I tend to agree with ttbn on this.

So much of what passes, for the scientifically illiterate, as 'scientific fact', is no such thing.

Al Gore and so many others have climbed on board the band wagon, to champion a cause which they don't understand and don't want to.

Whether it's main stream media beat up and reportng of, IPCC, NOAA, NASA, Climate Council, Australia Bureau of Meterology....All these agencies have a lot to gain, nothing to lose and All adjust the raw data.

The raw data, shows time and time again that there are seasonal cycles, there are fluctuations but that the hottest years for Australia, for instance, where in the 1800s.

What begins with fear, often ends as folly.

AGW is a hoax, and it's perpetrated by a lot of people, with much to gain.
The public has no idea about energy. Nor do folk understand, energy use reduction, which imo is always a good thing.
Free energy from nature is just another catch cry for the wholesale abuse of energy use, followed by some of the ugliest excesses done to poor ol nature.

Nuff said

Ho hum.

Having lost, and lost, and lost, and lost the argument over and over and over and over again, the global warming hysterics want to re-enter the forum having made no attempt to bother to understand and engage in the real issues.

Fail.

The same circular reasoning, the same appeal to authority, the same misrepresentation, the same non sequitur, the same ad hominem. Pathetic.

Mere malevolent abuse of people who not only disagree with you, but have completely thrashed you intellectually and morally, is all you've got.

If you want the issues to be resolved in your favour, you need to ADDRESS THE ISSUES you fool. Simple anecdotes about how your lawn is dry in summer at too stupid to be countenanced.

Regurgitated Greens' propaganda.

Just the source is "new"

The author makes this statement:” Lowering greenhouse gas emissions is imperative to reducing the risks of temperature-related deaths, water insecurity and drought”
This alerts us to the fact that he is a climate fraud supporter, asserting that human emissions have a measurable effect on climate, when there is no science to show that this is so.
Humbugs, like Peter Schraeder, who write this baseless nonsense should be ignored.
Alan B, you use the baseless, scurrilous term “denialist”.
The fraud promoters have no science to deny. Refer us, if you can, to any science which shows any measurable effect of human emissions on climate. Or desist from your ill-mannered nonsense.

I note that Dr Peter Schrader has carefully left out several problem with his ideas, including the succession of bitter winters afflicting the Northern Hemisphere. The current one is not as cold as the truly arctic winters that hit North America a couple of years back, but it is still very cold. What about the drought that has now broken in California? There was no indication that it was exceptional in historical terms (there has been some coverage of this recently)and now its gone. South East Australia? The so called millennial drought broke some years ago (the subsequent flooding was blamed on global warming). These are all climate cycles rather than climate change. WA is a big place, but it still counts as just one part of the world.

J.K.J. What's wrong with you? If more deaths due to heatwaves than that of earthquakes cyclones, bush-fires and flood put together, is not an issue? I'd like to know what is?

The cost of running a towering legal practice perhaps?

Not mentioned as an issue is the exodus of manufacturing and the jobs they used to provide! Or the fact the energy costs now exceed labour hire costs?

It's all too easy for an over priced silk to sit in his air condition plush office, or his air conditioned Bentley, or air conditioned penthouse and tell those who essentially paid for all of it? You're dreaming low life numskulls?

And all while energy as low as a dollar a year per household is possible?

Who gives a rat's what you believe, or can cleverly postulate? When what you know is all that really counts or of issue relevant interest!

I'm betting only one of us has worked inside the energy industry in a science based position and I'm betting it's not you!?

Disbelieve all you want, but remember the better off the affected low life are, the more affordable over priced, arrogance personified, silks and equality before the law become!

I'd invite you to check the facts and Marshall the verifiable case for nuclear energy in general and molten salt thorium based nuclear energy in particular. And the quite massive economic upside that'd go with it!

But that'd be a complete waste of time, and completely squandered pearls, when it would seem, you are so deep in some fossil fuel robber baron's pocket? you can't get that arrogant head high enough to look at the facts?

How do you manage to sit in your office when there's not enough room for both you and that oh so obvious ginormous super maxi ego?

What have you got left, more elder abuse?

Go your hardest pal, as that just opens the door to an effective fact reliant rebuttal and more folk wondering what the L denalists are so afraid of? The truth? U Tube, google tech talks, Kirk Soresen!
Alan B.