"The representatives of 5.3 billion people have signed the Kyoto Protocol, which came into force yesterday. Australia did not, neither did the United States."

Very misleading considering China (>1.3 billion) and India (>1 billion) are not actually bound by anything do with Kyoto. I'd sign something too if I had absolutely no intention of obeying it and there was no legal requirement to do.

Chuck in Indonesia and you are at about a half and half situation. inlucde all of the developing world not bound by Kyoto and you get more than 2/3 of the world not bound by Kyoto.

t.u.s.

Snowman,

I really look forward to reading your contribution in a real journal, under your real name.

Martin & Timkins

Firstly, to Martin ... the page of links to some useful data sources is now available at http://mclean.ch/climate/data_sources.htm (or via the link on http://mclean.ch/climate/global_warming.htm).

I try to make a point of specifying my data sources in all my writings. I want you to be able to see the data I work with and decide for yourself whether my interpretations are plausible.

Secondly, to Timkins ... I'm not arguing that the atmosphere is honky-dory but I am saying really that any warming could be entirely natural because (a) natural warming and cooling have happened in the past and (b) the case for human involvement in warming really lacks evidence. (One would think that about 35 years of claiming that humans have caused warming some kind of decisive proof would have been produced.)

I don't like any pollution whether it be in the atmosphere or water. You'd think by now we'd know how to catch these pollutants and do something with them!

Mind you the Montreal Accord of 1995 was an agreement to stop putting CFCs and other real nasties into the atmosphere. It's generally working but Russia has been a bit backward and some of those gases take a while to get out of the atmosphere and stratosphere once they're in there.

One that you don't mention is water vapour. I suspect that the WV we add to the air as steam could be upsetting a loose kind of equilibrium because it causes more clouds and these screw up the weather. Apparently a check of weather records near Whyalla and east of Victoria's LaTrobe Valley show some changes after increases in industrial output in those areas! Global average cloud cover has increased since 1950 and there are ways that it can cause warming.

I haven't seen anything that suggests the current level of carbonic acid in the oceans is a problem but there are articles that suggest that it may be one in future.

The depletion of ozone in the stratosphere is a funny one too. The hole, or more correctly the thinning, comes and goes with the seasons. Right now the northern hemisphere is worried about one above the Arctic. Hopefully the Montreal Accord will account for these problems.

Well, I started out with the idea of being brief ....

"Climate change equals business opportunity" says the WWF.
Yep. Start investing in nuclear energy.

"The Usual Suspect" is right.If we are going to have restrictions on carbon emmissions ,it must apply equally to all.If developing countries don't have the discipline to curtail their pop. growth,whose fault is that?