Ignoring for a moment that this is all nonsense since the computer models used for these predictuions are just the modern day version of tea leaves, and are not 'proof' of anything, and ignoring that whether Australia switches to Nuke power or not will have no bearing on Australia's weather if the rest of the world doesnt switch...

The notion of increased deaths is rediculous. They're applying 2007 living standards to 2070. There's no basis for that. 60 years ago few people had air conditioning. Now its available to practically all in the western world. Technology changes. 60 years from now I dont know how people will deal with heat, but I do know it will be far better than we do now, and far fewer people will die from it.

My suspicion, knowing how desperate the global warming cultists are, is that if Howard ignores this dire prophesy, in a year we'll get a new prophesy thats even WORSE! People will be spontaneously igniting in the streets, dont you know, by 2050!

Why should be politicians making up this stuff about Global Warming? Think about it, in the short-term, it's much more expensive to introduce environmentally-friendly policies. What's the benefit for their government? What's the advantage of stating the problem in a "conservative" society (call it what you want), if no one is going to care about it?

Think it twice, may be, some people still have honest intentions.

9 degrees by 2070? Sounds pretty bad, and it's supposed to. Where do these numbers come from? Some super-computer whose computations are based on events falling sequentially together in line for 63 years. The question that is never asked is what are we supposed to do when we hear about a report like this? Stop driving our cars and assasinate anyone flying a private jet, (of course with the exception being righteous celebrities). Or maybe better, just stop breathing! All that CO2 being emitted, what a waste. These agencies are not stupid. You tell the public that there is the possibilty that the average temperature may rise a couple degrees or so over the next 100 years and they just move on. You tell them esentially that incineration could become a fact of life for their children and grandchildren and maybe they perk up out of their slumber. I think it's interesting that the skeptics always come with a caveat, (well ya know they MUST be funded by industry). How bout the IPCC or similar organizations? How well would they be funded if suddenly global warming was proven to be just a natural occurence and not a serious threat in the long term? We'd have a lot of "scientists/government leaders" looking for jobs.

Quote from MG:
"People will be spontaneously igniting in the streets, dont you know, by 2050!"

Ha ha ha, wouldn't that be kinda sad, traumatic, and funny all at the same time? I'll bet we wouldn't have anymore fire-jugglers in Paris or anything. ^_^

There are probably a lot of technologies that already exist but have yet to be applied to conditioning air (cooling). One look at the computer cooling market and you can see a lot of patents just waiting to job on the home market. What if we all had heatsinks above our houses? ^_^ Or maybe watercooled piping!

Either way, statistics are evil, and models are usually based on assumptions that tend to be false by their very nature, so its definitely a loss for those who predict.

Man, why didn't I go into meteorology, can't really test performance in that field. ^_^ What would Peter Drucker (famous executive) have to say about managing a team of meteorologists?

I think Nuclear power plants are the way to go. I lived close to one for several years. They are efficient and clean. I know there was a blog a few weeks ago on nuclear plants. I was glad to read it.

BTW, I do find it interesting reading responses. Many people do what MG here does. "To start, I think this is all nonsense..." Why do you read it then? BTW, spontaneous human combution is nothing new. :)

Josh

So are man-made "greenhouse" emissions causing the warming trend on Mars, too? That must be it, there's no way that the Sun could have any affect on our climate ;-)

Australia's 'Big Dry' (a 6 year drought) may be worse than anytime since Europeans arrived.

These 4 articles are each horrible in themselves, but taken together may force even PM John Howard to take notice and do something significant.

The first 2 links are the projections by Australia's climate and ocean scientists. The top AU science agency, CSIRO, has long had a world-class reputation.

Climate projection for Sydney- (same story with more details)
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21146816-2,00.html

Great Barrier Reef -
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/01/29/1169919274339.html?from=top5

The 2nd two describe life there now.

