It is common ground that the globe has been cooling since 1998. That’s why they changed the name of the religion from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’; and why all those government-funded scientists have been falsifying records, suppressing information, and stifling dissent.

To the extent that there was a consensus to the contrary, it was based on computer models *all* of which were wrong. If the science really were settled, there would be *one* model, and it would have successfully predicted the cooling.

The issue now is, how far back in time do you go to find the start of a significant warming trend? But of course, since the climate has always been changing, that can never be anything but an exercise in arbitrary opinion as a matter of science, and arbitrary power as a matter of politics.

There is nothing magical about the period since records have been kept. So what? What kind of inane conservatism is this, that any peceived significant change in the climate in only 150 years out of 4,500,000,000, calls for a world government to police all aspects of global human life, which is what a carbon tax amounts to.

The warmists’ appeal to science is moreover especially weak because even if all their climatological claims were conceded, which they are not, *nothing * would follow from them as a matter of public policy, because science doesn’t supply value judgments, remember?

The twentieth century having been devoted politically to the experiment whether government could centrally plan the economy, and having failed at a cost of over 100 million unnecessary deaths, the socialists now want to re-run all the same arguments in favour of government centrally planning the whole world's economy *and* the whole world’s climate.

Sheesh! Give us a break!

Right now in Copenhagen, airlines are booming, limousines of important people are gliding in, lights are blazing, air conditioners humming, kitchens cooking, champagne bubbling and caviar disappearing.

The Carbon Sense Coalition's suggestion to the Gallivanting Green Geese of Copenhagen:
Use green energy and WALK HOME!

You have obviously thought very deeply about this, Peter Hume.

100% Correct Peter Hume.Even Q&A is lost for words.

You have got it wrong again, Arjay.

On the contrary, I could spend my word and post limits just in response to Hume's first stupid sentence:

<< It is common ground that the globe has been cooling since 1998 >>

Even Bob Carter has shifted his ground (or is it goal posts) from 1998 to 2001. Funny that.

let them..catch public transport home...let them reflect..just what change they fail to bring..that now seeks..to finance/finese..their next green/bubble

.Soros..Wants Poorer Nations..To Take On Green Debt..EU pledges USD 10bn to fight global warming...and create new third world debt..at intrest..

The European Union nations..have pledged EUR 7.2 billion..
http://www.prisonplanet.com/eu-pledges-usd-10bn-to-fight-global-warming.html
(USD 10.6 billion) to help developing nations fight global warming...no doudt lent...at intrest...our taxes..with copnditions attatched such as one child policy..but it gets worse..remember its our taxes paying this next bubble into green dictators/ship

Billionaire George Soros has suggested that poorer nations be persuaded to take on what he describes as..“green loans”..in the name of combating climate change,..a policy that would land the already cripplingly/poor third world..with even more debt,..payable to globalist institutions such as the IMF.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/climate-colonialism-soros-wants-poorer-nations-to-take-on-green-debt.html

Furious Reaction..To Sick Editorial Calling For Global One Child Dictatorship
http://www.prisonplanet.com/furious-reaction-to-sick-editorial-calling-for-global-one-child-dictatorship.html

An article featured in Canada’s/Financial Post/newspaper..calling for China’s draconian one child policy,..where woman are kidnapped off the streets,..drugged,..and forced to undergo compulsory abortions,..to be imposed worldwide has been met with widespread hostile reaction,...yet such measures..are being debated at the United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen.

Copenhagen climate change:..‘US should spend as much on global warming as war’
http://www.prisonplanet.com/copenhagen-climate-change-us-should-spend-as-much-on-global-warming-as-war.html
Poor countries have demanded that the US spends as much on tackling climate change..as it does on warfare.

