Martin, you miss my point entirely.
I agree that global warming may effect may the future of the species, but only effect, not destroy.
If we could survive ice ages, armed with a fire stick, & a sharp stone, we will survive a warmer planet.
Nothing we have, or will do, will have any meaningful effect on the temperature of the planet.
Yes, we have changed the face of Australia, almost as much as the aboriginals did with their fire sticks. But do you expect to believe these changes are anything but infinitesimal, compared to the changes caused by the continent drifting from antarctica to where it
is now.
May be you expect me to believe we have had an effect equal to that of India, crashing into Asia.
Core drillings, on the barrier reef have shown periods of 30 years
drier than the driest year recorded in our limited records, but when those dry times come again, & they will, It will be "our" green house, won't it?
The new cry. The Barrier reef is 1/2 degrees hotter, its going to die. No mention ahat the Red Sea is 3 degrees hotter, & the coral thrives. No research dollars in that.
I get so sick of the fragile environment rubbish. Its our built enviornment which is fragile.
I have seen the WW2 airstrips, which launched a million raids on Japan, where you could not get a hang glider in through the trees.
I have seen the 3 Ft diameter trees exploding the 8 Ft deep concrete where the machime shops were.
If you must stroke your ego by thinking you can change the planet, try to do something about the ozone layer. That may be our falt, & its serious, & we may even be able to effect that.

One other little thing. If the Gulf stream continues to slow, or even stops, as has been predicted by the green house lobby, just listen for the cry from your beloved France & the other European countries. It won't be stop the green house, it will be "burn more coal, warm us up". These self serving countries, that you so admire, are interrested on only one thing, whats good for them.
Its a pitty for them that its a myth, because it won't make any difference.
If the ozone hole were over Europe, there would be much more interest in fixing it, & green house would be history.

KAEP,

Those lines you quote in NO WAY refute the understanding that human induced climate change will cause us problems.

When a next US administration takes over in 2009, they will, as the US Senate has explicitly indicated, undertake mandatory measures so that they can reduce greenhouse emissions.

How has John Howard's stance on Kyoto has been vindicated? Emission reductions are needed and the Bush Administration, with Australia’s support, has stymied world efforts to do this. John Howard’s stance on Kyoto has been vindicated only in terms of good will towards the Bush Administration. Maybe this is worthwhile? I doubt it though.

World efforts to reduce emissions (Kyoto) continue. This is a fact. And it remains unfortunate that the US and Australia have chosen not to be part of this effort.

Geodynamics: Isn’t it possible that the rapid nature of atmospheric changes, induced by the sudden human contribution of extra greenhouse gases can have a rapid effect on our climate without having any impact, over the same timeframe, upon our planet’s core temperature? And I simply can’t accept your ‘thermostat’ idea. There’s no one ‘right level’. The earth core no doubt is changing but on the 10 million year scale, the climate on the 10,000 year scale and biosphere on the 100 year scale. The point is that we live at the 100 year scale and we are inducing a rapid climatic change that endangers our own species.

Col,

Collective action and organization provides every civil benefit you know and enjoy. Efforts to address climate change apparently strike you as a socialist plot to rob you of the freedoms and comforts that your society provides. Let’s hope society is wrong about climate change and will continue to maintain your lifestyle.

Hasbeen,

I see your many points and disagree with them. You should publish your conclusions in an academic journal. If your conclusions have any substance the scientific world will be revolutionized by them.

martin callinan “Collective action and organization provides every civil benefit you know and enjoy.”

Ah one of the classic lies of the socialist.

The difference with the truth is summed up in the statement

“one volunteer is worth ten pressed men”

In other words – sure collective interaction is the source of almost all human activity but
“Collective action” is not “socialism” when the activists “collect” freely – as in free trade or free market.
Socialism requires that element of authority and central control which “dictates” and ”commands” people as to where and how they will “collectively act” . Like using "carbon emissions" as a dubious “science” on which to base a “disincentive to individual development”.

Nice manipulation of the truth Martin, most imaginative, for a socialist. However, as flawed and corrupt as all socialist thinking.

“Socialism” is not the exclusive catalyst for collective action, “individual need and wants and perceived benefit is (eg the want to barter or “exchange”). The process of exchange has been going on for many millennia before socialists from pond life and will continue far beyond the time they are all reduced to dust.

As for maintain my lifestyle – I am responsible for maintaining my lifestyle, not society. If someone wants to live in an unimaginative cesspool of socialist glory – let them but I will always be fighting for the rights of individuals to act individually.
All human advancement has always been the result of “individual action” (even collectively which is, invariably, lead by individuals excepting the “mob”).

Now maybe you can enlighten us to how well our “collective existence” is advanced by fitting gas metres to the bums of NZ cattle to accurately measure their methane emissions.

Hasbeen & Leigh
You two are obviously correct, which means everyone else is wrong. When the Meterology Dept tells us we are expieriencing the hottest year in history, they are wrong it's a "socialist conspiracy" correct children. What is it about the lunatic redneck right that can't/won't accept reality, 2004 was a degree hotter than 2003, and 2005 a further 1.5 degrees hotter again, do you think this happens by accident, no wonder I lose my cool from time to time. We put people through university so that they may follow a profession, then some lunatics won't accept what they are being told by the very professionals trained to give the information, where do you lose the plot, how simple can it be. We must lower our reliance on fossil fuels like coal, and offset it with smarter technology, e.g. hydro, solar,wind power etc. You don't need a masters degree to understand that surely. Is Hydro, solar or wind power "socialist orientated" I am in a lighter mood tonight, however I suspect you two, and a few others belived Pig Iron Bob Menzies when he spoke about "the yellow peril" or "reds under the beds" please come to your senses and realise how much damage we have done to this continent in 200 years of occupation, compared to the previous 80,000 years. I am not a Green, but someone who can accept what is placed in front of me, if there is tangable evidence to confirm it, black is black, not a shade of grey, wake up and smell the roses.

Shoga, For a rationale debate see Ian Lowe - President of the Australian Conservation Foundation; emeritus professor of science, technology and society at Griffith University.

His publication on this topic is titled- Living In The Hothouse: How Global Warming Affects Australia Publisher: Scribe.

Ian does not present a fatalistic approach to the topic but he does consider global warming to be one the biggest problems we don't debate.

See: http://www.scribepub.com.au/New%20Releases/Living%20Hothouse.htm