Hi Misla

I thought before reading your article that you were taking the mickey.
But alas no. You are one of those persons who attributes mental illness or cognitive impairment to those who dont share your views.

What do you say to the proposition that most punters have short memories? For example who recalls the drought of '65-68 in NSW or further back the drought from 1937-46? Or in UK, who remembers the droughts or 'record' hot summers of 1954, 1976 etc?

I grant you that the world is in a warming phase, but it is hubris to use your expertise in psychology to explain climate.
There is a huge samizdat literature by scientists who dont buy the meme about catastrophic man-made climate change. You could read Roy Spencer's Inconvenient Deception for starters.

Those who believe global warming is a threat are gullible. Any global warming we can get will be beneficial, overall. Most people do not have the necessary background to challenge the beliefs of the alarmists and activists, so are incapable of doing objective, credibility checks.

Most people are not aware of the paleo evidence. Earth is currently in about the severest icehouse condition it has experienced in the past 540 million years (Ma)
https://html2-f.scribdassets.com/9mhexie60w4ho2f2/images/1-9fa3d55a6c.jpg
(Source: Figure 15 here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275277369_Some_Thoughts_on_Global_Climate_Change_The_Transition_for_Icehouse_to_Hothouse_Conditions ).
It is in a rare state of having polar ice caps. For only 75% of the past 540 Ma there has been no ice at either pole.

Global mean surface temperature (GMST) is currently 15C, i.e. 2.6C above the last glacial maximum (LGM), 13C below extreme hothouse, and 11C below hothouse. Average over the Phanerozoic Eon is about 7C warmer than now – which fossil evidence suggests is the optimum temperature for life on Earth. So, there is no threat of catastrophic warming. Any warming that does occur this century will be beneficial.

The temperature range from LGM to the Triassic maximum is 15.5C. GMST is currently 2.6C above the LGM. That is, at present GMST is just 17% above the bottom of the temperature range between extreme icehouse and extreme hothouse.

The last time Earth’s climate transitioned from icehouse to hothouse conditions was 300 Ma ago, and that transition took 40 million years.

There is no threat. Global warming is beneficial. Climate change alarmists need to do these sorts of reality checks.

More links:
Paleomap Project: http://www.scotese.com/Default.htm

Plate tectonic animations over the past 750 Ma. https://youtu.be/tObhGzHH2aw

Cretaceous Greenhouse: http://shadow.eas.gatech.edu/~jean/paleo/Lectures/Lecture_4.pdf

The main reason people fail to prioritise climate change is that its an ongoing part of nature driven primarily by solar activity and the earth's distance and orientation to the sun. Those with cognitive ability realise there's nothing we can do about it.

I think the best use of climate scientists it to throw them into an active volcano to appease the climate gods.

The idea of man-made climate change has always been rubbish and it will always be rubbish, no matter how many people think they have something new or different to say about a subject which sane people are sick and tired of having shoved down their throats.

What people are concerned about are skyrocketing power prices and Australian politicians' dumb refusal to do something about it - starting with getting out of the Paris Accord fraud.

The author writes: "Yet the Turnbull Government has done little to prioritise any initiatives to combat the effects of global warming and Australians allow greenhouse gas emissions to continue to rise." Can she advise what difference to global atmospheric CO2 levels will there be if Australia was to decarbonise its economy overnight? Our reduction of 1.3% of global emissions would be swamped within a few weeks by new coal-fired power plants being built and operated in many of the world's developing countries, so our efforts and trillion dollar plus expenditure would be totally futile.

Yet Australia is a rich country and anthropogenic climate change is real, so what should we do? Answer: spend money not on subsidising inefficient and ineffective renewables but on R&D and commercialisation of the new technologies the world (especially the developing countries) needs to reduce our carbon footprint while providing despatchable, industrial-scale energy. Alternatively, we could spend our money on developing geoengineering methods that will cheaply, effectively and safely remove CO2 from the atmosphere.