i'm with al gore, but author is right about social mechanics, sub-set: academia. i'm with mencken, too, but 'they' have created a real boogeyman in islam, a certain percentage of moslems are seriously angry with usa and henchpersons. so they should be. they remain vastly less dangerous than a senile driver or a summer storm.

Here's one from a Prof. Bignall(?)

"the only experimentally proven effect of increased CO2 in the air is an increase in the growth rate of plants".

Standard conservative stuff: human beings only care about money, therefore any scientist who backs the case for climate change must be in it for the cash.

Funny how the skeptics never wonder aloud if the dissenters - all of whom are funded by the fossil-fuel industry - are telling fibs to keep the dollars rolling in. The tobacco industry did it, as did the manufacturers of thalidamide and those scientific purists at James Hardy, but I'm sure the petrol giants wouldn't undermine good science simply to keep their share price up.

Omitted by the article - the fourth law of motions:
If you consume enough rubbish, you will have one. Having read the article, it is enough to send me.

I'm more interested in the physical laws which govern what is said by politicians and the mainstream media. For instance, there seems to be no end of babble about climate change, yet it seems to be forbidden to speak of recent weather in Australia as anything other than "the drought". In fact, I often hear BOM meteorologists qualifying statements to remove any inference to specific weather events being resultant from global warming. It is good scientific practice, which is something quite foreign to global warming skeptics, though it would be equally valid to say that such events are in line with global warming predictions, but it will be several years before any trend becomes apparent.

Then there is the law which prevents any newsreader from mentioning Australia's growing population with anything other than a glib smile and a positive slant. Then it's on to all the stories about the myriad of problems resultant from a growing population.

This is democratic Australia, yet the unanimity of public utterances on these subjects would not be out of place in Moscow in the 1970s.

Ponder “Like most trends, it will pass.”

But how much damage will be done to national economies and more importantly, the people they represent in the mean time?

Wizofaus “If you want to believe that thousands of scientists all over the world have been falsifying their research for the sake of extra research grants for the last 40 years, then go for it.”

Climate science is an infant and immature science, studying the impact of mans occupancy and impact on the earths carbon balance and claiming some new, bute hockey stick effect which means doom unless we follow, like lemmings the high priests of climate science is akin to meeting a new messiah and jumping off the top of a cliff with him.

People followed Jim Jones to their doom, others followed the loonies of Heavens Gate. Climate scientists have a similar credibility, especially when fronted by a wannabe ego and snake oil salesman like Gore.

You might but don’t ask me to run up the cliff, like the lemmings, some of us like to take time to consider major issues, rather than listen to the first scare-mongers with “grants” at stake, claiming damnation for all humanity.

“Socialism by Stealth” is the hidden agenda. The innovative and able subsidizing the incompetent through the medium of what amounts to mythical carbon trading.

I think fester might be observing something similar.