spindoc,

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/18/owen-paterson-lecture-nigel-lawsons-climate-sceptic-thinktank

"Former environment secretary Owen Paterson is to give the annual lecture for the UK’s most prominent climate sceptic group, the Global Policy Warming Foundation.

Paterson, who slashed funding for adapting to climate change impacts in the UK, agreed to give the lecture just days after leaving office.

The GWPF is led by Lord Nigel Lawson and the annual lecture has been given by high-profile climate sceptics, including in 2013 former Australian prime minister John Howard, who described those urging action on climate change as “alarmists” and “zealots” for whom “the cause has become a substitute religion”."

So another denier is dragged out to address the GWPF - Wow!...Earth-shattering!

You really want the truth about gas pricing - in Australia?

http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/the-gas-clubs-deals-like-their-product-are-not-to-be-seen-20141016-11726r.html

"Australia will soon be the largest exporter of gas in the world. We are bathing in the stuff. Still, beleaguered consumers are forking out wholesale gas prices of about $7-$8 a gigajoule. The second largest exporter is Qatar where the locals pay $1-$2 a gigajoule."

"The situation seems to enjoy all the requisite qualities of a cartel: a small number of companies controlling production and marketing and which appear to avoid competing with each other."

"In Australia, we are not paying world 'prices' for gas, we are paying a substantial premium," says energy analyst Bruce Robertson."

Care to tell us how much in subsidies is paid to fossil fuel companies?

Runner: Re your comment: "certainly fits your world view Cossomby. Just don't insult anyone's intelligence by calling it scientific."

The key characteristics of science are use of factual evidence and testability.

Your previous comment seemed to be based on the argument that humans do not have the 'power to change the climate'.

So, I reword my comment as a testable hypothesis: would the amount of fossil fuels extracted and burnt over the last 150 years have an effect on the world's climate regardless of the agency of the extraction and burning?

1. How much fossil fuels have been extracted and burnt over the last 150 years?
This is quantifiable through the historic records of the oil and coal industries.
2. Are there known scientific mechanisms by which the burning of fossil fuels can affect the climate?
Yes, much research done on this.
3. Given (2), is the amount of fossil fuel burnt over the last 150 years enough to register an effect on world climate?
This is quantifiable.
4. If the amount of fossil fuels extracted by humans had been extracted and burnt by non-human agency over the same very short time span (150yrs), would the same mechanism apply and would there be an effect on climate?
Yes, because the actual agency of the burning is not the issue, it's the amount of burning, the time frame, and the mechanism.

Climate deniers seem to get hung-up on the issues 'puny humans don't have the power to change the climate'. My hypothesis above is testable: if you had a non-human agency extract and burn the same amount of fossil fuel in the same time period would this have an impact on the world climate?

Seems a scientific approach to me

Of course, the agency of burning fossil fuels is important because that agency is us, the effect of our burning fossil fuels affects us, and puny though our brains may be, we can think of actions that would minimise the negative effects (it's probably too late to stop them).

British householders are facing soaring energy bills and winter power cuts thanks to the “folly” of relying on wind power, experts said last night. The green crusade of successive governments is set to double electricity bills for households and cost homes £26billion a year by 2030, it was claimed yesterday. The cost of renewable energy and carbon taxes will put an extra £983 a year on household bills by then, compared to relying on a mix of nuclear and new gas-fired power stations, three experts told a Lords committee. Last night Dr Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Forum said: “The irony is that energy prices around the world are falling, particularly for oil and gas. But households are not profiting because Government policies are making energy more expensive.” --John Ingham, Daily Express, 15 October 2014

Agronomist, "Oh dear. Someone has confused weather with climate again."

It is almost unbelievable that someone like you, a rabid warmist, who with your mates is given to claiming that things like bushfires, Hurricanes Katrina & Sandy are examples of global warming at work, can make such a post.

Have you no shame?

Absolutely, Hasbeen!

Considering snow in Spring "proves" global warming is a scam....or something to that effect, eh?