.
VIA peterc005 #227;
I'm happy with the scientific basis behind Global Warming.
Introducing a Carbon Tax is good Public Policy and a responsible thing for the government to do.
This rise of China and India, and their growing energy and resource usage, are costing me ten time more than the Carbon Tax ever will.
Carbon Tax = ~ 5 cents a litre, growing demand for oil from emerging economies probably adds 60 cents a litre.
The real cost of the Carbon Tax is having to listen to people whine about it!
peterc005, im still wondering where is this good, solid and peer-reviewed science
? i had another look-see at the CSIRO links yer provided and all ah see to back up the "scientific basis" to the AGW claims is the IPCC..
? ...perhaps ah missed sumthin..
Hmmm... Since the IPCC tells the CSIRO what to think, lets see what the IPCC has to say about their own "scientific basis"
Via Rajendra Pachauri, chairman, IPCC...
"...we carry out an assessment of climate change based on peer-reviewed literature, so everything that we look at and take into account in our assessments has to carry the credibility of peer-reviewed publications, we don’t settle for anything less than that..."
Dang, sounds good... ah assumes Pachauri is talkin about AGW there as the climate has been changing since the world began..
...There is a problem. Donna Laframboise and others had a look-see at the 'fully' peer reviewed claims and found out it is an
outright lie. Seems there are several THOUSAND
grey 'scientific' claims in the IPCC documents
...and seems a lot of the so-called scientists are actually "activists, 20-something graduate students, people appointed due to their gender or their country, etc..." ..
Donna Laframboise will be doing a speaking tour here in Oz next month -
Australia, I’m Looking Forward to Meeting You « NoFrakkingConsensus
.