Perhaps all those believers should start praying to all their interventionist gods.

The only good thing which could have come out of Copenhagen, is an acknowledgement that the attempted fraud on the civilized world was finished, and the guilty acknowledge that Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic is the only honest world leader in relation to climate change.

He asserts it to be a fraud.

Climate change has always been with us, and life would not survive without it. There are effects from it which we perceive to be detrimental, which may simply mean that we are lacking in experience and basic knowledge, in dealing with the effects.

The knowledge is available, and could be ours, if our politicians were not so enmeshed in fraud.

Humanity has always managed. There are many towns now under water which were ports during their lifetime, thousands of years ago, and new ports have been built on the new coastline. The change is gradual and with our advances in technology, is more manageable than ever

The demonization of carbon dioxide certainly demonstrates incredible ignorance, or worse, mendacity, since the scientific knowledge that all life on Earth is carbon based, and the carbon cycle is essential to life, is well established. The benefits of CO2 are downplayed. The Sahara is greening, not just from water technology, but from increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

The hoodwinking of the public, and the buying of the warping of scientific backing, with taxpayers funds, of a fraudulent scheme to make Gore, and the UN, and all their hangers-on rich, at the expense of the public purse, is a scandal.

Just yesterday, our Buffoon for the Environment demonstrated that he does not understand the difference between weather and climate, or global and local temperature. The BOM came out with the statement that the last decade was the second hottest recorded in Australia.

The oaf, Garrett, puts this forward as a justification for a scurrilous and unjustified tax to reduce CO2 emissions. Our emissions are negligible. In a year they comprise less than a millionth part of the atmosphere.

New evidence? No.
New opinions? No.

But articles like this are the creaks in the rigging that show the Good Ship Public Hysteria is preparing to change tack:

"We're running low on credibility, Cap'n! We can't hold this course!"

"What says the lookout, Mister Mate?"

"Thar she blows, Cap'n! Tax dollars off the port bow!"

"Hard a-port, Mister Mate! Set sail for Population Control!"

Or Acidifying Oceans, or Running Out of Food, or whatever seems likely to stir up the greatest panic at the time...

I believe the author is guilty of believing "that the human race as separate from other life on Earth" and wishes that the earth will "never again produce a species like us."

Do know of any other species that discusses the potential environmental impact of their activity? Do any other species attempt to conserve any other types of species? Do they even know that they can effect their environment? Perhaps we are the beginning of a "more intelligent species" that the author wishes would evolve once the terrible 'human species' has become extinct.

These anti-humanists really get on my nerve. Why don't you spend some time looking into some positive things we can do to make the earth a better place to live, rather than just hoping for the extinction of our species.

Ok, a bit off track I know, but where are we going to find the wasted millions that paid for the wasted holiday for 100+. The soup alone cost something like $51.00 a serve. God knows what the bill came to.

Do we take money from our failing health fund, or, perhaps the struggling education fund, or, perhaps we scrap some of the planned roads.

What about we raise taxes for the ever decreasing number of contributors.

Luckily, for the governments sake, they are not a business, so, they make these choices, attend the forums, achieve nothing and someone else foots the bill.

Thank you Mr Abbott for not allowing us to get egg on our face in the form of an 'ETS trophy' that Krudd wanted so badly to take with him.

It's not just the money that went into sending Rudd's 114-strong delegation to Copenhagen. Can you imagine the total cost worldwide that governments have poured into this scam? How much food for the hungry that would buy? How much better off society as a whole would be if that effort, and labour, and risk, and production, were not simply thrown down the toilet of governmental self-aggrandisement?

The entire global warming episode is simply an artefact of government funding of science. We are witnessing the planned chaos that comes from a state in which government is getting bigger and bigger. AGW is of a piece with the catastrophic Victorian bushfires, and the GFC, which are caused by government's attempts to control climate, trees, and money, respectively. Now millions aredying of starvation in the poorest countries because of the ignorance, state-worship and credulity of the climate hysterics.

What is truly outrageous is that the benefit to those who dropped everything to fight against this scam, is not getting lumbered with a world bureaucratic government, while those who tried to perpetrate it, already have their reward. They are all there, still receiving government funding, all still ready to move on to their next comfortable indoor- campaign with the same mixture of sanctimony, self-interest and belief in omnipotent government. Even after the whole thing has been proved to have no scientific basis, which is now, the taxes will remain, not just one big tax that you can repeal, but hundreds and hundreds of scammy little pious measures, at all three levels of government, all over the world - laws on what light globe you can have in your own home, how you must put out the garbage, what kind of shower head you can have.

