Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Climategate

Jump to new
Climategate's Deep Throat;
 

Attachments

  • PC-Clmategate.jpg
    PC-Clmategate.jpg
    37.3 KB · Views: 174
Aussiejeff said:
Future generations might well look back on this period in the "development" of human civilization as "The Age Of Smoke & Mirrors".... :cool:
Click to expand...
I suppose that goes with the speed and distance information can circulate nowadays. Lying is an option people take when they are wrong or they want to control a situation.
 
wayneL said:
I watched it the very end. :sleeping:

What does it prove?
Click to expand...

It doesn't need to prove anything, it simply explains exactly what the so called scandal is all about and shows that it isn't such a scandal after all... Plain and simple
 
While we are on the subject of facts and figures...i found this chart in a overview document put together by Hydro Tasmania...apparently over the last decade or so Tasmania's comprehensive Hydro electricity generation system has been generating less and less power from Hydro due to consistently falling water inflows.

Tasmania is famous in southern Australia for its very predictable weather and very predictable rainfall....this has got to do with Latitude, mountains, the southern ocean and prevailing weather patterns.

Hydro Tasmania has been monitoring river flows in the 6 major catchments since early this century...all very easy to monitor, very accurate and not really open to any interpretation....water inflows have been in a declining long term, unprecedented trend since the late 70's

http://www.hydro.com.au/documents/Corporate/Hydro_Electricity_in_Tasmania.pdf
.
 

Attachments

  • Tas hydro.jpg
    Tas hydro.jpg
    121.8 KB · Views: 45
So_Cynical said:
While we are on the subject of facts and figures...i found this chart in a overview document put together by Hydro Tasmania...apparently over the last decade or so Tasmania's comprehensive Hydro electricity generation system has been generating less and less power from Hydro due to consistently falling water inflows.

Tasmania is famous in southern Australia for its very predictable weather and very predictable rainfall....this has got to do with Latitude, mountains, the southern ocean and prevailing weather patterns.
Click to expand...
Depending on what historic baseline you use, total system inflows now are up to 16% down (on a rolling average basis) from those long term figures. It amounts to an annual increased loss of about 0.5% of original flows.

What's more worrying is to realise that man-made rainfall creation has partially offset the decline, Tasmania being one of the few places where cloud seeding has been proven to work and is in permanent use on a commercial basis. Without that, the situation would be even worse.

The basic nature of the decline in inflows takes two forms. First is increased evaporation due to changing climate and second is what I term the "rain hole" during Autumn - a period where rains essentially cease at that time of year (which historically was not the case). Those trends both date back to the 70's and were becoming clear during the 1990's.

Also evident is a virtual absence of high rainfall years in recent times, a similar situation to that seen in SW WA that has seriously affected Perth's water catchments.

It is also a factually correct matter that the Hydro's system would have failed specacularly in each of the past few years if not for extensive use of thermal support generation via Bell Bay power station (the only significant fuel burning power plant ever built in Tas which has spent most of its life sitting idle), development of wind energy and more recently the import of electricity from Victoria. Indeed it would be true to say that the situation has been very tight despite those measures.

All that said, Winter 2009 was exceptionally wet and has lifted Hydro storages to a peak of 46.9% on the 5th of October, a huge rise from the level of 27.3% just 14 weeks earlier and the low of 16.9% in june 2008.

My frequent references to Tasmania in the context of the energy and climate change debate is not because I live there. It is due to a number of factors as follows.

1. First Australian state to go down the energy-intensive industry track and it went further than anywhere. If Tasmania were an independent country, it would have ranked 1st in the world in that regard for many years. For some decades, that sector of the Tasmanian economy was somewhat larger than the resource industries of Qld, WA, SA and the NT combined at that time.

2. Also the first Australian state to face the reality of resource constraints as half a century of hydro-electricity as the state's primary means of economic development came to an end in the 1980's amidst a blaze of environmental controversy. The underlying resource may be different, but that is the same fundamental situation faced by the rest of the country at some point ahead.

