There must be AGW because there were floods this year in the UK. Even our unelected prime minister Cameron the great said so.. so it must be true.....

I think timothy posted this to the wrong website. Ars is where all the alarmists / AGW religious fanatics hang out these days. They even have a writer dedicated to regularly pumping out the propaganda, and moderators that silence any dissenting voices. It used to be like that on Slashdot too, but too many readers have woken up to the politically and financially motivated religion of climate change (Global warming). It was renamed for this very situation. Now it doesn't matter if the temperatures go up, down or even stay flat, they can claim their religion supports all these outcomes :D

Government is run by lobbyists/special interests and runs counter to the wishes of the majority of the population. No change there then. Wasn't Obama the guy who denounced special interests in the presidential debates? Nothing to see here, merely another puppet president controlled by the new world order elites.

That assumes there is anything out capable of even listening. Life, and consequently intelligence, could well be unique to this planet, for we have yet to even find an exoplanet with the right conditions. The sheer number of known variables that must coalesce before eukaryotes can exist is staggering, let alone thinking about those unknown factors. I have a sinking feeling life isn't quite as abundant as we presume it to be.

Which comes from the latin mille/milia. Milia passuum - a thousand paces (a roman mile).

Well, there are different kinds of intelligence, not just the iq test/problem solving kind. Emotional intelligence is widely seen among elephants, whales, and dolphins. Besides if you're just looking for that kind, then look no further than the corvidae genus of birds which display some remarkable problem solving feats.

I'm sorry, but random YouTube videos featuring well known liars does not count as "education". I tried to see what Bob had to say, and it was the old "not a pollutant" canard.

Well know liar? He's a professor at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, Queensland. And if you had watched more than 30 seconds of the first part of his lecture, and also the rest of the parts, you would see that the temperatures and warming rates of our time are statistically insignificant. In fact from the look of things, we are heading into another mini ice age. The IPCC will no doubt believe it can stop this occurring with bankrupting taxation too? Quoting the same pro-warming (pro-catastrophe) websites do nothing for your cause; Unless you enjoy preaching to the choir?

This disgusting liar claims that it is not warming.

There has been no statistical warming for the past decade. Why do you think those emails caused such a stink? They admitted it themselves. But of course they would never do so in public lest they jepardise their hefty grants. Even climategate's Phil Jones conceded in a recent interview with the BBC that there had been no statistical warming recently which belies their own models.

I'm sorry, but what on earth does this have to do with anything? Never mind the fact that Monckton is an insane liar, but what difference does it make what some random female on the street has to say?

Not some random female, but a greenpeace activist was who he was talking to. And if you had actually watched the video instead of once again switching it off after 30 seconds, you would have known that. In it, he queries her motives and how she investigated the science. And we learn that she never actually did, but instead took unquestionably the propaganda pumped out by greenpeace as truth. This is the problem with most of the alarmists; it's no longer a scientific debate, but a matter of faith as is the case in religion. An utterly abhorrent stance in my opinion, and not one that should be taken when making decisions that could bankrupt our country.

I think it's becoming clearer now... You don't actually listen to the scientists. You prefer to base your opinions on random ignoramuses on the street (one example being Monckton).

It's patently obvious you have made up your mind regardless of the actual science, as demonstrated by repeated links to pro-AGW sites. If you have any real unmarred data sets (not hockey stick graphs constructed with manipulated data sets) which prove your position, then I would be more than happy to evaluate them.

By the way, I notice that instead of addressing my comment, you are doing a Gish Gallop.

Please point out any half-truths I may have used. Is it a half truth that in the historical temperature record, CO2 follows temperature, not the other way around? That's a fact. Another fact; The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has been ten times what it is today, yet all life did not cease to exist. Quite the opposite in fact, life thrived. One more fact; even if what you say is true, and the whole world went back to the stone age for 60 years, it would only reduce the temperature by one degree. Are you willing to give up your pc, tv, phone, social life, education, existence?

Perhaps your should educate yourself, instead of blindly accepting propaganda: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI This one is particularly interesting, as it exposes that most alarmists completely ignore the scientific evidence and choose to believe unequivocally what most of these vested interest groups propagate verbatim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzkB5DuveDE

That this is merely a fraction of how widespread the problem truly is. When I go to look at tv, ram, and other similar electronics, the prices are manifestly the same. When has there ever been a detailed investigation into these activities? I'm willing to bet this is the icing on the cake.

On this very site for suggesting CO2 might not be the only driving factor, like it was some kind of blasphemy to question the "consensus". I don't see any of those same people showing intolerant zealotry now. This scandal has now become a case of alice and how far the rabbit hole truly goes. And now we are expected to believe the same UN which brought us all those embellished warnings of destruction is going to conduct a non-partisan investigation of itself? Pull the other one. These people should be sacked and publically denounced, but all we get is a whitewash. I've noticed recently that a lot of these same scientists, who rely on the opulent grants afforded them by taxpayers, have debased their arguments and unabashedly claimed the underlying science is right and further debate is still forbidden in a fashion befitting that of the most morally self-righteous twelfth century crusader.

I do apologise if I offended anyone. I was merely stating my opinion on the matter and meant no disrespect to anyone in the field. Of course I'm only a layman, but the ice-core samples do belie the popular belief of human induced global warming theory. I may not be a math or science wiz, nor did I conduct all the calculations done by climatologists, yet the ice-core evidence is readily understandable and does suggest a disconnect between increasing temperatures and CO2 levels.

Erm.. I'm not a bot lol. And I did do a small amount of research into the subject, but of course I'm willing to keep an open mind. That article was interesting, if not perhaps a little beyond my understanding. From what I could discern, the article admits to this temperture-CO2 differential, but argues that regardless of ice-core evidence, the increase of CO2 production has an amplifying effect and thus increases temperatures further. Still however, I don't see any long term evidence of how increasing CO2 levels affects temperatures. And before you label me as a troll or dismiss me as right wing, I do believe in reducing pollution and caring for the environment in which we live. I simply believe in questioning everything.

Have any of these climatologists considered climate change is a natural cycle of the planet? The ice record reveals that the extreme swings which our planet undergoes in each cycle are perfectly natural. And the evidence clearly shows that CO2 levels increase after warming occurs, not the other way around. This whole pseudo-science is fundamentally flawed. The idea that we as humans can control or even reverse this process is highly egotistical, and perhaps even delusional, for a single super volcano can produce more CO2 and other pollutants than we can collectively in 20 years. Now I do agree that excess energy consumption and general pollution should be reduced as that impacts all of us, but all this climate change propaganda drives me nuts!