Dear Robert,

It seems you and your friends live in a world where no news gets to you. Rather than getting bogged down in your science, I was wondering if you or your colleagues could possibly answer this question?

“ if your science is so strong, consensus is so solid and 97% of scientists agree, why has that “science” failed to convince the entire global infrastructure that was created to support CAGW in the first place?”

The comments from Guenther Oettinger, the EU Energy Commissioner have put the final nails in the coffin of any hope of a replacement for Kyoto in 2015.

Add to this the collapse of the RENIXX global renewable energy index, the closing of the Chicago Climate exchange, the collapse of the EU emissions trading market, Siemens in Germany closing its solar industry with 1Bn Euro in debts, all Barrack Obama’s public funded renewable startups are now collapsing (12 have filed for bankruptcy, the remaining 8 have defaulted on loans) at a public loss of $12Bn, wind turbine orders in the USA, the worlds largest turbine market are down 70% and still no Kyoto replacement?

China and India amended clause 2b in a final act of sabotage in Warsaw to exclude the biggest emitters from any obligations at all.

Britain has signed off on another two new nuclear power stations (total planned now 8),

Germany is building 12 new coal fired power stations, three of these to burn lignite. Their coal use for energy has increased by 17.5%, European “green capital funding” mechanisms have collapsed.

CAGW seems to be going really, really well.

Any comment?

For those who are still arguing , and my comment on a recent post, see below.

http://www.marketbusinessnews.com/extreme-weather-events-warning-europe/6312
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/02/13/1581351/the-188-billion-price-tag-from-us-extreme-weather-from-2011-to-2012/
http://www.eesi.org/insurance-industry-perspectives-extreme-weather-events-14-dec-2012
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/us-weather-whiplash-accounts-for-billions-in-losses-16055
http://www.wri.org/blog/new-report-connects-2012-extreme-weather-events-human-caused-climate-change
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/11/04/five-insurance-companies-debunk-fox-on-extreme/196734

Hi Robert but no thanks,

Just wondering if you had an informed opinion or an answer of your own. You know, something you have formed as a result of critical thinking rather than borrowing the opinions of someone else or starting a “link war”.

Anyway, if you do get time to answer the question that would indicate you have given it some thought. If you can’t answer the question, don’t worry too much as none of your fellow travelers can either.

When you conveniently remove the rigor upon which topics are analyzed, absent yourself from the discipline of “is it true?” backed up with the harsher discipline of “does it work?” there is only rhetoric

There are 2 things being mixed together here, as usual. One is the Carbon Tax, the other is Climate Change.

My view, based on my own interpretation of the peer reviewed and public domain science that I have read to date is that quite clearly there is a consensus in the scientific community that climate change and global warming are very real and that there will be increasing consequences as a result.

However, whilst I am of the view that it is already too hot, I have no particular anxst about this as the reality of climate change will force the need to address it all of its own accord even though this may come at both great cost and hardship.

As for the carbon tax though, I am opposed to it. There are better ways.

And this brings me to another mistruth being propagated by some of the more ignorant members of the community which is that even if we did act our contribution would have little impact globally anyway, so why bother?

The reality of course is that one aspect of climate change is how it manifests on a local level and something of a "direct action" nature is extremely important i.e lots more trees and plants, something other than black roads etc etc.

All this talk of democracy, free markets, a fair go and a fair days pay for a fair days work is largely b.s. The reality of most countries, is that the vast majority of the wealth is controlled by a very small minority and it is they who are making the decisions.

Unfortunately, as they care for little other their own and getting their own way, things are unlikely to change in any significant way until it starts to hurt them in the hip pocket.

If we take the 'broad brush approach' of the incumbent federal govt, either it didn't happen, act of god or just wrong place wrong time.

Write all you want. But the denial of everything climate related by the incumbent federal govt for the sake of their own political gain, to be different and keep the fossil fuel lobby happy is a sad day for our once proud nation.

Tony says "stand on one leg" The blue tie set stand on one leg, the rest of look on in amazement and dismay!!

@ DreamOn, "There are 2 things being mixed together here, as usual. One is the Carbon Tax, the other is Climate Change."

At present ABC focus is on climate change with little or no mention of CO2. No doubt they are cooking up the direct action ETS spin.

I wonder if ABC news editors actually know that those tapered chimney structures with the white stuff coming out are steam cooling towers.

Why don't they show us what one tonne of CO2 looks like. Then we might understand the size of one million tonnes of CO2?

I think we all have a right to know everything about this CO2 non-sense. It is even impacting viability of our national flag carrier, Qantas.