scott
Really? 400? Did you actually see who is on that panel?
There are the usual Fred Singer and Tim Ball who have no scientific credentials then scientists such as Dr Richard Courtney who is ...wait for it......a British Coal industry editor.
The author of this report is very adpet at producing a slick advertising campaign, much less so at providing scientific background.

tim, london,

Dr Coles thanks for the link. I agee:

CONSENSUS is NEVER science fact it’s always a POLITICAL STATEMENT1 (a Party Line 1).

1. the policy of a group. An argument rationalizing the course of action.

The test of a political statement is when the evidence is not discussed rationally, the issue is avoided and those who disagree suffer personal attack.

Alan, Luton,

Tim, London: Actually, Dr. Coles is correct. Many IPCC scientist spoke out against AGW in 2007. In fact, reputable scientist do NOT agree that the evidence is "clear" as you suggest. Far from it!

U.S. Senate Report:
Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007
Senate Report Debunks "Consensus"
Report dated December 20, 2007

U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport

Intro
"Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. "

"The new report ...details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.

Scott, Durham, NC, USA

Ed & Nicholas Lee, what new taxes? And since when did a Chancellor need an excuse for new taxes? He can always increase the old ones if he needs more money - and taxes don't just go into his back pocket, they go to pay for things like schools and hospitals, which I bet you whinge about not being good enough.

Tony, airlines don't charge for emissions - that's part of the problem. They will only start to do so if it's to pay a tax, so the extra WILL got to the Treasury (though I wouldn't rule out their taking a bit of extra profit too). Still, glad to hear you are cutting down your flying. We do need people who see what needs to be done (or in this case, not done) and go ahead and do it (or not do it!)

Bill Linton, London,

"Dr" Coles, those "scientists" make claims and fail to defend them from scientific rigour. Most reputable scientists now agree the evidence is clear aAnd most sensible people would too. Your cynicism is based on no real truth.

tim, london,

Condensation trails (contrails) only occur in a relatively narrow band of altitude when the humidity levels are optimal for them, and most modern aircraft cruise above those levels. I would be most surprised if they had anything other than a negligible effect on global warming. Do I smell another revenue-generating scheme based on highly dubious reasons?

Nicholas Lee, Windsor, UK

Given that emissions from vehicles, land, sea and air cause global warming what is the justification for airlines, in particular, to charge for emissions? Where does the money go? It certainly doesn't all go to the treasury, rather it's just another boost to airline profits. We're into rip-off UK again and we the public are, as always, the loosers.

If all the emissions-tax went to research then I would be quite happy to pay the extra, but not when it enhances profitability. So, my wife and I will restrict ourselves to one overseas holiday this year and none next year - for the sake of the environment and my pocket.

Tony, Preston, merseyside

Man-made CO2 emissions are the culprit for our changing climate, simply because it is easy to calculate and slap a tax on it to raise revenue for governments/profits for business.
Science has nothing to do with it.

Ed, Harrogate, UK

OK. So global warming may not be man made. But man is definitely contributing to it. The speed with which it is happening is caused in part at least to man. Besides, the damage that we are doing to the planet is undeniable. Oil spills, mass extinctions, deforestation. I am glad that in a few generations our race will not be around to curse us for what we have done.
I believe that it is time to give up the air travel until a much cleaner method is found. It's also probably time we all weaned ourselves off of fossil fuels.
Does anyone notice that the main deniers of global warming are Americans? Possibly for the same reason that people who that there are no problems with drug taking are drug addicts.

E R Mann, Warwick, U.K

Dude,

CO2 TRAPS HEAT.

So maybe we should at least THINK about trying to cut down on it? It's not exactly going to escape the atmosphere.

Yeesh.

Martin E, St Andrews, scotland

Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007. http://tinyurl.com/2dv6nz

Dr Coles, Los Angeles, USA