More from Greenie Watch

Emissions trading 'worse than drought' | The Australian

THE Rudd Government's attempts to combat climate change through an emissions trading scheme will do more damage to the farming sector than the drought, senior industry figures warned yesterday.

The claims were made as new economic modelling showed farm profitability under the proposed trading scheme could drop to zero. The research by the Australian Farm Institute suggests that under an ETS, the $100 billion sector could be forced into debt, with livestock farms and smaller holdings worst affected.

ETS threatens healthcare with $100m power bill | The Australian

HOSPITALS and nursing homes face a $100 million jump in powerbills under a national emissions trading scheme, threatening to compromise future levels of service unless they are included in government plans for compensation.

Would more rain be bad for us?

Below is an academic journal abstract preceded by a popular summary of it. It makes a point that I often make but which Greenies sedulously ignore: That warming would INCREASE rainfall overall -- which is of course great for crops. The idea that increased rainfall is a problem is laughable. I grew up in the tropics, where we measured our annual rainfall not in inches but in yards. And the rain was so heavy we used to say that it came down "in sheets". All that rain was slightly pesky at times (good for raincoat sales!) but the environment sure was lush and all the crops grew like mad. We had fields of grass that was over 6' high. And the grass concerned (sugar cane) was and is the world's cheapest source of sugar and ethanol. Heavier rain would be GREAT!

"The Green Paper? Almost Legless"

...anyone with a sensitive political antenna can see that in places like Britain, Germany, Canada and the US, the rising costs of food and energy, and the Green destruction of jobs, are worrying electors far more than a mythical global warming bogey-man that never arrives.