Global Warming - How Valid and Serious?

[ghotib]

The trouble is, quite simply, that most (all?) scientists involved with climate change research are employed by organizations which depend absolutely on man-made climate change being a major threat / not a threat for their continued survival.

"organizations which depend absolutely..."??? What organisations are you thinking of? Universities? Nope. CSIRO? Nope. NASA? Nope... That's already a heck of a lot of employing organisations that have plenty of work to do whether or not man-made climate change is a threat. What's more, there would now be immense kudos to any group who could come up with peer-reviewed, good science that strongly challenged the orthodoxy.

You surprised me with this post Smurf. I usually look to you for facts, for which I thank you, not wild generalisations like this. Must have been a cold night in Tassie.

BTW, I *think* I owe you for one of my favourite blogs: http://www.ecogeek.org/. If so, thanks for that too.

Cheers,

Ghoti

 

[wayneL]

I
What changes do you expect from people Wayne?

Most changes required for us to live "WITH" Mother Nature just aren't feasible yet.

Living a less crassly consumptive, less glossy magazine, less ego driven, less pseudo mock aristocratic lifestyle would be a start.

Do we really need a McMansion?
Do we really need a new X5 every two years to take the kids to school?
Do we really need a dishwasher?
Do we really need some of the rubbish we buy?

We can live more modestly and not try to look rich.
We can ride a bike or walk and have a modest car for when necessary
We can wash up with a cloth.
We can refrain from consumerist plastic rubbish.

Just use less - resources, energy, water.

It's easy and everybody can do it.

It's not about CO2 (but emissions would certainly reduce), it's about resources, waste and pollution. But people, even the AGW alarmists are not interested in that; the only real solution.

Even those governments levying so-called green taxes aren't interested in that solution because of the current monetary system. It would trash the western economies and probably crash the whole monetary system.

That's why "green taxes" are a farce and a ruse at best and reducing emissions a pipe dream.

That's why I no longer give a #### until I see the klaxons doing something other than making millions by making films and scooping up government research funds and living large (IPCC meetings at tropical resorts anyone?)

Paaaa!!!

 

[professor_frink]

Do we really need a dishwasher?

yes.

 

[Pat]

I might add the REAL changes are held back by the big business, not the gov's, nor the people.
For eg. the electric Car... a perfectly feasible option, they made some, they never took off, they gave it bad publicity, they held back breakthroughs in battery technology. They killed the concept.

 

[Pat]

Do we really need a McMansion?
Do we really need a new X5 every two years to take the kids to school?
Do we really need a dishwasher?
Do we really need some of the rubbish we buy?

We can live more modestly and not try to look rich.
We can ride a bike or walk and have a modest car for when necessary
We can wash up with a cloth.
We can refrain from consumerist plastic rubbish.

I think the need for this comes from the media force feeding the shyte eh?
Generation Y are the above, because they've been fed the garbage since day one. Blame whoever but as long as we're told this is "cool" don't blame the people. They're sheep.

You might also find its the so called upper class that contribute more than the smaller money makers. Not many can afford what you've posted above, let alone endulge in it.

I ask what is driving this mentality?

 

[Pat]

yes.

You can have dishwasher if it runs on solar power, and your on tankwater

 

[professor_frink]

You can have dishwasher if it runs on solar power, and your on tankwater

I get that green power thing so that's taken care of. The water isn't that much of an issue. My dishwasher uses about 14 litres per wash(or so it said on the sticker when we bought it). A full dishwasher load of dishes would require the sink to be refilled half way through if I was washing them manually, so I'd use 10-12 anyway.

 

[Fishbulb]

well, this is as good a way as any to make a first post.

when it comes to the new world religion of global warming, i like to take the stance of skeptic.

- http://antigreen.blogspot.com/

 

[gfresh]

Not just global warming prohorts that are paid to push a certain agenda, the anti-GW side is being nicely sponsored by Exxon.. No surprise.

Brad Miller, chairman of the US House of Representatives oversight committee on science and technology, last year said Exxon's support for sceptics "appears to be an effort to distort public discussion". The funding of an array of think tanks and institutes which house climate sceptics and deniers also worried Britain's premier scientific body, the Royal Society. It found that in 2005, Exxon distributed nearly $3 million to 39 groups which "misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence that greenhouse gases are driving climate change". Its protests helped force Exxon's recent retreat.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/global-w...nge-smokescreen/2008/08/01/1217097533885.html


Blah:

Andy Pitman, an editor of the prestigious international Journal Of Climate, says there are good reasons why global warming sceptics cannot get a run in peer-reviewed scientific literature. "We would kill, literally kill, for a good paper that proved the science on global warming was wrong," Pitman says. "Then I could retire and accept my chair at Harvard. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen, and there's vast amounts of evidence why."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/global-w...nsus-is-growing/2008/08/01/1217097533889.html

 

[noco]

well, this is as good a way as any to make a first post.

when it comes to the new world religion of global warming, i like to take the stance of skeptic.

- http://antigreen.blogspot.com/

Ha Fishbulb,
What a great topic you posted on GW. I have been in your skeptic club ever since this ugly GW thing raised its head.
Professor Bob Carter, James Cook Uni. Townsville is of the same opinion.
Hope KRudd and Penny Wong read this article; not that it will make much difference to them for they are hell bent on sending our country down the "gurgler" with cost to the economy and loss of jobs for the "working families" not to memtion the poor old pensioners.
Krudd and Swanie must pleased with the media diversion on Peter Costello as it has taken the attention away from GW FOR A WHILE.

 

[IFocus]

Living a less crassly consumptive, less glossy magazine, less ego driven, less pseudo mock aristocratic lifestyle would be a start.

