Weather Great Climate Changer

[Garpal Gumnut]

I notice that even Barack Obama is hedging his bets now on Global warming and is refusing to attend the Copenhagen talkfest at which ole Kev 07 will be making an absolute pillock of himself.

From The Times, a publication not given to inaccuracy or hyperbole.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6888165.ece

President Obama won’t talk climate change in Copenhagen

Only 57 per cent of Americans believe that there is strong evidence that the world has grown warmer in recent decades, down from 71 per cent a year ago, according to a new poll. Partly as a result, the White House is having to wage a vote-by-vote battle in Congress for a climate change Bill that would embrace cap-and-trade. The Bill will not be signed into law until next year at the earliest but is considered essential for any global deal.

Its a beautiful late October day in Townsville, this morning, a light breeze, no sign of rain, as is usual at this time of year.

gg

 

[Wysiwyg]

I notice that even Barack Obama is hedging his bets now on Global warming and is refusing to attend the Copenhagen talkfest at which ole Kev 07 will be making an absolute pillock of himself.

It`s not the warming it`s the burgeoning pollution problem. The warming scenario is the front to get the attention of the common ignoramus. Unchecked man made pollution will one day change the climate but probably not in this life time.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

There is a particularly good article in this month's Quadrant magazine by a physicist called Reid, I think that's his name, explaining the superiority of Weather for changing climate, over any mathematical or computer model for predicting climate change.

Perhaps Barack Obama has read it and that is why he's going for Oslo rather than Copenhagen.

gg

 

[Mr J]

It`s not the warming it`s the burgeoning pollution problem. The warming scenario is the front to get the attention of the common ignoramus. Unchecked man made pollution will one day change the climate but probably not in this life time.

I agree with this. While I am skeptical of human-induced change global climate change, I do wish we would better look after the environment.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

It`s not the warming it`s the burgeoning pollution problem. The warming scenario is the front to get the attention of the common ignoramus. Unchecked man made pollution will one day change the climate but probably not in this life time.

Could you provide some scientific basis and fact for the above?

 

[Wysiwyg]

Could you provide some scientific basis and fact for the above?

Think of how life creates life and how this process requires a "unique balance" of factors to happen. This live planet has all the necessary ingredients for this process to happen. Two of those are oxygen and sunlight in their life sustaining ranges. Now if we place a film or layer of particles (in the form of burnt fossil fuels) between the light source and the live planet, the living organisms will have a changed circumstance in which to live.
I had to source the internet for an appropriate example because I made my statement on the obvious outcome from continued (unchecked in my original post) choking of the atmosphere with burnt fossil fuels.

As the sun's radiation hits the earth's surface, it is reemitted as infrared radiation. This radiation is then partly trapped by the so-called greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)?as well as water vapor.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=more-proof-of-global-warm

 

[MrBurns]

I dont think anyone knws for sure if humans are responsible for changes in weather, I'd say probably not but it's an industry on it's own now and those who make money from it will never let it go.

We have to put up with energy saving light bulbs that dont work with dimmers and hardly work at all and this is just part of the conspiracy to create an industry out of nothing.

 

[noco]

I notice that even Barack Obama is hedging his bets now on Global warming and is refusing to attend the Copenhagen talkfest at which ole Kev 07 will be making an absolute pillock of himself.

From The Times, a publication not given to inaccuracy or hyperbole.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6888165.ece


Its a beautiful late October day in Townsville, this morning, a light breeze, no sign of rain, as is usual at this time of year.

gg

Yeah, good one GG. What an embarrassment for our fearless leader if Obama is not there. The little worm deserves all that is coming to him.

The signing of Kyoto is dead and it would appear that Copenhagen is heading in the same direction. What will he do if does fall flat.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Think of how life creates life and how this process requires a "unique balance" of factors to happen. This live planet has all the necessary ingredients for this process to happen. Two of those are oxygen and sunlight in their life sustaining ranges. Now if we place a film or layer of particles (in the form of burnt fossil fuels) between the light source and the live planet, the living organisms will have a changed circumstance in which to live.
I had to source the internet for an appropriate example because I made my statement on the obvious outcome from continued (unchecked in my original post) choking of the atmosphere with burnt fossil fuels.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=more-proof-of-global-warm

Let's consider this then:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaNcQ4Wj7bQ

I also agree with others that all pollution needs to be reduced.

Have a nice day.

 

[Smurf1976]

We have to put up with energy saving light bulbs that dont work with dimmers and hardly work at all and this is just part of the conspiracy to create an industry out of nothing.

Smurf recommends the "Philips" brand of these bulbs due to their relatively good light output and quality.

