“Perhaps citizens should encourage and support a national formation of our country's environmental scientists, health professionals and community stakeholders - a coming together of like-minded ethical people who will collectively raise their concerns over our governments' continuing apathy on environmental matters?
Posted by dickie, Saturday, 2 February 2008 “ -“LIKE-MINDED ETHICAL PEOPLE” What a joke!

“There are 5 million square metres here, which means lots
of potential very nice burial sites and no groundwater issues.
Posted by Yabby, Saturday, 2 February 2008” Actually, Australia is a “lead” of the world biggest potable ocean. So, burial sites might cause a problem

“Global Warming is a joke and will be proven as such within a decade if not sooner.
Posted by VRWC, Friday, 8 February 2008” – global warming is a reality of challenging climate which is a natural pattern occurring upon all the Earth’s history.

“Isn't it a shame that these "types" don't just move to Iran or Saudi Arabia where these are not pressing concerns? If course, the concerns they will be faced with may be tougher than their preaching to us.
Posted by Sue64, Saturday, 9 February 2008” No worries, problems exist wherever.

“Australia ceased to be a colony in 1901. I paid for my airfare in1983, after proving I had skills in demand, proper understanding of English and monetary resources so as not to be a drain on the Australia, before I arrived.

What accident of fate resulted in you being here?
Posted by Col Rouge, Saturday, 9 February 2008 Perhaps, the only differentiation is in biological backgrounds between properly understanding English: lured to Australia having got predictably different outcomes in a land of racists.

Tick. Thank you for your contribution and I agree that the current inequitable, global situation on the matter of CO2 requires an urgent solution.

Nevertheless, I adhere to the philosophy that "charity begins at home" and I continue to "think globally and act locally."

The status quo on environmental matters has "gifted" Australia with the ignominious title of the largest polluters per capita on the planet.

The author when asking: "Climate change, is democracy enough" is not being authoritarian but simply seeking our input into how we can change the status quo.

Headlines in the Australian today gave a small glimpse into how the status quo functions and of the recklessness and total disregard the "regulators" and corporations have for the environment and Australian communities. These common occurrences, which continue to expand and impact on communities, are simply described as collateral damage in an irrational quest for economic growth.

I believe it was also aired on tonight's ABC News.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23183753-601,00.html

"Trust the system, imperfect as it is, get yourself elected to where you can influence legislation and change the system we have." (Col Rouge)

And here we have Mr Naive (alias Col Rouge) et al, spruiking more gibberish and yet remaining ignorant on how to differentiate between a VOC and a sock.

Mr Naive. Included in my family are Liberal politicians. Seemingly you are unaware that there is no room for mavericks in party politics these days. Mavericks who dissent on party politics are simply left out of the next pre-selection process.

"The first one would mean you were exposed to public scrutiny."

Indeed I am exposed to public scrutiny and encouraged by communities to continue being exposed. So what dribble are you now alluding to?

"I have never ever been for no government or the violent overthrow of the democratic system...."

"The second would leave you exposed to prosecution for sedition"

"Sedition?" "Violent overthrow?"

Jabberwocky Mr Naive but spoken like a true raving lunatic!

It is not the ineqaulity that has me stirred up. It is some parts of the world scientific community and Al Gore who in declaring the debate "closed" that have me worked up. I noticed you did not address my comment about there being other scientists who have concluded differantly looking at the same science. Nor did you refer to my observation that there was climate change in the middle ages that had scandinavian immagrants farming Iceland. And you must have missed my comment that China and India are the biggest polluters and no one calls them to prudence in their power production. You see Dickie, you are sadly one of the ones who are defrauded in all this. Because it is fraud perpetrated on the whole world by hypocrates in the first order. TICK

Anyone who thinks that the US government's taking over (nationalizing) space exploration in the 50s by NASA (from GE and IBM) was a good thing should look up at the moon some night and look at the lights of all the colonies there, or pay to take a trip to an orbital casino on one of Pan Am's fully reusable space planes. Putting care of the environment into the hands of an irresponsible government like that of the Soviet Union (Aral Sea, anyone?) or 'democratic' Czechoslovakia or Rumania is just a great way to end up living in a sewer.

Tick

Thanks for the attack and I note your comprehension of the written word is poor.

I advised earlier that I care not "whether the weather is hot or cold." This is not a thread to debate whether climate change is natural or anthropogenic. The undeniable fact is Tick, climate change is occurring and is drastically affecting the lives of humans.

Since you are a new kid on the block I advise that the debate between believers and deniers on climate change has been done to death. If you want to debate it, bugger off and start a thread or find one that is relevant.

This thread has been raised by the Professor in an endeavour to find solutions for humans to manage climate change. Get it?

Climate change and pollution affects our eco systems. My concern is with man's contribution to the desecration of those eco systems - systems indispensable for human survival.

They include (and not limited to) man's decision to dump dioxins into the Sydney Harbour, pollute marine life on a global scale with heavy metals and chlorinated hydrocarbons.

Uncontrolled emissions of hydrocarbons from industrial stacks - volatile organic compounds (a couple of hundred of them), carbon monoxide, PCBs and PCDDs, (where the majority convert to CO2 when burnt), ocean "dead zones" etc.

Let's include the reckless contamination of a whole town with lead in Australia, the chemical fires caused through negligence, the disastrous underground toxic plumes invading or heading towards our waterways, soil salinity etc.

"You see Dickie, you are sadly one of the ones who are defrauded in all this. Because it is fraud perpetrated on the whole world by hypocrates in the first order."

What the......!? Tick, purchase a text book titled: "Environmental Toxicology" by John H Duffus. It's an old addition but easy reading for dummies.

This could prevent you from making a goose of yourself.

You appear to have adopted the attitude: "If China and India can pollute, so can we."

That's your perogative Tick - avoiding prosecution here is easy.

Your choice - your conscience? - your future - our future!

Dickie,

"I advised earlier that I care not "whether the weather is hot or cold." This is not a thread to debate whether climate change is natural or anthropogenic. The undeniable fact is Tick, climate change is occurring and is drastically affecting the lives of humans"

The fact that there is debate over whether or not climate change anthropogenic, and to go further the degree that it is, is exactly the reason why democracy must prevail.

We don't have all the answers now. There is the single fact right now. And it is why we cannot bypass democracy.

You've clearly bought into the dogma - whether you're proven to be right or not is in the hands of the future. But at this stage, there is still plenty of debate. Any group that tries to bypass democracy based on their beliefs (irrespective of what those beliefs are) would turn this country from a democracy into a theocracy and in this case, climate change would be the religion of choice.

If more than 50% of the public buys into it and our government acts according to the wishes of the people then fine: we're collectively responsible for our actions. However, whether that's the case or not, democracy must prevail.