But could that itself be a myth that a myth was spread ?

Bottom line is that we don't know anything for sure.
All we hear is people talking, some spout rubbish, others spout truths, some may do a bit of both, and the rest of us do not have a clue who to believe.

But...if every resident in Australia stops using electricity, we may just save 0.005% of the worlds pollution effect. That is about the only near fact that I know.

I take it you mean CO2 rather than all types of pollution?

What about CO2 emissions produced by other countries from using Australian coal etc? Are they ignored?

Fair comment your Lordship, And I understand your position.

Please try to understand mine on this: I am being forced to pay extra taxes and alter my lifestyle for a theory which is currently disputed and unproven. Not only that, even if AGW did exist, there is no evidence at all that my extra taxes and altered lifestyle will make any difference to it.

And conversely, new economies like china will boom as they find themselves even more competitive, and third world economies will ride a new gravy train of Carbon Credits. how the hell will that fix CO2?

I have the entire "leaked/hacked" emails, and the data sets. I can probably prove that 12 data sets were used. It would take me time, and if i did someone would pop up with some pointless other argument.

As I pointed out earlier:

1. Fact: This isn’t the first "Doomsday" prediction in my life. I’m still here....

2. Fact: the Scientists working on this theory have made some pretty abysmal errors. The Satellite drift one is a case in point. I wouldn’t trust these guys to measure the temperature of the Sunday joint in the oven.

3. Fact: An independent review by a panel from the National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics found serious errors in the main paper used in the IPCC 2001 report

4. Fact: when a full sample of the Yamal trees are analysed global warming vanishes.

5. Fact: Ice cores from the Antarctic show only a 3 degree increase in 18,000 years.

6. Fact: Manmade CO2 accounts for less than 4% of the problem.

7. Fact: IPCC review rules allowed non scientists and pressure groups to change scientific findings without the approval of the authors.
Etc etc etc.

Cape Cod seems to have given up, and his Lordship is reduced to saying “No”.

Copenhagen is going to be a flop, and ETS won’t get up next year. Rudd won’t have the balls to call a double disillusion on the new Tax subject.

It’s all a bit like arguing economic theory with Rick out of the Young Ones……. In fact, I can just imagine him telling me in a bar how the world is warmer now

Dr of Tropical Medicine. It has taken her to some very 'iffy' countries... she might have been turned to the dark side.


On a sort of similar subject to the climate change... I do remember her saying that Bangladesh was a lost cause and should be written off. It spends far too much of its time underwater already. God alone knows what future it has as a nation if sea levels do rise.

If Australia refused to sell the coal, I am sure those countries would buy it somewhere else, and therefore it would not reduce the worlds pollution (CO2) effect.
It would only affect Australia's economy for no world benefit.

When the whole word agrees to do something, maybe we should do the same.
But financially, for Australia to take the lead, it would be economic suicide if the others didn't follow.
And for what ? As said before, if we cut our use by 50%, we only reduce world pollution by under 1%. Our efforts would not even be noticed.

Only the US and China doing something would really make any noticeable difference to the world, and if they don't, then, if it all turned out to be true, we are stuffed anyway.

Bangladesh floods. It always has. Its nothing to do with sea levels or CO2. Its a riverine country where recurrent flooding is both common and necessary. The problem is the Bangladeshis now try to live semi westernised lifestyles in a flood plain, and we see them dying by the thousands on TV. I remember being shocked when I saw it on TV in the bad flood of 74. An ex Indian Army Major told me it had happened regularly all his time in India, but there was no TV cameras then.

On the other hand, a couple of years ago I had to listen to some windbag in a Jakarta bar telling everyone the reason the city was under water was global warming. In unison we told him “bollox”.

Two things cause Jakarta’s terrible floods. Deforestation to the south speeds up the flow of heavy rains, and the drainage canals built by the Dutch and repaired and extended by the Japanese in the 1970s are used by Jakartans as garbage dumps, until they fill and become blocked.

He is probably writing a paper right now, "Flooding Impacts of AGW in the Jakarta Basin".

I think I may start an internet campaign to get everyone to put their aircons on 24/7 and leave their windows open.

We'll cool the planet somehow.




Please pass this message on to at least 6 other friends.
Would you want them to miss out?

I think we have to throw our fans and air con machines in the road and then drink Ice Tea. That brings the temp down

I heard baked beans, pork and rhubarb may be banned.

Global warming is a conspiracy theory started by the BBC.

As all Brits know, if it's on the BBC - it must be true right

I blame the UN, the bunch of communists. Oh and Arthur Scargill.

I've been trying not to comment on this thread as we all know arguing on the internet is pointless. As well as this, nothing gets me all spaz'd out in an angry way than the nay sayers on global warming. I don't really understand why so many people so furiously deny global warming. When did everyone start believing politicians and the media over scientists? The entire international community of scientists are not conspiring against us. I'm pretty certain though that media, the wealthy and politicians are the ones to not takes advice from. Since 2007, no scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion.

Anyways, I'm not going to attempt to convince people here or anywhere as it's as pointless as trying to pry someone away from their religion. We're already f**ked. Regardless of whether you believe the actual facts or the magical world of gum drops and rainbows, there is not much denying peak oil. We will run out of oil soon and it will affect our western lives in a massive way. This massive impending problem seems like good enough reason alone, without the overly debated global warming problem, to change our western ways to one less reliant on finite resources, don't you think?

Not many people actually do. What you do see is many people questioning everything, to try to get a better idea of what is truth and what is not.

What I can't understand is why a few people insist that if you ask questions you are automatically called a Denier.

I also think that you are agreeing with most people, about needing to find an alternative fuel to our current supplies.

I agree here. Oil is a finite resource and will off course run out (so too the sun will eventually die, but that’s a long time away).

The problem with oil running out isn’t going to be going to the filling station and finding it empty, or even finding it the price extortionate, although both will happen. It will be the wars that occur over the remaining oil.

Lord Farquhar may well accuse me of spreading conspiracy theories here, but some people tend to feel that the Iraq War was about securing oil for USA/UK rather than see it go to China.

Australia may well have been involved as well – We stormed into East Timor, risking a war with Indonesia. Then we start demanding a redrawing of the sea boundaries so that the vast majority of the oil and gas come into Australian control.

Now there your Lordship, is a conspiracy theory.