Thank you for actually answering a question Protig, which was quite relevant to the topic of the use of fossil fuels. My apologies. I thought I'd read something such embedded somewhere in the torrent of ranting poop you smear this space with, but it must have been another poster. But I only asked, and will accept your answer as true - you may be unfamiliar with this kind of process. (If even a knuckle-dragging simian like myself can acknowledge being mistaken, at what level of evolution does that place you? Some sort of single braincell amoeba I'm guessing.)
--

"Read Plimer's book? I haven't even reviewed it yet!"

I don't give a rat's tossbag about the reviews you supplied. Who would have expected anything else? It's a sad person who spends their time ploughing for negative book review quotes, instead of showing any evidence of a mind of their own.
--
As you are evidently someone incapable of acknowledging when they are WRONG, quite characteristic of the alarmist prediction industry, I realise it is quite pointless debating with you. You provide a perfect example of the self-denial of climate fanatics that is projected onto the world as climate denial. I don't think I'll waste any more time in the featherweight division with you, but mix with worthier foes, who have some honesty. I'll leave you down in your weasel hole to continue excreting your self-loathing on any space you can find.

Talk about pollution.

Mysteries about globull whining are easy questions to answer. And speaking of easy, that is the route you warmies are taking; the comfortable route of believing what is easy and safe to understand. Playing “my google search is better than your google search” leads to what ever your predisposed conclusion was. The fact is, there is plenty of debate. I know that. You don’t. So stop demonizing an opposing view and read up on the denial side before you assume I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm a member of the union of Concerned Scientists and a former believer for almost two decades. And all the “Union” “scientists” wanted was my $ so, so much for consensus among so-called “scientists”. Think for yourselves for a change and recognize that all the research on climate changes is just on effects. The effects that are predicted to happen. Nothing proves the theory deader than the 23 years of predictions.
You hinge your belief on "they say, they say".
I live in Canada so don't tell me about what I experience with my own eyes. Our Inuit are issued hunting permits for Polar Bears and we are spending more on new icebreakers for our "melting" arctic than CO2 reductions. Up here we just had the coldest winter in 15 years, a summer that was as comfortable and like living in an indoor shopping mall and Canada has gone a long way in forest management (and that has absolutely nothing to do with global warming by the way), environmental awareness is at an all time high and our air quality has improved immensely since the smoggy 70's when a river caught fire just south of us in Ohio.
If following what hysterical media, politicians, PR firms and paid consulting leave the laughing at you to history. Meanwhile history will be laughing at the very idea of human monkeys destroying planets with SUV gas and plant food.
We are living longer than at any time in human history so I suggest you get your finger off the panic button and appreciate what we have.

Fungo, I’m just replying to Meme’s emotive “Stop scaring my kids!” routine as if climatologists were irresponsibly frightening our children on purpose. I’m trying to point out that it’s because we LOVE our kids that we are trying to “SCARE” the adults into action (because common sense hasn’t worked so far)! Besides, that’s MILD compared to the insults Meme vomits out. Am I a troll? No. I’m prepared to talk if you have a REAL question. But I am human and lost my temper. Sorry.

Spindoc,
I thought we were having a conversation but now you’re just ignoring anything you don’t like and accusing me unfairly. Y2K had some possible risks but I never thought it was really serious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y2k#Resulting_bugs_from_date_programming
A nervous friend bought tinned food. I just laughed.

“And no more science thanks.”

You don’t have to do the math to read the EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ARGUMENTS put forward by both sides. If you won’t do this, then you don’t have ANYTHING sensible to say about this whole subject! You may as well say “I don’t like global warming, but I don’t want to read anything about it.” Sorry, but that’s game over.

The sun shines. The earth reflects heat back into space. But, LUCKILY for us naturally occurring greenhouse gases bounce some of that heat back to earth, warming it, otherwise we’d be about the same temperature as the moon.

We KNOW this by Spectrometry, the same science that enables the internet with which you’re reading this sentence. It WORKS for other scientific enterprises and has enabled all sorts of modern wonders. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrometry

Here’s another preddie picture for you to look at.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

If we increase those gases the heat also increases. This equation spells out by how much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcing

Count the other forcings, and you get a picture.

It is not that hard, and I'm keen to know if Plimer even addresses these foundations, or if he just says "But Co2's too small a percentage to do anything!" WRONG — we CAN measure this, see common myth 8!
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11462

Protagoras,

Thanks for your kind response, but my previous post was a parody.

I stand by my statement: “…..everyone hold their breath (which is CO2 and H2O rich). If all 6 billion or so of us humans did this little thing, how wonderfully natural our environment would be.”

As you observed, the CO2 and H2O we breath fall within a closed loop however, however if we all stop breathing we would die, mankind extinct, and the world "wonderfully natural" without us.

Similarly my reference to Mother Nature was a tongue in cheek dig at the irrational and almost religious belief that there is some benevelant Mother of the Earth that wants the world to be a certain way. There is no such thing as Mother Earth 'she' is a figure of speech not a deity. We are simply blessed to live on a rock with just the right combination of water, atmosphere, orbit, tilt and most importantly - in built feedback loops which allow competing forces to stay in balance. No one knows how rare such planets are, but for practical purposes this is the only one we have.

Obviously, we do need to be careful not to upset the mechanisms which have allowed it to sustain life, I totally agree with that concept, but we also need to live, and civilisation, with all its evils, is part of that living.

At present, CO2 levels are not higher than they have ever been before, not even in a human time scale.

If CO2 levels and temperature are now high and rising, this is not cause for alarm because that's what happens at this point in the glacial/interglacial cycle). Surely you don't get scared when the days get warmer as summer approaches? There is no evidence of a runnaway CO2 tipping point and a great deal of historical evidence against such an effect.

The obvious lack of quantitiative understanding as to the effects of CO2 does not allow us to meaningfully conduct any cost benefit analysis to the steps now proposed.

In those circumstances, rational people must be skeptical.

spindoc

Thanks for acknowledging taking Professor Walter’s comments out of context.

Some posters here are "anti-science" (look it up). There is no point in discussing the science with them.

Kalin1

Catastrophic or runaway climate change is not about to happen anytime soon.

The qualified conclusions of the vast majority of scientists working in specific and related fields agree that the projected impacts of the current climate change are, however, serious enough to take urgent action.

Examples of which can be found within the below links.

From the USA

http://www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/us-impacts/full-report/executive-summary

From Australia

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/ClimateChange/effects/effects.htm

http://lowyinstitute.richmedia-server.com/docs/AD_GP_ClimateChange.pdf

The last of which is a PDF file.