"We mustn't disadvantage Australia," he (Senator Eggleston) said. If only that had been their policy on agriculture for the last 25 years.

He would only have been referring to the urban sector. Some body tell when any govt has really treated agriculture as it does our cosy protected urban sector. The more I read and learn about the differential treatment, the more I am ashamed to be a city person.

Four temperature data sources are widely used to monitor global average temperatures. Only the GISS data (produced with ever more dubious statistical adjustment and under intense investigation in Canada and the US as was Gore's famous 'hockey stick' graph fraud) exhibits values that do not unequivocally show that since 1998 there has been a temperature stasis until 2001 and since then absolute decline in temperatures. General Circulation Models have NOT predicted the near 10 year 'cooling' and the Australian PM Rudd together with his Climate Change Minister Wong, are surely open to censure for misleading the Australian public. When PM Rudd says it will get "hotter and hotter and hotter" he is surely compounding his Christian religious fears with his global warming religious fears and frankly debasing the intelligence of the electorate. He cannot lie for ever as it will get 'colder and colder and colder' and then what Mr. Rudd?

It is time for a Joint Party Select Committee of Inquiry that calls upon each of the Australian IPCC lead scientists who are paid by our tax dollars, to answer questions put to them, through the Committee that is not qualified to initiate the questions, by Australian scientists who have openly and BRAVELY expressed their concern. To describe these people as 'sceptics' or 'deniers' as does the Prime Minister is to lack an understanding of the scientific method - those terms are used to marginalize the scientists in the eyes of the electorate.

Global warming is AT BEST an hypothesis and the purpsoe of science is to REJECT hypotheses on the basis of a lack of EVIDENCE typically, but not always, using statistical probabilities that IPCC NEVER reports for the POLICY MAKERS!

Two of Australia's IPCC scientists have been unable to answer the question put to IPCC Chairman Dr. Pachauri on April 14 2008 by myself, two UK based scientists and a Greenland based Nobel Peace prize winner. The letter and associated graph can be found at : http://www.uncapsa.org/Topics/IPCC_letter_14April08-1.pdf)

A more recent letter (July 15) to UN Secretary-General was signed by 13 of us, scientists, engineers and ecologists, including a Nobel Peace Prize (shared) winner, 3 former IPCC expert reviewers, 9 countries are involved.

On what basis can PM Rudd and Minister Wong and Mnister Garrett (totally unqualified) continue to ignore such information? Here is the URL for letter to UN Sec-Gen Ki-moon July 2008 http://www.tech-know.eu/uploads/Letter_UN_Sec_Gen_Ban_Ki-moo n.pdf

The issue is straightforward: Carbon trading, taxing, capping call it what you like was unheard of before Dr. James Hansen, a known environmental alarmist at the Goddard Institute for Space Science, declared that human activity was causing catastrophic warming. This was circa 1988. A mere ten years later that warming, (a natural upward trend from the cold period of the seventies, most immediately and over the much longer term as a rise from the Dalton Minimum of the late 18th and early 19th centuries) had stopped.

Solar related dynamics and data from ever more accurate instruments, satellites, and deep space probes, ocean remote sensing and more are exposing the paucity of the GC Models used by IPCC and recently discredited by Dr. David Evans a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office, among others.

The recent cold weather (July 28 2008) in southern and eastern Australia especially, may NOT be isolated weather events and cannot be explained by reference only to the local synoptic charts as appear daily on TV weather stations.

There is no need for any taxing of carbon, now or ever and as to the absurd idea of generating power from poo - well pooh whoo? Our soils are depleted enough: they need the nutrients, we do not NEED the bulk of intensively fed farm animals either and anything that can reduce the enormous consumption of energy to feed and house what should be walking around and fertilizing the ground should be encouraged.