I think it's fascinating that climate scientists are accused of being self-serving.

Consider the following motives to deny climate change:
- I don't want to have to pay more money
- I don't want to have to drive/fly less, or use less electricity
- I don't want the economy to go into recession

These are totally reasonable and understandable motives to deny acting to prevent climate change. And hey, scientists are not immune - genuine action to address climate change may mean less scientific conferences in ritzy hotels around the world! Scientists are well-paid. At a guess, I'd say a number of scientists would have investment portfolios, would take holidays, and would generally have an interest in living in a healthy economy. Let's face it: addressing climate change threatens all of this. The motives to deny climate change are compelling.

AND YET THE SCIENTISTS INSIST WE NEED TO ACT.

Why would they insist on this, knowing (perhaps better than most) the costs of the action they are advocating? They must be absolutely compelled to think that the cost of INACTION will outweigh all of this, otherwise they'd just shut up about it and keep living the high life. Now if the world's top scientists (which include some of the world's smartest people) are so compelled to fight for action, and it is not really in their interests to do so, then why won't people listen?

I'm 25 years old. Here's what I will tell my grandchildren, if I live long enough to meet them:
I'm sorry, but I tried.

I would also like to see far more input by scientists. The politicians glibly use terms and implement policies without much thought to the science.
The Victorian Minister for Energy, Peter Batchelor last week introduced a program of harvesting geothermal energy into Victoria. His government has divided the state into areas offered to private enterprise under a licence system.
Batchelor demonstrated his ignorance by describing geothermal energy as “renewable”. I have no doubt that it is clean energy, or that it is used by many countries such as the USA, but of all the sources of energy, it is not “renewable”. Once it is used the planet will die.
I would like to see more discussion of geothermal energy because it is truly a resource that belongs to all mankind, and not to ignorant greedy little politicians looking for revenue.

Richard Castles: "Seems there's more profit in prophecy than dinero in denial."

ExxonMobil (most profitable corporation on planet) has spent millions secretly funding any GW sceptic who isn't a known paedophile; see http://www.exxonsecrets.org/, consider also who funds Institute for Public Affairs & Lavoisier Group in biggest coal exporting country in world, Oz.

Does Richard Castles have evidence for his ridiculous claim, is he just another RightThink smear-and-run hack, or is he really that bad at maths?

The climate has changed from denial to delusion.

Heaven help us if the media might actually present an intellectually rigourous discussion that balances ALL of the views. Interestingly a rebuttal documentary (recently aired in the UK) has been refused an airing in Australia. Very suspiscious. They think its biased, but of course big Al's contribution is very fair and balanced, sort of like fox news is fair and balanced.

All l want to see is a full and frank publicly transparent discussion. Without being lampooned by the true believers of spin.

In any event, there's a tonne of incredibly soft grant money being doled out, world wide, into the billions p.a. to 'combat' 'climate change'. There's gotta be a way l can get my snout into that trough.

There is no shortage of hot air about this subject, so l cant see a significant reduction in CO2 emmissions anytine soon.

trade215, Are you talking about the Great GLobal Warming Swindle by Martin Durkin?

Perhaps you've missed the broadsides from scientists who appeared in the program, from the UK Royal Society, and the British Antarctic Survey which said, "Any scientist found to have falsified data in the manner of the Channel 4 programme would be guilty of serious professional misconduct."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle
http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0313pure_propaganda_the.php

Mr Durkins is making a career out of smearing environmentalists as corrupt or fascist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Durkin_%28television_director%29
, betcha Hugh Morgan and Alan Moran have got his complete works. Should fit right in with SBS's techno-fantasy Future Focus series.

Liam, Saturday, 5 May 2007 10:57 AM: "...consider also who funds Institute for(of) Public Affairs & (The) Lavoisier Group..."
Well go on, Who?