So if everyone was like you the world would be a better place? Thats justification for promoting and worshiping the false Gods of climate change (used to be Global Warming).

You just might get your wish if the Copenhagen Treaty gets signed. It calls for the creation of a world governemnt (end of page 18).

Problem is if everyone was like you the world would be a less well informed place under dictatorial rule.

AGW gurus count on people like you to remain incurious, and a compliant media to keep it that way.

AGW is fake, its been exposed as fake because the data is faked.

C02 does not cause global warming. There is no science to support that claim. It was a theory that was validated not by real world observable data, but by computer models that were created to give the answers "scientists" and warmists wanted.

And even then the modelers had to manipulate date to make it work.

One thing that is unquestionable true is that higher level of C02 result in higher plant and crop yeilds. More Food.

As for C02s effect on humans? Not even noticeable until about 20,000 ppm or about 50 times higher than it is now ( It would take us 1000's of years to hit this level at the rate we currently use carbon)

Good to see the denial team out in full force - I wonder who is paying them.

Great work Caroline, please keep representing the vast majority of Canadians in Copenhagen.

Dot, Caroline meant what she wrote. 15000 km travelled by air to and from the talks. Not 15000 air miles. I took part in one of the fundraisers that Caroline organized to be able to travel to Copenhagen, she did not ride for "free".

Ward, you should meet Caroline. She does not think the world would be better off filled with people just like her. She thinks the world would be better off if more people, regardless of their divergent points of view or foundations of knowledge, were thoughtful and intentional about their actions.

I'm pretty sure that is the point of Caroline's post. As I read it, she wanted to explain to us that she carefully considered the implications of her decision to go to participate in the talks and she wanted to explain why she determined that it would be worth the cost.

We all make decisions every day that have important environmental implications. Many of us make them without even realizing it. Caroline is not one of those people.

I still can't believe how many ignorant people there are in the world.

People posting in reply (I'm looking at you ward) who spout a bunch of nonsense are what's wrong with the world.

You feel like you're "in" on the "secret" and that all the scientists are wrong. You get all you information from "reliable" sources like alex jones, and the very people who have a stake in people NOT believing in global warming, the oil companies. You need to stop being such a hateful do nothing and accept that fact that we have to do something to change our behaviour.

I'm not even going to refute the points you made because they're so far out to lunch it's not even funny.

I hope you purchased about 300EU in offset credits to cancel out that plain trip.

Justine, explain how shutting down the clean industry here and moving production to the much dirtier factories in China will reduce pollution.

I really wish these human caused/climate change deniers would takeup some other cause.

Their belligerent comments do nothing for humanity.
As a senior, I am focusing on the terrible decades of overuse of automobiles.I have for the past two and a half years used an electric bike for all my errands and public transit for longer trips.

No one cn deny the NOISE and stink from automobiles. Nor can they deny the expense. Or the deaths and injuries from accidents. And, the wasteful habits that accompany use of them.

I just love the term "denier"
It's just so Orwellian .
The left is so wacked-out in their enviro-cult that they don't realize that they are much like the radical Christians of yore who would margnalize people for being heretics .

Regardless of the fools , I sense that the global warming err... climate change global socialist agenda is really starting to come apart at it's seams .
It's a pleasure to watch .

In the past 100 years or so the scientific consensus has twice held that the earth was definitely cooling (1895-1930 and then 1968-75) and forecast that a catastrophic ice age was approaching.

Scientific consensus has also held on two occasions the contrary view that, instead of cooling, the Earth was dangerously warming up (1930-60 and 1981-now) to the imminent destruction of coral reefs and polar bears.

Mankind has been blamed in each of these four separate alarms and thus mankind must do something about it. What a cavalcade of bandwagons these dire warnings have engendered.

Grapes were once grown in Britain as far north as Newcastle, crops and cattle were once raised in Greenland and the Thames has frozen over on occasions. The very same scientists who were forecasting in the 1970s the imminent disaster of the approaching new ice age are now forecasting doom by global warming.