Copenhagen climate change summit:
The world is COOLING not warming says scientist Peter Taylor … and we’re not prepared
http://www.prisonplanet.com/copenhagen-climate-change-summit-the-world-is-cooling-not-warming-says-scientist-peter-taylor-and-were-not-prepared.html

In his provocative book Chill,..he warns that the world is cooling not warming..and that solutions proposed at Copenhagen ignore the risks of a possible return of the Ice Age…

Obama’s Top Climate/Advisers..Can’t Get Doomsday/Story Straight..While Testifying..Before Same Committee..on Same Day

Which is it–6 feet..or 3.5 feet?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama%e2%80%99s-top-climate-advisers-can%e2%80%99t-get-doomsday-story-straight-while-testifying-before-same-committee-on-same-day.html

Now EU..Wants Global Transaction Tax..To Fund More Bailouts
http://www.prisonplanet.com/now-eu-wants-global-transaction-tax-to-fund-more-bailouts.html

On the heels..of a similar proposal..being pushed in Copenhagen..in the name of fighting global/warming,..the European Union/has asked the IMF..to introduce a global tax/on financial/transactions..in order to fund more bailouts..in other words,..the globalists are devising yet more ways..to plunder the taxpayer..into servitude..to the private banks..that they own....lending govts their own monet/at intrest

Or Hume’s second stupid sentence, Arjay:

"That’s why they changed the name of the religion from ‘global warming’ to “climate change”

Hume obviously doesn’t know (or knows but is playing dumb-ass ignorant) that Frank Luntz (former George W Bush policy advisor) encouraged the Bush Administration to:

“reframe "global warming" as "climate change" since "climate change" was thought to sound less severe.

In a 2002 memo to President George W. Bush titled "The Environment: A Cleaner, Safer, Healthier America", Luntz wrote:

"The scientific debate is closing against us but is not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science...Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field."

Hume obviously does not know what he is talking about, and you fall for it (again and again) hook, line and sinker – well done, Arjay.

The New World Order facists are now on the back foot.The 911 truth movements are having an effect.see http://www.ae911truth.org/
There is one simple question that the debunkers cannot answer.WTC Building 7 186 m tall came down in 6.5 sec in classic controlled demolition style.No Plane hit it.For 3 sec it was virtually freefall acceleration of 9.7m/sec. If the momentum of the top of the building was crushing the lower portions,it could not possibly reach freefall speeds of 200km/hr.It's average speed was 103km/hr.If you study the video you will see that it was demolished from the ground up.Larry Silverstein."There was so much suffering and loss of life ,the decision was made to pull it.So we pulled it and watched the building come down."later Larry said he was referring to the firemen but they were already out. "Pull" is a demolition term meaning to pull the steel and concrete structures via explosives in perfectly timed synchronisation so that it comes down in it's own footprint.

The second blow to the NWO facists is Climategate.The carbon taxes and derivatives were going to fund their New World Govt but that is looking very shaky at the moment.Have a look at who funds the Greens.A lot of money comes from the Global Corporates.We have a stange mixture of Socialists and Corportates who are seeking to control the entire planet.The are trying to push through their World Govt via the UN.

The third blow to the NWO facists is Ron Paul's HR1207 which seeks to audit the most powerfull banking cartell on the planet,the US Federal Reserve.It has passed committee and the Senate.317 of the 435 members of Congress are in favour of an audit to see what they have done with $ trillions of tax payers money.They are more secretive than the CIA.

Okaaay - roger that.

Dear oh dear. Tinfoil hats are available in the foyer.

Neither CJ Morgan or Q&A can counter any of my arguments.All they do is to allude to incredulity and innuedo of unhinged logic.

Just disprove the logic and science I've presented about WTC 7.

CJ

Tinfoil hats in the foyer are reserved for the cosmic ray enthusiasts, perhaps you forgot.
On the other hand, maybe you were thinking of those weird looking white jackets with the long leather straps? If so, they're in the cloak room.

Alas, I won't be commenting on the 2nd part of Peter's 2nd second sentence in only his 1st paragraph;

"... and why all those government-funded scientists have been falsifying records, suppressing information, and stifling dissent."

No worries, I've better things to do - and I'm already running out of post limits before I even get to his 3rd sentence - tried posting 3 hrs ago and was knocked back.

Nuff said.

And CJ, if any wingbat thinks the imputations above are in any way ad hominem, tuff titties - they dish it out with flame throwers and are the first to cry foul when it's returned in kind.

