Jees, it is so hard to read about, or participate in any climate change debate without getting angry! This is bad for intelligent debate.
I don’t know much about Bob Carter, but can someone who really knows tell me why he is persisting as such a vocal skeptic - I know everyone uses the old "paid by Exxon-mobil" line, but in reality not all skeptics can be part of this lobby surely.

What we do know:

* global temperatures ARE rising, "The ten warmest years have all occurred since 1987, with nine of them since 1990." - http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories/s1075.htm
* CO2 and other gases DO cause warming
* human activities DO release large amounts of these gases
* levels of CO2 are almost double where they were before industrialisation
* records from ice cores and other samples show historical temperature rises correspond with high levels of CO2

What always annoys me is this argument that "spending on mitigation activities is drastically harming our economies". This is silly. Whatever money is not spent on say, petrol and coal by consumers will be spent somewhere else in the economy which will stimulate it just as much. Whatever money is spent on mitigation initiatives - Australian Greenhouse Office, campaigning etc.. Mostly will go to employing people, and through the supply chain for related activities, again, whoever receives this money will also spend - all productive activity for the economy.
The money spent on mitigation does not just get burnt or thrown down the drain - it is further distributed throughout the economy on all kinds of activities, just like any other type of spending.

All I can say is "Ugh!"

Hmmm. Genuine question here- if global warming is caused by c02 emissions (?) then, why is mars also going through global warming (or so i've heard) ?

Yes, Bob Carter has a point. The global-warming hysterics appear to resent the Industrial Revolution but don't mind eating the fruits of progress.

In any case, if global warming is "bad" then all green politicans should ride their bikes to work, stop eating meat, share houses (10 adults per hemp tent) and stop flying on planes to conferences around the world. Put simply, they don't really believe their own fibs or they would be doing all of the above and more.

Well, I am no scientist, but if mars is warming, which I do not know about, then I am sure that is easily explained.

Sure, mars has no atmosphere, earth does. The sun is the main source of warming for both of us if I am not mistaken. While, on mars all the sun's heat is reflected back into space, on earth the atmosphere (greenhouse effect) trapps the warmth in. However, both earth and otherr planets experience fluctuations in temperature as a result of "solar flaring" and other causes - variations in the level of heat the sun is radiating. Obviously, if the sun outputs more energy for a period, then some of it will be soaked up by mars resulting in heating.

This solar flaring argument was one of the initial points of controversy in the global warming debate, but was dismissed early on as not being responsible for the heat we are experriencing on earth.

As I said before, I am no scientist, so forgive any errors I may have made.

Wrighta, not sure of composition of mars' atmosphere, but methane, N2O and CFCs also trap in heat.

Good point Benji.

wrighta, co2 (amoung other gasses) is the general cause of global warming on both earth and mars, the differnence is that c02 is the primary element of the martian atmosphere and so is a natural process. on earth co2 is a relatively minor (in terms of concentration) element behind nitrogen and oxygen, however due to the emission of co2 in industrial processes this percentage is increasing rappidly, thereby increasing the amount of heat trapped by the atmosphere.