Dear Belly,

Australia has a preferential ballot. That means if one prefers the Greens over Labor and one prefers Labor over the Libs one can mark the ballot accordingly. I don't see that the Greens take any votes away from Labor because Australia has a preferential ballot.

My chief concerns are the environment, militarism and uncontrolled population growth. Those are not the chief concerns of either Labor or the Libs. As far as the environment goes Labor is better then the Libs. As far as militarism goes Labor is worse than the Libs. As far as jobs for the boys Labor is slightly worse.As far as controlling population growth neither party is worth anything. As far as seeking control and concern with winning elections there's not much difference.

I really don't care for or have any abiding loyalty for any political party. They are just devices by which I can express my views. At this time the Greens are closer to my views than any other party. I wish the Greens would be more concerned with population growth, but no party is. The Greens are somewhat concerned with militarism.

You have not given a single real worthwhile argument against the Greens or for Labor as far as I can see.

Labor is bankrupt as far as any abiding principles I care for. So are the Libs. They are both machines which promise goodies to get elected. Sometimes it's tweedledum. Sometimes tweedledee. I prefer Gillard to Abbott and don't like my local Lib rep so will preference Labor over the Libs. However, if I had a better Lib rep and Turnbull headed the Libs I would preference the Libs over labor.

Dave you have every right to your views
As I have mine.
Federal Labor, apart from too many of the worse kind of union members, only about a third of ex unionists are worthless.
And the infection of Sussex Street passed on the power brokers from the right GILLARD! TOO.
Are doing ok Sussex Street is crippling us still with maggots they kept in place being ,RIGHTLY uncovered for yesterdays crimes, is doing the damage.
A clean slate is coming .
That National COMIC BOOK Murdock,s Australian news paper is on the job serving Abbott.
It may even one day highlight CURRENT issues in QLD and Victoria, even NSW Liberal ranks.
A tip, cut in quarters and hung in the smallest room in the house it finds a real purpose, and saves money.

Paul,

You exude confidence, but at all the latest elections (i.e. the polls that count), the greens have been given a hiding.

I for once agree with Belly that climate change is real, and that rational action needs to be taken. The fantasy the greens dole out is that renewable energy is the answer to all our needs. The reality that renewables are both hugely expensive and unreliable seems to elude them.

Come on folks, we all know climate changes. There are 2 questions, as Belly says.

1/ Would climate change be good or bad for life on earth. If I were anything but a polar bear, living in Siberia, my answer would have to be good. As Siberia is the largest land mass, that must be good for land animals.

2/ Does CO2 have much to do with it. The answer is not much.

First of all CO2 has increased somewhat in the last 15 years, but temperatures have not.

Even the models used by IPCC only claim about 0.7C increase from a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere. Even that is refuted by much evidence that CO2 displaces water vapor, a much stronger green house gas, according to the theory. To get any serious increase in temperature the models all require positive feed back.

EG. any increase in temperature increases evaporation, leading to more cloud. The models are programed to show more cloud increases the temperature.

At least 5 papers recently have proved that more cloud is a negative feed back. IE. Even in the event that CO2 increases the temperature, the increased cloud created will cause it to cool again. More cloud cooler.

Please do go to the sites that actually publish the latest peer reviewed literature on the subject. Our current government, the greens & the media are all promoting a fallacy, of any mild warming being disastrous. The truth is out there, if you look

How about just simply accepting climate change as part of our planet's evolution ? After all, people continue to change also. Many get smarter, way more get sillier. Anyone for a tax there ?

Hasbeen said;
Even the models used by IPCC only claim about 0.7C increase from a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere.

So another doubling will only give another 0.7c.
And another doubling will only give another 0.7c.
and so on.