Climate change another name for Weather

[2020hindsight]

Yep Labor Voters dudded in the eye AGAIN

Guess it's called politics.
When half the people say you've gone too far, (big business); and half say you haven't gone far enough (greens) and taking into account the circumstances of the current economic changing climate, that's probably all you're gonna get away with.

Of course you could always be ethically driven like Nick Greiner (whom I admired), start up the ICAC in NSW, only to have it rule you corrupt, and hence you get kicked out.

I sure as hell wish that the Libs had not been such a negative influence on this - to this day (even today) they still won't make a decision, reserving the right to go wherever the wind blows.

And at least it will be first step on the ladder - and if that's as fast as they can go, and still hold power, then that's it then .

(PS but with the recently announced investment in coal areas, you'd have to say we're going backwards, no question)

 

[MrBurns]

Guess it's called politics.

Yes I know just stiring the labor voters, they dont seem to be biting tonight.

I personally arent convinced that warming is influenced by human activities.

Reducing emissions is a good idea anyway.

If we are responsible for the problem we're rooted anyway, Govt's wordwide wont have the political will to reduce emmissions to any meaningful extent mainly because it would virtually bankrupt any developed country that tries it.

They literally would rather see the planet go under than lose an election.

Also if we are the problem even if we had the will we couldnt make enough changes in time to change anything now.

 

[2020hindsight]

... They literally would rather see the planet go under than lose an election.

Also if we are the problem even if we had the will we couldnt make enough changes in time to change anything now.

MB, I'd agree with you - except it's defeatist, and this test is too important to fail

And the worst failure would be to fail to try.

 

[MrBurns]

MB, I'd agree with you - except it's defeatist, and this test is too important to fail

And the worst failure would be to fail to try.

They'll try all right , just have a look it's pathetic. too little too late and the catch 22 is if they really pulled out all stops there would be millions out of work and electricity would be unafordable.

It needs new free thinkers but there aren't any, with any influence anyway.

 

[2020hindsight]

too little too late.

lol - I was importing solar (photovoltaic) cells back in the early 80's - lost a bundle - too much too early

 

[2020hindsight]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/16/2447132.htm?section=justin

The Government announced yesterday it proposes to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 5 per cent by 2020, with an option for cuts of up to 15 per cent if other countries come on board.

The Opposition will not state its official position on the scheme until it has seen the results of an independent study into the plan, which is due to be completed in two months time.

But Nationals Senate leader Barnaby Joyce is already expressing his concerns about increased costs of living and job losses. ...

...

"It will be very hard to see how Malcolm Turnbull could make it any more attractive to the coal industry if he tried," she said.

Greens MPs are planning to protest against the emissions targets in capital cities around the country later today.

and meanwhile Rome burns.

"What we are seeing at the moment is glee on the faces of the industry group, ... and they will be on Malcolm Turnbull's back to immediately shift position and support the Government."

 

[MrBurns]

and meanwhile Rome burns.

Yep if you expect planet earth polititians to save earth you may as well start building your own spaceship now.

Just watch how they handle the global economic problem to see how effective they are though there's a much bigger issue at stake there - MONEY.

 

[2020hindsight]

My point has always been to shift the debate sideways to real, demonstrable, measurable and current environmental issues,

... Concentrate on these and co2 will naturally be contained, whether it is a real issue or not.

Here's a real demsonstrable issue Wayne ...
(But since you arrive at the correct bottom line - i.e. act on all these things and they'll all benefit, I'm not gonna take you to task too much).

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/12/2444380.htm

... The waves washed away costal village houses or shuddered them up to 50 metres inland.
...
The Papua New Guinea defence boat has evacuated 120 people from a low lying island, and a local Red Cross team is supplying water and makeshift shelters on the New Ireland main land.

evacuating 120 people today ... tip of the iceberg when compared with what is to come (try 50 million)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/12/2445384.htm

Australian pledge
The $1 million support includes relief supplies and funding for non-government organisations already responding to the disaster.

An Australian Defence Force C-130 will fly water containers, tarpaulins and water purification tablets, which will be distributed in the worst hit areas in New Ireland and Manus provinces.

New Ireland's coastline is littered with battered villages and PNG disaster officials estimate that 50,000 people have been affected.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/14/2445952.htm

Relief operations in Papua New Guinea, where huge seas have displaced thousands of people, have been stepped up with the Royal Australian Air Force now delivering supplies to stricken islanders.

This from the recent conference (last week) in Canberra:-
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/10/2442933.htm

Protect climate change refugees, conference hears
Posted Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:09pm AEDT
Updated Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:08pm AEDT

There has been a call today for human rights protection for people who are forced to leave their homes because of rising sea levels.

Experts and representatives from affected island nations met in Canberra today for a United Nations-sponsored conference to discuss the forced displacement of people because of climate change.

One of the organisers, Scott Leckie, says the majority of people who will be forced to migrate will be from the larger nations such as China and Bangladesh, rather than small islands.

"Current predictions indicate that 50 million to 1 billion people are going to be forcibly displaced from their homes and lands over the next 40 to 50 maybe 100 years due to climate change," he said.

