Q&A "China is doing a lot more than we are, rpg", what utter rubbish, they have said they will build a minimum of 1 coal fired power plant a week for the next 10 years, so what are we doing, building 2 a week?

Get your head out of the sand and admit we are completely inconsequential to the rest of the world, as much as your ego would prefer it to be other than that.

If you go down the "per capita" line, (which is disinformation at its best), there are 20 million of us and 1.1 BILLION of them, if we vacated Australia completely tomorrow it would be a couple of weeks before they replaced our entire contribution.

"China is adopting policies", well they say they are, but they said they were going to be more tolerant of human rights before the last Olympics, no evidence of that either is there. They will always say what suits them and what they think will placate westerners, fools that we are.

"Some of us like being informed.", how noble you are, but sadly it's untrue Q&A, you just like to sneer at others and criticize and it is reflected in your continued intolerant nature.

I can accept other people can have different points of view, you clearly cannot. You need to grow a bit, probably why you have never truly succeeded in your field and remain a minor frustrated player, but I'm sure you've heard that before from your superiors.

Hi Folks
Just wanted to set the record straight about a few points that have been raised in relation to my article.
1/ It was not an article about the science of climate, it was saying that we need to be informed about all the information on this subject as the world is being restructured around us on the basis of AGW. If you re-read the article you will see I was not stating one side was right, and the other wrong.
2/ The main thrust was a call for us to not get so wrapped up in CO2 we ignore the destruction we humans are definitely doing such as deforestation, oceanic plastic, over-fishing, water table pollution, industrial run off etc, etc all of which the mass media (& politicians & corporations) largely ignore.
3/ I am not in the pay of the oil companies, or anyone else for that matter, I do this of my own free volition (though I strongly suspect my bank manager wishes I was)
4/ Joseph Goebbels would be proud of some of the vitriol spouted to silence dissent on The Forum (not just on this subject) of those who have the temerity to at least question the status quo in what, at last glance, was a free society. Shame on you.
5/ Are all those who believe and fight for AGW in the pay of the big banks? For surely it is they who are going to be the multi-trillion dollar biggest winners from all this....always follow the money.
It is not (yet) a crime to be informed or to question. It is your world too after all. James

James, You aren't fooling anyone - the article tries to throw doubt on the validity of climate science, implies they haven't even checked what the sun does or how much of recent CO2 is from volcanoes and how much from burning fossil fuels, ask why gov'ts 'go along with this if it wasn’t necessarily correct'. It's denialist drivel.
James, of course people understand that there are many serious issues around sustainability; Climate of the whole planet into the future counts as serious enough to get a lot of attention. I think the article is drivel and I haven't silenced any 'dissent'. Shame on you to suggest that labelling the article denialist drivel equates to silencing dissent. Also - oversight of the overall balance of taxation is constant and fundamental. Taxing carbon and feeding the money to support energy efficiency at consumer level and low emissions energy technology at the producer level isn't a scam to boost taxes at the expense of the gullible.
It's not a crime to hold opinions like yours but basing climate policy on them would be dangerously irresponsible.
Mainstream Australia increasingly accepts the science and increasingly wants this faced head on.

Q&A admirably demonstrates that the "science" of climate is not a disinterested pursuit of truth, but is characterized by hysteria, hubris, bullying and ideology, rendering itself glaringly corruptible and vulnerable to bias, intolerant of skeptics, and blind to inconvenient facts.

"I remember at an early period of my own life showing to a man of high reputation as a teacher some matters which I happened to have observed. And I was very much struck and grieved to find that, while all the facts lay equally clear before him, only those which squared with his previous theories seemed to affect his organs of vision." - Lord Lister

.

Historian aka James; I think you are a bit thin skinned; after implying that climate science doesn't track or consider solar activity or look at how much CO2 comes from where - ie imply they are so incompetent that such basic fundamentals are overlooked - you get upset that people aren't polite and dismiss what you say as rubbish. That's not vitriol; what you say actually is rubbish.

Come on James, you are the one asking that people be better informed but it's clear to me that you aren't very informed yourself. Quite the contrary, you must be remarkably ill-informed or else you would know (and have passed on to readers) that manmade emissions have been much greater than volcanic emissions over the past century, that solar activity is monitored and measured with great precision , on Earth and with satellites, and has not undergone any changes that could make it a primary cause of a rapid warming trend. Water vapour and clouds have been the focus of a lot of study and it's quite insulting to the many competent scientist who do such work to imply they overlook them.
I think you are far more insulting to working scientists than anyone here has been to you.

Ken, surely Government policy should be about the whole environment, not just "climate" - that is rather the point.
As for accusing someone that you know nothing about of being "remarkably ill-informed" rather proves my Goebbels point. I could retort "Yes I am actually, and for these reasons...." however what does that prove? Likewise it would not prove anything by me questioning your credentials.
It is absurd for any of us, me included, to ever hold a fundamentalist opinion on any subject. It is impossible to know all the facts no matter how compelling the arguments are to date and therefore it is a betrayal of our own humanity to not at least keep our minds open to the possibility that what we believe may be incorrect. It is therefore imperative to never close our minds to alternative view-points, no matter how implausible they may at first seem.
I respect your informed position, it is a great shame that you cannot respect others.