_____

Oh look, Arjay just flashed!

Pssst, Arjay

wtf does WTC 7 have to do with Copenhagen Delegates using (or not using) Green Energy to WALK HOME! (Peter Hume's emphasis)?

Or are you changing goal posts (I mean playing fields) ... again?

OMG, I see - the 11th sentence! And that's not counting those very long sentences with the so many sub-issues (like the 2nd) in them.

Nah Arjay - at the rate we're going, it will be well into 2010 before I get round to your logic, no pun intended.

Nighty-night.

I really do get the feeling that Q&A can talk the talk but can’t walk the walk
How many posts and how many lines ---and not a single argument.

Without trying to sidetrack the thread I would really be interested to hear Q&A tell us
IN HIS OWN WORDS
IN HIS OWN WORDS
IN HIS OWN WORDS
(and not a barrage of links!)
What fact/incident /argument convinced him of AGW.

And here's some thinking music he can listen to while he contemplates his answer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9ZCjGIb_2E

Arjay: I am with you all the way on this one!

We are all being suckered by this bunch of "Climate
Apologists" who are too dumb to see that they themselves are going to be paying through the nose for increasing implementation of more and more laws and legislation designed to totally enslave us.

If anyone reading this thinks that all this hog-wash regarding Global Warming is being directly caused by human activity, then I would strongly suggest a review of the lost freedoms that have been enacted against us all during the last 50 years, all in the name of our own protection!

It never fails to amaze me that the masses are so prepared to march behind the piper, blindly following as he leads them into the ocean of totalitarian control.

We are all born with the latent ability to think and to rationalise, but for some strange reason, so many of the sheeple allow the self-serving autocracy to do the thinking for them!

For God`s sake, can`t you people see that this whole "Climate Control and Global Warming" issue is deliberately being presented in a very dubious state of confusion, with many questionable and so far unresolved issues that need clarification before we are all committed to allowing the signing away of the future wealth of this country and as a consequence in the process being consigned to virtual slavery, simply to appease these out of control maniacs and their lust for notoriety akin to Hitler!

Crackup,

An excellent summation.

Setting aside the quite bizarre assertion from Peter Hume and others on this thread that AGW is not real, and that we shouldn't be doing anything about it including not even erring on the side of caution if there is any doubt whatsoever, there is indeed an issue with the extravagance that is occurring at COP15.

There is a terrible lack of principle being observed by the summit delegates, to the most enormous extent it seems.

Apart from the Australian delegates costing the taxpayer far more than they should be, not least with more than a hundred of them staying in the $850 a night Kong Arthur Hotel, and presumably the same sort of extravagance occurring for delegates from all or most other countries, their green principles seem to be non-existent.

The place is heated to the extent that summer clothes are being worn. If the heating was turned down eight or ten degrees and people dressed accordingly, a much better example of energy-use efficiency would be set with no discomfort to anyone.

Recycling bins are not being used. Masses of paper documents are being printed despite access to hundreds of laptops. And so on.

You've got to ask; how on earth can the people at this summit possibly be genuine about sorting out a course of action on climate change if they so flagrantly display a culture of profligacy when they could so easily be much more frugal, without being disadvantaged at all?

And Peter I've got to ask; why are you concerned about this if you think anthropogenic climate change is bunkum??

Crackcup,this is why the 911 issue is so important.It is about freedom of all people on this planet.At a recent conference in Sydney.I met Richard Gage the founder of Architects and Engineers for 911 truth,Prof Steven Jones Phyicist,Dr Frank Legge[Aust] who worked with Neils Harrit and 7 other scientists who found nano thermite in the dust and rubble of WTC.This is a highly sophistocated explosive that was only known to the US military.You cannot make it in a cave in Afghanistan.

