I really need to get back to my work rather than get sucked into arguments with people over conspiracy theories.
Garth Paltridge's view is in a small minority. The accepted view of the CSIRO is what is published. It's not just the CSIRO, it's pretty much the same view of every relevant academic and government body that I've come across.
There is no point in arguing with someone ranting over conspiracy theories, nothing, not reason nor facts will change your view.
The science behind Climate Change and Global Warming is good, solid and peer-reviewed. Not everyone will agree with it, but it is still good science.
Peter
With due respect to the CSIRO whom you quoted a few posts back, and have most likely included in your opinion on the AGW case being "Good Science" I would like to offer the following comments.
A pruner who I can't recall his user name, once wrote to me identifying who he was and where he worked and what he did prior to leaving the CSIRO in disgust. Why? They spent more time and resources on studying how to get Government funding than they did on anything else. The method for ensuring funding was to pander to political wins which in this case included the pro AGW position. This guy was not a low level clerk either. If he is reading this I would hope he jumps in here but I suspect he has departed ppruneland.
Good science is about testing hypothesis. All it takes to disprove a hypothesis is despite hundreds or thousands of supporting results or claims is to have one prove otherwise. On that alone the AGW position is at least far from sound, and in my opinion it is debunked!