Predictions for Copenhagen

[2020hindsight]

Maybe do a Keating and pat 'er on the backside y reckon.

PS Howard would have done the same if he had the chance - then again that was as high as he could reach.

 

[Calliope]

PS Howard would have done the same if he had the chance - then again that was as high as he could reach.

I think Howard was a monarchist. However I may be wrong.

 

[Buckeroo]

Copenhagen is a mirage in the desert, a figment of peoples imagination. As is always, nothing ever comes from group therapy sessions.

If you are a climate change believer (which personally I'm not), the best you can hope for is the world economy tanking - there would be no need for action particularly if its severe. With 20 - 30% unemployment, the environment wins as long as no war occurs.

For Australia, Krudd will do anything he can to destroy our economy and a carbon tax will greatly assist in achieving this objective - so unfortunately, it will probably happen.

Cheers

2020hindsight
I can't see how you can compare Howard with Keating when it comes to decorum - Keating never had any class, he's really not much higher in the scheme of things than a pimple on Howard's rear end.

 

[2020hindsight]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/21/2632483.htm?section=justin

The deep divisions in the Opposition over an emissions trading scheme have been laid bare for all to see, with outspoken Liberal backbencher Wilson Tuckey labelling his leader "arrogant" and "inexperienced".
Mr Tuckey sent an email to all Opposition MPs and Senators criticising Malcolm Turnbull for suggesting the Coalition could back a scheme ...
Mr Tuckey is no fan of the Government's emissions trading scheme, but he is more worried Mr Turnbull appears keen to manoeuvre the Coalition into voting for it.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/21/2632081.htm?section=justin

Former Liberal minister Robert Hill will chair a Federal Government trust designed to improve the energy efficiency of buildings.
The Brisbane-based Carbon Trust will see $75 million loaned to households, organisations and companies to refurbish buildings to make them more energy efficient.
The money will be paid back to the trust by the recipients through savings from lower energy bills.
Mr Hill held the positions of environment minister and defence minister in the Howard government.
......
"Nobody is going to argue against giving the public the opportunity to better climate outcomes or helping facilitate the refurbishing of buildings in a more or efficient ways.

So , in summary , the current Labor are pro-action
Past Libs are pro-action
Current Lib leadership ( Turnbull and Hockey) are prepared to negotiate before Copenhagen
Greens are pro action
Nick Xenophon is predominantly pro-action (but timing undecided)
Fielding - depends whether he's had his medication today or not ..

But then there's Wilson Tuckey lol <Deleted>

 

[wayneL]

Tuckey should have been put out to pasture long ago, but on this issue, he deserves to be heard.

Politics is about discussion, debate and determining the best course of action.

Emissions trading is a very detrimental course of action with a very sinister ulterior motive.

 

[Mr J]

It is also almost identical to that youtube presented by David Attenborough (using IPCC and UK Met Bureau data) . I won't post it again , I 've probably done so 3 or 4 times already. And those that refuse to read this sort of data will continue to refuse to read it no doubt.

That Attenborough clip was a load of rubbish, or at least simplified to the point where it can't be taken seriously. God knows what they may have done to their models, the flawed inputs or the selective data. My take is similar to how I'd define a swing in the market. It may be happening, but we can't know until it's too late. Since this is basically our first climate swing to predict, it's like asking a random person whether the market will go up or down. Even then all it proves is that the climate is warming. I think what really says it all is that the pro-humans-warming -climate scientists are stating it as fact. A true scientist would not do this.

 

[2020hindsight]

...It may be happening, but we can't know until it's too late...

Can't see you getting a job with the weather bureau there Mr J. (let alone the IPCC). And if you listen to what they're saying, it is that there is one heap of evidence that things are going downhill at an unprecedented rate.

 

[wayneL]

Can't see you getting a job with the weather bureau there Mr J. (let alone the IPCC). And if you listen to what they're saying, it is that there is one heap of evidence that things are going downhill at an unprecedented rate.

There is evidence the US was behind 911 too. Do you believe it?

There is evidence the moon landings were faked. Do you believe it?

There is heaps of evidence that co2 is a minor climate forcing.

Who's right?

Re CC, I believe balanced scientific evidence like that discussed by Roger Pielke Snr.

