“There is not, now, much value in arguing about the science of climate change. Even if it’s wrong, enough people now believe it that it may as well be right.” The Age, September 2009

This is the state of the climate debate in Australia. The Labor government and the media have decided that the debate on climate science is over, and we should get on with “tackling climate change”. The reality, however, is very different. The debate is far from over, and the science is far from settled – as you will see from the pages of this blog.

Despite this, the Labor government wants to spend billions of your dollars on a carbon price (either a tax or an emissions trading scheme) which will achieve absolutely nothing for the climate, but which will do enormous damage to our industry, our economy, and the standard of living of all Australians. The public should therefore be asking some very difficult questions, and the purpose of this blog is to ask those questions and provide an alternative to the one-sided story we hear daily from the government and the media.

If you are new to this blog, we recommend you read the ACM Summary, which gives an overview of the main issues we discuss.


About the Author

Simon from Sydney

First off, I am not a climate scientist. But that’s OK, since neither is Al Gore. However, I do have a Masters degree in Engineering from the University of Cambridge, so I am more qualified to speak on matters scientific than 99.9% of the journalists you are likely to read in the mainstream media. I am not a climate change denier. I acknowledge that climate change is happening – just like it has happened for 4.5 billion years, and will continue to happen for another 4.5 billion years until the Sun swallows the earth whole – however I do question the present cause, and I am particularly concerned about the politicisation of the scientific process. Impartiality has gone out of the window. As scientists, we must review the evidence for and against anthropogenic global warming dispassionately.

I am also a qualified lawyer, so as soon as I can set up my own practice charging hundreds of dollars an hour to advise rich corporates on the coma-inducing complexity of the ETS, this blog will be history [that last bit was a joke, by the way].

A few things I am not (just to preempt the inevitable ad homs):

  • a fundamentalist Christian wingnut (in fact I have no religion at all – an agnostic tending towards atheism)
  • a Creationist
  • a Holocaust denier
  • a denier of the link between smoking and cancer
  • a shill for Big Oil
  • in the pay of Heartland or the Lavoisier Group.

Material on this site

Photos and material on this site are sourced from media outlets and the internet. If you are the copyright owner of any material used on this site and you object to its use, and such use falls outside the fair use provisions in ss. 40 – 42 of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), please email me, and it will be removed.


  1. […] approach to greenhouse gases.[Oct. 3, 9:00 p.m. | Updated As it happens, the blogger behind Australian Climate Madness has posted a skeptics' map of "the climate alarmism machine." I think some, though by no means all, […]

  2. […] 3, 9:00 p.m. | Updated As it happens, the blogger behind Australian Climate Madness has posted a skeptics' map of "the climate alarmism machine." I think some, though by no means […]