wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,962
- Reactions
- 13,264
That's where the credibility falls over. Research this, there are numerous problems with this organization and the truthfulness/accuracy of their reporting.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
That's where the credibility falls over. Research this, there are numerous problems with this organization and the truthfulness/accuracy of their reporting.
I did check them out briefly, but found nothing more than a few rants on some blogs.
Then by your own admission, you haven't researched this. Come back when you have.
Start here http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/main-conclusions-2/ (Not a "denier")
ok right, so you're disputing 1000+ scientists/researchers/experts, from 100 + countries - based on some internet blogs you have read.
[which arent peddling their own agenda... right?]
you seem adamant that 'CC is a fraud' so i doubt you're going to change your view, but try and look at it rationally.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007; with a 90% or greater probability, human actions are the cause of climate change.
- caused by natural climatic processes alone is less than 5%.
1000+ researchers/scientists/experts... 100+ countries.
-all reviewed/peer reviewed.
Carbon tax should work fine as a means of reducing CO2 provided that there is no means to opt out other than by not emitting CO2.We should have a simple carbon tax and leave it at that.
Apparently there's an internal agreement that there is up to a 10% chance that they're all wrong. I can only imagine the agenda and corruption flying around there, but even they admit they may not be correct.
Carbon tax should work fine as a means of reducing CO2 provided that there is no means to opt out other than by not emitting CO2.
If you take a look at the schemes that have been proposed, they all have some means of opting out, commonly by shifting operations to different countries. The whole thing fails miserably if the tax rate in, say, New Zealand is different to the tax rate in Brazil. Polluters will simply shift to the lowest tax country and continue polluting if that situation is allowed, precisely what they have done in the pursuit of cheap electricity for the past 100 or so years and are still doing today.
Dunno what all the fuss is about -
Humans arent alien to Earth, everything we do is natural so doesnt really hurt the environment.
Do people point at other animals and say they are hurting the planet ? No
This is all BS
so i guess if we dump some 'natural' toxic waste into our water supply we'll all be fine.
Don't talk rubbish, no animal drinks contaminated water.
i dont even know what that means,
anyway the extraction from carbon -- underground --> to carbon in the air is not a natural process.
deforestation is not a natural process.
Whatever animals do is a natural process, we are no different.
It does little to address the core question of when the demands of our growing population will outstrip the Earth's capability to sustain it.Dunno what all the fuss is about -
Humans arent alien to Earth, everything we do is natural so doesnt really hurt the environment.
Do people point at other animals and say they are hurting the planet ? No
This is all BS
is that the best you have? hahaha
then chernobyl was natural... and this is... no fuss.
It does little to address the core question of when the demands of our growing population will outstrip the Earth's capability to sustain it.
Should we reach that point then nature's solution is not overly pleasant.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?