The more you investigate 911 the more anomalies arise.Fire never before in the history of modern buildings has ever caused total failure of concrete and steel.Norad routinely intercept planes within 20 min once contact is lost.2 hrs passed with no interceptions.Unidentified insiders made millions on stocks of American United Airlines and those Corp affected by 911.There were warnings from 11 countries warning people of the attacks.Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book "The Grand Chessboard" " What we need is a truely massive and widely perceived direct external threat."Some of the alleged suicide hijackers are still alive and well.Even the FBI admits they don't have enough evidence on Bin Laden to convict him.
The Bush administration resisted the formation of the 911 commission for 411 days.For JFK and Pearl Harbor investigations theywere started in a week.It took 6 yrs for a sham report to be done on Building 7.Most people to this day do not know of it's existance.70% of the questions asked by the families of the deceased of 911 were not adaquately answered.

Horus

Peter Hume's whole rant is so full of bluster, inconsistencies and outright guff. My argument started with his first sentence; even Bob Carter has shifted his stance on 1998. Following his logic, global warming has stopped in each decade since 1960. He will also say (I guarantee) that warming will stop in the next decade too.

Or the 2nd sentence - did you not understand why "climate change" is more favoured or who popularised it?

You don't have to shout, Horus ... and you don't have to repeat yourself - I read you the first time.

Btw, what barrage of the above links are mine, what ones are you referring to? I can see OUG's (one under god) barrage of links, maybe you are confusing my post with his.

Anyway: "What fact/incident /argument convinced 'me' of AGW"?

Simple chemistry and physics really - if you put energy into a system, it heats up. If there's water around, it evaporates, condenses and falls out as rain or snow, leading to a warmer and wetter world.

It's a tad more complicated than that, but we can do the number crunching because we have all sorts of fancy techno stuff (and it's getting better all the time). We have satellites orbiting all over the place; swimming robot thingies; sensor detectors of all shapes and sizes measuring all sorts of things; and a vast amount of observed historical data, from all around the globe and from many different methodologies and sciences - all telling the same thing.

We also have very good accounting systems; we can measure the amount of energy in the system, where it comes from and where it is going. We know about the Sun, cosmic rays, magnetic flux, tilts & orbits, volcanoes, air & sea currents, albedo, latent heat, radiative properties of different types of molecules, even cow farts! Yeah, we know a heluvalot (but not everything, we never will). We do know enough to say some things with a very high level of confidence.

Cont’d

Europol director..Rob Wainwright..issued the following statement:

These criminal activities..endanger the credibility of the European Union Emission Trading System..and lead to the loss of significant tax revenue for governments.

Police authorities in Belgium,Denmark,France,the Netherlands,Spain and the United Kingdom/have worked together..in what Europol calls a process..to identify and disrupt..the organised criminal structures..behind these fraud schemes.
http://www.infowars.com/organized-crime-in-charge-of-eu-carbon-trade-europol-says/

Lets see if we can explain the scheme,..using this graphic provided by Europol.

The fraud is based..on a what tax experts and investigators call as a Carroussel fraud..with missing traders...This carroussel generates money by stealing value added tax..from governments.

The first step..of the criminals..is to open a trading account with a national carbon registry,..in the name of a newly registered company.

From there,.this company buys EU emission allowances..in another country..on one of the six..official carbon exchanges..in Europe.

After that,..these emission allowances..are moved to another country, and subsequently sold..to an unregulated broker in yet another country.
This broker..then charges VAT on these transactions..but does not pay the collected VAT to the tax authorities.

Just before the tax authorities realize..that this company owes them huge amounts of VAT,..basically a period of a few months,..the company..and its owners disappear.

A new company is set up,..using other front men, to repeat the carroussel...Crime rings that run such schemes..can have several dozen or hundreds of companies..whose real owners are difficult to trace.

Basically,..this type of fraud is possible because European countries continue to disagree..on single market tax legislation...Carroussel fraud..is a constant feature in the European cross-border market..and until recently only happened with shipments of valuable goods such as iPods or flat-panel tvs,..not with carbon credits.

Europes tax commissioner,..in an interview with EUX.TV,..has estimated the damage from these carroussel frauds..at more than 60 billion euro per year..as Euroean finance minister continue to disagree..on effective measures to fight this fraud.