What a myriad of businesses this new religion of climate change has spawned and what a bandwagon on which to advance both careers and profit. En passant, an entirely new concept has been created - that of policy based evidence making.

The thinning of the polar ice caps has not just started to happen - it has been going on constantly but irregularly since the last ice age. The Earth's polar regions have had ice caps for only about 20% of the Earth's geological history. To parade precariously poised and puzzled polar bears as being the consequence of man's burning of fossil fuels is political gimmickry of a low order -- yet it sells, and how!

Yes, the Arctic ice is thinning but do we hear at the same time about the contemporaneous extension and thickening of the Antarctic ice? Why are some populations of polar bears actually increasing?

If it were not so serious it would be profoundly funny to witness the very building block of life, carbon dioxide, vilified as a pollutant. Nitrous oxide, nitric oxide, sulphur dioxide, the fluorocarbons and the particulates of combustion are all pollutants and do damage. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant; it is an essential part of all life on Earth. Furthermore, atmospheric carbon dioxide is but 0.0001% of the carbon dioxide held in the Earth's oceans, rock, terrestrial structure, soil and life itself.

There is no notional greenhouse surrounding us. The Earth has an atmosphere composed of a number of gases, some of which absorb and impede heat re-radiated from the Earth but others do not. The atmosphere contains two main absorbers and retainers of Earth's radiated heat - water vapour and carbon dioxide. Water vapour accounts for some 70% of the retention whilst carbon dioxide accounts for less than 10%, with methane and ozone accounting for nearly all the rest. I.e. by far the largest culprit in so-called global warming is water vapour but do we hear anything about that?

Without these heat-retaining gases Earth's surface temperature would be some minus 18°C and life, as we know it, could not exist. It is more accurate and meaningful to describe the atmosphere as a sweater round the earth, protecting us from the cold, rather than a greenhouse intent on boiling us and doing us harm.

To ascribe modern climate change to one single variable (carbon dioxide) or, more correctly, a small proportion of one variable (i.e. human produced carbon dioxide) is not science, for it requires abandoning all we know about planet Earth, the sun, our galaxy and the cosmos.

The Kyoto agreement has fallen apart, whilst the Russians for a long time resolutely refused to join it. That is until they belatedly realised just how much money they could make out of the EU with carbon trades. They have made billions out of these trades, to which you and I have contributed involuntarily, without needing to modify their emissions by one puff.

The disaster of chopping down and burning of carbon-absorbing rainforests in order to grow biofuels has added measurable amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere - never mind the immorality of diverting agricultural output for us to drive our cars whilst many in the world are starving. This gives an inkling of the degree of human idiocy involved in trying to interfere with the natural change of Earth's climate.

I pity the party in power when the public arrives at the full realisation of how completely misled it has been by its own Government and how many trillions of their money had been wasted (accompanied by falling standards of living) in vainly trying to pursue the deluded folly of stemming naturally occurring climate change. The two concepts of King Canute and the Flat Earth Society spring to mind. I can just imagine the wrath that will be visited on the party in power when the full realisation sets in.

To summarise: scares may come and scares may go but there is no universally accepted evidence that the burning of fossil fuels and the consequent production of carbon dioxide has anything whatsoever to do with climate change or even temporary global warming.

In ending may I commend and acknowledge valuable help from Nigel Lawson's book "An Appeal to Reason - A Cool Look at Global Warming": Professor Ian Plimer's book "Heaven and Earth - Global Warming: the Missing Science": Christopher Booker's "The Real Global Warming Disaster."

I fear that "climate change" has simply become a Convenient Untruth; now being peddled to conceal a hopelessly delayed and utterly inept energy policy for Britain.

--
"Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree and on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age"

- Professor Richard Linden of MIT.

"Global warming is largely a natural phenomenon. The world is wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that cannot be fixed"

- Doctor David Bellamy, Lecturer in Botany and wildlife broadcaster.