Noting your comment about whatsupwiththat.com, Luke, I have to agree that it is generally biased towards the skeptics. However, suggesting that politicians are the final abiters of truth is drawing something of a long bow. I also read a lot of stuff from other sites provided that they provide URL's to back up their position.

I also have spent a lot of time trying to understand the science and, believe me, that can give you a headache sometimes. Good to see that you are studying it though - I wish more people would.

With regard to your comments on the UN's desire to tax individuals to free themselves from nations contributions, I make this comment; almost half of the UN's income is supplied by US, UK, Australia, Canada, Japan, and New Zealand. The remaining roughly 180 countries pay the rest. Certainly you could pull out NZ and put in France, for example, but the fact is that the UN could not exist without the western nation's contributions. If the UN looks like doing something that the western countries don't like, it is threatened with non payment and this they hate. They have been working towaeds a solution to this for some time as the UN sees itself as a world government in waiting.

Google "tobin tax" if you want a nasty fright. No URL's from me, spend a few nights chasing through that yourself. Good luck and nice debating with you guys.

The curious thing about Ozone is that it is thinner at arctic and antarctic latitudes, where fewer people can live. CFCs are released at ground level, and are stable enough to travel for years. They eventually end up in the stratosphere where they are broken up by photodissociation, releasing chlorides. The chlorides are then free to catalyse the breakup of ozone down into O2.

The UK House of Commons is by far a more reputable source than wattsupwiththat.com, and the idea that the UN has the ability to impose a worldwide tax is laughable when they cannot even get the USA to pay their fees.

@Bruce#6 Well, let’s start with the ozone hole. It was discovered a couple of decades or so ago, but it was not a case of there being no hole and now there is one. Nasa went and looked and found a hole. Is this normal? Nobody knows. It gets larger and it gets smaller. Ozone layers around the world vary in thickness between seasons and years. The curious thing is that ozone layer is generally thicker over populated areas and the hole is over Antarctica where there is almost nobody. Ozone is depleted, amongst other things, by chlorides. 95% of which are given off by the sea surface. Ozone creation is a continuous process, so we cannot "run out" of stratospheric ozone. The more ozone (O3) is destroyed, the more free oxygen radicals (O1) are available to bind with free oxygen (O2) to create ozone (O3), the same applies with free oxygen (O2). Should we worry? I don’t know, but I don’t think so.

Yes, human behavior does effect the local environment (such as cities) but these amount to a tiny fraction of the Earth's surface and have little or no measurable effect on the global climate as a whole. Certainly volcanoes and ocean currents do to a limited extent, but humans cannot control these immensely powerful phenomena either. The thing that has by far the most effect on our climate is the sun.

So human behaviour has no impact on the local environment?

Or the environment has no impact on the climate?

Is that what you are saying Rick?

Volcanoes have impact on the environment and climate. Ocean currents can have an impact on the climate, but men cannot?

And the ozone hole ....

@Luke Johns #3

Oh, and in response to your defence of certain unscrupulous climate scientists, you must read this...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/the-medieval-warm-period-a-global-phenonmena-unprecedented-warming-or-unprecedented-data-manipulation/

@Luke Johns#3 The thing about this subject is that, whatever evidence one puts up, there is always someone who says it’s wrong. This is very hard to disprove because of the complexity of the science. On top of that, there are many who fill the media with emotive nonsense. So I present a historical proof that is easier to grasp and is irrefutable. About 1100 AD to 1300AD, Eric the Red was tossed out of Iceland for “some slayings” and he moved to Greenland. This country was much warmer than it is now and had forests of birch trees, grass and other vegetation. The Vikings prospered, growing grain and livestock and became major exporters of rope, hides , wool and other important products of the time. The large permanent settlement grew and even had stone churches. Then it got colder and the settlement was abandoned. It has not been that warm in Greenland since that time. This is fact and it is not questioned by anybody.

Now, it needs to be explained why the “global warming” of today is still not warm enough to allow birch forests to grow in Greenland. Did the Vikings have bigger SUV’s than we have now? Were their factories belching out more pollutants?

No. Climate change is normal and natural. Human beings don’t cause it and we can’t control it. The idea is as ludicrous as trying to stop the wind. http://www.theresilientearth.com/?q=content/medieval-warm-period-rediscovered and http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Forecasters-odds-global-Warming/2010/03/30/id/354205

So why are the Global warming supporters so vehement in their dire predictions? Well, you need to look behind the curtain, Dorothy. http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/1/2/63214.shtml

The report by the UK House of Commons addresses your concerns about the Climategate so-called "scandal". The professor was not hiding raw data, he was merely refusing to release it to people who were insulting and antagonistic to his work. The data was verified by independant research.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387/387i.pdf

Also, the so-called poll is rubbish. http://www.desmogblog.com/30000-global-warming-petition-easily-debunked-propaganda

Not to mention, the past decade is the warmest on record. http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/jan/HQ_10-017_Warmest_temps.html

You could go on, but you just reveal yourself as ill-informed.

Yes, Colin, the UN has cooked the books, and they have been caught doing it. To give just three examples:

- "Climategate". Where Prof. Jones discussed ways to "hide the decline" which would damage their theories were it known. And also hiding the raw data from other scientists which would show up their manipulation of it. - The IPCC statement, ahead of Copenhagen, that the Himalayan glaciers would all have melted away by 2035. When challenged, the scientist who wrote it (with the approval of Mr Pachauri - head of the IPCC) admitted that it was a lie to "put pressure on world leaders". - The respected scientific magazine "Nature" retracted a published article saying the sea levels would rise by as much as 800 mm, when it was discovered that the "evidence" was at best flawed, if not entirely invented.

As for the thoudands of scientists... there is an international poll signed by over 30,000 qualified scientists who are skeptical of human caused global warming. As opposed to the 2,600 scientists who support it.

And then there are the global temperatures which have been on a cooling trend since 1998.

I could go on and on but I think that's enough.

The scientists are following the funding and who can blame them. You forgot to mention France abandoning their ETS because of flawed science and the damage to their economy. Polling in the US and UK put believers of AGW at 25%, Tony Abbott has had a stratospheric rise in the polls over his opposition to their ETS. Once our world leading ETS starts and household bills start rising Key will take a huge hit and the media will slaughter him. I bet if Clark was still in charge she would be pragmatic and announce a delay. Going to be a long Winter for the Nats with the budget hitting 400,000 landlords, GST changes, ACC rises, rising petrol prices and interest rate increases. No one to blame but themselves for taking their constituency for granted, Labour are too stupid to take advantage with their continued leftist nonsense but the fact Act cant get any traction must worry them.