Drinking water for people of Queensland -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6308715.stm

Farms ruined -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6065220.stm

well ya know they MUST be funded by industry

In this case, Exxon/Mobil and Big Oil did fund the skeptics -- just as Big Tobacco funded the "skeptics" who attempted to delay the public's recognition of the dangers of tobacco. Funny how Exxon/Mobil has started backtracking, now that their role is becoming so obvious. Of course, it hasn't hurt their profits yet.

Cheney/Dubya have already slashed the funding for NASA and NOAA to collect climate data and already used their official duties to try and silence US researchers from publishing or revealing the results of their research.

Tell us, Sean, who SHOULD fund such research?

We just had our first snow in Memphis after dozens of predictions of snow for the last two months. Now someone claims to be able to predict the weather 50 years from now. Give me a break. I am old enough to remember 30 years ago when these same types were predicting an ice age. we can see how that worked out. I'm sure the temperature is fluctuating since it always does and there will always be "experts" to tell us of some impending disaster no matter which way things are going.

Emiliano: Are you serious? Why would they make this up? Because they crave power. When they have the populace scared of the pending doomsday, people give them power to 'do something' about it. Then they get to rule by decree, just like their celebrated Hugo Chavez, and they get to force constituents to live the way the politicians want them to live. And ignore, I'm sure they'd tell you, that the end effects of their legislation will be very similar to what socialists have been demanding for years but could never get via votes. Power is what they desire. Its more seductive than Barry White music, and more addicting than crack cocaine.

I dont think the politicians & scientists are 'making things up' whole cloth, but rather failing to review scientific evidence and are instead drawing conclusions based upon their personal biases rather than critical thinking. The scientists are awash in research money on the topic which would dry up if the global warming scam went away and they are harangued by the politically correct culture of universities and their left wing peers. The politicians desperately want there to be global warming so they can take advantage of it for their own puposes and enforce their own world view on people.

To be fair, some of them just might not be too bright, too.

Given the miserable track record of long term computer modeling in all sorts of meteorological applications, it seems beyond ridiculous that we somehow assume all this "science" is infallable.

My guess is that 100 years from now, people will look back and realize how this particular field of science was just in its infancy when it was making these silly, dire predictions.

Bottom line ... I don't accept that our level of understanding and sophistication on these dynamic and complex systems is any better than a 1930's doctor's understanding of pancreatic cancer, or a 1950's computer scientist's understanding of modern information technology.

zzzzzzzzzzz. Wake me when it's over. ;o)

The whole global warming thing is yet another in a string of enviromental disaster predictions by the misguided. Remember these past predictions[ WORLDWIDE OVERPOPULATION RESULTING IN WORLDWIDE FAMINE BY THE YEAR 1980.... GLOBAL COOLING, ACID RAIN ETC. ETC. Every few years its some new prediction and it IS ALWAYS AMERICAS FAULT. There is no scientific basis for global warming predictions period. The earth has had thousands of warming and cooling periods over the last several million years with temps during the warming periods much higher then they are today. Remember the ice age a mere 12 thousand years ago? Who created all the CO2 to cause the global warming to melt the ice over North America? It was up to a mile thick! Man sure didnt cause it. I know maybe it was natural fluctuation in the global temps, and a radical one at that. We may be in a warming cycle or maybe were not. To think man could change the weather in any noticable way is laughable at best. This whole thing is a rerun of the enviro doom and gloom profits who want to blame America, redistribute Americas wealth and to create some U.N like international authority to regulate what we do and to redistribute our wealth to the rest of the world.

The whole report is a joke. Sydneys temp > 5 degrees by 2070.

When are people going to realize that computer models for climate are wrong. You know Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Does anybody here know that the South Pole is cooling? Yes folks its getting colder. Guess what Australia is close to the SP. Now get the computer models to explain that.

John Howard is correct to resist Kyota.

Oh and BTW we have had a cool summer this year. The satellite data I have studied confirmed my senses.

It's nice to know that a country other than the us doesn't bend over and grab their ankles for these global warming freaks. The science doesn't add up...and if we actually could warm up the planet, there is nothing but gloom and doom scenarios for the planet...nothing is EVER mentioned on the positives that would result if we had the capability of warming things up.