There are several layers of argument in the climate debate.
1. Is there actually global warming, and if so, is it enough to cause concern?
2. If there is global warming, how much if any can be attributed to human activity?
3. If Yes to that question, is it (a) possible (b) necessary and (c) cost-effective for the human race to alter our activities to reduce the warming?
4. If Yes to the above, does it make sense for Australia to take the lead in reducing our standard of living?
The very first question is the extent of warming. Sophisticated commentators like Lomborg and Monckton are not denialists in the sense of denying that there is warming, the point is that they do not see that it is a serious threat and they don’t think that attempts to stop it necessary and certainly they are not are cost-effective.
This is Andrew Bolt’s report on the exent of warming in recent decades.