our climate deeds will influence other nations, page-23

Starburst you really are pushing your luck. If you thought about it for more than a nanosecond or read my posts you would realise that I have always argued that CO2 followed temperature in the past because climate change in those times was clearly due to natural factors. It is the anti-AGW hatchet crew that has argued that CO2 followed temperature in the past and therefore should also do so now, despite the fact we are pumping it into the atmosphere. A more fallacious argument I have never, ever heard!

I think you'll find my view is that we have natural climate change and we have man made climate change and what we are seeing is an overlay of the two. However, I believe that the man-made portion is the most significant and it is due to billions of tonnes of GHG's being pumped into the atmosphere! How simple is that? Where does that thesis reject any sort of natural climate change? I am also cogniscent of temporary El Nino and La Nina events. We all know these can also have a large impact.

You are deluding yourself if you think that one can be a climate change sceptic or denier and at the same time call for meaningful, positive, environmental change. You are simply playing into the hands of the big polluters. They will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Bacci, that is a very considered and pragmatic view and I commend you for it. I still think we have to do more than just retain the status quo. After all, if the sceptics and denialists are wrong, Australia has the most to lose out of any developed nation due to climate change! Should we risk that in order to be able to retain the status quo and maintain a highly polluting environment for the sake of convenience and cost and our dearly held Australian Dream? Or are we going to blame China for everything since we can - apparently - make no difference anyway? I believe we need to take a risk based approach and we need to act because the risk is so great.