At last, someone who is prepared to stand up to this green house gas dooms-day cult and call a spade a spade.

Interesting to see, in The Land-online, this story following a story where the federal Agriculture Minister says: Yes, we can cut emissions and lift productivity. Increasing Co2 is a given. There is no proof that it causes "Global Warming". There is proof that it causes increased crop growth. Why cut emissions?

Joyce and Boswell do not have the mental capacity to understand the book or the science and are simply trying to get on a bandwagon of ignorance. If you don't believe you do not have to do anything. This is political so you keep voting for them whilst they lead you down the garden path. If you cannot see the risks you don't deserve to be on the land. Boswell and Joyce will keep telling you what you want to hear to keep their jobs. The Lorax

Mind you Plimer has sucked you all into buying his book so he can make a fortune, he has never been on the radar of significant climatologists or scientists, my god you people are easily fooled. Just for the record I am not convinced about human caused global warming based on current science, but I know crap science when I see it. I also know that if human-induced climate change is real then the price we have to pay is too great and if we act and get it wrong then the worse thing we have is a cleaner planet and less dependence on Arab oil. Stop being fooled by big business and self serving scientists (on both sides) and politicians and make your own mind up. There are compelling arguments on both sides and Plimer is not one of them.

The ratio of scientists favouring man-induced climate change to those disavowing the link is vastly towards those favouring man induced climate change. Sadly Senator Boswell is utterly wrong to suggest the score is 50/50. Professors Bob Carter and Ian Plimer are both very much in the minority.

There is a price to pay for freedom of speech, for example for years there were authorities denying the pathogenic influence of cigarette smoking, the benefit of flouride for dental hygiene, of iodine in salt to prevent goitre, codliver oil to prevent rickets, the benefits if immunization. On the otherhand there are people in authority making unsubstantiated claims, for example Linus Pauling claimed Vitamen C would prevent colds.

The two Professors are honourable men and have raised issues, but both are geologists and it appears this may have coloured their perspective. Their views are already widely heard and discredited. I have heard both of them, there were flaws it their arguments and other points were quite adolescent. Some of their references have been questioned by their peers. Senators Joyce and Boswell are doing a disservice to their constituents by promoting Prof. Plimer. One suspects that Prof Plimer is being used by Senator Boswell as a grandstand to express his views on the ETS.

It seems that "the Lorax" has to put in two comments against balanced debate because he fears he will not have enough support otherwise. I am not claiming support of either side but I do fear that if the government gets a whiff of climate change being a normal phenomena they will do nothing about the pollution in this world and the pollution by chemicals and other ingredients is more urgent than climate change.

" the lorax " & "fekin".....sound very much like paid members of various environmental groups hell bent on not debating the whole climate change debate. As a farmer I have planted trees, retain crop stubble, use min-till farming for crops, utilise alternative natural fertilisers, recycle household waste, have built a five star energy efficient house etc, etc. My guess is you sit in your metro monstrosity feeding off the earth's resources and generally forcing your ideological bull on the rest of us. I encourage everyone to read as much as possible of both arguments to reach your own conclusion. Climate change is happening...it's called nature and I am adapting to it and doing my bit for the preservation of my environment. What do you two clowns do ?

The Lorax, if you speak for the trees as the name suggests, then you must know that the trees need food. CO2 is tree food. Fekin, I don't know where you get your information but my research leads me to the conclusion that scientists who favour the man made climate change theory (and it is just that, a THEORY) are actually a substantial minority. And yes freedom of speech, like any freedom has a price. It is eternal vigilance. We have far more to fear from suppression than from freedom. I would rather hear a million crackpot ideas voiced and allowed to stand or fall on their own merits than have one true idea suppressed. And anyway who is to decide which ideas are allowed to be heard and which aren't? For every example you give to illustrate your point there are many more which illustrate a contrary point of view. Galileo was suppressed, Marconi was locked up in a nuthouse because no one believed in radio. A few hundred years ago surgeons and those delivering children refused to wash their hands after dissecting corpses. They went straight to deal with the living and suppressed one man's attempts to have them clean up. Hundreds of thousands died of child bed fever and similar infections. How's that for the effects of suppression? And just because some of the references have been questioned by others doesn't make them wrong. The references and every part of the argument should be questioned. That's healthy. Blind acceptance of the man made climate change theory, as many are doing, is not just unhealthy it's very dangerous. It's not just about cutting dependence on foreign oil. It's an insidious cancer-like invasion into every area of our lives.

Here are a few simple questions to ask yourselves. Are other planets in the solar system heating up and if they are is that our fault too? If man made CO2 causes global warming, where is the evidence of all the billions and billions of people who must have been responsible for ending the last ice age, or for causing the medieval warm period, or the Roman warm period? If an increase in atmospheric CO2 causes global warming then a decrease in CO2 must cause global cooling. So where did all the atmospheric CO2 suddenly go to cause the mini ice age in the 1600s and 1700s? If there is more CO2 in the atmosphere lately, then why by many accounts has the earth been cooling since 1998. Who has most to gain by pushing the man made climate change theory, which is an unproven computer generated theory (GIGO)? Is it the ordinary man or is it those who seek to maintain control over societies and peoples? Life as we know it cannot continue without CO2. It is the food of our food and a product of our bodies. A tax on CO2 is a tax on life itself.

Dear E and Damian, I do not live in the city, I have a modest house in the country. I am a 7th generation farmer and landholder and a qualified forester (so thanks ozfirst for the lesson in forestry). Nice to see the respondents can leave thier assumptions and bigotries out of the first line of their arguments at least. I am looking for a balanced debate and have said many times there are compelling arguments on both sides.

The anti ETS/AGW/CC group are doing themselves a diservice by allowing their fear of change or potential losses to cloud responses and arguments. Stop hooking onto any argument that suits your needs without examining it in detail, your rush to believe the non AGW or disprove the science of the pro AGW group leaves you open to abuse by self serving individuals and groups.

The all or nothing arguments will bring us undone. Whether it is the solar cycle that is causing the problem, and tectonic or volcanic activity, and man made emissions and the moon moving away and any other theory, then we are in a mighty big jam, but we can only control one of them. Can we have a debate about the facts without the conservative diatribe, it is rally lame.

The lorax

Lorax I can't believe you are who you say you are. You put this debate where it is by your initial, abusive and denigrating remarks, quite unnecessary. I think there is more science in Dolly Parton's left... errr ...foot! than in what you write. Just read the book, all of you out there!!