The Emission Trading System/system..sceme..was set up in 2005..as part of Europes efforts to curb emissions of greenhouse gases.

That topic now is..at the top of the agenda..at the UN Climate summit in Copenhagen this week and next...This unprecedented and massive fraud..is likely to prove a major embarrasment for EU negotiators.

Cont’d

Horus

I have been working in the field for over forty years, Horus - mostly things to do with the hydrological cycle (my research interest is in land, ocean, atmosphere coupled systems). Things that impact on the hydrological cycle - rain, snow, el nino, pdo, walker & hadley cells, ocean currents, drought, floods, evaporation, humidity, yada yada - as it all applies to land use/management practices. You know; agriculture, soil moisture, river flows, crop yields, catchment management, water quality, salinity, desertification, yada yada.

Yeah, a lotta water under the bridge has convinced me, Horus. Not all anecdotal either, most of it hard empirical science that, taken altogether, gives me confidence in saying that humanity's actions (and inactions) over the last 200 years are having an adverse impact on not just the environment, but on the planet's whole ecosystem.

What nails it though, imho - is that at the tropopause, the stratosphere is cooling whilst the troposphere is warming – check it out.

And the song – one of my favourites, thanks.

_______

Arjay

That 911 stuff, all very intriguing – I’m not informed enough to make a contribution, sorry.

Why don’t you start another general discussion thread?

_______

Crackup

Just because you don't understand something does not mean it is wrong. Can you suggest a way to explain the science better?

Q&A: I DO understand that there has been reasonable evidence presented by various scientific studies indicating that the Global Warming issue that the world is getting so frantic about is a direct result of increased solar activity and is affecting all the planets in the Solar System, not just planet Earth.

Regardless of whatever COMPULSORY TAX is invoked upon the various world communities, the ultimate result will not be altered and the world will continue along its current path, as happened many times before throughout the history of this planet.

The gullible passengers climbing aboard the Rudd/Wong rollercoaster of Carbon Emmission "Control" are the same elements who believed that 911 was carried out by Bin Laden, John F Kennedy was assasinated by Lee Hervey Oswald, Diana and Dody died as a result of bad driving, and the invasion of Iraq was justified!

Unfortunately throughout history there have been literally billions of people who have been conned and manipulated into believing that white is black and black is white, purely to sate the appetite of the monsters who exist simply to attain massive wealth and power at the expense and ultimate starvation of the unsuspecting innocents, who believe everything that these manipulators tell them.

Anyone with half a brain would have to smile witnessing George W Bush with his bandy legs and ear-piece being instructed on which three word sentences to use when addressing his nation,....and to think that this clown had the power to plunge the world into nuclear holocaust, should the Puppetmasters decree!

Q&A, wuth your wide knowledge, you would no doubt, be aware of the recently revelled 2 degrees C "correction" added to the Darwin temperature record, to give Darwin the APPEARANCE of an increase in temperature, in the recent record.

Every week we find more such alterations, such as the whole New Zealand record. In every case the "correction" is upward in the recent record.

Despite the fact that the heat island effect has dramatically increased the temperature in many urban recording stations, we are yet to see any corrections in the downward direction.

This continual change in the true record, & the disappearance of the original raw data must make any thinking person a little suspicious of the scientist/activists in control of this data.

The fact that they then discuss how best to lie & cheat, adds more fuel to the fire.

There is no way that I could ever believe any of their cr4p/research, until their entier workings are exposed to verification by anyone who wants to look. The fact that all this was paid for by the tax payer gives them no excuse for secrecy. We can now trust our scientists about as much as we trust our government.

Crackcup: "is a direct result of increased solar activity and is affecting all the planets in the Solar System, not just planet Earth"

I guess you must realise all climate scientists are fully aware of this increase, yet almost all reject it as an explanation. The Sun is now 30% brighter than 4 billion years ago. The rate of rise of the Sun's temperature is about 0.0000000225 degrees per year. Currently the planet is warming at 0.1 degree per year.