These guys really make my blood boil. They should be recognised for the violent, anti-social pests they are. They belong on the gallows.

After Copenhagen failed thanks heaven global warming has died much quicker than other hypes like mad cow or swine flu, check this trend line:

http://www.google.com.au/trends?q=climate+change

I receive many reports personally from people in Europe about the worst winter conditions, even worse than the winter of January 2009 which was already very bad.

Yes, that is weather as opposed to climate, but then in yesterday's SMH I read the mild winter of 2009 in Australia was and indication of global warming and we need to fight that. What then about ice age conditions in UK, all of Europe, India, Russia, China, Korea and the US? Is that an indication as well?

Gas reserves in UK are running out with a national gas emergency at the doorsteps.

I think it is time to stop worrying about global warming and take care of more important issues, namely the looming energy and food crisis: http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/12/2010-food-crisis-for-dummies.html

For those who missed out on the big cold a few links:
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/snow-brings-chaos-to-britain-as-europe-shivers-20100107-lumr.html?autostart=1
http://www.accuweather.com/news-weather-features.asp?partner=&traveler=0&date=2010-01-04_1701&month=1&year=2010
http://www.thelocal.se/24206/20100105/
http://www.thelocal.se/24200/20100104/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/6937854/Britain-braced-for-heaviest-snowfall-in-50-years.html
http://www.wreg.com/news/wreg-cold-deaths,0,5066667.story
http://www.necn.com/Boston/New-England/2010/01/03/Alltime-record-snowfall-in/1262573458.html
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100103/NEWS/1030352/-1/SiteMap/Feeling-cold?-We-re-at-30-below-normal
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/807821-pensioners-burn-books-for-warmth
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100104/ap_on_re_as/as_asia_storms
http://cbs3.com/local/nuclear.power.plant.2.1404207.html
http://www.news.com.au/antarctic-ice-is-growing-not-melting-away/story-0-1225700043191

Another report - not in English - says the last ice age came within a few months, not years, and scientists are getting a bit concerned now about the big cold on all of the northern hemispere. An indication, maybe?

Hey George, while I sympathise with your perspective, I believe I see a fundamental flaw in your logic, regarding living organisms.
Let's accept for the moment that your assertion: “there is only one life on Earth and that is “The Biosphere”” is correct. One of the defining characteristics of living organisms is the ability to reproduce, or propagate. Historically, this propagation process in most cases has been initiated by an environmental problem or crisis, such as overcrowding.
So far, only one species on this planet has demonstrated the ability to take living organisms outside this biosphere, and 'propagate'.
The only real question to my mind is, do we act blindly as all species from the beginning have, and wait until a crisis (quite possibly of our own making) forces us (or at least a microscopically small minority, or seed population) off this rock, or do we act rationally, and plan ahead?
The problem is, in order to propagate we need to climb out of a very deep gravity well, which will take enormous resources. If we continue to squander our natural resources the way we have been, we may never be able to do it; and even if we do succeed in getting that small seed population off the planet, it will in no way make life any better for those who stay behind.
The history of Life should have taught us that failing to get all your eggs out of the one basket greatly increases the chance of extinction.
In short, I believe the biosphere needs a technologically capable species like Humanity in order to propagate. But whether this scenario is true or not, forcing ourselves to the lifeboats -which may or may not exist- for a lack of forward thinking, is just stupid.
What we need to do now is start living up to the kudos we have so arrogantly given ourselves, and be 'sapient', and 'humane', and stop thinking that what we do in our part of the world will have no impact on anyone else.
As an example I recommend this vid:
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/757.html

I share some of the author's pessimism but seriously doubt his prediction of humanity ending up obliterated; we're much too hard to stop for that. Even if it's a ruthless remnant in bunkers, we will survive, but so much that is beautiful and valuable, including such things as many of the natural ecosystems the author so much enjoys looks almost certain be forever lost.

Still, all is not lost yet. Much of the 'failure' of Copenhagen was from the demands from so many to do more rather than less and that has to be a step in the right direction. Technology continues to offer possibilities of a sustainable future; a fall back to the stone age is the least likely of all outcomes. We will probably be a lot less extravagantly wasteful and will appreciate much more that the world's resources are limited but we won't be impoverished by facing the future with eyes open.

From the growing capability to look ahead and foresee consequence we are slowly gathering the will to do more with it than throw our hands up in defeat; we do have the ability to use the window of opportunity foresight gives us.

Hey Grim, who's "we"?

Who elected you the spokesman for the entire human race, halfwit? You wouldn't know your arse from a hole in the ground.