Copenhagen 'failed' because so many wanted to do more about climate change, not less. One thing that didn't make any serious impact was denying the existence of the problem. When it comes to vested interests in promoting false beliefs, look no further than entrenched fossil fuel interests; their cash flow makes all the world's science funding look like pocket change, but they still can't make a serious impact on the credibility of climate science. Except amongst non-scientist.

Doubters obsess over a single series of proxies being omitted whilst ignoring all the other direct measures as well as proxies, obsess over the "missing" or "hidden" data whilst ignoring the overwhelming weight of evidence in the rest of the data, obsess over some short-term cold weather and ignore long term warming trends, insist a hot spike in a warming trend somehow proves it's cooling and deliberately ignore natural variations like El Nino (in that hot spike) to enhance their argument that it's all natural variation.

The noise level may be rising but the scientific case that shows AGW to be true strengthens with every serious study project, whilst the case for it being false are so weak they can't even get published in serious scientific journals. The PR and political debates may be ongoing but the scientific one over fundamentals of climate change is settled.

Ken Fabos ,open your eyes.The carbon energy producers want the taxes and their ponzy scamming derivatives.It will be us the consumer who will pay more for less energy while the producers make even more profits.

Kevin Rudd was willing to sign away our sovereignty to a World Govt run by the banks at Copenhagen and hardly a word of outrage or protest is heard? Are you insane or do you believe that we can save the planet by enslaving the masses?

Arjay, from the content of your posts to OLO lately, I don't think that it's Ken Fabos whose sanity is in question.

So CJ Morgan since you have entered the fray have the guts to debate.Should Kevin Rudd have signed the Copenhagen agreement that would have ended our sovereignty?

We would have been under the power of a World Govt financed by our carbon taxes and controlled by the international banks.