Interestingly, the Earth's temperature has remained remarkably stable despite the Sun's increasing temperature. If you want to know why, read http://j.mp/7cc9ja

Crackup: "Regardless of whatever COMPULSORY TAX is invoked upon the various world communities, the ultimate result will not be altered and the world will continue along its current path"

Carbon trading is modeled on Sulphur Dioxide trading. Contrary to what you imply it was very successful at changing the path we were going down.

Crackup: "Unfortunately throughout history there have been literally billions of people who have been conned and manipulated into believing that white is black and black is white"

We agree on this. What we don't agree on is who is being conned. You apparently think raising a tax on ourselves which is then ploughed back into society, as taxes always are, is some sort of disaster. I agree we are better off allowing the economy to direct where funds are best applied (the GFC notwithstanding), if possible. But when it isn't possible funding infrastructure via taxation (eg roads) clearly hasn't been a disaster you seem to think it was.

Letting yourself to be conned by Exxon and other major corporations into allowing them to inflict great damage on the world while leaving us to pay for the consequences is far worse. To me, this is no different from allowing a chemical factory to dump its waste into a river for free, and having the tax payer fund cleaning up the resulting mess. Far better to insist the factory fund the cleanup itself. If that is best done via a tax on its products, so be it.

Crackup
Psst! a word in your ear , someone you’ve been in discussions with on this thread (who shall remain nameless) has told you:
“Carbon trading is modeled on Sulphur Dioxide trading. Contrary to what you imply it was very successful at changing the path we were going down”
You might like to have a look at this link, http://www.abc.net.au/rn/rearvision/stories/2009/2750919.htm paragraph starting: “Larry Lohmann: However, there's a lot of differences between the sulphur dioxide scheme and any scheme which would use cap and trade to reduce global warming gases.”
Not all is as represented!

Q&A
Thank you for your forthright reply.

I was recently reading about the hole in the ozone —noteworthy because:
1) It involved many of the opinion leaders now pushing AGW .
2) It involved similar predictions of dire consequences, and
3) Many of the predictions proved wildly inaccurate

Here are some examples —courtesy of Panicology by Briscoe & Aldersey-Williams.

Al Gore: “What will it do to our children’s outlook on life if we have to teach them to be afraid to look up?” –never realistic!
Al Gore: Due to the hole in the ozone “ Patagonian fishermen are catching blind salmon” – now discredited!

Scientists employing modelling:
“Both the extent of the depletion and its latitude came as a surprise to scientists , WHOSE MODELS HAD LED THEM TO EXPECT to see the first evidence of ozone depletion in the upper stratosphere above the tropics”

-Iconic bodies employing “hard empirical science”:
-“In 2002 NASA predicted that repair of the Antarctic hole would only be detectable by 2020”
Since then it has opened and closed a number of times and now appears to have stopped growing.
“Annual monitoring since then has revealed no clear trends and suggests that ATMOSPHERIC SYSTEMS ARE MORE COMPLEX THAN SCIENTISTS HAD HOPED”
( I am well aware of the international agreements & resultant restrictions on CFCs --- and so was NASA when they made that prediction!)
This is not to deny the hole –rather to highlight how our experts often get it wrong

TBC

Q&A
You say: “ humanity's actions (and inactions) over the last 200 years are having an adverse impact on not just the environment, but on the planet's whole ecosystem”
I am with you there. The question I have is the extend of the impact on the atmosphere.
A good reality check is to consider the --the percentage of CO2 generally acknowledged as arising from anthropogenic factors.
If you were seeking to treat some other affliction would you make such a secondary source your main focus?

You say: “What nails it though, imho - is that at the tropopause, the stratosphere is cooling whilst the troposphere is warming – check it out.”
It certainly is a symptom of something – but the questions remain: is it anthropogenic or natural? & is it short term or long-term?
You say: “We also have very good accounting systems” to measure this and that --- so said the executives of Enron!

I have doubts that many of the natural sources of GHGs can be accurately measured.
For example: “experts” can make any number of cocksure statements about how much volcanic sources emit or how “all” their emissions’ have a higher C13 signature.But when one considers the remote location of many of these sources, the variability in the sources and the fact that new ones are being still discovered –the latest a volcanic belt between OZ & NZ, a few short years ago– a prudent person is inclined to take claims that: “they know it all” with a very big grain of NaCl.

