The Greens need our support to make themselves big enough to be electable, their policies, right across the board MAKE SENSE, before the election i answered a guardian policy test, every time i chose the green policy (you only found this out at the end) I've joined and I will support them

nice article boss.x

Would the Gideon Polya who writes so authoratively about 'Climate Genocide' be the same Gideon Polya who wrote the conspiracy piece at Counter Currents claiming that 'The world is marking the 9th anniversary of the 9-11 atrocity in which, according to some top scientific and intelligence experts, the US Government, with likely Israeli state terrorist support, killed 3,000 Americans on 9-11 to launch the War on Terror for oil, US hegemony and US-Israeli domination of the Middle East'

Surely not. Say it aint so, Gideon.

See the link below.
http://goo.gl/O2ZMM

Luddite,
Again you are talking about the deluded scientists, but I have seen your arguments in the past. They are all based on popular media and cherry picking evidence. Read the actual science- it is substantial and conclusive. The vast majority of climate scientists and organisations in the world agree- it is time for uninformed people like you to move on.
Johnny Three
You are simply wrong. See Gideon Polya post above re hottest 10 years. I addition the last 12 month period has been the hottest on record. This is what the actual science shows- there really is no dispute on this. Some people have tried to prove otherwise by simply using surface temperatures, but you will find few legitimate scientists who agree that is valid method.

Those of us old enough to remember the likes of the SWP standing shoulder to shoulder with striking miners defending the coal mining industry. Now look on quite bemused to see the same folk's, now standing shoulder to shoulder with green activists demanding the total destruction of that once proud industry.

The denialists need to stop reading media articles referencing the odd scientist sponsored by the energy industries, and start reading the actual science. It is comprehensive and conclusive. The debate is over.
Let us now move on to action.

swatantra nandanwar,

seriously?

the policies that Caroline Lucas represents are completely at odds with those of Labour!

Good article Caroline, direct action is urgently needed.

@swatantra: Labour are off the mark in so many ways. The kind of reforms they're offering don't go nearly far enough. Besides, I don't think Greens would want to support a party of war criminals.

@David: Rich people in the West through consumption pollute and emit more emissions than the entire African population. So you're taking the side of the rich telling the poor to stop having children? Whilst I agree urgent measures need to be taken to empower women and increase equality, both of which would reduce the global population, I think us in the west who on average emit 14 - 28 times too much carbon, should change our habits before blaming the poor in the global South.

Many disagree that the debate is over, including 9,000 with PhDs, claim that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane are actually beneficial for the environment. They urged western governments to reject the Kyoto treaty and said: "The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind." Another point the debat is never over,

Perhaps its time for the greenies and their fellow travellers (mainly ex SWP/Militant sparts) to consider the 100s of years of causation that led to the presentr infrastructure?So what if you realise your orbital solar fantasy? then distribute the electricity through switchyards, cables, street boxes made of smelted copper, zinc and steel, mined by I/C engined machines, staffed by locals driving 4x4s - crap roads in north Chile dontcha know? Wires of course connected by plastic glands made in China from old pastic bags melted to suite. So Greenies you think that human agency can tuen thi stide of causality with some violence or even votes? No clowns - would need as many years as it took for womens rights to get back to where they were in pre christian england.
the earth can wait - but can you?

If Caroline Lucas is correct and the only thing of true importance to battle in the world is Climate Change then it should be very easy to win a general election on that platform. In short all she has to do is convince the people of the UK that she is correct and she will be in government and can enact the policies that she believes will save us. In the last election the Greens managed fewer than 300,000 votes out of the 30 million or so that voted. The politicians are not failing their constituents by inaction, their constituents have not asked or required them to act in the ways she is suggesting. In a democracy the voters are supreme and they have spoken - global warming is not nearly as important as the economy, crime, education etc.

Some of the comments here are ridiculous. Have UKIP linked their supporters to this page or something? What's going on?

So called man made global warming may prove to be the first great example in the modern Western world, when science was betrayed by scientists themselves

Science and scientists cannot always rise above the prejudices of their class and of their age. The selection and handling of evidence often reflects these prejudices. The most highly qualified and respected scientists can be blind to obvious deficiencies in a theory, and will be dismissive of evidence when it undermines what they want to believe.

Ok the Polar Bear is reasonably safe can we now go to war with Indonesia? these fast breeding peasants are forcing the Sumatran Tiger out of its rightful habitat. We need to do something drastic here the tiger is virtually exstinct!

Gideon I see no proof from the links you provided that climate CHANGE killed anyone. Weather killed a lot of people but to demonstrate that AGW made a difference you first have to subtract the deaths that would have occurred anyway. A difficult prospect when you have to adjust for all the other changes that have happened, from flood plane building to modern medicines. A look at population rises since the Industrial Revolution give a very simple measure of how CO2 emissions have actually saved a net number of lives. How this might change in the future is up for debate but you can’t win the argument by focusing solely on the negative effects of CO2 on climate.

Deprivation is certainly a killer and one of the main sources of deprivation is fuel poverty. By placing a moratorium on coal and a premium on gas you withhold the very energy that enabled first world countries to pull themselves up from similar conditions. Biofuels are even worse, artificially bumping up the price of food to produce a vanity product.

The deaths from pollution you mention (both Australia and UK) are deaths from pollution not CO2 or global warming. If you don’t pinpoint the real problem then sometimes the solutions make the situation worse. China and India poison many of their own populations by recycling our waste or manufacturing products we import now to reduce our CO2 footprint (eg steel).

Your work seems to stress ‘avoidable mortality’, what about the extra pressure on the planet those people would have made if they had survived? One way to cut CO2 would be to cease any and all aid or technology to developing countries. Let nature take its course. I hope you’re not advocating that, but by turning fossil fuels into the bad guy you effectively keep them in poverty or even drive presently prosperous countries into chaos.

Make your mind up, do you want to save lives or reduce CO2, the two are not compatible with today’s technology and might not be for centuries.

Re climate change denialism, we take the Met seriously over weather forecasts and should take the Met seriously over its considered climate change findings and projections.

The Met about global warming: "The rise in global surface temperature has averaged more than 0.15 °C per decade since the mid-1970s. The 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 1997. Global warming does not mean that each year will necessarily be warmer than the last because of natural variability, but the long-term trend is for rising temperatures. The warmth of the last half century is unprecedented in, at least, the previous 1,300 years" (see: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/guide/quick/doubts.html).

The Met further states: "Urgent steps need to be taken to tackle climate change. The earlier action is taken, the more effective it will be. If we want to hand on this world to our children in a fit state, we must do something about our emissions and climate change" (see: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/guide/quick/whatcanido.html ).

The Met further staes: "The overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree on the fundamentals of climate change — that climate change is happening and has recently been caused by increased greenhouse gases from human activities. The core climate science from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was written by 152 scientists from more than 30 countries and reviewed by more than 600 experts. It concluded that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in man-made greenhouse gas concentrations" (see: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/guide/quick/doubts.html).

The Met office have given up with long range forecasts because they kept getting it wrong, yet you believe what they say with regards to the climate 50 years down the line, you need to staret doing some independent research then you will realise what a fool you have been.

What a load of tripe - so by shutting down car production we stop road deaths? Not really much in the way of logic but more in the way of grandstanding.
Tell me this - the last Ice age ended about 10,000 years ago, and geologically come around every 10,000 years or so.
At the end of the last ice age the ice shelf retreated form Southern Europe back up to the Arctic. I don't really think there was much evidence of man's involvement in the process.
Yes, the earth has finite resources which should be protected where possible - but this whole global warming scaremongering that it is all our fault is just nonsense.