Resisting Climate Hysteria

[qldfrog]

Peabody CEO says 'policies such as the carbon tax and renewable energy target had hurt the sector and called for whoever (sic) won the federal election to repeal the carbon tax and streamline the project permitting system'.
It's wrong to suggest the only problem is the lower price of coal.

well if this was the case, coal mines in China, Mongolia or Brazil would be booming.They are not...
The ghost town in inner mongolia was built during the coal rush up to 3 years ago and then coal crashed.
Nothing to do with carbon tax or anything specifically australian, coal is out of demand, US is becoming a major exporter as they have huge new gas production ramping up for domestic consumption
and the world economy is not that healthy.
While Australia is a major exporter of coal, its actual production is not that big on the world scene: most countries are producing their own (us/china/india) especially for thermal coal which will probably slow down drastically in the next decades.

 

[Knobby22]

I don't know about the rest of Australia, but regional Qld electricity suppliers are all owned by the government, so no way of blaming privatisation here.

I don't think Queensland has suffered from gold plating to anywhere near the extent Victoria has.

"There is a fundamental flaw in the structure of the power industry. Thanks to its regulated returns on assets, the more the power companies spend the more money comes through the door."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/goldplating-the-power-grid-20120705-21iv5.html#ixzz2a8Brpcub

 

[Zedd]

I don't know about the rest of Australia, but regional Qld electricity suppliers are all owned by the government, so no way of blaming privatisation here.

There seems to be rather a lot of attributing cause and effect in accordance with the philosophy of the person attempting to make the argument.

Government-owned corporations have a stake in about 65% of the state's generation capacity, but the numbers of partially or fully privately owned power stations are increasing. The Queensland Government plans to reduce the share of the aggregate capacity the state owns or operates in Queensland to around 50%, primarily as a result of new capacity requirements being met by the private sector.

http://www.business.qld.gov.au/indu...electricity-queensland/electricity-generation

Generation - Shared public private
Distribution - Public
Retail - Private

Even the public owned and operated areas though are now through government-owned corporations, that are in my understanding run on profit-orientated models so gold-plating is still in their best interest. I haven't had much to do with the electrical industry, but saw first hand where all the money was going as SE QLD switched over to government corps vs council run water provider/distributers and saw massive hikes in water prices with virtually no new investment occurring at the coal face.

So its the greenies fault that gold plating occurred!

I thought my comment was dripping with sufficient sarcasm to splatter the keyboards of all who read my post. Apologies if that wasn't clearer. The greens had nothing to do with lobbying for privatisation, and certainly had nothing to do with company policies aimed at increasing book values of assets by which allowable returns are judged.

 

[orr]

You obviously have no idea, and no practical experience growing food commercially.

You read it on the internet, therefore it must be true.

Stop embarrassing yourself by quoting reports as fact.

This might be usefull to pass on to party HQ 'Sprinkles' " Lessons From The Ord "

http://www.cis.org.au/images/stories/policy-monographs/pm-2.pdf

And that's just for starters more reading on the intrigues that promoted the original development through the Menzies admin is well worth the effort. Check the name of the 'Whitey' who first trudged the banks back in the late 1800's, notice any relationship to an operator in the region these days?

All fits well with the deeply ingrained ethos of agrarian socialism kept just beneath the tweed of the squatocracy.

Oh and wayneL, ' so I was saying' was in the paragraph directly above your lifted quote. To compare you to a goldfish would be...well, unfair to goldfish. So when your ready to come out from under the bed with your chewed plastic sword, only to be skewered again, whilst revealing the porosity of intellectual rigour of the charlatans you present... Just answer the questions, your 'Mills & Boon' is off topic.

 

[springhill]

This might be usefull to pass on to party HQ 'Sprinkles' " Lessons From The Ord "

http://www.cis.org.au/images/stories/policy-monographs/pm-2.pdf

And that's just for starters more reading on the intrigues that promoted the original development through the Menzies admin is well worth the effort. Check the name of the 'Whitey' who first trudged the banks back in the late 1800's, notice any relationship to an operator in the region these days?

All fits well with the deeply ingrained ethos of agrarian socialism kept just beneath the tweed of the squatocracy.

Oh and wayneL, ' so I was saying' was in the paragraph directly above your lifted quote. To compare you to a goldfish would be...well, unfair to goldfish. So when your ready to come out from under the bed with your chewed plastic sword, only to be skewered again, whilst revealing the porosity of intellectual rigour of the charlatans you present... Just answer the questions, your 'Mills & Boon' is off topic.

