Ant,

You haven't a clue what other people's background, training and experience are, nor what they've read. By making guesses and pejorative comments you show you are not capable of rational discussion.

You have clearly not understood the magnitude of the changes and time frames involved. Nor how far the planet is below optimum temperature for life on Earth. You also incapable of seeing obvious errors in what you read -s such as Scotese's comparisons of rates over different base periods - it's invalid to compare a rate of change over 140 years with a rate over 21,000 years. You continually make a fool of yourself.

First a little fact-checking:

* "A review of peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that global warming is likely due to human activity." Nup. Said review was of a certain subset of articles and, when examined by chosen alarmists, found that 97% of the articles (not scientists) could be read to say that the article supported the view that some portion of GW was caused by man. (Some of the authors of those articles have disputed the claims about their own articles). There was nothing about what scientists think about the future temperature trend or how dangerous (or beneficial) warming might get.But the 97% figure is used as a substitute for thinking.

* " Scientists predict that if temperatures rise more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels, we will suffer harm to.." etc etc. Nup, the 2°C figure is a politic number not a scientific one. There is no science to show that it is any more or less dangerous (or beneficial) than say 1.8 or 2.5. We do know that temperatures exceeded the 2°C level many times in the past 12000 years and those periods have corresponded to advances in human welfare.

* "Australians allow greenhouse gas emissions to continue to rise." Nup. Emissions per capita to December 2017 have fallen 36.3 per cent since 1990. Total emissions have fallen 11.7% since 2005. According to the Department of Environment, emissions did increase in 2017 primarily due to: "The expansion in LNG exports, with an estimated production increase of 41.4 per cent over the previous year, was the major contributor to this increase in emissions."

/cont

/cont

* "Stephan Lewandowsky and his colleagues found..." Any thesis that relies even tangentially on Lowandowsky is by definition false....(Lowandowsky scam)

http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/08/lewandowsky-scam/

_________________________________________________________________

I'll believe climate change is a serious problem when those who say its a problem start acting like its a problem. For example, if we truly believed our future relied on us reducing emissions by 30% over the next two decades we could do so through two measures. But those who whine about emissions would, in the main, oppose those measures thereby showing how much they really believe the scare. The measures?....

1. Stop population grow. Our per capita emissions are falling while our population is increasing by about 1% pa. Stop all immigration and emissions would fall by over 1% pa (or 15% by 2030) through that measure alone.
2. The US is the most successful nation in the world at reducing emissions. How? Fracking. Moving power production from coal to gas. If we allowed unfettered fracking we'd do the same and significantly further reduce our emissions .

But neither measure is supported by the powers that be. Why? if they truly believe their claims then they'd do whatever necessary to save the world. The don't because they don't.

______________________________________________________________

Does anyone remember the recovered memories scare of the late 1990s? False memories were 'recovered' by patients and many a life ruined based on the implanting of 'memories' of things that never happened....

http://www.jimhopper.com/child-abuse/recovered-memories/

The author wants society to implant false memories into the populace so as to 'encourage' us to do what the author considers to be the right thing.

There's many a scary notion coming out of the authoritarian left. This is right up there in scariness.

Peter Lang ... your criticism cuts the other way as well.
There are Geologists who do not share your opinion; for example, Dr Burger, reference provided.

" This is the first study to examine barium content across the Permian-Triassic boundary, and it provides evidence that upwelling of methane hydrate in the oceans followed the initial acidification event. Ocean anoxia (absence of oxygen) is suggested by the unusual deposition of pyrite within the shallow marine waters of the once coastal sediments of northeastern Utah. Precession orbital geochemical variation is observed in the stratigraphic section allowing a finer temporal resolution beyond any previously published section. Together, this dataset gives a unique picture of an ancient cataclysm that altered life on Earth. This study is a cautionary tell of what can happen if we do not heed the warnings of the geological past."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323402270_What_caused_Earth%27s_largest_mass_extinction_event_New_evidence_from_the_Permian-Triassic_boundary_in_northeastern_Utah

Records go back further than 140 years, through proxy data obtained from sediments, ice cores, tree rings, pollen, historic written data, and corals.

I have provided a reference to Professor Michael Benton, Palaeontologist, previously who would dispute your comments.
Professor Will Steffen et al have recently had a research article published about heading towards a man made "hothouse climate".

As Hasbeen
pointed out , according to this author their was a drought and heat like now,
back in Autumn 1902.

Hardly a one off occurrence then, is it.

Someone said “we’ve never had so many flash floods.”
As if rivers haven’t always flooded.

The only difference now is the satellite news, beaming it from around the world into your lounge room.
And with ever expanding human populations there are more villages and towns built on old river flood plains, then there were 50 years ago.

I remain unconvinced until they show me where this global warming is.
I see no weather events I haven’t seen before in my lifetime. Nigel Farage said the Artic pole had 60% more ice mass last winter.

The left wing is the politics of victimhood. Global warming allows them to be victims of
bad people making money off coal.
There’s plenty of corrupt science professors being paid 100,000$ salaries by politicians
trying to win the green votes and delusional globalist(communist),leftie votes.

A few inconvenient facts, Misia.

1. The first Global Warming conference held in Europe, rather embarrassingly ccurred during one of the worst recorded snow storms in European history.
2. The Himalayan glaciers did not melt.
3. Climategate, where the "scientists" were caught admitting that the worldwide temperatures were showing no change, and saying that this crucial fact should be kept from the public.
4. The same thing happening in Australia where "scientists" from the weather bureau were found to have "adjusted" 100 year old nationwide historical temperature statistics to conform to the new religious orthodoxy.
5. The "ship of fools", who were Australian climate scientists, who went to Antarctica by ship to prove that Antarctic ice was disappearing, and got stuck in a new ice sheet that had not been there before.
6. Although "scientists" claim that sea levels would rise between 3 meters to 30 meters by 2100 (which would drown half the world), coastal real estate prices are not plummeting anywhere. This seems to indicate that banks and investment organizations (the really smart guys) know it is complete B.S.
7. Most of the USA, including southern states, blanketed in snow in 2014.
8. The original idea of Human Induced Global Warming is on so much shaky scientific ground, that even the UN has exorcised the "Human Induced" bit and now just calls it "Global Warming."
9. The persecution of academics and even their sacking for not towing the Global Warming party line. (Blomberg)
10. The general shift in the tone of the media from self righteous advocacy of global warming to a more impartial position, as the penny drops, that just like with the Millenium Bug and Peak Oil, they have once again been conned.
11. The dams filled again.