Ahh, "The Australian". From supporting Saddam Hussein in the eighties to global warming denial in the noughties... How low can they stoop?

It is interesting to read what scientists and scientific organisations think of the misrepresentation of their data in this show..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle#Reactions_from_scientists

I look forward with interest to viewing the controversial doco that (it seems) argues against a humankind directed global warming scenario. That the earth is warmimg up seems to be beyond doubt, although similar arguments were in vogue some years ago in support of global cooling. The real issue is that we are, in one way or another, fouling our own nest. The earth is four or five billion years old - the idea that we, in two hundred years or so, can have such a direct effect on some of its fundamental parameters seems a bit hard to accept. Even so, the cleanup is fully warranted apart from issues of climate change. The need for clean air, clean water, ample supplies of non contaminated food etc, is in itself sufficient reason for the current efforts to find alternative non-contaminating power sources and industrial processes. Forget climate change - just clean up our act.

For a man who believes that a scientific hypothesis "...is validated not by shouting but by experimental and observational testing and logical analysis" Bob Carter does an awful lot of shouting in this article.

Carter's use of the extended military metaphor is neither scientific nor sotto voce. Nor is his suggestion that people who claim consensus should be referrred to the nearest psychologist for re-education.

And invoking the revered names of Charles Darwin, Wilhelm Roentgen, Marie Curie, Albert Einstein, Robin Warren-Barry Marshall and their like, as suitable company for Martin Durkin is more a rhetorical gimmick than cold science.

I will watch the documentary tonight with an open mind despite Carter's attempt to properly prepare my neural receptors.

I don't think that anybody on either side of the (so-called) debate denies that the climate is subject to change.

I thought that the real issue was the RATE of that change and the degree of humanity's impact on that rate.

The problem is that if the believers win - and are wrong, it may slow down the world economy for a while, which may cause some people some problems.
However, if the deniers win - and are wrong, then those problems may be far worse for many more people.

At the moment there are "extremist sympathisers" on one side and "holocaust deniers" on the other side who are making all the noise and at the moment, it's the deniers who really crave the public attention more than the sympathisers.

What about those of us left in the middle?

Maybe we should throw caution to the wind and go all-out trashing the planet and leave it to a future generation to sort out.

“In March, 2007, UK television Channel 4 screened another film about climate change which had a different message. Made by Martin Durkin, and called The Great Global Warming Swindle, this documentary explored the science of alarmist global warming a lot more carefully and accurately.”
Upon the pedestal of that grossly misleading statement, flies the tattered banner of Bob Carter’s scientific credentials.
As with General George Custer,
R.I.P.

I dont see the logic in trying to refute the possibility of climate change due to man made activity because it has happened before when we were not around - So what! I splutter - the forces of nature may still gazzump the impact we are having - or not.

It is still naive to deny the fact that when 6 billions pigs leave a little faeces and what ever else around things will change.

As for the science and AL Gore - lets face it An Inconvenient Truth was about as scientifically based as an ad for hair conditioner - it adopted the typically American Shock and Awe approach to sales - for all that and the overt hypocrisy of a green warrior jetting around the globe telling us to make less CO2 - the balance of authority lies with the Climate Change advocates - it is prudent to be wary when warned - If 8 out of ten games hunters tell me the signs suggest there is Lion in the area - I heed them , not the 2 who say tish tosh its all in thier heads.

The debate will be polemic and passionate reason will rule the day -