yes lexie tim flannelry isnt a sellout
nor a hooker..he is a saint...lol

of course he has no adgenda
he hasnt invested so much of his name
and honur..in this issue..lol

but lets get this straight
there are too many issues here

eg..the science..[those caught defrauding the numbers]
there are the ol,..al gore..*lies...[less said about those the better}

of course csiro/nasa are completly free..from govt bias
and bolt and me..are going to clean/up..from no tax
were going to get rich..not*..trading carbon-credits

mate your usually so clever
yet you cant see this tax..wont do nothing
as if money*[tax]..was able to fix..the weather..[cli/mate]..

but it will enrich those selling the solar/
wind...coal-seam/gas..scams

THINK HOW MUCH EXTRA POLUTION
just in making these..it will cost..in co2 alone

yes its great
working off our guilt..
but lets be FAIR...co2 is ONLY one* greenhouse gas

nitrous oxide and methane are FAR WORSE
but they..get no tax

were going to loose too much farm land
planting mono-culture forrests..to store carbon away for 100 years[lol]

the lie of doing nothing..or doing something
is all a lie..if nothing needed be done

but here we got economists/accountants/bankers...
greenies..rich business millionairs..non smokers..and big poluters

all saying we going to die
based on a lie

here we got polititions..from maggie thatcher
[who said the sky is COOLING..we need to tax you

to juliar gullable canard guiltlard..saying
its getting hotter..[the poles are melting]...'we must tax you..

the prediction's are....[lol]
how did they..[you]..go..predicting
the bankers going bust?
or its safe to load a waashing line

[assuming the science..is soooo sure...
is like a wether [weather]..girl/man..
is sure*..

..tommorow*..
it will be
MORE GUILT..!]

well guilt...is how they con you
into fight or flight..a cnditioned response
like pavloves dogs...a simple reflex..making you susseptable

TO THEIR
CON-ditioning

tomorrow its going to be colder

oh no tomorow
its going to be hotter

duh

the only sure thing...is tomorrow
you get a big new tax

and the day after your kids
will be paying..a much bigger tax

be sure tomorrow
they will be speculating up the price of co2
just like they now do with the price of your fuel

and you will be forced to pay..
or repay..[if you got conned into carbon sequestation...
and then..got hit by a default..[loss of assets]

in the carbon ..YOU CLAIMED
you sequestrated away

and tomorow it will be
the same as to day..

change we can get by spin decieved by
no different from what it was yesterday

but the same as it will be again...sometime
..the day after..the new tax dont change nothing..
but how much tax govt steals..from your purse..today

and thus..from your kids mouths...
by lying/laying on the guilt
selling us spin

"To suggest that nothing will happen even if we attempt to take any action is understandable for those who have a propensity to discount the future"

Such as Tim Flannery?

Please show me how Australia with about 1.4% of the world's emissions by reducing this by 5% will make a significant difference in the face of India and China increasing their emissions by more than 100% of Australia's emissions every year?

Otherwise everything you said in the last post is unsubstantiated mumbo jumbo.

Much can be said, little will be heard,so Shadow Minister I leave the floor to you and my old mate OUG.
Small minded is it not OUG?

SM,

Your claim that everything I said in my last post is unsubstantiated
"mumbo-jumpo," has me wondering which part of my last post you're referring to exactly?

As for why Australia should proceed when India and China can't seem to be able to (at present at least), that is a question that you need to answer for yourself. Your conscience should lead you onto the right path. Because as we all know the most industrialised nations are now actively trying to limit the effects of pollution even though the populous less developed societies are more concerned with economic growth, and tend to see pollution as simply part of the price they have to pay for it.

It took the medical profession from the 1960s to the present era to get the public, and the governments we elect, to act on the toxic, life-taking efforts of tobacco. Eventually sanity prevailed, although it took over 40 years.

Economists know that pollution, resource degradation and all sorts of negative environmental impacts come at a genuine cost to society -
usually not to all of society, but significant parts of it. One person's free disposal of toxic waste is another person's cost. That cost can be severe and life-threatening, as with water-borne diseases and particular air pollutants. These facts we're all aware of of - and depending on how climate change plays out, extreme weather events could be more like a nuclear war, and come at the expense of all.
But hey, if you regard it all as "unsubstantiated mumbo-jumbo,"
then you should not be surprised if you're not taken seriously.

It seems that new ideas, instead of being welcomed for the opportunities they open up for the improvement of the human lot are seen by those who are comfortable in their ideologies. Little has changed in 2000 years since Socrates' murder by the state, when ignorance and vested interests are confronted by scientific facts.

cont'd ...

My apologies. I left a couple of words in the sentence that should read: -"...new ideas instead of being welcomed... are seen by those who are comfortable in their ideologies - as a threat."