My God, written in 1982. Could it be any less relevant?

If i was using practices from 1982 in my business today I would be in serious financial trouble, as well as breaching a whole load of laws.

Perhaps we should go right back to the industrial revolution and run a google search for a report from then?

Another 'internet urban farmer'.

:headshake

 

[wayneL]

Oh and wayneL, ' so I was saying' was in the paragraph directly above your lifted quote. To compare you to a goldfish would be...well, unfair to goldfish. So when your ready to come out from under the bed with your chewed plastic sword, only to be skewered again, whilst revealing the porosity of intellectual rigour of the charlatans you present... Just answer the questions, your 'Mills & Boon' is off topic.

Mills & Boon... hah I'll grant you that.

However, it's nicer in my "Mills and Boon" reality than your negative, nasty, nihilistic, apocalyptic delusion where ad hominem is a valid substitute for empirical data and real world observation.

In your world, only pseudo scientific Don Quixotes, tilting at windmills gain admittance to your litany of dogma. A world where intellectual rigour is only applied to those with whom you disagree, ignoring the gaping chasms of both science and logic in your faith based Armageddon scenario.

The real world, even with its real environmental challenges, is far preferable to your (in the collective sense) Revelational imaginings and failed climatic models.

While I admit a certain amount of hypocrisy here, I also admit that my observations are in fact empirically accurate, rather than just the poisonous name calling you and your fretting coffee klatch of malcontents indulge in on this forum.

 

[explod]

wayneL;786197] ...I also admit that my observations are in fact empirically accurate,...

A joke surely ?

 

[basilio]

A joke surely ?

Surely not Explod. We know, because Wayne told us ,that the world is actually not warming at all. It's just urban heat island effects and dodgy recalibration of temperature records by the BOM et al.

That is empirically certain. Nothing to worry about as far as the climate. Just a bunch (of about 10,000) pseudo scientists who want to get billions of dollars in grants to study ice that isn't melting, floods that aren't occurring, extreme cliamte events that aren't happening and species that aren't going extinct.

 

[wayneL]

Surely not Explod. We know, because Wayne told us ,that the world is actually not warming at all. It's just urban heat island effects and dodgy recalibration of temperature records by the BOM et al.

That is empirically certain. Nothing to worry about as far as the climate. Just a bunch (of about 10,000) pseudo scientists who want to get billions of dollars in grants to study ice that isn't melting, floods that aren't occurring, extreme cliamte events that aren't happening and species that aren't going extinct.

Basilio, I knew you would fly your true colours eventually. You misrepresentation of my position is bordering on libelous, an out and out lie, evidenced on this forum in black and white with my oft stated view.

So not only are you monumentally hypocritical by tacitly admitting you do nothing to mitigate your own emissions, a grotesque misanthrope who openly salivates at the prospect of the death of the majority of humans on this planet, you are also an out and out liar.

This is not opinion, the incontrovertible evidence is here on these pages.

 

[springhill]

That is empirically certain. Nothing to worry about as far as the climate. Just a bunch (of about 10,000) pseudo scientists who want to get billions of dollars in grants to study ice that isn't melting, floods that aren't occurring, extreme cliamte events that aren't happening and species that aren't going extinct.

All events that have been happening since the dawn of time and will continue to happen regardless of human influence.

If it wasn't detailed in one of your sycophantic global warming..... oops climate change reports then it didn't occur did it?

You are one of the most myopic clowns to grace this forum.

 

[Knobby22]

All events that have been happening since the dawn of time and will continue to happen regardless of human influence.
.

Duh! What about things that happen because of human influence?

 

[springhill]

Duh! What about things that happen because of human influence?

You should me credible, peer reviewed (by a independent body, not a for/against group) scientific statistical evidence that there are more:

-Eathquakes
-Cyclones/Tornadoes/Hurricanes
-Tsunamis
-Volcanic Eruptions
-Floods
-Wild Fires

Than there were:

-10,000
-100,000
-1,000,000
-10,000,000
-100,000,000
and 1,000,000,000 years ago and I will reconsider

Until then it is all clap-trap and ****-talking.

Carbon is the new vehicle to control the masses and the money, now that Western religion is in its dying days.

