Runner,
Several points:
1. There is no such thing as a 'healthy' fear in God;
2. If you believe in God then you are admitting to believing in something without a shred of scientific evidence to support it, so I guess it's easy to believe climate change denialism, which also doesn't have a shred of evidence to support it.
3. You quickly call Gore and Flannery liars, yet you seem to yet you are unable to show evidence.
3. I have pointed out to you before on another thread, Runner, that your assertions that pensioners are afraid to turn on their heaters due to the Carbon Tax is a blatant, provable lie. My evidence for that assertion is treasury figures, acknowledged even by the Coalition, that pensioners receive compensation which more than covers any impact of the Carbon Tax.
So, what are we to make of a person who professes a 'healthy' fear of 'God' yet who accuses others of lying but is unable to provide evidence and who blatantly lies even after having the lie pointed out to them?
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

It never ceases to amaze me that people seem to pin most of this on Al Gore - as if he "discovered" the concept of AGW.

He was just a high documentary profile presenter putting forward a case for something that has been researched for decades.

It's like claiming that David Attenborough "discovered" all those animals he presents on his documentaries of that Neil Armstrong "discovered" the Moon.

Unbelieveably naive.

And as for Bolt, he's just a lying and paid mouthpiece for Gina the Hutt and her cronies who have their own agenda and wingnuts-for-hire like "Lord" Monkton are no better His current campaign is trying to prove that Obama was not born on US soil. I suppose he's an expert in that field too.

Just because AGW isn't on the front page of the news every day (like the wars in Afghanist and and Iraq aren't) doesn't mean it's gone away and by no means disproven.

Your last point is well made, Wobbles.
The reason AGW is no longer on the front page so much, is because most thinking people now accept the reality of AGW.
Also, since the Carbon Tax has come into force, and we find that the sky hasn't fallen in, and Abbott's absurd scaremongering has been shown for the sham it is, there is no longer much sensation in the topic.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Harking back a few of your posts Hasbeen, you wrote:

<< Luddy mate, it comes totally naturally. I have always had a nose for a fraud … >>

Hehehe. You do indeed have an innate ability to be suspicious, if not immediately see the worst possible side of these things.

It seems to me you are all too willing to condemn people and processes unless they can demonstrate strong and immediate positive things, and no negatives.

You condemn every politician, every academic, every person who puts forward any ideas for improving our society. Well, so it seems to me.

It’s all just sooo negative!

I reckon it is fundamentally due to a great fear of major changes to our way of life and our quality of life, and an enormous desire for things stay as they are.

This appears to be the bottom line for abject denialists. They just don’t want to know about anything that is likely to threaten our peaceful existence and end up just totally denying that there are any threats to it, and denouncing anyone who says that there are.

<< …the great ozone hole fraud. >>

I’ve got to admit, I chuckled profusely when I read that! (:>)

PEST: Therefore I feel that what I have here, in all these posts is a bunch of narky old women. I object to your blatant sexism.

I'm confused PEST. You weren’t specific in your objection. Was it the word ; a. bunch (wrong collective noun) b. Narky (name calling), c. old (ageism), d. women (genderism) or e all of the above.

Please look up my profile. It states that I am "anti PC". It's the only thing I hate. Well one can't be perfect, can one? So I’ll not apologize. I object to your intolerance, I feel that it's Politically Incorrect. I await an apology for your intolerance.

Ludwig: the great ozone hole fraud. I’ve got to admit, I chuckled profusely when I read that!

Yes I remember it well. I remember that some scientist said we'd all be burnt to a crisp with Solar Radiation by the year 2000. I sent him an email at the time and said the simple answer was that when all planes flew over or near the poles they release Ozone. He did have the courtesy to reply with, "if that were to happen that would give people the excuse not to do anything about the CFC's". So he really wasn't interested in saving the planet by doing all that was possible. He was only interested in his crusade. I find a lot of the same thing around here.

Anthonyve,

'Every NSW town visited by Professor Tim Flannery or his Climate Commission colleagues for community forums where residents were told they were in a "drying trend" has been deluged by rain up to three times the annual average. '

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-news/its-a-case-of-tim-foolery-as-flannerys-predictions-of-dry-dams-go-unfulfilled/comments-e6freuzi-1226297567261

come out of denial before accusing people of being liars