This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Climate change another name for Weather

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to new
Seems you can study Climate change at Uni. The science must be flawed if they are teaching this to the new minds of science

http://www.handbook.mq.edu.au/unit.php?edition=2009&unitCode=GEOS214
http://www.handbook.mq.edu.au/unit.php?edition=2009&unitCode=GEOS301
http://www.handbook.mq.edu.au/unit.php?edition=2009&unitCode=GEOS301

Regardless of the non belivers out there, the wanted changes will take place... Until then enjoy the smog/warm weather LOL!

PS. I'm sure uncertanty reigns supreme on both sides of the debate.
 
Appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.

You can study economics at uni too. Look how wrong they got it. Only the Austrian school knew the current financial malaise was inevitable, but you can't study Austrian School economics at uni.

You can study politics at uni too. But I have yet to meet a qualified political scientist who is not pretty hard to the left of the spectrum, due to what is taught.

Hell, you can even study nutritional science.... and that field is in a freakin mess.

As you may have noticed, climate change science is all tied up with economics and politics. For there to be changes, there will have to be changes to economics, the entire system of money and politics. That is the scary bit and where I am inclined to don my tin foil hat.
 
Smurf1976 said:
To a large extent, we're just changing the nature of the impact rather than actually reducing it, the inevitable consequence of continuing to pursue constant growth on a finite planet.
Click to expand...

Seems like you have dropped out of the race Smurf.Jobs jobs jobs is what the tribe leaders espouse and up here they are going to bury the by product of energy creation.Out of sight out of mind.All temporary fixes for the next generations to inherit.

Queensland is also spending $300 million on developing the technology for burying carbon emissions, a technology that might never be perfected and, furthermore, is twenty years into the future.
Click to expand...

As for population well with no natural predators there is only one way to go I`m sorry.
 
Pro climate change "science" took decades to get noticed by the politicians.
When it did, anti-climate change junk science, bankrolled by vested interests, attacked its legitimacy: Judging by many posting here they have been fairly successful.
The correct point is not that climate change science is all tied up with economics and politics, but the response to it must be.

The continuing petty point scoring does not change the science. Nor can it change the data.
 

Great summation Redrob.

--------------------------------------------------
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts
 
What else do you think to be junk? apart from economics, politics and nutrition.
It's all part of our evolution. You know they used to say the world was flat.
 
I doubt if Mr Rudd shares the views of the confirmed global warmers on this thread. After all his hype on "drastic action" and "leading the world" in cutting global emissions he has now pulled his head in. Now that he knows that he is not going to lead the world or even save the Reef or the rivers he doesn't want to play any more.

He is smart enough to realise early that there in now little mileage in the harebrained theory that that climate can be controlled by reducing carbon emissions which won't happen anyway. After his token 5% target he is assuming the Copenhagen talkfest will be a fizzer and his stance will be justified.

Just to rub in his increasing doubts he goes on another overseas jaunt laying down another huge carbon footprint. How many light globes would you have to replace with fluros to compensate for that little indulgence.

It would be ironic if Turnbull ended up to the left of Rudd on this issue. His credibility would be shot. All you can do with a dead horse is bury it.
 
Thankfully there is no need to look at other parties attacking the legitimacy of 'offical' climate science. The IPCC are doing a bang up job of that themselves, and blissfully ignoring any data that dare contradict the conclusions they are still tring to prove.

The U.S. Climate Change Science Program has released its report on Abrupt Climate Change. It includes a chapter on “Rapid Changes in Glaciers and Ice Sheets and their Effects on Sea Level”
http://climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap3-4/final-report/sap3-4-final-report-ch2.pdf


And for some perspective again from the head of the IPCC.


:bs:
 
Even if climate change is man-made, who cares.

Little old ozzy cant do a thing about it. Our emissons are a drop in the ocean and not worth crippling our economy for unless India, US, China and a lot of others also take action
 
prawn_86 said:
Our emissons are a drop in the ocean and not worth crippling our economy for unless India, US, China and a lot of others also take action
Click to expand...

That's the whole point of setting different targets. A small target to get the ball rolling and a larger target when the rest come on board.

Also, Australians are big emitters on a per-capita basis. Having a small overall population doesn't give us license to pollute at will.
 
prawn_86 said:
Even if climate change is man-made, who cares.

Little old ozzy cant do a thing about it. Our emissons are a drop in the ocean and not worth crippling our economy for unless India, US, China and a lot of others also take action
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes it is pointless getting worked up to a fever pitch over whether man can or should change the climate. We will always be guided by self interest. A Chinese worker who wants a car couldn't give a stuff about the Barrier Reef, and why should he? He will never see it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...