This article is typical of the writings of fanatical global warming alarm people. Within 5 years or so it will become clear that Carbon Dioxide is actually good for the world, beneficial for man and not the prime cause of global warming. In any case the world has been cooling since 2001 and there are predictions that we may in fact be entering into a period of significant cooling.

There have been many periods of significant warming throughout history with far higher percentages of CO2 in the atmosphere. Life has survided, even flourished. The big threat is significant cooling, not warming. Man can live is a warmed world, but when the next ice age comes we will be in real trouble.

Methinks Mike Pope is about to become a great writer of scientific fiction. Where is his evidence that universal global warming is a fact? OK South East Australia is enjoying a heat wave. In Perth temperatures are moderate and in North America a cold spell.

By what statistical trick does Pope average out these diverse effects? What is the evidence that certain gaseous emissions (artificial and natural) are the sole or at least main climate forcing factors?

Then there are the disease phantasies so beloved members of the medical profession. It is sheer speculation to claim that as a consequence of alleged global warming there will be epidemics of this and that tropical disease as far south as Sydney- thankfully Perth is at slightly higher latitude.

A warm climate and higher CO2 levels usually means greater crop yields. Evolution by natural selection means animals and plants continuously having to adapt to environmental changes. In the case of mankind and the associated domestic species the extremes of temperature can be modified by central heating on the one hand and air conditioning on the other. Now these adaptations require lots of energy. So in the interest of furthering human adaption to his fantasies Mr Pope ought to be supporting Dr. Switkowski call for fifty Australian nuclear power stations

Hey Mike run that bit about Ozone again? See Greenpeace reckon that they solved the problem of the ozone depleating chemicals and a resultant hole in the "Ozone Layer" by banning those chemicals. Are you saying the ozone is building up? Wow lets get back to the Greenpeace chick who lambasted me for saying it was all nonsense and how her and the Green Nazi's saved the planet.
OK you two can argue amongst yourself and I will just put a bee up you both every chance I get.
Mike I think the term "Drama Queen" suits you and little Miss Adolf Greenpeace.

Your comments on the range of temperature that humans can live in may come as a surprise to the Bedouin, Laplanders, Sudanese and Eskimos.
As to increased bushfire risk a much greater effect was the misguided politicians who changed the prescribed burning legislation in the mid 1990's.
By preventing sensible fuel reduction in the nineties it allowed the 'mega' fires of 2000's to occur with all that accumulated fuel.
Fortunately with the new RFS commissioner in NSW we have started to gingerly get in the cool autumn prescribed burns as we did in the 1980's.
There is just so much fuel in the bush now in areas that have not burnt in the past decade that prescibed burns need to be carefuly managed.
We still have quite a few years of wildfires to come till the balance returns.
1 or 2 degrees extra on a 40 deg day is neither here or there. Fuel and wind are the biggies.
I am surprised that the thawing of the tundra was not brought up, all that captured methane.
But that avoids having to explain how all that vegetation that grew in the far north when earth was warmer than now and by what global climate mechanism the last ice age was initiated and then thawed out.

Alas, time for a confession, I worked on the studies in to heatwaves in SA last year and the year before.

I'm afraid the reason why about 70 percent of those people died was because they were elderly and/or were taking kidney or heart medications. They were old and living alone. Nothing to do with global warming, people 'breeding' or 20 foot rises in sea levels.

I could go case by case and show how the climate change gnomes have stuffed up their arguments but in the case of heatwaves, it's a fact that we need to keep an eye on our elderly and make sure they turn the bloody airconditioner on (if they have one).

The writer has a point re mossies and other airbornes. You get hot seasons, the little buggers head south.

What is it about the training of economists that makes them so gullible. Most of them seem to fall for this, or another con, than any other group. Remember Y2K.

Yes Cheryl, we do need to keep an eye on our elderly, but that's not only for AGW. The other day, about 9.30, I went into my 90+ year old mothers granney flat, to give her breakfast. She had got up early, & turned the radiator on, because it was cold.

A little later she was hot, so she turned the Air Con on. She's not dumb, just a bit forgetful. I think the air con was winning.

You don't have to have it get hot, to get your plague of mossies, just ask the Laps, & their reindeer herds. They'll tell you there are more mossies, & other bities per square foot in the tundra, than anywhere else.