The final paragraph says it all; but still the hysterics will blunder on, and the politicians will continue to use false information and downright lies to fool and frighten people to prop up their corrupt regimes.

With your attitude, Leigh, a course in historical philosophy would do you a lot of good.

Being an old retired cockie with Honours in the above, one simply asks you to read below.

Thinking back back philosophically when the Age of Enlightenment delivered its wonderful birth-child, the Industrial Revolution, the so-called necessary change from - manhandled axe rake and hoe - to miraculously powered machinery now so scientific that though wonderfully beneficial it has trapped the average man's mind to the extent that most production now includes the thrill of the chase, sweetly clouding any fear of the danger to our Planet - even to its end - that our advancing Powered Enlightenment is now very capable of.

I am utterly confused.

All these words about CO2 being recycled and in balance. Yet not one acknowledgement that the CO2 concentration started rising at the begining of the industrial revolution, and hasn't stopped rising since. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_History_and_Flux_Rev.png As far as I can tell, no one disputes this. Even the article doesn't dispute this.

So I am lost. What is Ian Read's point?

Your wasting your time trying to talk sense with Leigh,Runner et al because don,t like being told they might be wrong, with that lot whatever comes out of the Right wing noise machine in the US, and the backsides of Bolt and Ackerman two more loathsome people you could never hope to meet,is correct
They are followers of the Beck,Faux News, NEWS LTD liars,so you are just wasting your time on them

Rstuart, Ian's point is simply, he wishes to confuse you, and he has done that. If you want answers to this go the real climate dot org.
Whether its AIDS, germ theory or even 911 conspiracy guys, what these people tend to do is focus on one little thing a try to poke a hole in it. What Ian is really saying is the most climate scientist are lying, that they are doing it for the money and that they are all dumb and he has found the magic bullet that proves it all, only his facts are as effective as the weapons of mass destruction that Sadam had.

Ian Read's conclusion is precise and correct.

An ETS or carbon tax will deliver nothing except a massive increase in national and international bureaucracy at vast cost - and a major reduction in our standard of living to pay for it.

Sound like a good deal?