Sh1t, sorry about that.

Cheers, thebas.

He very easily squashes the most compelling arguments of the climate change movement.  Many of the climate change enthusisists throw insults at him, but thats it - they've got no counter-argument - just personal barbs - in a brazen attempt to help there own self-interest.

No climate change = many high paying public/private jobs disappear - in addition to the Green investments/taxes that are being embraced by some big business/governments.

Amazing how many scientists are backing Lord Monckton.

The "many scientists" that more and more of the believers refer too are clearly dwindling.  The myth is unravelling. 

Slowly, but surely.

secong here's a simple answer for you - we are the biggest polluters on the the planet per capita - to me that suggests we have a moral obligation to do something.  Add to that, if we don't - how many countries does that give an out to - 'well Australia is doing nothing and they are the worlds biggest polluters per head of population, why should we do anything'???

lord monckton

Carbon tax = change of government.

Lots to smile about in that regard.

Agree Wombleoz ... their has to be a way to cut the pollution and clean the environment up for the future but seriously a tax that will get put onto the end consumer...

I mean let me give a example: I go out and install solar panels and put surplus energy into the grid and the govt is going to tax this as revenue ...ffs

strange how the chief lets increase tax supporter was in favour of less tax for the corps vs pvl

Call it a Liberal line or not.

The carbon tax is fundamentally flawed.
You won't accept that.  This IS a great big tax on everything.

You've said on this place that tax is good!  You love it.  Embrace you've said - I have a hunch to you, there's more to this tax that you like, than just it being a "climate change" related tax.

I'm not sure what your socialist motives are in that regard. But I don't trust this tax and the answers we get from supporters and the govt in relation to outcomes are sketchy to say the fkn least.

Again, with regard to this thread, I question the science of "global warming" or "climate change" - absolutely - but I'm all for a cleaner environment.  AGAIN, what I'm against is a dirty, grubby tax grab that is completely and utterly inefficient.

As Secong said.

"actually develop smarter cleaner energy sources & give incentive to not only reduce emissions but give the people a chance to reduce cost"

That is in the too hard basket.

Lets apply a "we hope it works" GREAT BIG tax on EVERYTHING and then cross our fingers - because "we've got to do something".

P-lease.

Doesn't matter wombleoz.

The compensation models being flagged by the government are just pathetic - it won't cut.  It won't cut it politically.

I've heard some hard heads within Labor that are deeply concerned about the shift in climate change sentiment publicly and are concerned by some who compare a carbon tax with the GST.

The GST is a fundamentally sound tax
The carbon tax IS NOT.

John Howard is/was a political genius with a political antenna for the public mood.  Julia Gillard is definetely NOT.

This will be a disaster for Labor.

I can see it coming, can you?

(P.S - someone needs to re-advise the PM on her dress code when entering disaster zones, i.e. Queensland.  Very tasteless.  And, oh, how I wish she would display some leadership and not look so wooden and uninterested.  She needs to speak to Anna Bligh, who has been doing an absolutely oustanding job)

What colour nail polish do you think she should have worn Jez?

If you want to be Prime Minister Jez, I think you'll have to come up with something better than that.

You can't pull her apart on the things that really matter during this period of disaster, so you look for the lowest form of criticisim and criticize her dress sense. FFS.
Pathetic.

That's more your style.

JEZ MELB PUNTER J HOWARD political genius ??? Did not understand the the aust way with work choices.Lost govt.lost his seat .

Yes that's true Jez, Howard was a political genius - he always knew what to wear - for fark sake, you are becoming more shallow by the day !!!!

*Not only is she

ffs, need to go back to typing school

Unemployment 5% - nice work Labor

Thought for a minute you were trying to make the point that Labor are responsible for our strong position post-GFC.

ffs

Yes, it feels like a long time ago.

But it was only 3 and bit years ago.  Australian's remember the position the economy was left in for the incoming Rudd Government.

I know you take the public for fools.  But they've seen a lot over 3 and a bit years.

We've seen a first term PM massacred.

A first term govt lose it's majority.

A government lose its way and stay there.

