Don't worry about all these Leftie Schoolies trying to hijack OLO, they'll soon run out of cut & paste material. The problems discussed require common sense which of course leaves them with nothing but satire & humourless ridicule in reply to any thread relating to everyday problems.

ALTRAV,

I would say that Maxie is a plant from some extreme Left activist show. He came out of nowhere, as you say, 'rehearsed'. He has the patter of a sideshow barker.

He certainly returned my serve with aggression, mistakenly accusing me of calling him a 'shyster' when it was a lawyer of the same name who was the shyster. Perhaps his sensitivity to the word stirs something in him.

He doesn't accept that I'm not denying climate change (no surprise there), but actually calls me a "climate denier", meaning that I don't believe there is a climate! I suppose it's easy for some people get a bit muddled when they are fuming because someone has questioned their piffle.

I'm so glad his feelings were not hurt; I had no intention of hurting his feelings. Perhaps it is his technique to try hurting the feelings of people he disagrees with.

And, yes Bazz; "shrill" suits Max. He's had a chance to respond reasonably, but he has proven himself to be just another verbal head-batterer from the Left. Just what we needed:).

I find it incredible to witness the depths of investment, belief and conviction, that some people will go to in believing something which is merely an allegation or theory, and not an actuality.
Where-as the fires are real, they are an actuality because they exist, it is happening, now.
Where is the evidence and fallout of the allegation that CO2 is guilty of all these crimes it is accused of.
Allegations at best.
We know that the fires are a DIRECT result of arrested burn-offs.
We know that the intensity and severity of the fires are due to hot and windy weather, together they all conspired to the end we are now witnessing.
We know, the GREENS are behind the cessation of burn-offs.
We know that CO2, is a good gas.
We know that CO2 on it's own is not harmful.
WE know that GW, CC has happened before.
We know that the ice age or cooling period, has happened before.
We know that the climate goes in cycles as does the rest of the universe.
So why is it that the climate freaks, believe in something that is not proven nor showing any evidence of what they purport.
The "facts"they keep bleating about are just that facts.
Any attempts at trying to accuse CO2 to the weather patterns is a good ole' attempt at straw man reasoning, at best.

Dear Max Green,

I suppose it has also dawned on you that all of the AGW denialists happen to be bogans.

Who was the bogan who said bitumen is made from coal? I suppose he also thinks he can make coke from petroleum.

"He doesn't accept that I'm not denying climate change (no surprise there), but actually calls me a "climate denier", meaning that I don't believe there is a climate!"

Sorry TTBN, but your silly semantics don't fly. You previously said:

" I don't know anyone who denies climate change: the climate is always changing - naturally."
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=9037#297932
That one word NATURALLY means you just dismiss the ANTHROPOGENIC causes of climate change. It's all just natural, see? The climate's changed before, see? You're a piss-ant little cliche, see?

I love the wiki on climate deniers, but just wish there was a new, stronger term. Like Denial-tards! That sounds about right. Denial-tards.

Anyway, the wiki has you deniers worked out!

"Climate change denial, or global warming denial is denial, dismissal, or unwarranted doubt that contradicts the scientific consensus on climate change, including the extent to which it is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, or the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions. Many who deny, dismiss, or hold unwarranted doubt about the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming self-label as "climate change skeptics", which several scientists have noted is an inaccurate description. Climate change denial can also be implicit, when individuals or social groups accept the science but fail to come to terms with it or to translate their acceptance into action.[9] Several social science studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denialism, pseudoscience, or propaganda."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial

Again, it's not my fault you Denial-tards have decided you're smarter than every National Academy of Science on the planet.

MR OPINION,
it's been so long since one of them has tried to debate the science with me I'm officially bored.

TTBN didn't even TRY to answer that he was quoting THE most basic Anthropogenic / Human caused climate change myth. He just turned around and played a bunch of really crap unconvincing semantic games! EG:-

>"but actually calls me a "climate denier", meaning that I don't believe there is a climate!"

I read that and winced for our country, that these uneducated bogan idiots get to VOTE! What a retard!? I mean, what hope is there when these dumbass climate deniers are actually patting each other on the back for their dumbness? They're standing in their dumbness, celebrating it!

ALTRAV is so blunt he can't divine that there are "natural" forcings and "human" forcings on the climate. He can't understand that the Milankovitch cycles that caused the ice age cycle can't explain 40% of the extra energy in the system! The sunlight changes triggered it, but where did the extra cold in the cold part of the cycle come from? Trapped CO2 under ice sheets! Where did the extra heat in the interglacials come from? FREED CO2. In other words, the very natural ice-age cycle he's turning to has evidence of CO2's power to warm and cool the planet if it is released or trapped!

Again, climate sensitivity models are BASED on our understanding of paleoclimate.

But this dumbass just says “Climate’s changed before y’all” and CELEBRATES his accomplishments! Wow. Dunning Kruger's much?