3. Economic problems and general events since the 1980's have shown that even stabilising energy consumption is anything but easy in a world set up for constant growth. Eventually, the economic pain became too great in the late 1990's after years of recession and what many termed "a second wave of hydro-industrialisation" was launched, albeit fuelled by gas and imported electricity. Total system load is up 32% since 1996 and the economy has boomed ever since...

4. Easily one of the first places globally to recognise the problems with fossil fuels, that having been noted as far back as the 1950's in relation to oil depletion and the 1960's in relation to CO2.

5. Worth noting also that Hydro itself publicly noted the environmental issues surrounding large scale dam construction as far back as the early 1960's. A decade later it was one such development in Tas that gave rise to the world's first Green political party. A decade after that the conservation movement put an end to further large scale dam building.

6. Still has a predominantly renewable electricity supply and could foreseeably return to 100% within a decade if the economics worked and non-CO2 environmental issues didn't constrain development. Technically it's all easily doable, it comes down to cost and politics.

7. Worth noting in a political context that throughout the 70's, 80's and 90's electricity was a consistently dominant theme in Tasmanian state elections and on a number of occasions, most recently 1998, became the primary issue. Energy isn't a new issue to most Tasmanians...

8. Somewhat ironically, would seem to be one of the few real examples globally of measurable effects of climate change. Even more ironic in that the effect is to reduce renewable energy output.

Hence my often repeated view that anyone wanting to understand the issues of energy would be well advised to examine the circumstances in Tasmania over the past three decades. Then you'll find it's not as easy as it sounds - stabilise energy consumption and you end up an economic laughing stock. Develop more energy and the economy booms once again. There's a rather big issue there... :2twocents

First attached photo is of Great Lake and Lake Gordon, the largest and second largest system storages, virtually empty during the drought. Great Lake has been in continuous use for power generation since 1916, Lake Gordon since late 1977. Both photos taken by Smurf.
 

Attachments

  • MVC-002F_edited.JPG
    MVC-002F_edited.JPG
    28.2 KB · Views: 147
  • MVC-011FA_edited.JPG
    MVC-011FA_edited.JPG
    76.8 KB · Views: 145
So_Cynical said:
While we are on the subject of facts and figures...i found this chart in a overview document put together by Hydro Tasmania...apparently over the last decade or so Tasmania's comprehensive Hydro electricity generation system has been generating less and less power from Hydro due to consistently falling water inflows.
Click to expand...

And this data is statistically significant? I doubt it, I would have thought a trader would know not to be so results-oriented. That's the problem with all of this - everyone is drawing conclusions from data that seems to be completely insignificant to me. 10 years of rainfall? The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. It seems like seeing the market close down today and assume we're in for a crash.
 
Mr J said:
And this data is statistically significant? I doubt it, I would have thought a trader would know not to be so results-oriented. That's the problem with all of this - everyone is drawing conclusions from data that seems to be completely insignificant to me. 10 years of rainfall? The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. It seems like seeing the market close down today and assume we're in for a crash.
Click to expand...

I am now beginning to understand why many traders have trouble with global warming, (besides the facts they are influenced through biased business media interests especially Fox (follow the money and the politics! the cartoon above is back to front!)).

Stock prices are influenced by many changing factors including especially human psychology that ensures that you can't draw conclusions from history that are accurate. You can't backtest and expect the system to work for ever.

Global warming is a measurable scientific fact. It is happening over the short term. In the past it has happened over the long term. The world is getting hotter and we know why! The seas are only going to become more acidic and we know why! There isn't going to be a crash like the stock market. There have been thousands of scientific studies confirming this and though the nay sayers pick on instances where it has gone wrong (due to the weakness of some scientists but that is the way of humanity) the direction is irrefutable.

As a fundamental investor I know that media is changing and you should not invest in Channel 9. As a trader you don't care as long as the profit occurs.


