Yeah, that's about what i figured.  (And predicted.)

More money in keeping things at the status quo.

My country is relenting to the 'consensus' and doing a cap n trade scheme of our own. Its pretty bad, I say if this is the problem to define the 21st century then we should put a disproportionate quantity of resources on finding out the nature and extent of the problem. Given the scale involved it feels like we're crossing the street blind because there may or may not be a mugger behind us.

The interesting thing about this (to me) is this approach seems to be back-firing ,,,

While I could be wrong, there seems to be a lot of anger towards news organizations who haven't covered this yet or who are defending the scientists; and several "Pro-Global Warming" articles I saw today ended up having comments disabled after (roughly) 90% of comments posted were amazingly critical of the reporters.

From personal experience I know of a handful of people who I have argued with about Global Warming in the past who are now far more doubtful of the science because these scientists are not being made an example of. After all, the approach most hard-sciences would take towards someone faking results would be to discredit them to preserve the integrity of the field.

I agree.

The problem is that many countries are doing cap and trade for exactly what emission? Co2? Given the research, Co2 isn't the major problem for global warming - methane and other chemicals are.

Methane is a more powerful greenhouse gas but it's also a less common one than CO2. CO2 is the second largest contributor to the greenhouse effect after water vapor.

@Squlliam. The problem with our ETS scheme is that it's very lopsided and essentially stupid. It grants huge concessions to farmers when farmers emit a huge amount of our greenhouse emissions. In reality we need to accept that per capita emissions for NZ are always going to be large as we export so much meat and dairy.




One question for everyone who believes that AGW is driven by a political agenda. Who's political agenda is it? Every damned country is doing their best to avoid the issue - hence the problem with the Copenhagen talks.

wow thsi si big stuff, why aretn we hearing about this on the news?

But if the quantity of greenhouse gasses released by our farmers were to decline then farmers overseas would pick up the slack and they are far less efficient than our own which would mean effectively a net increase in greenhouse gasses when you have farmers whom are far less efficient replacing our lost production in 3rd world countries. Effectively its the same as co2 heavy industry in the U.S. being outsourced to China where the net outflow of these 'greenhouse gasses' is actually higher than if nothing were to be done at all.

P.S. I live in the Waikato.

Not in any meaningful fashion, nope.

1) Scientists... they are given way more attention, money and fame this way.

2) Media... global warming always gives them a good backup story.

3) The UN.  This is the big one.  Global Warming gives the UN a huge edge over major industrialized countries.   Hence why every UN global warming "solution" has been nothing more but huge cash payouts to underdeveloped nations both for cap and trade, and just paying and developing theire countries so they don't have to "burn more gas".    The UN has been very "small country" focused lately.

4) Various green and more liberal parties around the world.  It's a good tool to hit conservative and more economic faced parties... whether they plan to do something about it or not.

The US is just about to put CO2 targets in place.

5) In general people who want to research renewable energy with a populace who would prefer cheaper gas.   Global Warming in general will allow people to accept a higher price for gas and alternative energies.

For example, look at all the gas taxes in europe... a lot made because of gloabal warming.

I have heard it on a few News Networks now. Both FoxNews and CNN have had segments on it, where they have people from both sides argue over what this means to Man Made Global warming.

So at least it has gotten some press. Here are some links as well.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/23/hacker.climate/index.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576009,00.html