globalists are anticipating their new bubble[bbc is reporting 80 to 100 dollars..a ton carbon[even the petro-chemical dude inter-viewed..lol..anyhow even the petro/spokes-person is looking forward to the tax..[why ?..because the petro/industry has a lot of plans...lol

plans..we tax-payers will be paying for..[via this new tax]..so who benifits from the..new-tax..clearly is industry..[who will get issued free carbon/credits by govt..[they will sell to the securities/speculators..[who will speculate'their'..new windfall.into 100 dollars a ton]

govts wont be getting the benefits..[and the tax wont be going back to the people]..[they]..WE will just pay it on top of EVERYTHING..the elites wont be paying for it/because the company/credit-account will be paying it..for them

industry has produced many of the wolds problems..[this tax will allow buisness to rebuild..for free..[to keep on doing the same..[just look at the same posters posting in favour..[the same lot who blog for gmo,..big buisnes..[look at who is saying the same-thing..and..[playing the man/not the ball]

we have not had the debate about carbon/caused global-warming[lol..climate-change]..beyond doudt the industry was causing the cooling..[as all them smoke filled clouds cut-off the sun..[note the intro of..cleaner air../regulations,..neatly coincides with the turning trend..from cooling to warming.

im seeing a simular con here..[to the non-smoking debate]that sadled the smokers with smoking taxes..[to avoid setting up a double disolution the libs will go along with the deception..sold us by the media..[look at the absurd links some of these..doomsdayer carbon-based global/warming doomsayers..are putting up here

[the last one had a polar bear sitting on a wedge of ice hunting seals[but the photo suggests the last of the ice..[the very point heaven and earth rebuts]

JUST THE PHOTO..INDICATES the level the media is going to[for their global money masters]..[needing this new global/industry-tax]..[just as the turncoat[turnBULL-into votes]..wants a smoking tax..[so his elite mates can get govt-welfare..subsidised..PRIVATE/health-care..govt..subsidised drugs,docters..[paid for by the pensioner doing without food..to buy their last innocent pleasure,smoke]..that big buisness has pumped full of nicoteen..[to make more money]

well..welcome to the next big-businness cash-cow..[carbon-tax]..again mainly paid by the poor people..[not big/buisness-poluters getting it..[and its sure inflating]..gain..for free

Climate change has been happening for millenia, or eons. The only difference this time around is that it has been hijacked by the "New Millenium Money Grab." Seems, just like the Y2K bug, every man is trying to make a quick buck, or defraud the public in some way or other, to transfer wealth to themselves without actually providing anything of any real value in return - because they can't - provide an end to climate change.

Most people buying Plimer's book will treat it as a 'bible' and he the high priest of the church of denial.

No doubt it's a lot easier reading a novel than reading something like AR4 or PNAS, which you won't find at Walmart, Tesco, Big W or Target.

Here's what Plimer's colleague up the corridor has to say:

http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/04/23/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/

"Ian’s book contains over 2,000 references to the scientific literature ... What the unsuspecting reader might not realise is that a large number of the scientists he cites in footnotes agree with the mainstream consensus..."

An income stream for Plimer in his retirement? Possibly.
However, it's unfortunate he hasn't published any critique in the scientific literature ... there's no money in that though.

oh dear q+a quote<<Ian’s book contains over 2,000 references to the scientific literature...What the unsuspecting reader might not realise is that a large number of the scientists he cites in footnotes agree with the mainstream consensus...">>wow no poop?

using others figures and numbers is now a crime?..[what the faulty con-colusion now owns the facts?..to the ex-clusion of others using the same facts TO REBUT..their faulty CON-CLUSION...lol

you guys are short on actually rebutting the fact's..[your tired inuendo's are so revealing of a falicious debate] facts can be used by BOTH suides..to draw their own conclusions,

q+a...i expected more reasoning..[logic]..fact from you

ps..if you use any of my words..you cant
i own them...lol

its so sad bro..[you cant tell collusioned deception from science[think of all the cash..those supporting this cash/grab will get if you guys pull of the big con..

cli-mate change..isnt egsactly about small/change..if they pull it off it will be the biggest tax based cash/grab in histry

[most certainly those wanting..a bit of the huge cash/pie..will lie down with demons..[demonic autocracies]..to get their fithy lucre]

do the number's 10's of billions of tons..[co2]sold for $100 per ton=trillions,...10,s of trillions of tons of co2..becomes quadrillions..[the current burst/bubble cost/..lost 2.5 quadrillion,..

hence..all stops out..for the new cash/cow..[they just need to not let the real debt out of the bag..before the carbon securities hit the derivitives bonus on-sellers..[carbon traders/traiters]bankers

Q &A Says "An income stream for Plimer in his retirement? Possibly.
However, it's unfortunate he hasn't published any critique in the scientific literature ... there's no money in that though"

Obviosuly Q&A is not aware that many of the darlings of the AGW sphere havnt published either.

You know, people like Gore,Flannery et al, both of whom won awards for not doing so. Others who have published have been caught out producing rubbish anyway eg Hansen and Mann etc.

As for making money, if Plimer was really after money he do what Gore has done. Produce a work of exagerrations and unscientific clap trap,get the scientific fraternity to back it, and then trot it around as a Prospectus.

Has made millions out of his various ventures all designed to supposedly solve a beat up he conspired to create in the first place.

Ha!! Apparently, scientists are now only allowed to cite the work of people they agree with 100%. Q&A betrays himself and the very concern many have about the closed shop peer review club of so-called climate science. Of course, if Plimer hadn't cited these he would be accused of ignoring the literature. You can be pretty sure that if someone is damned if they do, damned if they don't, it's because people like Q&A know that he's someone of substance.