Alison Jane,
I don't get it - if you really have the credentials you say you have, why are you so pig ignorant of the basics that you didn't even understand the reason for the lag? Why are you so intellectually dishonest that you resort to mass ad hominems (libellously labelling scientists "cultists" when you don't like what they have to say)?

Do you doubt the ability of CO2 to absorb and reemit infrared, despite the overwhelming evidence from both theory and measurement?

The reason the Milankovitch cycles are regarded as trifles is because they have so little effect compared to other factors; they certainly can't explain the current warming.

And yes, I do include Plass's groundbreaking 1956 paper in the "trifles" category because it did not tell me anything about the effects of atmospheric CO2 beyond what I already knew.

What a strange article! Viv Forbes is to be commended for explaining the exorbitant costs and problems in carbon capture and storage.

But hey! Read on, and you find that the author is a climate change denialist! An odd argument, but still, interesting information in here.

Proud/experienced/sceptical scientist, YUPP! You should look at your cultist believes. Science is question driven. I personally taught some of your climate modelling priests, and while you may belief they are pure a snowflakes, the rest of the scientific world worry over the credibility impact of this small niche of scam artists.

For 35 years, I have only discussed this BS among trusted scientists. Now retired and beyond castigation by you beloved politically driven cult, I can speak out.

Two things to ask your conscience. You, I guess are a globalist left-leaning open-borders individual... You probably cheered when Maggie Thatcher died, yet check the facts and the launch of this scam in the late 1980's (a tactic, assumed to be short-term by her, to bury the coal miners). You must love Greta the wonder Kid, but do you praise the Maggie T, the first CC hero?

Second, if you think my brief background is respectable, then ask your self the question why?. I have NOTHING to gain from speaking my mind, other than childish, ill-informed, abuse from narrow-minded worshippers like you. BUT you, and your like with your left/greenie/one world government agenda, have all to gain... influence, money, grants, egomania, tin-pride. Fair enough its a free world... well unless you imprison us in your utopian/socialist nirvana where Gaia will euthanise climate realists like me. If that happened, I wonder which new propaganda purge will you slavishly follow. …. because that's what cultists need, as they talk down alternate views to promote your happy cult. Your nothing better than those who used to drown witches, to proof their innocence.

Happy culting and spoofing your way thru life. and please do supply me with a brief summary of your climate science credentials, as opposed your "trifling" comments. If your bored and can learn to read real science, why not read Plass 1956, and instead of "Skeptical Science" propaganda, read the detailed analysis done by non-gravy train scientists. I doubt you will, and return to your double skim lattes, with avo-toast washed down by organic-Pinot-Greggio, and an organic de-nicoteened cuba cigar!

I continue to enjoy the comments on this site. It is such an interesting exercise. I try to find the time to read these, and also to read the comments on Independent Australia. What a wide chasm apparently exists between the readers of each of these online journals!
It is sadly, indicative of Australia's divided society, especially divided on issues of climate change and of the nuclear industry.

WELL Said, ChristinaMac1. Glad you enjoy the debate. Its healthy and Like you I always check my media across the spectrum from left the right, although I must admit to becoming disappointed that ABC is so partisan... Its not Our ABC as the tell us but Theirs.

In my opinion the majority of articles are better written than professional journos and the authors freely put a lot of effort into their pieces and many offer interesting off-beat/tangential views, which is hard and needs discipline in a 1000 word article. Discussion can be good, but from experience is often a battlefield for some know it al pseudo-intellectuals. But its healthy, provided they don't fall down into insulting, bullying and propaganda so common on the popular social media.

I have written and observed other UK and USA e-journals, and they are lame, tame and often light, so OLO readers are privileged.

Aiden, wakey-wakey….are you there? You all-knowing Trifler of Plass.

What are your climate science credentials.. Nothing personally identifiable just general stuff.

We 'actual real world' climate scientists only call you cultists because you display the 14 core behavioural attributes of Cults. And if you stopped slandering those of us who have knowledge and opinions you despise and calling us sceptics and deniers, then I would be prepared to label you with other descriptors... what polite words would you like that accords you with the appropriate stature your ego's would like? By the way Sceptic is OK, but the denier is damned disrespectful to past and current oppressed populations.

Yours kindly, "Pig-ignorant" AJ, a humble, non-vested interest climate realist.

ps and if you Gaia god and Greta have their way, we 60 year-old inconvenient 'Pig-ignorant/denialist/sceptics' will be sent to Hell and damnation by the COVID-19. I can't wait to see you CC cultists propaganda that relates COVID-19 and all post industrial pandemics as the devine retribution caused by CO2 and big bad CC bogyman.

Happy Self isolation/socially distanced weekend, Grand Fubah Aiden.

ps I am curious, are you CCcultists the ones buying up all the toilet roll?.. is it a way off increasing the chances of wiping out us old, "pig-ignorant" climate realists? if so, dumb strategy, as of all the 9 symptoms for the cold,flu and Covid -19, the runs is the one COOVID rarely produces