BTW that image has been thoroughly trashed and discredited before on this forum. The "unequivocal" stamp can only be used by a total imbecile. There is nothing unequivocal about hypothesis, particularly in chaotic systems.

 

[2020hindsight]

Just in case you've got a bad memory - remember the fires last Jan (Black Saturday) ? unprecedented fire hazard conditions ?

PS A few more people should read some of James Lovelock imo. He's an old man now. When he dies, the world will mourn.

When the likes of Fred Singer and Tim Ball die, it will be a different matter - probably a smile from those whose relatives died because they told them there was no risk of cancer from cigarettes.

and of course they also say there is no evidence of agw

 

[wayneL]

Many of those points have been shown to be nonsense as well.

 

[Mr J]

And if you listen to what they're saying, it is that there is one heap of evidence that things are going downhill at an unprecedented rate.

Seems it did for the dinosaurs as well. Perhaps they caused global warming with the methane from their farts .

I think the weather reports from the done the public a disservice. Had they always listed the probabilities, the public may have some understanding or probbabilities and variance. How many people have said "well, the weather girl got it wrong today", when the actual information may have suggested there was a 60% chance of rain, not a 100% chance? Maybe they concluded people could not understand it anyway, but I believe it was actually weather that started me to think in terms of probability.

 

[Julia]

Going back to the clear split in the Libs regarding the ETS, Malcolm Turnbull is in a very difficult position. If he refuses to negotiate and ultimately pass the ETS legislation, he is giving Labor a perfect double dissolution trigger.

Obviously he doesn't want this because clearly the Libs would lose.

Stupid Wilson Tuckey is saying he can "think of no better issue on which to fight an election". Get real, Wilson. You'd lose, for damn sure, you idjit.

I doubt Mr Turnbull has the personal negotiating and/or unifying skills to find a satisfactory solution here. He has not just Tuckey, but Warren Truss and Barnaby Joyce et al vowing that they will not agree to the ETS, now or ever.

So different from the Howard era when (rightly or wrongly) the party was unified behind John Howard and presented a single view to the opposition and the media. Clearly Mr Turnbull has so far failed to engender that level of respect from his colleagues.

Labor must be tickled pink.

 

[Calliope]

PS A few more people should read some of James Lovelock imo. He's an old man now. When he dies, the world will mourn.

So we're all doomed in 40 years! Why are you making such a song and dance about it? You won't be around. Doomsayers have been proclaiming "The End is Nigh" for centuries.. If an Apocalypse does come I don't think we will get much notice.

 

[2020hindsight]

So we're all doomed in 40 years! Why are you making such a song and dance about it? You won't be around. Doomsayers have been proclaiming "The End is Nigh" for centuries.. If an Apocalypse does come I don't think we will get much notice.

I'll let others comment on that attitude ...

Like I say, A few more people should read James Lovelock.
We've had a heap of notice- he's been writing on it for decades.

You'd see that he deserves the many acculades bestowed upon him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lovelock

Lovelock was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1974. He served as the president of the Marine Biological Association (MBA) from 1986 to 1990, and has been a Honorary Visiting Fellow of Green Templeton College, Oxford (formerly Green College, Oxford) since 1994. He has been awarded a number of prestigious prizes including the Tswett Medal (1975), an ACS chromatography award (1980), the WMO Norbert Gerbier Prize (1988), the Dr A.H. Heineken Prize for the Environment (1990) and the RGS Discovery Lifetime award (2001). He became a CBE in 1990, and a Companion of Honour in 2003.

Learn about his twigging to possible ozone layer problems - just looking at a sunset one day, and noticing the "anthropogenic haze", etc. - and from that - and some testing and further research by him and others - came the realisation that we absolutely had to act if we didn't want to destroy the ozone layer.

Until you read some of this bloke Calliope, we're not gonna get very far in sensible discussion about him are we.

A couple here (a stack of others):-

1979 / 2000 Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth (3rd ed. ed.). Oxford University Press.
1991 / 2001 Gaia: The Practical Science of Planetary Medicine. [This one is more like an earth chemistry / physics textbook - recommended]

2006 : The Revenge of Gaia: Why the Earth Is Fighting Back - and How We Can Still Save Humanity.
2009 :The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning: Enjoy It While You Can.

