Australia must take responsible action

Those who are not able to understand the significant and valid criticisms of Professor Plimer's books simply have no understanding of science. To agree with Plimer requires rebuttal of the criticisms, not merely endorsement in the belief that having Australia do nothing will mean we can all go on as before. The IPCC conclusions are conservative, as is being demonstrated almost every week!

Iceland is still melting?

Haven't the Alarmist's been told that there is a giant active volcano under Iceland? Ice will always melt when its sitting on top of an active volcano. Talk about looking down at the ground and citing things that seem to have changed because of an already formulated conclusion. The debate is not over. In science the debate never finishes. There is always new facts to discuss and debate over. Anyone who says that any scientific debate is over is looking for a pay cheque.

Climate Change

I just watched the interview with Stern and nearly spewed. How could you let him get away without challenging some of his points ,even if it was to be the devils advocate? Are we really up there with the biggest emitters and is the world really hanging on for our move in the whole political debate? I don't think so. It would have been good to point out to him that Aust is only 20 mio out of 6 billion and surely has a special case to wait till the really big emitters do first.

Stern

Stern will make an assessment of the responses to see how far down the road Australia is to accepting the will of his bosses and decide the next step.The real issue here is Australia's sovereignty and whether we will be dictated to as we have in the past by the globalists.AGW is a false issueThe sqabbling here is intentional on the part of Stern as a divide and conquer technique..

Sick to death of shills for the New World Order racketeers on Dateline...It's BAD for Australia

I am so sick of Dateline putting on people whom seem to be pushing for "the mainstream media narrative" or the "agenda" of foreign vested interests like say,..USA Federal reserve Bank, IMF, World bank & their interests...or "The carbon trading ""system"" profiteers. If we want to reduce Coal energy just very gradually tax it and invest alternative stuff. I wish they would ALWAYS have a response from genuinely respected REAL Australian academics & business people..who have CREDIBILITY HERE

Plimer exposes poor science

Neilious, you are obviously not really interested in seeking out the science. Thats OK, because Plimers book is heavy going being 500 pages long packed with some 2300 references to scientific papers. Certainly it does undermine the AGW case, but that is what scientific debate is all about is it not?? I have read several critics of Plimers work and they just nit pick, they cant touch him on the real core important issues that Plimer attacks.

Back to the original point

Prof Lambeck raised valid points in rebutting Plimers work, but admits that the IPCC's work is not perfect. Even the Garnaut Review states "significant uncertainty around how the atmosphere will respond to a given change in CO2 concentration", and "the IPCC models show that the warming out to 2030 is little influenced by greenhouse gas emissions from the present.." Some predict that power costs here will increase 60-80% with an ETS. Why commit to an ETS now?

Response to JohnR

Sure no problem, http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2009/2589206.htm