Quadrant Online - Inventing a pollutant

On Sunday, 10 July 2011, Australia witnessed a surreal farrago of lies and ideological conceit. Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s announcement and later address to the nation was a weird concoction of figures relating to compensation for the masses and monotonously repeated use of the word “pollution”. Since both Julia Gillard and Treasurer Wayne Swan specifically call carbon dioxide a pollutant, I looked up the National Pollutant Inventory, published under the authority of the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Surprise surprise, there is no mention of CO2 as a pollutant. Even more astonishing is that no gallery journalist has looked up the easily accessible website and asked the obvious question. Julia Gillard’s failure to correct this omission by this recalcitrant department is starkly revealing.

What really convinced me that the Government was stark raving nuts was the calm precision of the supposed benefits of the compensation package. Can you really believe that the average family will lose precisely $9.90 in costs but gain $10.10, leaving a net gain of exactly 20 cents? This is beyond satire. This surely rivals the crazy delusions of the central planners in the old Soviet Union. The notion that bureaucrats could capture in a model every variable and capture every last detail of every business and consumer decision is beyond mad.

Polluting our reason, not the air | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

One of the masterstrokes of this Government’s propaganda has been to persuade even educated journalists ("even"?) that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, threatening even the air they breath.
,,,
We can laugh, but this meme has escaped. I heard a woman on ABC talkback assert, without contradiction from the host, that if we didn’t stop emitting carbon dioxide, her children would not be able to breath. On Channel 10 on Sunday, former Liberal leader John Hewson, on being told be me that Gillard’s carbon dioxide tax would have close to zero effect on temperatures, insisted that “cleaning” the air would still be good, regardless.

Take a deep breath, please | Herald Sun

Could somebody down at The Age - anybody? - explain to the poor chap about carbon dioxide.

Which if the atmosphere wasn't "polluted with," life on earth would not exist. All plants would die. He wouldn't actually have any "air to breathe."

And which - just to break it to him gently - he, ahem, breathes out in concentrations that are 10 times that of the "polluted atmosphere."