Spindoc

<< there remains a significant body of scientific opposition to current AGW thinking. >>

This is simple spin Spindoc. While there are few genuine ‘contrarians’, the vast majority of scientists and scientific institutions accept “current AGW thinking”. This is why the UNFCCC and its member states accept the science. Of course, there is serious debate about adaptation and mitigation measures - this is what policy and decision makers are focussed on, as they should be.

Not one scientist has been able to explain the warming trend over the last 200 years without factoring for GHG, not one.

Now, you link to a previous thread – why not link to the later thread?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8792#139777

I was (still am) hoping you could get back to us on your question to CDIAC, and their response. Are you still trying to formulate a more precise question? It does not appear so; it looks more like you are repeating the confusion.

<< This concept is obviously hard to contemplate, it has resulted in Protagoras blowing a fuse and mumbling poetry. >>

Maybe it is hard to contemplate, that is why you should ask CDIAC before you distort or misrepresent them.

KenH, spindoc, others,

Why are trying so desperately hard to ridicule and disprove the science on anthropogenic causes of climate change?

If the scientists are wrong, which they are not, what will be the absolute worst consequences for us? A slow down, stalling or even reversal of economic growth perhaps?

If the scientists and conservationists are right what will be the worst consequences for us? The collapse of civilized society and human population perhaps? What will be the minimum consequences for us? A slow down, stalling or even reversal of economic growth perhaps?

Your responses please lest you prove to all that you are simply being mischievous at best, or worse, that you are desperately trying to protects vested interests regardless of the consequences to the rest of humanity.

Thanks KenH

Were you aware that in an attachment to 'that letter' was listed a number of other prominent people that ‘shared’ their views, including His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI?

Were you also aware that neither Ban Ki Moon nor his secretariat responded to 'that letter?

kulu .. A response to your version of Pascal's Wager and your bullying little demand at the end of it .. "Your goal is to convert people to your religion. If you attempt to do so using tactics that people find boorish and belligerent, it will have the opposite effect and disincline them from choosing your religion."

Pascal's Wager also works for war e.g Iran may or may not be developing Nuclear weapons, the world would be more dangerous if they did because they have stated that Israel should not exist and it's likely they will use them against Israel.

So following your logic, should we not just blow them off the planet now which would be an easy task since they probably don't have enough warheads or a delivery mechanism yet to respond.

Or should we wait until they do attack Israel, then blow the crap out of them but then the world will already have suffered two bouts of nuclear attack (and risk escalation), instead of one if we do it now. (Equally for North Korea or anyone else - it's simplistic and juvenile to attempt this game logic technique.)

Right back at you - "Your response please lest you prove to all that you are simply being mischievous at best, or worse, that you are desperately trying to protects vested interests regardless of the consequences to the rest of humanity." Well?

Pascal's Wager never worked, much to his distress, except on the simple minded who cannot think for themselves .. oh

Gee, don't you guys know anything?!

You're ignoring the FEEDBACK LOOPS! They are what explain the cooling temperatures and expanded ice coverage (northern polar, but also in the Antarctica).

It goes something like this: warming melts the ice caps, which then releases cold into the atmosphere, reducing temperatures. Then we get those record snowfalls and cold spells. All just more "proof" of Global Warming which, as we all just know, is Anthropogenic too. Get it?

Tell them Q&A! You're more sophistimecated than me...

Wow, the Pope's in on it too! That must mean the IRA too, because Fenians have a fiendish plot to reproduce "like rabbits" if I'm not mistaken. That would mean more CO2-emitting, non-middle class babies, in an endless cycle of CLIMATE DENIALISM.

Help us all Q&A. Contact the ABC and SBS with your scoop on this Vatican plot (or was it Lyn Larouche's)?