Read some news. This is yesterdays.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2765726.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2765906.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2766508.htm

As I said, follow the money. Follow the science. See the crap for what it is.
 
Knobby22 said:
I am now beginning to understand why many traders have trouble with global warming, (besides the facts they are influenced through biased business media interests especially Fox (follow the money and the politics! the cartoon above is back to front!)).

Stock prices are influenced by many changing factors including especially human psychology that ensures that you can't draw conclusions from history that are accurate. You can't backtest and expect the system to work for ever.

Global warming is a measurable scientific fact. It is happening over the short term. In the past it has happened over the long term. The world is getting hotter and we know why! The seas are only going to become more acidic and we know why! There isn't going to be a crash like the stock market. There have been thousands of scientific studies confirming this and though the nay sayers pick on instances where it has gone wrong (due to the weakness of some scientists but that is the way of humanity) the direction is irrefutable.

As a fundamental investor I know that media is changing and you should not invest in Channel 9. As a trader you don't care as long as the profit occurs.


Read some news. This is yesterdays.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2765726.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2765906.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2766508.htm

As I said, follow the money. Follow the science. See the crap for what it is.
Click to expand...

Or, in your case - follow the media?

I would say that everyone on this thread believes in Climate Change - but few of us believe that it is man-made.

The temperature on this planet has been shifting since the beginning! We have no control over it, simple as that.
 
I would say that everyone on this thread believes in Climate Change - but few of us believe that it is man-made.
Click to expand...

I'm one of those, except that I believe that it is possible it's man-made, yet there is no conclusive evidence of it, hence I get called a 'denier'.

What really concerns me is that if all energies :rolleyes: go into fighting co2 emissions, yet something else proves to be the main cause of CC, then we're stuffed. What I have long thought is that we should be learning to live with change, both hotter and colder, by spending the billions, maybe hundreds of billions, on securing food, water, energy, and safe living areas (above areas that could be flooded, away from cyclone prone locations etc).

brty
 
"As a trader you don't care as long as the profit occurs."

"As a Scientist they dont care as long as the funding keeps coming"
 
i was talking to my friend in houston texas, 3 inches of snow a week back there.. and that has not happened in 15 years there he says

the whole system of evolution and change in climate is inter related. seasons change as the tilt on the axis changes, the sun rotation increases and decreases, the tidal effect of the inner planets on the sun, and the massive jupiter effect on the solar orbits..

the solar activity has finally died down on the sun,

and things will change - on earth (lol as it is in heaven)

the effects of carbon (a leading indicator of effect) is in no way the cause of the warming, the cause of how all planets sit, their orbits, speed and tilt and the speeding up and slowing of the suns rotation all have root causes and effects on many stellar planets..

taxing the end product of climate change is a ludicrous notion, and one that will never have any credibility for those who actually care enough to be interested in and fully understand what the actual global climate change is about.. which is a natural progression and inter relationship of entire planetary system..


the gravity of climate change is in essence caused by gravity.. and the velocity of mass, the temperatures that it causes and the relationships between masses and objects in a planetary system..

just as the moons gravity causes change in the liquids and flows of all the gasses, liquids and matter on earth. it generates temperature in the earths core, it has a real and measured effect on the entire planet itself in every respect..

everything in orbit aroiund the sun also has cause and effect.. and most importantly the sun itself and its winds sunspots and rotation has measurable effects on weather patterns on earth..


pointing all these satellites at the surface and measuring the change of climate in a microclimate of earth, then going bonkers and spinning out on a carbon figure which is nothing more that a net result of a changing climate, is inexcusable when your ignoring the total picture of where that microclimate sits in the stellar system.. and what the inter relationships are.

having a narrow minded closed shop way of viewing your environment wont change whats actually happening in terms of the bigger picture. and more importantly whats about to occur right now...

its like looking into a pond and seeing it evaporate and forgetting to look outwards and see what caused that evaporation.. omg theres a sun up there... hmmmmmm

i fully understand how climate change advocates can believe their data, but its time some of them woke up and looked around at thought things through..

not everything is fully understood, but what is understood by many is that things are about to change in the climate of earth and its not going to be anything like a global warming outcome..

