Dear Editor,

Take a bow Al Gore. Though it was Kevin's day, the times are clearly yours. As the green revolution gathers pace it will emerge that election '07 marks a turning point. We will look back upon the Howard era, not with fondness, but with the sentiment reserved for the slave trade, the white Australia policy and the denial of voting rights to women. Howard gone; coal going; long live the Kyoto Protocol (KP). One down, one to go (not counting Kazakhstan).

The lesson to be learned globally is that climate change true believers are now an unstoppable force. Henceforth, no politician who fails to support the KP and back it with action is electable. It is fate that Malcolm Turnbull survived the bloodbath and is the only known KP supporting Liberal. Go for the leadership Malcolm, you are a decent human being.

Regards,
Carl Sparre
Eastwood

And for the record (why a climate change activist should never be underestimated):

Letters team,

This is roughly my one thousandth letter on the topic of global warming (a search on "Dear Editor" on my computer reveals 972 hits, and more than a few letters were sent from work - the last 500 letters are blogged at http://www.blognow.com.au/600letters). I don't know how many were published, more than 100 is my gut feel, though the goal was not to see my name in print, it was to influence the discussion. I could claim it was a ten year campaign, though that would be like saying the population explosion began thirteen thousand years ago in the fertile crescent – true but misleading. Although my first published letter was in the early 90s, I began writing regularly in 2004, then in earnest following the catalyst that was Hurricane Katrina.

Did my letters make a difference? This is a difficult but important concept: the answer is that it doesn't matter because the question is wrong! A theme running through the letter series is that what matters is one's philosophy. What I can know is that it was the cumulative effort of all who shared the right philosophy that produced the necessary result – Australia's ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. Note the metaphor: ratification requires nations to adopt this philosophy – we ratify so that others ratify – we restrain carbon so that others restrain – I campaigned so that others would campaign. They did, and together we were victorious. Will the pattern continue with respect to the protocol? It will, because the human race survived the litmus test of November 24, 2007.

Perhaps staunch Liberals will question my sincerity. Could it be that the science argument is influenced by existing political beliefs? I can only assure that I backed Maxine McKew and Kevin Rudd despite my politics rather than because of them. Yes, I believe in a fair go (who doesn't?) but I also believe in reward for effort and I am not blind: we can all see that free markets deliver results.

Had John Howard acted to fix the market failure that delivers the enhanced greenhouse effect, my driving incentive to depose the government would not have existed. But the Prime Minister damn near destroyed my faith in people. To this day I am perplexed that a mind as sharp as his cannot see. Greed is one thing; driving a planet, our only home, to the brink is quite another.

Science is, was, and shall remain my guiding light. Science and philosophy bring out our best. Religion and blind faith hold us back.

Many thanks,
Carl