to cause a glacial period, are expected in the next 50,000 years.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles#Present_and_future_conditions

4. The majority of the hype was from the media, not the scientists.
"However, these are media articles, not scientific studies. A survey of peer reviewed scientific papers from 1965 to 1979 show that few papers predicted global cooling (7 in total). Significantly more papers (42 in total) predicted global warming (Peterson 2008). The large majority of climate research in the 1970s predicted the Earth would warm as a consequence of CO2. Rather than 1970s scientists predicting cooling, the opposite is the case."
http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-
Those who predicted cooling overestimated global dimming, and underestimated global warming. They now admit they were wrong.

"One volcano could make more difference to global warming than humans ever could."
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/10/01/james-lovelock-godfather-green-climate-change-religion-totally-unscientific/

//"One volcano could make more difference to global warming than humans ever could."//

Yes, super volcanoes are bad. The Toba eruption ~75,000 years ago reduced global temperatures 3-5 C, and reduced the breeding population of humans to a few thousand people.

Thankfully, super eruptions are few and far between. Although the Yellowstone super volcano could go any minute.

The thing about super volcanoes is that if they're going to explode, even if we know about it there is nothing we can do about it. There is no way to stop a super volcanic eruption. Think of them being a bit like massive meteorite impacts or gamma ray bursts. Very unlikely but catastrophic if they occur and impossible to prevent.

We can reduce global warming; we know it's caused by greenhouse gases and we know how to emit less greenhouse gases. Stopping a super eruption is the stuff of science fiction at this point in time.