Do we really need a McMansion?
Do we really need a new X5 every two years to take the kids to school?
Do we really need a dishwasher?
Do we really need some of the rubbish we buy?

We can live more modestly and not try to look rich.
We can ride a bike or walk and have a modest car for when necessary
We can wash up with a cloth.
We can refrain from consumerist plastic rubbish.

Just use less - resources, energy, water.

It's easy and everybody can do it.

It's not about CO2 (but emissions would certainly reduce), it's about resources, waste and pollution. But people, even the AGW alarmists are not interested in that; the only real solution.

Even those governments levying so-called green taxes aren't interested in that solution because of the current monetary system. It would trash the western economies and probably crash the whole monetary system.

That's why "green taxes" are a farce and a ruse at best and reducing emissions a pipe dream.

That's why I no longer give a #### until I see the klaxons doing something other than making millions by making films and scooping up government research funds and living large (IPCC meetings at tropical resorts anyone?)

Paaaa!!!

I can see your point Wayne because of the above we are pretty much screwed its just not going to change.

Only a pandemic will save the planet but I think culling 2/3's of the current world population would be required.

I just keep thinking that we once lived on Mars but we fu%ked it and had to come to earth..........

 

[Fishbulb]

Ha Fishbulb,
What a great topic you posted on GW. I have been in your skeptic club ever since this ugly GW thing raised its head.
Professor Bob Carter, James Cook Uni. Townsville is of the same opinion.
Hope KRudd and Penny Wong read this article; not that it will make much difference to them for they are hell bent on sending our country down the "gurgler" with cost to the economy and loss of jobs for the "working families" not to memtion the poor old pensioners.
Krudd and Swanie must pleased with the media diversion on Peter Costello as it has taken the attention away from GW FOR A WHILE.

thanks

and yes, i've read what the unfortunate penny wong has said about co2. laughable if it wasn't so serious. but on the upside the evidence, or lack of - against this new religion is beginning to mount.

i guess i'm ever surprised by human beings.

 

[2020hindsight]

i guess i'm ever surprised by human beings.

me too
and the bs they can pedal

Like that site of yours lol. "Greenies hate people" ??
(only selfish ones m8, only selfish ones)

 

[wayneL]

To me it is illogical to go to some extent only to fudge, fake, exaggerate results, just for more funding... funding a lie?

FYI

Rotten eggheads

With no celebrities to talk about, last week's earthquake has been making all the headlines in LA while providing an opportunity for people with overgrown beards and pieces of cheese lodged in their hair to get on TV - ie, earthquake scientists. These eggheads haven't been allowed out of their laboratories since the last serious rumbler in 1994. To be honest with you, I worry about the scientists more than I worry about the earthquakes. After all, look at the case of the anthrax attacker.

If you believe Sunday's newspapers, he was a biowarfare scientist named Bruce Ivins, who found himself twiddling his thumbs after the Cold War and thus came up with a dastardly plan to win more money for anthrax research. It worked. The Government proposed a $877 million contract for a vaccine based on two patents co-invented by none other than Ivins himself. Could the same thing happen in LA? Could an unloved earthquake scientist plant explosives along the San Andreas Fault in the hope of triggering the Big One, just to teach everyone a lesson? Stranger things have surely happened.

 

[So_Cynical]

Its unfortunate that what should be a scientific debate on this forum
and globally has degenerated into a political debate.

 

[wayneL]

Its unfortunate that what should be a scientific debate on this forum
and globally has degenerated into a political debate.

Because that's exactly what it is.

The science is fluffy at best, a hypothesis, not even a genuine theory.

 

[Pat]

FYI

Rotten eggheads

With no celebrities to talk about, last week's earthquake has been making all the headlines in LA while providing an opportunity for people with overgrown beards and pieces of cheese lodged in their hair to get on TV - ie, earthquake scientists. These eggheads haven't been allowed out of their laboratories since the last serious rumbler in 1994. To be honest with you, I worry about the scientists more than I worry about the earthquakes. After all, look at the case of the anthrax attacker.

If you believe Sunday's newspapers, he was a biowarfare scientist named Bruce Ivins, who found himself twiddling his thumbs after the Cold War and thus came up with a dastardly plan to win more money for anthrax research. It worked. The Government proposed a $877 million contract for a vaccine based on two patents co-invented by none other than Ivins himself. Could the same thing happen in LA? Could an unloved earthquake scientist plant explosives along the San Andreas Fault in the hope of triggering the Big One, just to teach everyone a lesson? Stranger things have surely happened.

Meh.
Same could be said about the web site above. There will always be the crap to sift through.

The climate is changing, we can see it, some scientists measure it, but the only way we will ever be able to tell if it's "warming" is wait'n'see.

I think its a valid debate, with positive out comes. The science is fluffy for all sides of the argument. I guess it makes it more interesting.

 

[wayneL]

me too
and the bs they can pedal

Like that site of yours lol. "Greenies hate people" ??
(only selfish ones m8, only selfish ones)

They would be the ones that preach AGW and expect everyone to change their lifestyles, except them, wouldn't it.

Al Bore comes to mind as selfish.
Perhaps BHP bridge building AGW klaxons as well.

 

[2020hindsight]

They would be the ones that preach AGW and expect everyone to change their lifestyles, except them, wouldn't it.

Al Bore comes to mind as selfish.
Perhaps BHP bridge building AGW klaxons as well.

Wayne
you're gonna have to stop getting lost in your Ad hominem sidetracks.

 

[wayneL]

Wayne
you're gonna have to stop getting lost in your Ad hominem sidetracks.

Oh Al can stand up to it with Nobel Peace prize and Oscar in hand... not to mention millions of dollars and an energy hungry mansion and lifestyle.

As for sensitivities to generalities, reactions to having accidentally touched a hypocrite nerve, I can do nothing about.