Ho hum, same old whining, this time dressed with hilarious pseudoscience - but its by repetition that influence is gained, and Terpstra packs plenty of nonsense into one page. Theres the obligatory airing of 'chattering classes' type labels, an almost nostalgic Stalinist smear, and the implication that he is somehow defending the kiddies - so far so ordinary, timeless even. But theres also an attempt to claim/reframe 'denial' as anyone who can't see Ben's bogeyman, a very late claim to 'scientists breaking ranks' (presumably on climate, bet hes got that list of weathermen Mark Ramsay was peddling last week), and the complete lack of references or supporting links for his claims that is such a hallmark of RightThink intellectuals.

What exactly is Ben after here, apart from a hynotic repetition of 'The debate is over?' If he's looking for the debate and the change its happening all around him, he oughta get out more (out of the Liberal party particularly). If he wants to participate in debate maybe he should bring something apart from his cliches (eg. data, info or knowledge).

Ever since the the evolution of our consciousness we've always been faced with some sort of survival dilemma whether we have a Chimp or Homo Sapien perspective.

People who suffered WW2 had far less surity of survival yet coped better than our present generation of whimps who seek excuses not to face the next challenge."We are the Hollow Men,head piece filled with straw."Just love Elliot.

I think that our humanity naturally decays unless we have a challenge that tests our survival instincts and skills.

Presently we are in the process of serious decay.

I could not agree more with some of the above comments, particularly Donnie's comment about finally taking a position despite not having proof. We may never actually prove that global warming is caused by human activity, but when the evidence is so overwhelmingly in favour of the idea that we are causing it, then we need to act. To do anything else is irresponsible.

Also, dare I say it, the debate actually is over Ben. Just because there are some scientists who disagree with the majority (as there always will be) we are told that there is a debate. This is Andrew Bolt's line. Far from being a voice of sanity, he is one of the most unbalanced and manipulative journalists out there, yet he sees himself as the last bastion of truth. When the vast majority of the world's scientists are saying that global warming is caused by human activity, Bolt will quote the few who are saying the opposite, in the name of balance, and say "There! There is a debate".

This attitude from Bolt can be seen in his rigid defense of the ABC screening 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' when the science that this program defends has been debunked and even one of the scientists appearing on the documentary has openly said he was misrepresented, and at least one other has been actually proven to be wrong.

We all know what our children will say to us in 50 years time if we are proven right. However, even if we are proven wrong, there will be respect for those who decided to take a stand to try and make the earth a better place.

Agree fully with Ms McFuzz. Bolt! Wish he would.

TRTL has a rant against "the left" yet again. Quoting statistics he can't back up in his claim. Assume you made it up TRTL. Perhaps you are being humourous, I can't tell the difference.

As to the issue of this article. Very good. Agree with most written.

I'd extend it though to include all of us. We are daily attacked with a variety of tragedies, dramas and very little good. All day every day.

And who are the most prolific exponents of this? Politicians. Currently our PM is the vilest practicer of this. He wants to create fear as he has no other way of gathering support. "I'll save ya's" is his motto really. But he doesn't. Or dossent as he pronounces it.

I'm sick to death of the gloom and doom and have started tuning out of politics as I find that once a week is all you need to find out the whole week's "issues". Nothing ever actually happens. Check it out. Keep a list of all the "big" issues" over a year and see if you can remember them at the end of the year. Bet you can't. Even just scroll through OLP's back items and you'll see the same thing. Why the hell was I interested in THAT is what you will feel on most issues.

You just miss the bickering and BS that is said.

pegasus

Yeah. My 85 per cent was a joke. Yes, you failed to see the humour. Perhaps the joke was flat, but the fact remains that Terpstra doesn't back up his claim regarding the death penalty, and quite frankly, I don't believe it.

As for a "rant against the left again."

If you can demonstrate where I rant against the left I'd be interested. I'll have you know I reserve most of my rants on behalf of the 'left' against the right. Though I tend to think the 'left' as a united entity is more of a concept and less of a reality, and most of my rants are directed at those at the extreme end of either spectrum.

I'll also have you know I don't buy into the doom and gloom BS either. Note that on the 'don't worry, be happy' thread, I'm against those who try to paint everything as negative.

On this case, I just think Terpstra's attack on the 'left' is condenscending and doesn't actually address anything of substance. He tries to claim that the left just opts out of arguments claiming that there is no more debate. The fact of the matter is, that we have a conservative government and there is most definitely a debate.

Mr Terpstra is a desperate man when he attacks Rachel Carson's review on organochlorines and he's reduced to validating his argument by mentioning the renewed use of DDT in African nations to eliminate malaria.

DDT has been re-introduced in Africa, as a last ditch, desperate effort to reduce the scourge of malaria, simply because there are no effective alternatives.

The scientific fact remains: DDT is among the persisent organochlorine pollutants (POPS), which affects the reproductive and immunological systems of all living species including the destruction of sea grasses and corals.

The asymptomatic long lag time for diseases to show in humans, from exposure to DDT, is well documented, where this chemical can also affect the kidneys and liver.

So while many millions of Africans can be saved from malaria, by the use of DDT, others will eventually die from long-term exposure to the spraying of DDT and the biosphere will degrade even more.

I shall place the author's credibility rating at zero, along with Andrew Bolts - another desperado, who appeared rather pathetic in the interview conducted by the ABC in last night's documentary on "Crude."