A few points JMD.1. Carbon diioxde is not a pollutant, nor is it listed by the EPA as such. It is a colourless odourless trace gas, essential to all plant and animal life.2. There is no direct evidence that the small net atmospheric warming that has occurred since the low point of the Little Ice Age some 300 years ago has been caused in any significant measure to by man made carbon diioxde emissions.3. The complication is that by sacrificing one of the major advantages Australia has when compared with our main trading partners, i.e. cheap energy, we would simply be sending our manufacturing industry and jobs off shore for no measurable change in atmospheric temperature.4. A carbon diioxde tax would benefit some local carpet baggers and rent seeker making a killing flogging prohibitively expensive subsidised and mandated renewable energy. Overseas manufacturers of windmills and solar panels (particularly China) would benefit, as would overseas entrepreneurs in the corrupt carbon credit business. But the gains to these classes would be at the expense of the living standards of the vast majority of ordinary Australians.5. : (Click the link then click on Andrew Bolt with Steve Price 25th March, next to Andrew Bolt's image)Bolt: Everyone understands that that is the argument But we’re just trying to get basic facts, without worrying about the consequences about what those facts may lead people to think. On our own, by cutting our emissions, because it’s a heavy price to pay, by 5 per cent by 2020, what will the world’s temperatures fall by as a consequence?Flannery: Look, it will be a very, very small increment.Bolt: Have you got a number? I mean, there must be some numbers.Flannery: I just need to clarfy in terms of the climate context for you. If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop for about a thousand years.6. Atmospheric carbon diioxde levels have increased by around 4% during the last 10 years but despite the twenty or so tax funded IPCC climate models predicting ongoing tropospheric warming, temperatures have have been uncooperative and have remained flat or actually fallen slightly. As Dr. Kevin Trenberth of Climatgate fame said in one of the leaked CRU emails: The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t .7. Very few scientists would dispute that carbon diioxde is a greenhouse gas that exhibits direct radiative forcing (heating) in the atmosphere as a result of outgoing long wave (LW) radiation. But as the atmospheric concentration of carbon diioxde increases, the amount of additional heat released per unit of carbon diioxde becomes less and less following a logarithmic function. The main scientific argument is about whether the small increment in direct radiative forcing caused by increased carbon diioxde will give rise to an enhanced greenhouse effect (positive feedback). There is no credible evidence that supports this enhanced greenhouse hypothesis despite the millions spent on research over the years trying to find the missing hot spot .8. When the quarry runs dry if draconian taxes and Green regulations haven't long since forced it to close down and move off shore, it would indeed be good for Australia to have some remaining manufacturing industry. But the chances of that under the economic suicide of a go-it-alone carbon diioxde tax are remote indeed. Maybe all those Green jobs will save us? No I think not, an army of Green police and bureaucrats will contribute nothing, nor is there any likelihood that we would be in a competitive position to sell u-beaut windmills and solar panels overseas.Sadly for our kids and grand kids unless this madness is stopped I believe they are destined to become the poor white trash of Asia.