They make a 20W (equivalent to 100W) dimmable version and you'd be surprised how well they work. Readily available at Bunnings and also some supermarkets and other stores. Get the "Warm White" (2700K) version and not the "Daylight" version unless you do like the cold, blue light the Daylight ones produce.

Only buy the dimmable ones if you actually do have a dimmer since they are considerably more expensive than the non-dimmable equivalent.

Another option is the Osram halogen energy savers. These fit straight in place of a conventional incandescent bulb and are a bit under $3 each at supermarkets and hardware stores. 70W is equivalent to the old 100W (53W = old 75W, 42W = old 60W, 28W = old 40W). They come in both clear and frosted types just like old style globes. Performance of these is directly comparable to an old style incandescent bulb - most people wouldn't notice any difference at all and they even look the same on the outside.

I'm reluctant to criticise specific brands on a public forum but I mentioned Philips for compact fluoro lamps and Osram for halogens for a reason based on my experience and opinion.

I suggest that you use the compact fluoros where lights are on for long periods and these bulbs are suitable and use the halogens elsewhere.

 

[Gamblor]

Its a beautiful late October day in Townsville, this morning, a light breeze, no sign of rain, as is usual at this time of year.

gg

Well then clearly we don't have any problems. Thanks man, i feel much better now.

 

[MrBurns]

Smurf recommends the "Philips" brand of these bulbs due to their relatively good light output and quality.

They make a 20W (equivalent to 100W) dimmable version and you'd be surprised how well they work. Readily available at Bunnings and also some supermarkets and other stores. Get the "Warm White" (2700K) version and not the "Daylight" version unless you do like the cold, blue light the Daylight ones produce.

Only buy the dimmable ones if you actually do have a dimmer since they are considerably more expensive than the non-dimmable equivalent.

Another option is the Osram halogen energy savers. These fit straight in place of a conventional incandescent bulb and are a bit under $3 each at supermarkets and hardware stores. 70W is equivalent to the old 100W (53W = old 75W, 42W = old 60W, 28W = old 40W). They come in both clear and frosted types just like old style globes. Performance of these is directly comparable to an old style incandescent bulb - most people wouldn't notice any difference at all and they even look the same on the outside.

I'm reluctant to criticise specific brands on a public forum but I mentioned Philips for compact fluoro lamps and Osram for halogens for a reason based on my experience and opinion.

I suggest that you use the compact fluoros where lights are on for long periods and these bulbs are suitable and use the halogens elsewhere.

Dimmable ones !!!!!!!! I didnt even know they existed.

Many thanks

 

[basilio]

Thanks Smurf for your comments on quality CFLs and the the Osram Halogens. Amongst all the marketing hype it's good to get some clearer more objective advice.

One point I have found in the past has been that sometimes name brands also distribute identical products with other labels. They can't quite get everyone to pay the premium so they attempt to capture the lower end of the market without overtly damaging their premium price. Do you know of any lower price lights that offer similar quality to the Phillips ect ?

And frankly I also can't see why we can't state our negative experiences of products on these Forums. In theory the marketplace is supposed to work on perfect information. All the consumers are aware of the quality/value of the products . (Not likely...) Some websites like Whirlpool.net act as outstanding places to compare internet and phone plans and share information so the principle is there.

 

[basilio]

More than 80,000 buildings on Victoria's coast at risk from rising sea levels, extreme weather


MORE than 80,000 buildings on Victoria's coast will be at risk from the ravages of rising sea levels and extreme weather.

The Western Port region is especially vulnerable amid estimates that 18,000 properties valued at almost $2 billion are in the danger zone.

And the effects of storm surges, heatwaves and insect-borne diseases associated with climate change are likely to increase the nation's mortality rate.

The alarming forecasts emerged last night in a new report tabled in Federal Parliament by the all-party House of Representatives Climate Change, Environment, Water and the Arts Committee.

Titled Managing our Coastal Zone in a Changing Climate: the Time to Act is Now, the 368-page report urged the Federal Government to take greater charge of protecting the nation's coastline in co-operation with state and local governments.

It is estimated 80 per cent of Australia's population lives in coastal areas and 711,000 addresses lie within 3km of the coast and less than 6m above sea level.

Expert evidence to the committee estimated one metre of sea level rise this century - the upper limit of expectations - would drive the shoreline back 50-100m, depending on local wind, wave and topographical features.

Taking a more realistic mid-range projection of half a metre for this century, it considered shoreline recession of 25m to 50m.

Combining the effects of rising sea levels, melting polar ice, higher ocean temperatures and changing ocean currents, the report cited Climate Change Department projections for Victoria.

"More than 80,000 coastal buildings and infrastructure are at risk from the projected sea level rise, coastal flooding and erosion," the department said.