But having said that, none of the above is an argument against us reducing waste or pollution or widen our energy base.
Though, it could be a good argument against the Copenhagen approach which entails the selling to the world of the narrative that the climate villains are responsible for all woes, and the others are innocent victims and whose over population, poor farming practises and corrupt governance has no bearing on their plight .

Horus: "This is not to deny the hole –rather to highlight how our experts often get it wrong"

Well Horus, in that case you will be happy to know you are already right - they already know they got some AGW predictions wrong too. Their predictions about how fast the Arctic ice sheet would melt was out by decades.

Not that this is terribly surprising. We know that predictions from the scientific community are conservative as they assume things will continue as they are unless they have strong evidence to the contrary. What you pointed out just confirms that, and in the case of AGW and the Ozone layer it is not a comforting news.

Horus: "http://www.abc.net.au/rn/rearvision/stories/2009/2750919.htm ... However, there's a lot of differences between the sulphur dioxide scheme and any scheme which would use cap and trade to reduce global warming gases."

What a coincidence Horus, we listen to the same ABC Radio shows. Here is another quote from that same program:

So has Europe's ETS lead to a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions there? ... emissions were reduced anywhere from 2% to 5%. It's definitely had an affect, and I think what everyone has to understand is that at least during the trial period, that's the period up through 2007, the ambition of the European program is very modest. ... What's happened in Europe, and I think this is an important thing to say, that despite all those problems in the first phase of the scheme that ended in December, 2007, the very existence of the scheme has changed the political landscape in Europe. When the scheme was first started you could easily imagine it being blocked. Now it's there, very hard for people who are unhappy with it to stop it existing. So what's happening in Europe is that the scheme wasn't very effective when it first started, but it's getting more effective and I can imagine it becoming more effective still in the next phase of the scheme that begins in 2013, because then we might start getting significant auctioning for example, rather than free allocation.

Nah! only half right, RStuart.
YES, your “experts” got it wrong about the Antarctic, but NO, not for the reasons you've proffered.

Their prognostications about its slip-sliding-away (not much sign of their careful conservatism on show in those predictions!) were a bit out –a big bit out : http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/revealed-antarctic-ice-growing/story-e6frg6no-1225700046908

Hey here’s a suggestion, try reading a bit wider, wider than those Al Gore publicity fliers —could just change your whole outlook!

Oh, and while your at it, you might like to read up on the history of the Arctic (that’s the one up north).It turns out the melt there over the past couple of centuries has been...well, all over the place.

Horus: "YES, your “experts” got it wrong about the Antarctic"

I didn't mention the Antarctic. As far as I am aware the climate scientists predicted the ice sheets would on average grow there and so far they have been right. As I understand it, the temperature is rising there - but it still well below zero so that the ice still doesn't melt. But the rising temperatures also means more water vapour is in the atmosphere, and thus more snow falls - and so the amount ice grows overall despite some shrinking at the edges. As far as I know this always has been the prediction.

Horus: "Oh, and while your at it, you might like to read up on the history of the Arctic"

Maybe you could provide a link.

Horus: ".It turns out the melt there over the past couple of centuries has been...well, all over the place."

Global warming is all over the place in general Horus. There is nothing new in this. In general terms it is more prominent in the Northern Hemisphere. This again is pretty much what they predicted. They can't really say much about small areas (say one part of the Antarctic versus another) as their long term models don't work at that level. However the amount of land in the Northern Hemisphere always meant it would heat up faster than the Southern Hemisphere. You can see a map of it here:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/climateconnections/climate-map

Notice there is no dispute that some places have got colder - including parts of the Antarctic. On average though the planet is heating up.

Like all the Posts on all the different Threads we could go on arguing our own point of view ad nauseum , but at the end of the day we will each want to stick with our own view upon the particular subject if we are NOT prepared to accept the facts and the figures pertaining to that subject!

