Joanna,

Logic girl, aren't you doing exactly the same thing? I'm a little perplexed as to what the point of the article is?
Proving Rudd is a politician honouring his mandate? What else would you expect?

That the A in AGW doesn't exist? You didn't prove that case scientifically either. In stead you gave us a lot of irrelevancies.
You know as well as I do that the validity of the retired 'scientists' opinion is in their competence, currency of their knowledge and expertise (discipline). Need I remind you that Darwin was raled against by some of the greatest 'scientists' of his day, perhaps one of his greatest critics was an Astronomer.

I've seen opinions from retired scientists who couldn't distinguish between laws of gravity and those of thermodynamics, basic stuff.

As I understand the issue, it isn't about CO2 per se but more the excess of it and the consequences there of, specifically the remaining flexibility in the natural systems to absorb the same.
A bit like the old joke 'we don't have sharks here the salt water crocks keep them under control'...a moot point.

You are clearly guilty of the mirror image of Rudd's alleged crimes.

AGW aside it is irrational rubbish to assume we can continue 'business as usual' with an world wide economic system that is built on a fallacy unlimited growth/consumption/waste/pollution in a finite world.

Here we once again have an uneducated (in climate science) denier saying that there is no debate. THERE IS A DEBATE. IT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS. AMONGST SCIENTISTS THAT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.

You denialists are trying to spin, delay and muddy the debate. Not contribute to it. You are devoid of reason, sense and any skill at debating. One of the most important points in a debate is to understand your opponents argument which you lot patently dont.

Listen to the scientists and not the shills with the money in their pockets. This is all about the rich elites scared they might lose some of their power and influence and maybe some of their riches if climate change is addressed. The foolish thing is they will lose a lot more when our whole society goes tits up from rising seas, droughts, famine and disease.

>> Instead of politely explaining the evidence ...

yes, shame on rudd for not just summarising the work of a few thousand scientists.

joanne oughta learn the difference between skepticism and denialism. and well done rudd, for heaping the appropriate scorn on these denialist loons.

"It’s not hard to get labelled a climate change “denier”. You don’t even have to deny that climate change is real, man-made and a problem. As Bjørn Lomborg, climatologist Patrick Michaels and political scientist Professor Roger Pielke Jr have discovered, you merely have to challenge the orthodox political policy responses. Or, like Climate Audit’s Steve McIntyre, dare to scrutinise the statistical workings behind influential climate research papers. If you stray from agreeing with the political prescription, you're an immoral person." - Stuart Blackman, The Register

Let me tell you a true story.

In the 60's a woman started an organization to clothe animals. Her reason was that you could see their "private parts" & as "Private parts" were obscene they should be covered, even on animals. She traveled around America for a year & started many groups who held demonstrations & even a march on Washington. 10 of thousands attended. One Zoo even went so far as to comply & dressed their animals. Clothing companies got into the act & made & sold clothes for peoples dog & cats. It turns out that the woman was doing her Majors in Psychology on Brainwashing the Masses. I remember the article in the paper & on the News. & so it goes on.

Global Warming is a bigger scam than the Nigerian scam. It's all a World wide Governments revenue raising scheme.

It is all very depressing rstuart and other like–minded folks. I have made photocopies of Peter Doherty's article in the current issue of "The Monthly". Since Doherty can put his points much more clearly than you or I and, further, has credibility in Spades, I merely now hand out his article to people with the comment "This is all you need to know about the climate change argument. I speak with the authority of a silly old man who once did have some scientific reputation but alas it was in the long long ago !