>> Protagoras: "To Plimer, it would be a mere peccadillo that Australia’s mining industry, from which he profits, has slaughtered thousands of native species just this decade (officially 16,000 in WA alone) and the industry from which he profits, continues to contaminate and threaten the health of the environment and communities across the planet while the displacement of indigenous groups, human rights' atrocities and the accidental deaths of employees continue unabated."

Do you have a source for the 16,000 extinct WA native species?

You are therefore being unethical and un-'environmental' by posting here, Protagoras, presumably using electricity and a PC that has components derived from mining. Good to know we shan't be hearing from you again.

Protagoras, did you have a great fondness for pantos, as a kid? I ask merely, because you're doing all but hold up the "Boo! Hiss!" signs when you mention Prof. Plimer's name.

Flannery: "environmentally friendly", "ethical", "international significance" and "international acclaim".

Plimer: "Dracula", "avaricious", "rock doctor", "slaughtered", "contaminate", "threaten", "atrocities", "deaths", "greedy" and "suck the life blood from this nation".

Funny how I've never noticed Plimer's (Boo!) horns before, nor the fluffy bilbys hopping around Flannery's (Yay!) feet while twittering birds droop garlands of wildflowers on his shoulders (carefully avoiding his halo, of course).

When lovingly reciting Tim's (Yay!) CV, you might also have mentioned that Ian Plimer (Boo!) is a Fellow of the Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, twice Eureka Prize winner, Daley Prize winner, Fellow of the AusIMM, Fellow Geological Society, winner of the Centenary Medal, Clarke Medal, Leopod von Buch Plakette, Sir Willis Connolly Medal, Member of the Royal Society of South Australia, New South Wales and Victoria and Australian Humanist of the Year 1995

You also dodged the point. The point was not whether Flannery (Yay!) or Plimer's (Boo!) money-making activities are ethically acceptable to Protagoras; the point was that Flannery stands to profit from climate change alarmism every bit as much as Plimer profits from the evil, planet-killing mining industry.

But ultimately, we've also completely lost the point of the actual article we're meant to be discussing.

Gad, this is like debating Creationists: getting bogged down in pointless side-arguments.

“Do you have a source for the 16,000 extinct WA native species?”

Thanks for detecting the error Ratty which should have read 16,000 native “animals:”

http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/parliament/commit.nsf/(Report+Lookup+by+Com+ID)/6F072B9AF0DE627AC825734E000ADCDB/$file/COMPLETE+REPORT.FINAL.PT1.pdf (Page xxiii)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2004/03/23/1071910.htm

The author advised: “The need for a more rigorous response to climate change in Australia is urgent”

Clownfish, you exclaimed: "you cannot be serious!” Huh?

I prefer dealing with facts and a growing number of today's crimes against humanity are in fact environmental. As mining pushes into more and more regions and ecosystems, people all over the world are seeing their basic rights compromised; they are losing their livelihoods, their traditional culture, and even their lives. Mining has contaminated rivers, forests, soil, crops and health.

A typical example of the hundreds of human rights and environmental abuses within the mining industry (not least from Australian based companies) include the case against Californian based oil and gas company, Unocal which involved not only the destruction of tropical forests, wetlands, and mangrove swamps in territories inhabited by the Karen, Mon, and Tavoy peoples in Burma, but also human-rights abuses ranging from forced relocation to rape, torture, and murder.
On 1/4/09 Australia’s National Pollutant Inventory (NPI) released data indicating that Xstrata's Mt Isa Mines is one of Australia’s biggest polluters. The group surveyed 4,116 facilities across the country which were found to produce varying levels of 87 toxic substances. Australia's largest mining and processing operation topped the list in six types of pollutants.

On 2/4/09 WA’s Mines and Petroleum Minister Norman Moore advised that BHP Billiton had received 12 prohibition notices in 2 weeks (of course no real regulatory enforcement for breaches - typical!) 5 people have died at BHP’s minesites this financial year.

It’s not surprising that the most vociferous deniers of climate change are connected to mining.

“But ultimately, we've also completely lost the point of the actual article we're meant to be discussing.”

Of course Clownfish. I had already anticipated that the connection between global warming, climate change and the mining of coal, oil, metals, bauxite etc, by self-regulated companies, operating with impunity, would be lost on you.

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/monitorissues_1/2009/02/monitorissue2120/?pa=B56F3A15

http://www.protestbarrick.net/article.php?id=293

Nice try, Protagoras, but you're still dodging the point.

Do some people in the climate alarmist camp stand to gain financially by influencing government policy or not?

But, once again, this is a sideshow; let's keep to the point.

As interesting as the diversions you keep introducing are, how about steering this back to what the article was about: "Australia’s 2007 national election, which saw the Progressive Party" (ho ho ho, 'tis to laugh) "come to power, was the first national election in the country’s history in which a scientific issue - climate change - played a decisive role."

I say again, you cannot be serious.

Clownfish, I cannot help but think you are accusing Protagoras of the very thing you are engaging in yourself. Some would think that is hypocritical.

The point Keith Schneider was making is summed up under the Article topic:

"With record-setting heat waves, bush fires and drought, Australians are increasingly convinced they are facing the early impacts of global warming."

Cherry pick or move the goal posts all you want (it happens in online forums about climate-change all the time). Nevertheless, Schneider's point still stands - Australians are increasingly convinced they are facing the early impacts of global warming.

Until people accept that they have to adapt to a changing climate and live in a more sustainable way, then humanity (and all that relies on it) will suffer.

Of course there will be 'winners and losers', there always has been and there always will be. However, the smart ones ('progressive' for want of a better term) are planning ahead - they don't want to be caught stuck in the mud.