That should have read:

"So what is the truth ? Another two inches sea-level rise by 2070, or vast stretches of coast-lines swamped ? Another 0.7 degrees C (if no government ever does anything about any of it) by 2070, or will we all be frying by 2050 ? All glaciers are to be melted by 2035, i.e. in 23 years, or the snow-line retreats by no more than 100 metres up the mountains by 2070 ?

Meanwhile, of course, the rivers and coasts are getting more polluted, land is becoming more degraded, while we f@rt around worrying about a couple of inches of sea-level. Are environmentalists barking up the wrong tree, and why ?"

“Being a representative of true science & objectivity, Mr Luciferase will I expect, be exposing the above-mentioned warmist shenanigans in a upcoming post...”

SPQR, on the basis of what some anonymous bloke asserts, I am seriously required to respond as if it is fact? Do you read anything (serious that is), watch TV or converse on non-paranoid sites? Do you live under a rock? The entire planet knows man is affecting the climate but a few blokes who reckon they know what's REALLY happening (on climate and everything else it seems to me).

You want the "A" out of AGW but I'll stick with peer reviewed scientific research literature, not untested conjecture. Even more incredibly, if you accept rapid GW (hard to be sure if you do or don't) you don't see it as a problem. Our food security is seriously at risk, and all that goes with that, a nano-second's thought leading to more intelligent conclusions than you seem capable of.

To all, please ensure to put rubbish in the usher's plastic bag as you leave the cinema. Poirot, I too feel cheated, as I expected a real pie-fight. The effing fat head in front of me blocked the closing credits when he replaced his hat (I always like to hang back in case they show the bloopers).

Dear Luciferase ,

SPQR and his denialist friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except what they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Lucerifase , whether they be men's or women’s , are little. In this great universe of ours humanity is a mere insect, an ant, in its intellect, as compared with the boundless forces of nature , or as measured against the processing power of a CRAY petascale supercomputer.

Yes, Luciferase, there is AGW . It exists as certainly as the Y2K bug or the Mayan End of the World Prophecy exists and you know how much joy and purpose they have given. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no AGW . It would be as dreary as a cartoonists life without Bob Brown or Julia Gillard . There would be no childlike faith then, no potlatches in Copenhagen or Cancun, no fantasy to make tolerable this existence. .

And Alas! how dreary would be the world if there no way to hype AGW as the coming apocalypse. The left would have no cause for self righteous rage … well, at least till the next big thing comes along! The nightly news would be so bland without pictures of Greenies chaining themselves to smoke stacks. We should have no entertainment , except The Voice or The Block, and who would wish that even on their worst enemies.

Not believe in AGW ! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get SPQR and his friends to measure the increase in sea level in over the last century , but even when they tell you there hasn’t been any significant increase , what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor adults can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

No AGW ! By God! It exists, and it always has . A thousand years from now, Luciferase , nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, AGW will be continuing to give lefties something to scream about –though, by that time ALL climate is likely to be controlled by a SPQR petascale supercomputer.

[with apologies to the editor of the New York Sun --http://www.newseum.org/yesvirginia/]
]

Hi Belly,

Sorry, no 'highest maximums' today across the eight capital cities for the past 12 years: i.e. out of 96 possible readings (8 capitals x 12 years), none were either a 'highest maximum' or a 'lowest minimum'. Of course, you can't go by just one reading, or one day, or even just a few readings.

After all, sea-level has risen a massive 2 inches in sixty years, and even taking into account the heat island effect of ever-larger urban areas, temperatures have risen, we're told, by a phenomenal 0.7 degrees C over that time. And it's all our fault !

At this rate, all of Sydney will be flooded (even allowing for land-rise) in barely 50,000 years. But we would have fried by then, so it may not be much of a real issue.

As long as governments do nothing, we can safely say that AGW is going to cause havoc. If we keep our fingers crossed, AGW might even accelerate - around the world, sea-levels might go up as much as a foot in the next century ! A foot ! Anybody living less than a foot above sea-level will be flooded and perhaps drowned ! And if things turn out right, and nobody does anything, we can be confident that the 45+ days of our childhood will return with a vengeance ! Conversations will be replete with exclamation marks ! We'll all be rooned ! Move to higher ground ! Stock up on cartons of baked beans and store any spare water ! Sterilise your kids ! There's nothing we can do !

That's it, I think I've used up my exclamation-mark quota for 24 hours :(

All great fun :)

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Belly,

Two 'highest maximums' today, and no 'lowest minimums', for the past twelve years, out of the 162 years of readings. So that brings yesterday's reading on no 'highest maximums' back into line with the average of one per day. i.e., one 'maximum' reading out of the eight capital cities over the past twelve years.

Something is weird about Darwin's readings - the hottest and coldest days seem to always have been back in the time between 1880 and 1910. One would have expected that, as Darwin grew from a sleepy town into a mega-metropolis, the heat island effect would kick in, and there would be some 'highest maximums' in more recent years. As industry develops there, and as population (with its A-C demands) grows, we'll have to wait and see.

Cheers,

Joe