None of us here can say either way can we?

What has been clear is that there was a sudden shift about a year ago from the term "global warming" to "climate change". That's no coincidence is it?

It indicates there has been some political awareness that the climate change, which as others here note, is a part of Earth's history. And the past changes have had nothing to do with human activity at all.

So I have to listen when another group says carbon has little or nothing to do with it.

You also have to suspect the political motives for suggesting what is effectively a tax as the solution. Only a greedy fool (Hello John Howard) would suggest a tax will change climate, regardless of the efffect of that tax, or market if you want to call it that.

So what I see is some acknowledgement at the highest levels that carbon may not have anything to do with the problem but that it is a very powerful political tool and a great way to make money out of nothing.

What more could a politician want? Public fear, free money and no chance their perfromance can be measured as all they have to say is "This will take decades".

Once again here Runner shouts from the rooftops that he, Runner, lives in the 50's as he shouts about the left which doesn't exist. Neither do socialists. You really should update your reading list mate. Try Billy Bunter books, they are closer to current history. And Biggles.

As to the ABC and it's "bias" do try researching this urban myth. It's only the Liberal Party that says this stuff so we know your membership don't we.

Wonder what synthetic burrows all you sceptics climbed out of?

What none of you mention, is that our earth has never had modern man before, or rather the materialist technology that admittedly has its good as well as its bad capabilities.

As an old cockie have seen so much change even in my own life -at first only saw good as we cleared thousands of acres to grow more crops, as well as feeling less lonely to get a full sight of town over fifteen miles off.

Did not worry at first to see the last of the scrub turkeys, the last of the malley fowl, the last of the chubby little native bush mice, carrying their babies on their backs.

More the yappy bark of the imported foxes at night, taking the place of the sharp coo of the native plover foolishing disappearing through their age-old habits of nesting on the ground, modern man and his farm machinery finishing the job.

Further the precious high yielding low grounds all now white with salt, applaudable ag' scientific research resultantly trying amends.

Yes, an old retired cockie does muse a lot about man and his ever-more capable technology, now no trouble getting rid of tropical forests surely nature must have grown there for a purpose.

Will say looking back that hungry greedy man deserves what is happening to this earth, for modern man, who should know better, is surely capable of ruining this earth far more than nature ever did.

Is it too late to turn back the tide on our so-called need for stupid materialistic things and somehow claw back some of what nature intended for this continent before humans used it to get more possessions than the next guy.
Let the ABC air this piece and judge it on its' merits or lack thereof.

I'd be very surprised if it changed anybody's mind, shortened or not. If you really wanted a lot of people to believe this program the ABC is not the place to do it.

Why not insist it be screened on commercial media where the big audiences are? Big Brother could have a special on it. You could force the Home and Away people to write it into a script.

To ABC regulars it's pretty obvious that this is only being shown to meet the "balance" requirements of conservative commentators. What'll it be next? Creationism? Flat Earth? A documentary put together by Wiccans on wart cures?

Mr Kinninmonths recitation of GGWS’s claims on temperature data are commendable only because he leaves out all the other skeptic talking points that GGWS gambols thru. See
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled/ for the science flaws and http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0313pure_propaganda_the.php
for autopsy on the RightThink full-media-press that preceded its showing in the UK. How depressingly unsurprising we see the same here. See http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=William_Kininmonth for lowdown on Mr Kinninmonths .. objectivity – and no, Hugh Morgan does not count as a character reference.

Why show it on the ABC, Chainsmoker? Because they can – the ABC board is now the Liberal Partys great pasture in the sky, from whence its more aged hacks deposit their wisdom for our benefit. The cuts were probably from Legal as believe the ‘documentary’ maker and some of his misquoted guests are still swapping threats.

For the record, the ABC lists Robyn Williams' early accomplishments thus: "Although he graduated with a Bachelor of Science (Honours) in England, Robyn admits to spending as much time acting as studying. Early in his career he made guest appearances in The Goodies, Monty Python’s Flying Circus and Dr Who and stood in for Tom Jones for four months in his TV series."
What puzzles me is why the AGW enthusiasts are so single minded?
Where is the problem in investigating factors other than CO2 which may be just as important, or more important, as drivers of the Earth's climate?