You are right ALTRAV. You can't reason with those blinded by their flawed ideology. No doubt the couple of hundred mm of rain in Broome overnight was caused by man made climate change. Such a flawed, irrational and unscientific bunch of lies.

SR, here's a fact for you.
The sea levels will NOT rise to the levels these idiots are crapping on about.
I have done some research and as many idiots claim it will rise to ridiculous levels, (60 - 70 metres) as there are those who say it won't.
I tell you what, you go back in your corner shaking and shivering with fear over the BS alarmists are spreading about GW and CC, and I and a lot of others will calmly walk away, shaking our heads in dis-belief, and get on with our lives.
Oh and while your curled up in the corner, think about this.
If we have had such a SIGNIFICANT amount of ice and snow melt or disappear, how much did the ocean level rise by.
If it is such a large amount of ice/snow, then it should be a very significant rise, should it not?

AyameTan

You just said:

'Mr Opinion, are you even willing to read what climatologists have written on the issue, or is your mind already made up? I've already refuted your sources.'

I am an environmental sociologist and I research what scholars and scientists are saying, which requires reading everything I can get hands on (outside of AGW denialist propaganda that is).

Could you please tell me which of my sources you have refuted?

Do you know why some predictions haven't come true? Blind luck. Technological advances.

Most of them are still accurate, and many of them have come to pass.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/jun/25/30-years-later-deniers-are-still-lying-about-hansens-amazing-global-warming-prediction

In the WSJ, deniers again lie about Hansen
The incredible accuracy of Hansen’s climate model predictions debunks a number of climate denier myths. It shows that climate models are accurate and reliable, that global warming is proceeding as climate scientists predicted, and thus that we should probably start listening to them and take action to address the existential threat it poses.

Hansen’s predictions have thus become a target of climate denier misinformation. It began way back in 1998, when the Cato Institute’s Patrick Michaels – who has admitted that something like 40% of his salary comes from the fossil fuel industry – arguably committed perjury in testimony to Congress. Invited by Republicans to testify as the Kyoto Protocol climate agreement was in the works, Michaels was asked to evaluate how Hansen’s predictions were faring 10 years later. 

In his presentation, Michaels deleted Hansen’s Scenarios B and C – the ones closest to reality – and only showed Scenario A to make it seem as though Hansen had drastically over-predicted global warming. Deleting inconvenient data in order to fool his audience became a habit for Patrick Michaels, who quickly earned a reputation of dishonesty in the climate science world, but has nevertheless remained a favorite of oil industry and conservative media."

AyameTan

Could you please tell me which of my sources you have refuted?

I am an environmental sociologist and I research what scholars and scientists are saying,
Mr Opinion,
Don't you come up with anything yourself ? Must be dreadfully demoralising to have to wait till someone else writes something for you to read !
I like to to observe goings-on myself & form my own conclusions rather than rely on 'experts" who more often than not are dreadfully out of sync with reality. Contrary to what you've been indoctrinated to believe, everyday people can observe too, in many cases even better than the 'experts'.