 

[2020hindsight]

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=373231

 

[wayneL]

Excuse me, but a tidal surge <> anthropogenic sea level rises.

 

[wayneL]

55 years ago, East Anglia, the same thing happened.

It happens and it's nuttin' to do with GW anthropogenic or otherwise.

 

[2020hindsight]

so lol - you're back to saying we shouldn't act!

make up your mind wayne

Incidentally in that poem linked back there , I used a term "gambler-pseudo-scientist" - anyone you can think of fits that bill?

 

[wayneL]

so lol - you're back to saying we shouldn't act!

make up your mind wayne

Incidentally in that poem linked back there , I used a term "gambler-pseudo-scientist" - anyone you can think of fits that bill?

Would you be so kind to explain to the readers of this thread as to how you drew that conclusion from my post.

Or is this a demonstration of how to draw erroneous conclusions for irrelevant data sets?

Don't bother apologizing for your appalling and dishonest (but thoroughly typical) misrepresentation, it will not be accepted.

Your integrity is lower than a snake's belly.

 

[2020hindsight]

Would you be so kind to explain to the readers of this thread as to how you drew that conclusion from my post.

Or is this a demonstration of how to draw erroneous conclusions for irrelevant data sets?

Don't bother apologizing for your appalling and dishonest (but thoroughly typical) misrepresentation, it will not be accepted.

Your integrity is lower than a snake's belly.

To act on global pollution or not?

two options wayne - multiple choice.

first option , one syllable , rhymes with "less"
second option , one syllable , rhymes with "moe"

which do you choose?

 

[2020hindsight]

and while you're at it mr gambling-pseudo-scientist man,

see if you can interrupt NASA from their great work of plotting these trends - to hire you a spaceship -

and go find some other planet to gamble with maybe.

 

[wayneL]

I see bluster and BS, but no answer.

On form there.

 

[lcl999]

I recently reviewed the reaction to Bjorn Lomborg's "The Skeptical Environmentalist" and his follow-up, the "Copenhagen Consensus" and drew the following conclusions.
1) The environmental movement (EM) is very prone to biased selection of data to support their position, so we get exaggerated forecasts. For example, estimates of sea level changes over the next 50 years have a median of around 40 cm. Forecasts of tens or hundreds of metres are either invented or extreme outliers on the spectrum of forecasts. Good PR but bad science.
The EM is also prone to attack its opponents with sneering and slurs rather than closely reasoned arguments.
2) On the other hand, the doubters or realists tend to be less emotional and more scientific in presenting their arguments.
3) There are good arguments that much of the money to be spent on ameliorating climate change would be better spent on cures for malaria and HIV/AIDS, 3rd world education, addressing wars, etc. etc.

Think it through.

 

[Calliope]

I recently reviewed the reaction to Bjorn Lomborg's "The Skeptical Environmentalist" and his follow-up, the "Copenhagen Consensus" and drew the following conclusions.
1) The environmental movement (EM) is very prone to biased selection of data to support their position, so we get exaggerated forecasts. For example, estimates of sea level changes over the next 50 years have a median of around 40 cm. Forecasts of tens or hundreds of metres are either invented or extreme outliers on the spectrum of forecasts. Good PR but bad science.
The EM is also prone to attack its opponents with sneering and slurs rather than closely reasoned arguments.
2) On the other hand, the doubters or realists tend to be less emotional and more scientific in presenting their arguments.
3) There are good arguments that much of the money to be spent on ameliorating climate change would be better spent on cures for malaria and HIV/AIDS, 3rd world education, addressing wars, etc. etc.

Think it through.

Your post puts into a nutshell the thoughts of many of the realists who read this thread but do not post. Those who do are attacked by the alarmists with sneers and slurs in a deluge of so much obfuscation, muddled thinking and idealogical nonsense, that to respond you have to stoop to their level.

Wayne is fighting a rearguard action, but no reasoned and rational argument will penetrate the idealogical mindsets of 2020 and his brainwashed acolytes.

 

[2020hindsight]

I recently reviewed the reaction to Bjorn Lomborg's "The Skeptical Environmentalist" and his follow-up, .

I think Lomborg participated in another of those "interlligence squared" debates - like the one I posted on #215. (the one where all 6 participants agree that CO2 is increasing and causing warming).

Some rainy day, it might be worth seeing if it's on youtube. See if he does any better.

 

[Panacea]

Your post puts into a nutshell the thoughts of many of the realists who read this thread but do not post. Those who do are attacked by the alarmists with sneers and slurs in a deluge of so much obfuscation, muddled thinking and idealogical nonsense, that to respond you have to stoop to their level.

Wayne is fighting a rearguard action, but no reasoned and rational argument will penetrate the idealogical mindsets of 2020 and his brainwashed acolytes.

Rubbish! The 'deniers and skeptics' are equally vehement, biased and unscientific in their rants.

Look at your post (quoted). You start by complaining of being a "realist ... attacked by alarmists", then go on to attack people who don't agree with you ("idealogical mindsets of ... brainwashed acolytes").

Bit hypocritical mate.