I have researched the subject for my own satisfation, by going to the source and relying on what the scientists on both sides say, and by their respective behaviour, and there is no question in my mind that the answer to both of those questions is affirmative. Now, I will just leave it to every person to do their own investigation and draw their own conclusions.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article15765.html

“China, the world’s largest carbon polluter, is now holding the Copenhagen conference to ransom. To get an agreement, the US will have to borrow more money and ‘compensate’ China and other developed nations for its own past emissions so that China can keep increasing its own pollution.”
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Americas-obligatory-lessons-pd20091214-YPRTJ?OpenDocument&src=kgb

In fact, looking at the current proposal, you can regard the science of CO2 and climate warming to be a secondary issue, if an issue at all. But even so, these mongrels should pay enough respect to our intelligence to make their plans go by a name something like a Sustainable Environment Trading Scheme, not a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. It is simply false that CO2 is a danger to our climate or our health, and in fact the opposite seems to be the case. Plants and food production are far more robust and reliable, and they need far less water, when they grow in a CO2 rich environment. So, this lie is not going to wash, no matter what. The result will be surpression of science and freedom of speech. Mark my words. You cannot build a free society on lies. Especially not blatant ones like this.

I am not convinced about the governments motives in explaining the situation. If they had agreed to an open debate on the matter and thoroughly wheight both sides of the argument, then I would be more inclined to accept the final decision. Instead, however, they have created an atmosphere where ANY questioning/opposition to their view is automatically labelled as “sceptic” Why? We are simply asking to have a look at the “other” evidence that many scientists want to put forward. Is that not a reasonable request? When something is forced down peoples throat, like it or lump it, it will always leave an intelligent mind wondering as to the motives behind it. Why should we (Aust) be the first to lead the way since we are the least of the polluters? Why does China want to dump it’s nuclear waste in our back yard? If India China & USA alone reduce their emissions by 10% what a difference that would make? Now with new evidence and exposure of a more sinister regarding the whole fisaco, shouldn’t that be allowed to be investigated? If proven false then so be it! All it would achieve is to discredit those who are advocates to the “conspiracy”. My true beleif is that the planet will survive, if we are in the way, it will remove or reduce our numbers, (if we don’t do it ourselves). Whatever mount of money thrown in it’s direction will not stop a thing as the more people there are, the more egos there are, the more consumption there will be, the more production of products there will be to satify the masses, hence we are back to the same old problem again. By the way, why is the goverment building a new and larger “bunker” under parliment house?

I think that the government has spent too little time in explaining the working of the scheme, and perhaps on the few occasions that they have we haven’t listened as well as we should. Because of that unknown factor people naturally get cold feet on the launch because they haven’t been correctly informed. That to my way of thinking is the main problem.

Nick you have suggested that the government inject many $Billions into research, but the ETS will MAKE private enterprise inject those dollars into research that will eventually lead to greater efficiencies.

Now in any new venture I would expect us to trip stumble and fall through the first 3 to 5 years before we see great results. But whenever you put a system under stress you will always be rewarded when you see how it responds. Yes there will be winners and losers, but that’s life.

Think of the fantastic advances that were made as a result of two horrific wars in the last century.

I repeat that I would rather be wrong and pay to fix a problem that is not as bad as I think, than to ignore a problem that could be worse than I think.

I don’t mean to lecture, Nick you are able to make your own decisions, and I have made mine.