Basically, he says you can look at the atmosphere of a planet and tell if it has life or not. Too much CO2 (eg Mars environment - that he researched whilst working with NASA) - no chance.

With so much CO2, (and so little O2) Mars was always gonna be a dead planet.

A lifelong inventor, Lovelock has created and developed many scientific instruments, some of which were designed for NASA in its programme of planetary exploration. It was while working as a consultant for NASA that Lovelock developed the Gaia Hypothesis, for which he is most widely known.

In early 1961, Lovelock was engaged by NASA to develop sensitive instruments for the analysis of extraterrestrial atmospheres and planetary surfaces. The Viking program that visited Mars in the late-1970s was motivated in part to determining whether Mars supported life, and many of the sensors and experiments that were ultimately deployed aimed to resolve this issue. During work on a precursor of this program, Lovelock became interested in the composition of the Martian atmosphere, reasoning that many life forms on Mars would be obliged to make use of it (and, thus, alter it). However, the atmosphere was found to be in a stable condition close to its chemical equilibrium, with very little oxygen, methane, or hydrogen, but with an overwhelming abundance of carbon dioxide. To Lovelock, the stark contrast between the Martian atmosphere and chemically-dynamic mixture of that of our Earth's biosphere was strongly indicative of the absence of life on the planet.[4]

However, when they were finally launched to Mars, the Viking probes still searched (unsuccessfully) for extant life there.

ozone :-

Lovelock invented the electron capture detector, which ultimately assisted in discoveries about the persistence of CFCs and their role in stratospheric ozone depletion.[5][6][7]

nuclear supporter:-

Lovelock has become concerned about the threat of global warming from the greenhouse effect. In 2004 he caused a media sensation when he broke with many fellow environmentalists by pronouncing that "only nuclear power can now halt global warming".

In his view, nuclear energy is the only realistic alternative to fossil fuels that has the capacity to both fulfill the large scale energy needs of humankind while also reducing greenhouse emissions. He is an open member of Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy.

 

[Calliope]

2020,

:topic You are obviously a devout follower of this guy which answers my question. Now I know where you got your pro-nuclear stance. Your beliefs are really none of my business.

Cheers.

 

[2020hindsight]

... he deserves the many acculades bestowed upon him. ...

doh - stupid bludy language ...

accolade   1. any award, honor, or laudatory notice: The play received accolades from the press.

2. a light touch on the shoulder with the flat side of the sword or formerly by an embrace, done in the ceremony of conferring knighthood.

etc

PS whereas "to behead" is "a somewhat more vigourous touch of the sword, more on the neck than the shoulder" etc

 

[Julia]

2020, what has the above post to do with the topic?
Nothing, as far as I can tell.

Do you just have nothing to do, that you feel obliged to clog up threads with your multiple irrelevancies?

 

[Calliope]

doh - stupid bludy language ...


PS whereas "to behead" is "a somewhat more vigourous touch of the sword, more on the neck than the shoulder" etc

What's all this rubbish got to do with the thread you started. I'm afraid you are living up to your name and keep revisiting old posts. The result is no one knows what you are on about, or whether you are living in the past or the present.

To get back to your thread, I predict that Rudd will come back from Copenhagen with his tail between his legs. This buffoon who thinks he's a world leader has been firmly put in his place by a country that he thought he could influence.

China is the only country that has any relevance in the decisions of Copenhagen, and it's not in China's interests to accept the emissions targets of the western democracies.

 

[Buckeroo]

Agreed Calliope, it will depend on China & the US.

I saw in the "Australian", that in its present form, our CPRS tax on energy in the first year will be around $404 per person (through the permit system) while in the US around $57.

Krudd must look like a real hero at Copenhagen, willing to sacrifice Australia for practically no environmental benefit!

And its ironic, that few people in Australia doubt they will feel any pain economically because the permits are targeted to business. Why is that a highly educated nation does not see a link between increased business costs & lower living standards? Beats me.

Same can be said of the stimulus packages - but that's another story.

Cheers

 

[2020hindsight]

2020, what has the above post to do with the topic?
Nothing, as far as I can tell.

Do you just have nothing to do, that you feel obliged to clog up threads with your multiple irrelevancies?

Julia
I was just correcting a spelling mistake. (as you were encouraging us to do last week, I thought).

Still I realise it's easier to criticise that post than the previous one about James Lovelock