Evos, probably why the world is in such a eco-political mess today is through the use of dangerous definitions like free-market and deregulation, both doubtless having lumped us with the bulk of the global recklessness that even children might understand.

Cheers, BB, WA.

EVO: "Who is the smartest? [sic] a kangaroo or a human. Well the kangaroo is."

Probably better if EVO speak's for EVO's self there.

Such matters as socio-economic justice, education and medical treatment are all proper concerns for mature political activism in progressive, compassionate, and efficient systems for humanity.

Green mysticism and its desperate, pessimistic eschatology result in one a logically disastrous regression of fascist/feudal genocide.

That's why dull, pampered hedge fund pigs like Al Gore just loves you guys.

Milly. Probably better if EVO speaks for EVO's self there.

I thought I was?

My opinion is just what it is, take it or leave it. Iam not very smart, but that's problely dew to the fact, that Iam married to a wombat!lol

EVO

Yeah, it'd also be illegal. Unless of course such secular green saints as Peter Singer had their way, contriving defences for bestiality based on whether "pain is involved", etc.

Well, kulu, since you asked. One may need to be a very well qualified scientist to understand some of the more complex aspects of climate science, but to regard the authority of climate scientists as beyond question just BECAUSE they are climate scientists, as you do, is to put them in place as a priesthood. Now that fits, because global warming has all the hallmarks of a cult. People like you “believe” in global warming. The problem is, logic and evidence and science are not about “belief”, they are about what is or is not.

The only “evidence” global warming is caused wholly or mainly by emissions of CO2 from human activity are computer models which have failed to predict the cooling of the past decade. Computer models are not substitutes for reality. Look out your window. Do you see any catastrophic global warming going on? If such a small increase in temperature (less than 1degC) is claimed to result in catastrophe ("WE'RE REACHED THE TIPPING POINT! SOMEBODY SHOULD DO SOMETHING! WE HAVEN'T A MOMENT TO SPARE!"), then we should see progressively greater catastrophes on a more or less daily basis as we drive from Melbourne to Cairns.

The average global temperature increase of 0.6C during the last century has already been nullified by cooling in the past decade.
The surface temperature record, the basis for IPCC scams, is from thermometers which have not been calibrated or validated, in many cases. The records from satellites and radiosonde balloons agree with each other, but not with the surface record, which, in any case, accounts for only a minority of the earth's surface. Many of the surface thermometers have been contaminated by the urban heat island effect, so their accuracy is nothing on which to wager the well being of your children.

In my experience, people like you know almost nothing about any of the issues related to the global warming scam, yet you cling to green left religious belief because that's where you're coming from, along with a whole lot of related ideological baggage.[CONTINUED]

So, kulu, what is the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere? It’s 0.02 per cent or thereabouts, depending on the reference source you use. What percentage is attributable to human beings? It’s about 0.004 per cent. And what per cent is generated by Australians? It’s about 0.00006 per cent. And if we eliminated all Australian CO2 emissions tomorrow, what effect would it have on global warming, assuming that global warming is being caused solely or mainly by human-originated CO2?

Pretty much none, but we’d destroy the economy overnight. You see, it is actually impossible to supply cities like Sydney or Melbourne or Brisbane - or even small remote towns - with food, water or anything else without CO2 emissions. THAT is an incontrovertible fact and wishing it were not so is just arm waving.

Water vapour is not only present in the atmosphere in much greater concentrations than CO2(water vapour, variable from 1-4 per cent) but accounts for, according to some, up to 98 per cent of the so-called greenhouse effect.

Then there is the contribution of the sun, so vast that variations in average global temperature on earth can be entirely accounted for by solar variations. And there are variations in the earth's tilt, spin and orbit. And a variety of overlaying climate cycles. We don't need 0.004 per cent of the atmosphere to explain climate or global temperature changes. [CONTINUED]