Perhaps the difficulties arise, in part, from the fact that these are not three simple questions, but five very skilfully loaded questions.

More than three simple questions.
The world polar ice caps and frozen tundra are melting at levels NEVER seen in living memory.
Why I do not know
Is it man-made I do not know
But is it just possible that the LITTLE (or lots) that man does contribute will be the straw that breaks the camels back.
Come on we have all seen smog
Now is a chance to do something about it.
Even if you do not believe carbon pollution is killing the planet you can not deny it is killing our cities.

Well observed, Mr Bamford.

According to Sourcewatch, Carter has addressed the Heartland Institute and "is a member of the right-wing think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, and a founding member of the Australian Environment Foundation, a front group set up by the Institute of Public Affairs."

In other words, he's a free-market fundamentalist ideologue first and foremost, with no ethical qualms about setting up an "Astroturf" organisation.

How much regard for science can we expect him to have?

Thank you Senator for taking the time and your willingness to take the political heat on a topic that the government wants to use as it's "next big crisis" excuse for unrelenting spending.

I expect that this was the first time that Wong and her merry band of climate change advocates have had an intellectually based set of questions sent to them where the answers were not allowed to be soft and dodgy but rather forced to be fact based.

I really look forward to more fact based dialog on this topic.

Hopefully Sen. Fielding is making some belated efforts to get the minimum of understanding of climate issues a voting senator needs but he won't get honest climate science off Carter or Heartland. Carter needs to apply some science (ie true scepticism) to his own unfounded beliefs, rather than perpetuating misinformation and misunderstandings. Fielding should look to CSIRO, BoM, our excellent universities.
Bob, surface air temperatures, as I'm sure you've had people tell you many times, are not direct measures of Earth's net energy balance and are indicative of climate trends only as long term averages. Longer than 10 years. Try 30. Ocean Heat Content, meanwhile shows all the signs that would be expected and is closer to a direct measure of how much warming. Take a look at borehole temperatures too. Actually, look at the science in it's entirety rather than trying to rely on and perpetuate popular misunderstanding and misrepresentations of climate science as you normally do, in your advocacy of scientifically unsupportable disbelief. As Paul says, your questions are skillfully loaded.

What's so difficult? Between January and June the physics of our
planet and its axis allows me to reliably predict
a gradual cooling in Australia. If there is a week in April where
the temperature doesn't monotonically decrease, would I
be correct in throwing out my model and saying that
the standard explanations of the seasons is false?

Look at any retreat from glacial termination, does it
proceed monotonically? Of course not. There are way too many
feedbacks and too much complexity in the climate system. If you
really think a lack of monotonicity in global average surface
temperature invalidates a GCM like GISS E, then your
understanding of such matters is pretty primitive.