"Sea level rise, more frequent and severe storm surges will damage the coastal environment and coastal infrastructure in the Western Port region.

"Eighteen per cent of the Western Port region is likely to be affected by inundation or overland flow path. It is estimated that 18,000 properties, valued at almost $2 billion, are vulnerable to flood events."

What is classified as a one-in-100-year storm surge is likely, by 2070, to happen every one to four years in Victoria.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mo...-extreme-weather/story-e6frf7jo-1225791490198

The report praised Victoria's coastal strategy for integrating social as well as environmental effects of climate change and rising sea levels.

I guess many forum readers would have seen this report. This comes from the Herald Sun.

I was fascinated that the committee decided to take "a more realistic approach" that the sea would rise only 50 cm instead of the expert opinion of 100 cm. Certainly would have have reduced the potential situation from catastrophic to merely diabolical.

However the readers of the Herald Sun who respond to these stories have almost unilaterally decided (43 out of 44) this is just alarmist rubbish intended to scare the hell out of people and justify the chardonnay sipping socialists who are bent on creating a one world government.

Which really comes back to what has been the dominant comment on this thread and it's predecessor....

 

[skc]

Only 57 per cent of Americans believe that there is strong evidence that the world has grown warmer in recent decades, down from 71 per cent a year ago, according to a new poll.

The whole climate change issue rests of 2 premises.

1. The world is getting hotter
2. It's getting hotter because of human activities

I've always thought the first premise was not questioned, and that there are reasonably definitive proof on that front.

It is hard to argue against evidences like melting ice caps, retreating glaciers and rising sea water levels... and the most powerful nation on Earth decides to make policies around what a poll says its citizens believe?

I am happy to accept debates / discussions on the second premise, although I would err on the side of caution in the absence of absolute scientific certainty.

It's a risk:reward thing. The risks are the certain inconveniences that come with changing our behaviour (e.g. having to search for dimmable energy saving bulbs), while the reward is that humanity survives. Simple really.

 

[wayneL]

I guess many forum readers would have seen this report. This comes from the Herald Sun.

I was fascinated that the committee decided to take "a more realistic approach" that the sea would rise only 50 cm instead of the expert opinion of 100 cm. Certainly would have have reduced the potential situation from catastrophic to merely diabolical.

However the readers of the Herald Sun who respond to these stories have almost unilaterally decided (43 out of 44) this is just alarmist rubbish intended to scare the hell out of people and justify the chardonnay sipping socialists who are bent on creating a one world government.

Which really comes back to what has been the dominant comment on this thread and it's predecessor....

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
Abraham Lincoln,

 

[MrBurns]

I'd like to know where exactly the effected areas are, thats one of my concerns after looking at property in Port Douglas but I'm interested in Vic and NSW as well.

 

[lasty]

There are those who get sucked into this climate change warm and fuzzy stuff.Whats really dangerous is that people dont understand the treaty.
See here.
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/55...reaty-would-impose-communist-world-government

We have Al Gore who is a climate change advocate and alarmist.Thats fine everyone is entitled to their views.
If he was so paranoid about climate change, rising sea levels blah blah blah.. why does he go out and buy a beachfront property?

 

[Knobby22]

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
Abraham Lincoln,

“You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.”

George Bush

 

[MrBurns]

Smurf recommends the "Philips" brand of these bulbs due to their relatively good light output and quality.

They make a 20W (equivalent to 100W) dimmable version and you'd be surprised how well they work. Readily available at Bunnings and also some supermarkets and other stores. Get the "Warm White" (2700K) version and not the "Daylight" version unless you do like the cold, blue light the Daylight ones produce.

Only buy the dimmable ones if you actually do have a dimmer since they are considerably more expensive than the non-dimmable equivalent.

Another option is the Osram halogen energy savers. These fit straight in place of a conventional incandescent bulb and are a bit under $3 each at supermarkets and hardware stores. 70W is equivalent to the old 100W (53W = old 75W, 42W = old 60W, 28W = old 40W). They come in both clear and frosted types just like old style globes. Performance of these is directly comparable to an old style incandescent bulb - most people wouldn't notice any difference at all and they even look the same on the outside.

I'm reluctant to criticise specific brands on a public forum but I mentioned Philips for compact fluoro lamps and Osram for halogens for a reason based on my experience and opinion.

I suggest that you use the compact fluoros where lights are on for long periods and these bulbs are suitable and use the halogens elsewhere.

Well what do you know, just checked 3 packs of bulbs and they're all not suitable for dimmers. No wonder I've been having problems.

Why is this in the small print, bastards !

Thanks again Smurf, I called my electrician about this last week and he didnt tell me that so... so much for his expertise.