http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/17584/is-the-cos...

Also, the conclusion after the introduction of the carbon tax was that GDP was 0.1% lower than if it hadn't been there. How you get from there to 80% is very funny maths. Hang on, not funny, pathetic.

0:23-ish: No one in the mainstream media in Australia has ever told anyone about Henry fucking Ergas? Well, this is full of shit already. He also ran Concept Economics.

> Concept Economics, the consultancy that recently estimated the costs of the National Broadband Network outweighed the benefits by up to $20 billion, has gone into administration.

Sheesh, what is it with these climate skeptics and their businesses going under?

0:48: Lack of action across the world? Most expensive carbon tax in the world?

Kind sir, I have a graph to cure that ailment: http://static.politifact.com.au.s3.amazonaws.com/politifact%...

Austria is AUT. Australia is AUS, in case there's any confusion following the whiplash you just got by this fact-whipping.

1:18: Thank you for that idiocy. Australia is the world's highest CO2 per capita emitter with any population to speak of, apart from the UAE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse.... It has the dirtiest power station in the entire OECD, which alone produce 1/1800th the greenhouse gas emissions on the planet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazelwood_Power_Station

You know what, I'm done. I will go on, but considering such a litany of error within a minute and a half, I can spend my time vastly better. But like I said, I'll watch it for amusement value.

Meanwhile, you go ahead and watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52KLGqDSAjo&list=PL82yk73N8eo...

Edit: OK, just wanted to add that the carbon tax does not "cost" 10 billion a year by any means. That's near enough the revenue being raised by the government through carbon pricing and near enough all of it makes it back into the economy through various means. One example, there's the rise in the tax-free threshold. Apparently billions of dollars being spent in removing the lowest income earners in the country from the income tax system is money wasted on reducing carbon dioxide a fraction of a percent? I don't think the story goes quite like that.

All this is just another example of Christopher Monckton displaying a serious case of illiteracy of various sorts: http://topher.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/50-to-1-sour...

You're a fool. Thank you for your skepticism, but in this case you've been had. By all means keep it up though, just double-check and don't be misled :)

Edit 2: $3.2 quadrillion for each degree? Sigh, and you actually were brave enough to show this crap to other people? Wow. If you really wanted to do it on the cheap (and that number is still very made up), you could do it for much less, albeit with side-effects: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_sulfate_aerosols_...