 

[Knobby22]

You stated humans don't influence the world.
Obviously this is untrue. We make animals extinct, we turn areas into deserts...and yet we can't influence the weather????

You can't accept scientific peer review, you can't even read the facts on the sudden rise in temperatures, the melting of the arctic, the massive rise in sea levels and yet you call basilio myopic? Pot kettle.

 

[springhill]

You stated humans don't influence the world.
Obviously this is untrue. We make animals extinct, we turn areas into deserts...and yet we can't influence the weather????

You can't accept scientific peer review, you can't even read the facts on the sudden rise in temperatures, the melting of the arctic, the massive rise in sea levels and yet you call basilio myopic? Pot kettle.

Nice dodge of the question.

The timeframe you are talking about is but a pimple of the butt of time.

That is why I ask for data ranging back further than the last 1,000 years.

You have no proof, nor did your quick google search turn up anything.

You are unable to construct a scientific argument or provide one scrap of data.

As I said clap-trap and ****-talking.

You are a disciple of carbon.

One of the lemmings needed to perpetrate and spread the propaganda.

It is about deceiving a critical mass of people.

Your ticket has been stamped.

I stand by my comments.

 

[Zedd]

You should me credible, peer reviewed (by a independent body, not a for/against group) scientific statistical evidence that there are more:

-Eathquakes
-Cyclones/Tornadoes/Hurricanes
-Tsunamis
-Volcanic Eruptions
-Floods
-Wild Fires

I haven't back-read this whole thread yet, so not sure of you're understanding on the subject. I assumed that you're constant use of "global warming ... oops climate change" was just **** stirring, but the above comment suggests you don't understand the basic principles behind the theory of global warming.

An increased proportion of so called greenhouse gases in a closed atmosphere have been shown to retain heat.
It's also well known that temperature levels and temperature differentials have significant influence over weather patterns. Coupled together it is plausible that a sufficient proportion of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere could see changes in weather patterns that may result in an increased frequency or severity of cyclones, floods, droughts and wild fires.

Personally I'm not convinced that it's conclusive if and when any long-term damage will be done, although I'd rather err on the side of caution, and think our general level of pollution needs to be addressed anyway, as does the rapid depletion of finite resources

Argue back and forth on the significance of the effect of mankind all you want.

Last I checked though no-one was suggesting that changes in atmospheric temperatures, even at the extremes of any projections, would have any effect on magma flows or tectonic plate movement. Have you?

 

[wayneL]

On extreme weather events, Pielke Jnr has the oil on that. Here is is recent statement to the US senate hearing:

(It should be noted that Rog is a warmist, but with I think a moderate view that can be supported scientifically)

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/in...Store_id=a6df9665-e8c8-4b0f-a550-07669df48b15

 

[Knobby22]

It is pleasing to see the US senate talking to a true scientist.
I hope he is allowed to talk to them about other aspects of climate change.

 

[springhill]

I haven't back-read this whole thread yet, so not sure of you're understanding on the subject. I assumed that you're constant use of "global warming ... oops climate change" was just **** stirring, but the above comment suggests you don't understand the basic principles behind the theory of global warming.

An increased proportion of so called greenhouse gases in a closed atmosphere have been shown to retain heat.
It's also well known that temperature levels and temperature differentials have significant influence over weather patterns. Coupled together it is plausible that a sufficient proportion of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere could see changes in weather patterns that may result in an increased frequency or severity of cyclones, floods, droughts and wild fires.

Personally I'm not convinced that it's conclusive if and when any long-term damage will be done, although I'd rather err on the side of caution, and think our general level of pollution needs to be addressed anyway, as does the rapid depletion of finite resources

Argue back and forth on the significance of the effect of mankind all you want.

Last I checked though no-one was suggesting that changes in atmospheric temperatures, even at the extremes of any projections, would have any effect on magma flows or tectonic plate movement. Have you?

Perhaps you should

 

[basilio]

Perhaps you should

No mate... Life is too short...

 

[Zedd]

No mate... Life is too short...

No, no, I will. It looks like there's collectively a decent amount of papers and thoughts, and it's been quite a while since I refreshed my knowledge on the topic.

Mainly though I want to see the reasoning for how global warming is going to shift the tectonic plates and cause more earthquakes and volcanoes. Sounds like a fascinating twist, on what is otherwise a fairly straightforward concept.