Pointing to right wing talk show hosts does raise another interesting question though. Given that this particular slice of the right wing seems to have drifted well away from the traditional right and is almost as hostile to big industry and finance “elites” as the left has been, why is that that these shock jocks do not believe in climate change? Presumably it has something to do with seeing scientists as leftists “elites”.

I am almost reluctant to mention this because I find this discussion really interesting in its own right. But if you want to understand the left/right split on global warming, you have to factor in the influence of right wing media.

By some counts, there are as many as 1000 right wing talk radio stations broadcasting nonsense about climate change every day. There is no equivalent on the left. Not even close. By one listing, the count of “progressive” talk stations is around 40.

Nor is there a balance in more mainstream media such as television news.

The impact of this cannot be overstated. Wall Street (banks, big oil, coal and nat. gas), which benefit from the status quo on the continued consumption of fossil fuels own almost all of the broadcast media. I assure you, this is not a conspiracy theory.

What is the impact of such a lopsided distribution of ideas? So complete is the blanket of right wing propaganda across the US, one could find more intrigue in why more people don’t believe climate change is real.

This is not to take away from your interesting observations and analysis. But one cannot ignore the effect of the media and expect to obtain a complete picture.

And imho, those who understand credit well, understand inflation and economic cycles well.

Prove climate change is a bad thing in its net effect on the planet and humans. Bjorn Lomborg has spelt out the benefits of a warmer planet.

Prove whatever ETS action is taken now to turn the tide will reverse or slow whatever lies ahead.

Prove ETS will stop emerging nations from knocking out rainforests.

Prove that any seconding of ETS taxes by sticky fingered govts will make a measurable difference to whatever ETS supporters want to spend the money on….let alone lead to quicker better discoveries of cleaner energy sources.

IMHO, the most sure fire way to lower human impact on the planet is to reduce the human population…..and what is any Australian politician doing to achieve that?

As for the Coalition, they are as uninspired as ever. So what’s the common denominator with Labor? an uninformed apathetic electorate.

As usual in history, not until our lifestyles are eroded dramatically, will we get sensible govt on any issue.

You’ve managed to prove that Labor sucks! That’s great and I couldn’t agree more.

How does this prove climate change is not happening, though, wasn’t clear. Would you mind explaining?

Or how is the Coalition any better?

Marco, nah big scarey issues like

- how much money Labor burnt on peddling ETS, and quickly forgot about it after Copenhagen. If we’re all in such peril of drowning, why has Rudd stopped pushing that barrel, and moved onto Medi-wtf…..obviously it was all a tad sensationalized…..don’t you think?

- the Minister for Bilbies refusing to let SE Qld build a new dam, even though Captain Bligh wanted it because current reserves got down to 15% a few years back, and Captain Rudd wants at least another 15% people in SEQ by 2014. wtf?

- Labor being so perplexed about population growth, we need a new minister for it. …. pfffttt…..what a crock….

Or that we are about to go into inflation hyperdrive.

Or that the climate change thing is all a communist conspiracy to create a world government…

Puleese