Maunder Minimum

let the global warming nutters live their fears imho.. but in no time the cycle of suns present change will be far more understood..

time to buy some cold weather gear.. as we enter the age of aquarius
 
lasty said:
"As a trader you don't care as long as the profit occurs."

"As a Scientist they dont care as long as the funding keeps coming"
Click to expand...

That's a complete slur on scientists completely against their code of ethics.
If that's what you think then you should get out and meet some scientists involved.

As I said, follow the money and the politics. The money for the naysayers doesn't come from innocent sources. And if you watch Fox you know the politics. Goebbals would be proud if he ran it.
 
Knobby22 said:
That's a complete slur on scientists completely against their code of ethics.
If that's what you think then you should get out and meet some scientists involved.

As I said, follow the money and the politics. The money for the naysayers doesn't come from innocent sources. And if you watch Fox you know the politics. Goebbals would be proud if he ran it.
Click to expand...
LOL that's mild.

One of Missus' best friends is a PhD and works in gene technology. She has far far far FAAAAAAAAAR worse things to say about the integrity of many scientists.

Trying to flip the propaganda argument ain't going to work either. Even if Co2 induced global warming happens to be real"An Inconvenient Truth" was by far the most obnoxious piece of propaganda since Genghis Khan was a lad.

Fox is not where the credible sceptical argument resides. I have placed enough links here to show that.
 
Agentm said:
i was talking to my friend in houston texas, 3 inches of snow a week back there.. and that has not happened in 15 years there he says

the whole system of evolution and change in climate is inter related. seasons change as the tilt on the axis changes, the sun rotation increases and decreases, the tidal effect of the inner planets on the sun, and the massive jupiter effect on the solar orbits..

the solar activity has finally died down on the sun,

and things will change - on earth (lol as it is in heaven)

the effects of carbon (a leading indicator of effect) is in no way the cause of the warming, the cause of how all planets sit, their orbits, speed and tilt and the speeding up and slowing of the suns rotation all have root causes and effects on many stellar planets..

taxing the end product of climate change is a ludicrous notion, and one that will never have any credibility for those who actually care enough to be interested in and fully understand what the actual global climate change is about.. which is a natural progression and inter relationship of entire planetary system..


the gravity of climate change is in essence caused by gravity.. and the velocity of mass, the temperatures that it causes and the relationships between masses and objects in a planetary system..

just as the moons gravity causes change in the liquids and flows of all the gasses, liquids and matter on earth. it generates temperature in the earths core, it has a real and measured effect on the entire planet itself in every respect..

everything in orbit aroiund the sun also has cause and effect.. and most importantly the sun itself and its winds sunspots and rotation has measurable effects on weather patterns on earth..


pointing all these satellites at the surface and measuring the change of climate in a microclimate of earth, then going bonkers and spinning out on a carbon figure which is nothing more that a net result of a changing climate, is inexcusable when your ignoring the total picture of where that microclimate sits in the stellar system.. and what the inter relationships are.

having a narrow minded closed shop way of viewing your environment wont change whats actually happening in terms of the bigger picture. and more importantly whats about to occur right now...

its like looking into a pond and seeing it evaporate and forgetting to look outwards and see what caused that evaporation.. omg theres a sun up there... hmmmmmm

i fully understand how climate change advocates can believe their data, but its time some of them woke up and looked around at thought things through..

not everything is fully understood, but what is understood by many is that things are about to change in the climate of earth and its not going to be anything like a global warming outcome..

Maunder Minimum

let the global warming nutters live their fears imho.. but in no time the cycle of suns present change will be far more understood..

time to buy some cold weather gear.. as we enter the age of aquarius
Click to expand...

Good one Agent M, you are spot on with your hypothesis. You are a man after my own heart. I believe in climate change but not man made.
 
Top