That along with rocketing debt, incompetence, irresponsibility, a good dollop of spin and absolutely NO leadership.

Here's a very interesting opinion piece in one of the daily newspapers from California with Australian references.......I find the comments in relation to the non-reporting of a great deal of research and science that threatens to lessen the climate change argument, going unreported in large parts of the media....absolutely spot on.

World stepping back from carbon tax?
By Dick Little
Posted: 01/11/2011

There are some within the Australian government who are resisting attempts by other governments to set up a carbon tax.

Let's hope our government joins them. The idea of a carbon tax emerged from a recent conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, that included a group of government officials worldwide who believe carbon dioxide emissions from cars and factories are destroying the planet.

The group believes that individuals who own an excessive number of cars or similar vehicles, or heavily industrialized countries that spew out excessive amounts of hydrocarbons, should be taxed heavily.

It probably won't happen.

The richest countries may go along with the idea, but poorer countries trying to compete will cry foul. This may put liberals into a quandary; do they side with the poorer or go along with the richer countries? But some in Australia believe the global warming debate is a lot of nonsense. Aussies are basic, down to earth folks who still believe that one and one equal two, not some feel-good number. Some Aussies want to see verified scientific data to support the warming theory before they set up new laws to combat it. And so far no one has produced enough scientific evidence to support the matter to their satisfaction.

Australia has done considerable research on the issue, as have numerous other countries. Every day another scientist concludes that emissions from autos and factories have little to do with global warming cycles. Other countries are concerned about the economic impacts.

Japan recently postponed its plans for a national emissions trading scheme, bowing to business groups that warned of job losses as they compete with overseas rivals that face fewer emissions regulations.

The American press rarely quotes these scientists. The push to limit carbon emissions appears to have slowed during the past couple of years, as more scientists are studying the data and are backing away from the idea that man-made CO- 2 is responsible for global warming.

Every day, new research shows CO-2 emissions are not nearly as dangerous as many had initially believed, yet the media rarely reports this data. We were taught in grade school that CO-2 is important for the survival of both plants and animals. It must be frustrating for those who believe that CO-2 is killing the planet and are doing all the right things to curb emissions, to read reports that their efforts are being negated by Mother Nature as she permits yet another volcano to blow its top.

When Mt. Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, geologists said it emitted more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the entire human race has produced since the dawn of the Industrial Age. Some 17 million tons of sulfur dioxide were injected into the atmosphere -the largest volume ever recorded by modern instruments.

If you are still feeling guilty about emissions from your car, here's something that may make you feel better: The wildfire season that swept the western part of this country in 2008, and the fires that ravaged parts of Australia as well, negated any and all efforts governments in industrialized countries have made in recent years to reduce carbon emissions.

Yet, our government has been considering establishing a carbon tax. Fortunately, the proposal died before it could get any momentum. But there are still a number of congressional members supported by politically powerful environmental groups who would like to see the proposed law on the books. In order to revive the issue and justify their lust for additional tax dollars they will need to keep global warming fears alive. Another blow to global warming advocates comes from Dr. Don J. Easterbrook of Western Washington University, who has concluded that our planet has been cooling since 1998. No wonder the doom and gloomers decided to no longer use the term global warming.

Now they're calling it climate change. The mainstream media needs to report both sides of the climate change argument instead of presenting it as an absolute fact. When I went to journalism school we were told to " check your sources; seek other opinions; check out their research."

The global warming issue falls farther short of passing the smell test every day. Yet many members of our press corps continue to push the issue as a real threat to the planet. They will never admit they were wrong. If, and when, they finally cave in to the mounting evidence that global warming is a farce, they will simply stop writing about it.

wombleoz
Date Joined: 15 Feb 03 Add contact | Send message When: 19 Jan 11 08:15 whatever Jez, most countries and people agree with the science it's just what to do about it that is argued about, the Liberals in Australia can't even get to first base

???

what would it matter what any lay person (people) or politician thought ... because

not even all the scientists agree with the science

no one has said it's a unified position, there are obviously contrary opinions but they are in the minority - man is having an effect on the environment, no question, we are also having an effect on the climate