Hasbeen

Love your Luddite logic, I don't know anything about this so I'll oppose it. It *explains* a lot about your comments.
i.e. I don't understand accounting so I'll oppose it...good strategy...for fools.

Funny, old son, I always thought that the logical, objective and sensible thing to do was to be informed *before* making a decision.

BTW who said Rudd or his government doesn't understand the the science, at least he consulted the scientists. if he didn't then he is as big a fool as the Mad Monk.

Austin Powerless: "is there anyone objective enough to consider how many scientists support the global warming theory and how many don't?"

I think just about everyone commenting here has been through that. If you haven't, look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Surveys_of_scientists_and_scientific_literature

One comment on this. Be careful to distinguish between generic scientists who may of spent most of their lives studying rocks, fruit flies or the ancient Aztecs, and climate scientists who have spent their scientific lives trying to understand and predict climate.

The opinions of generic scientists (ie those commenting outside of their area of expertise) are not too different to those of the general public. The more stringent you are in demanding the person knows what they are talking about, the closer to unanimous the consensus becomes. Thus in the most stringent study, Oreskes, 2004 (see above link) that looked at roughly 1000 peer reviewed papers involving climate, there were no published papers that disagreed with the AGW hypothesis.

examinator, I am aware of only one Australian weather forecaster who has produced results that resemble accuracy, And that is Inigo Jones RIP, who over 50 years ago forecast this current warming period (drought).

Rstuart,

This would then imply that Ross Garnaut is not qualified to comment.

"Garnaut attended the Australian National University and attained a Bachelor of Arts in 1967, and a PhD in 1972"

His comments on the economic effects were based on information fed to him by others.

SM
You forgot the others who were appropriately educated and evidence on both sides.

I don't remember MM doing either?

An after thought. It seems to me that politicians (major Parties) and their supporters seem to justify their political shenanigans with an underlying attitude akin to that of team members in some high school debating contest. One where the only objective is to win, at almost any cost, not the the truth or what is best for the country.

What they don't seem to understand parliaments and politicians are supposed to *LEAD and GOVERN* on our behalf (all of us not just special interests , or people who agree with them.) Its not some meaningless game that the outcomes won't really matter this is serious.

SM's shock horror and MM cynical comments simply don't fit with the importance of the situation, much less the topic.

Everyone's fear that their country might be disadvantaged by Copenhagen is blinding them to the *REAL* point of them being there.
And people wonder why I despise most politicians.