Hi Peter, given your climate-sceptical tone, I'm not sure what it is you don't want to do on the basis of a 90% forecast. Change our economy, in ways that would also take care of the many other problems we are creating on the planet? Or risk our industrial civilisation, by doing nothing?

There seem to be two issues in your comment. One is reliability of short-term versus long-term forecasts. In chaotic systems like the weather, detailed short-term behaviour can be difficult to forecast. Nevertheless the fluctuations average out and long-term trends are more predictable. This may seem surprising , but it's well established, both in observing the weather and in more basic understanding of chaotic systems.

The other issue is whether we should reduce our CO2 emissions, even if we're not sure they're a problem. Well, if the great majority of professional climate scientists are right, the effects of global warming could disrupt global food production and bring down our fragile global industrial civilisation. On the other hand the costs of reducing emissions is a minor reduction in economic "growth", a shift in the mix of industries and jobs, and a shift in our attitude to the natural world, on which we are totally dependent.

Personally I think the insurance payment is well worth it. Especially as my personal assessment is that the chances of catastrophic global warming are now somewhere above 50%, even if we act urgently.

I think if climate sceptics would rationally address the cost of emission reductions, and also take account of the other global crises - soil loss and degradation, fresh water, chemical pollutants, forests, biodiversity and ecological stability, to name several others that will also soon bring our system down - then they might stop being so noisy about global warming.

If Rudd signs the Copenhagen Treaty, he will be destroying freedom that now exists in Australia. This Treaty is a means to achieve World Government - see Lord Monckton at St.Paul speech now on UTube. Kevin Rudd should get down from his ivory tower and instigate a referendum that will advise voters as to what the Copenhagen Treaty will entail as far as giving away our rights. The Emissions Trading Scam will take money out of Australia and hand it out to other Countries. Along the way many people will dip in and take out their share. Australia will suffer by becoming a dictatorship. Signing this treaty will make sure that we are definately a dictatorship. There are many people who are opposed to this Treaty and want to see Australia remain a democracy.
Have a good look at the countries that currently do not have a democracy and ask yourself why would we want to give up a system that has seen this country remain free to be part of a socialist system that will control our Country and take away our freedoms under the guise of environmental betterment. Wake Up and protest to your politicians that we do not want to be controlled by the United Nations.

Geoff, from your post I can only assume your income comes from the taxpayer. I find it hard to believe that anyone dependant on industry could so quickly dismiss "a shift in the mix of industries & jobs".

Those few words, so easily, & should I say glibly, rolled out mean the destruction of the lives of tens, or more likely hundreds of thousands of Ozies.

I don't know how anyone can still hold your views, if they have followed the debate. The now shrill, & ridicules stuff comming out of our academics, speaks for the growing fear of the collapase of the whole catastrophe. It doesn't bear thinking of does it? All those research dollars, gone.

Still, there would be an opening for courses retraining now excess climate scientists

The ravings of a marine "scientist", from yet another Copenhagen conference, on the ABC this morning, is just another nail in the coffin, as only the dim witted could believe this twit. Raving that they must start a freezing project to save corals this year, or it will be too late.

What cr4p. Even IPCC authors have admitted there has been no warming for over 10 years. Some have now predicted another 10, or even 20 years of cooling. The ARGO project has only found cooling oceans, throughout the length of the study, & yet we have a "scientist" foaming at the mouth, on our ABC. It is getting harder for these people to sound even slightly credable

I suppose the foaming is at the thought of all those research dollars.

There is obviously too much evidence now refuting the whole CO2 thing, for us to rush in. There is even enough evidence to start to believe that more CO2 would be better for all, biodiversity included.

Yes Geoff, if you are genuine, go back & have another look. The incredible rush of AGW properganda smells of panic. The rush to shore up a failing levy bank, before total failure washes the whole edifice down the same drain as the Y2K bug, before it.

Peter McCloy,
Re your opening remarks on the boat people.
Both politicians and it seems the government members seem to be unaware
that the people picked up by the Oceanic Viking are not covered by
the UN Refugee organisation treaty.
They were picked up as a result of a distress call and are covered by
the Safety Of Life At Sea Treaty. As they were in the Indonesian
search and rescue zone they are the responsibility of Indonesia no
matter what the nationality of the ship that picked them up.
From what the Australian Foreign Minister said their rescue was as
a result of a request by Indonesia as the Australian ship was the closest.

So all the song and dance about what Indonesia is to do with them is
non of our business.

LMAO
Did the author say the same when johhny boy wedged labor with the Tampa?
Just because your side cant get its act together you want to infect labor with your disloyalty disease.
You all praised Johhny coward for his ruthless hold over the party in recent years (although the way I saw it was more as weak yes men complex than howards "toughness").
No one can blame politicians for playing politics and at the moment Ruddy and co are wiping the floor with Turdbull and his mob.
One of the reasons why the tories are a laughing stock at the moment is too much "debate" by idiots who are about as far from scientists as one could be but continue to embarrass themselves by talking about things they obviously have no idea about.

The "debate" is best undertaken by those with the training to do so. Indeed that "debate" has been going on in scientific circles for 30 years or more and the outcome is overwhelmingly in support of the premise that "human releases of Co2 and other gasses can, will and have changed the earths climate".

The "debate" you deniers want to have is nothing more than a continuation of your long practiced delaying tactics for your own greedy and self serving ends and nothing to do with reason and resolution of the problem. It is typical of you types that you write crap like this while hiding your real intents and never revealing your real belief or nonbelief in climate change.

No one will sell you flood insurance when your house is under water.
I think the author should take a long hard look why he has a 20,000 year plan for his farm, the rest of us are a little more action orientated and climate change needs action not debate.
The way the right has tried to politicise science is shameful, they cut their teeth on asbestos and smoking and they are trying to use the same technics on global warming, AIDS, and evolution. Shame, shame shame.

The right was always able to find a scientist that would say smoking wasn’t bad for you, in fact they still do in the US, The fact that they can find a few to say global warming isn’t happening, shouldn’t come as a surprise