I believe that the Government`s direction is bunkum and we are being prepared for sacrifice!

I would suggest a quick read of the following article:

"A Cool Look at Global Warming" by Phillip R Wood

Managing Director and CEO of Intec Ltd

Crackup: "Like all the Posts on all the different Threads we could go on arguing our own point of view ad nauseum ... I would suggest a quick read of the following article: "A Cool Look at Global Warming" by Phillip R Wood"

If you mean that article espouses a "point of view", then no I don't agree with you. Take these concluding statements from it:

- The Seas are not rising
- the Ice is not melting

These are statements of fact, about things we can observe. They are not points of view. And as statements of fact, they are just plain wrong.

It appears to me some skeptics can't even bring themselves to acknowledge the facts. There is no dispute from me - if you can't agree on the facts then arguing a point of view based on them is a total waste of time.

Fact, for RStuart seems to mean anything that agrees with the AGW narrative .
Opinion, is anything that doesn’t agree – and it’s usually qualified as denialist-opinion or worse.

His statement of fact : “ the sea is rising” is only a fact if you’re living in a static world (perhaps, like one found in one of his programmers models).
The sea level is changing all the time; by many accounts it is lower now than it was in the 1970’s.
And lower now, than at many times in the Earths history.
And higher now, than at many other times in the Earths history.
Depending where you draw the line in the sand, you can make any determination you like.

Many AGW believers have not moved far from the days when they were believers in other things.
In those days the deity simply was. There was no questioning that --just as they now believe there can be no legitimate questioning of AGW.All they’ve done is dust out theology and chalk in science. But it’s not real science , only a golden calf they’ve created.
And they’ve dusted out good shepherd and chalked in a person in a white coat respectfully referred to as an expert or in Al Gore’s case an Italian suit, who likes to be seen as the environmental shepherd .The framework stays the same –only the names change.

And then, there’s this neat little paradox unearth by RStaurt:
“Global warming is …In general terms it is more prominent in the Northern Hemisphere” --Yet, most of the registered climate change “victims’ are in the southern hemisphere; south America & Africa!

The Ockham’s explanation would be : many basket-case nations suffering after generations of overpopulation & corruption have simply rebadged themselves as climate victims.(hoping for yet another free hand-out).
The true believers explanation is likely to be some recycled Marxian proposition that blames the haves for the plight of the have-nots.
Ho Hum! the theme stays the same –only the names change!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner

Mörner disagrees..with the view of future rise in sea level caused by "Global Warming"...A recent booklet The Greatest Lie Ever Told, published by Mörner,..refers to observational records of sea levels for the past 300 years that show variations..ups and downs,..but no significant trend.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner#cite_note-3

This contrasts with the usual view that sea level rise has been occurring at 2-3 mm/yr over the last century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner#cite_note-4

Mörner asserts that satellite altimetry data..indicate a mean rise in the order of 1.0 mm/yr from 1986 to 1996,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner#cite_note-5

whereas most studies find a value around 3 mm/yr.

Mörner argues that sea level rise will not exceed 200 mm,..within a range of either +100±100 mm or +50±150 mm..based on satellite data over the last 40 years and observational records over the last 300 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner#cite_note-Morner2004-6

In 2000 he launched an international sea level research project in the Maldives..which claims to demonstrate an absence of signs of any on-going sea level rise...Despite President Gayoom speaking in the past about the impending dangers to his country,the Maldives,

Mörner concluded that the people of the Maldives have in the past survived a higher sea level about 50-60 cm..and there is evidence of a significant sea level fall..in the last 30 years in that Indian Ocean area.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner#cite_note-9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils-Axel_M%C3%B6rner#cite_note-10

In an interview in June,..2007, Mörner described research he had done in the Maldives..that had been reported in the documentary Doomsday Called Off.

Specifically,..he mentioned a tree..he had discovered growing close to the shoreline..as evidence to support his claim that sea level had actually fallen rather than risen.

He also reported that the tree had been deliberately destroyed by a group of Australian researchers..who were promoting the IPCC view that sea level was rising.
http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen7/MornerEng.html