What biased reporting in the article. A very poor journalistic effort. I am very sceptical about global warming, there seems to be very little physical evidence by way of temps, sea level rising, coral reefs dying etc to back it up.

What would this fool know?

Sorry Stephanie, I have to agree with Mick's comments. Senator Fielding joins tens the of thousands of Australians sceptical about climate change and its real causes. In my communications with other senators, the majority also concur with Senator Fielding, however Senator Fielding is an easy target because he has said exactly what he thinks to the media. Many of those people questioning the science are also believers in reducing our impact on the planet as I'm sure Senator Fielding is also. The earth isn't going to self destruct tomorrow and it is worth the time to get the science settled and come up with a system, if required, that the majority of Australian's believe is in humanity's best interest in the long term.

Mick, what are your creds....? diploma in flat earth policy I reckon.

Pretty poor response there Pete, can you do no better than offer personal abuse? If I really wanted I could abuse you too, probably much better than you could do to me. Why don't you offer up some facts to back yourself up? I didn't see Mick offering up any qualifications, good on him for stating what the majority or residents think and are sick of hearing from the climate change nuffys.

The thing about climate change is firstly the phase "climate change" seems to imply that the climate is not surposed to change! But anyone who lives in and with the climate knows that it changes all the time.Only people who drive a climate controled car from a climate controled home to a climate controled office think other wise.

I have rainfall records going back to 1889 and for the 30yr period 1922-1952 the average rainfall was 25pc lower than the 120 year average. Interestingly, the 30 years 1970-2000 was 10pc higher.

As far as the science goes, once you look past the'1000 scientists agree' headlines, the actual science is very hard to find and harder still to believe.

I wonder how many of the true believers have actually had a hard look at the science? I just find it interesting that the majority of septics seem to be people who actually live in and with the climate, like farmers.

Probably about as much if not more than another fool who hides behind the pseudonym 'tigerdicky'. If I'm wrong tigerdicky perhaps you may care to answer a few questions that I have been asking but have not yet had anybody attempt to answer"

-Why chose carbon as the demon? It is not a gas and does not exist in the atmosphere as an element on it's own.

- What about other elements that make up these 'greenhouse gases' like nitrogen, sulphur, oxygen, hydrogen? Why not lock up some of these? Won't it be just as effective to lock these up?

- Why lock up things that are not gases when they are not causing this supposed temperature rise that is claimed to be a problem?

- What about modern day inventions such as jet aircraft who spew their waste production such as CO2 directly into the upper atmosphere where the problem manifests itself?

What a totally biased article from another brainwashed indoctrinated zombie. Makes you really wonder which side this newspaper is on. Not the man on the land, that's for sure. So much for a balanced argument, because you wont find one here.

Read Prof Ian Plimer book "Heavan and Earth" the missing science. AGW is the biggest scam of the 20th century. What about the thousands of scientists who don't believe in AGW, but they dont count?

Can't have any dissent can we. Disracefull.

The IPCC has few real scientists, unlike Ian Plimer and Bob Carter who are the real deal. Pretend scientists like Tim Flannery and alarmists like Al Gore are nothing more than jokes on the international science world who are just pushing an agenda for those who run our Govt and the UN.

You will take note that they will NEVER debate us on the public stage because they know they would lose. AGW is a scam, follow the money trail as always. People who write articles like the one above are indocrinated, brainwashed and totally biased. Bring on the debate.

To "Poor journalistic effort" - nonsense The writer clearly addressed the issue that the good Senator went to see a lobby group that is funded by the fossil fuel industry and still has a problem with smoking being harmful and came away with an opinion that increasing Co2 levels are not dangerous. There's a surprise. I suppose that the flat earth society will be now claiming that Penny Sackett is in on the great conspiracy.

Too much TV chaps...