Thinker2
To start with, the globe is not warming, it's cooling. Secondly, carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than are water or air. Thirdly, there is not a skerrick of evidence that carbon dioxide causes global warming. Computer models are not evidence, and in any event *all* the computer models relied on by the warmist hysterics failed to predict the current cooling phase. In other words, the much-vaunted consenus was *wrong*. Fourthly, carbon dioxide is plant food, and the more of it we have, the more plant life there'll be - you know, like a greenhouse?

You don't seem to understand the connection between the so-called "polluters" and the mass of the people. The reason the "polluters" are producing so much carbon dioxide is because they are using it as part of productive processes to *satisfy human wants*. Why are they doing that? Because the mass of the people are directing them to do so, by paying for it! That's what you're argument is with. The root of the evil you are railing against is human life. You don't seem to understand that people don't want to die just to please you, they don't want to cut short their vitality, their children's lives, or their own enjoyment, just so you can have the enjoyment of sucking lemons and declaring it to be a virtue and an imperative.

You should stop fretting, stop carping, stop your anti-human hypocrisy, and stop your nasty fascist religious worship of omnipotent government.

The carbon tax is not like a tipping fee, it is like a compulsory tithe being levied on the whole population to pay for the religious foolery of a cult of deluded fools.

Very well put Jardine K Jardine.

The science is one thing that we may be able express, discuss or exchange our views about till the methane emitting cows come home JKJ, but I was looking back into history and pointing out, that human decision making has had a role in the state of the planet today. Of course overpopulation is our primary problem but I'm certainly not suggesting that some of us be extinguished or even inconvenienced.

All I'm asking JKJ is, "can business/commerce offer the solutions we need to solve the problem and can they actually afford to foot the bill, instead of their position which is that the taxpayer should foot the bill regardless. (because we exist, it is therefore our fault).

Historically decisions (re our modes of transport, power generation, population, food production, etc) have been made by our world leaders with a pattern of scant disregard for the environment, when other decisions regarding our technological directions would have been better.

Paper is the best example of this, we allowed the patent process out of the US, for making paper out of wood pulp. "Even though Dioxin was a known bi-product of this process. We could have made equally good paper out plants grown annually instead without introducing Dioxin to the food chain.This decision is a classic historical example of profit driven manipulation of law and govt. The patent owners even funded lobbyists campaigning to have a particular annual plant suitable for making high quality paper banned. And succeeded.

I think JKJ that there is an environmental problem. I think that it requires a change in our attitudes about the affect we're having upon the remaining inhabitants of this little rock in the middle of nowhere (not just humans). It is also ridiculously far to another inhabitable rock when this one's no longer available to us.

JKJ it appears to me that your one of those rare people who think their isn't a problem.
Am I right?