Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Jump to new
basilio said:
So what ? Whatever you are saying has absolutely no relevance to the story on how all parties in Germany have come together to plan the orderly closure of all coal fired power stations and the redeployment of capital and labour to other more sustainable ventures.
Click to expand...
Because they won't hit their target :rolleyes:
Talk is cheap.
 
Comment today


"It’s silly to have a target without a plan.

But apparently you can have a “strategy” without a target. Or a plan.

This is the level of stupid we have reached today.

Compounding that stupid, is the fact we have signed up to the Paris agreement. We keep hearing about how we are meeting our obligations. A big part of the Paris agreement is to work out how to become carbon neutral by the second half of the century.

Which is just another way of saying – ZERO NET EMISSIONS BY 2050.

And what did Angus Taylor say this morning, in between talking about how silly Labor’s “uncocked” policy was?

Well, there is that targeting built into the Paris agreement where the world has agreed to get to net zero emissions in the second half of the century. That’s already there. We’ve got to do our bit. And that’s why we’ll be focusing on technology.

I swear I have become dumber today just following this “debate”. I have actually lost brain cells."
 
IFocus said:
Comment today


"It’s silly to have a target without a plan.

But apparently you can have a “strategy” without a target. Or a plan.

This is the level of stupid we have reached today.

Compounding that stupid, is the fact we have signed up to the Paris agreement. We keep hearing about how we are meeting our obligations. A big part of the Paris agreement is to work out how to become carbon neutral by the second half of the century.

Which is just another way of saying – ZERO NET EMISSIONS BY 2050.

And what did Angus Taylor say this morning, in between talking about how silly Labor’s “uncocked” policy was?

Well, there is that targeting built into the Paris agreement where the world has agreed to get to net zero emissions in the second half of the century. That’s already there. We’ve got to do our bit. And that’s why we’ll be focusing on technology.

I swear I have become dumber today just following this “debate”. I have actually lost brain cells."
Click to expand...
It's called "Ride the wave".
Wait till other countries come up with cheap technology. Then lego patch them into a half ass solution or let business deal with it.
 
Always wondered where and why so many climate deniers get their talking points. And also why there are so many denialists poxing up the net.
Turns out around a quarter of the Twitter denial comments are produced by Bots.
Now isn't that intriguing?
Check out the story.
Study finds quarter of climate change tweets from bots

A study by researchers at Brown University has found a quarter of posts about climate change on Twitter were written by bots.

Bots are computer programs that can masquerade as humans to post or send messages on social media.

Researchers discovered tweets posted by bots created the impression there was a high level of climate change denial.

The paper detailing the finds has not yet been published and was first reported by The Guardian newspaper.

The research team analysed 6.5 million tweets from the period surrounding President Donald Trump's June 2017 announcement that he was removing the United States from the Paris climate accord.

The finding showed 25% of tweets on climate change were likely posted by bots. Most of those tweets centred on denials of global warming or rejections of climate science.

"These findings suggest a substantial impact of mechanized bots in amplifying denials messages about climate change," the authors of the reporter wrote, according to The Guardian.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51595285
 
basilio said:
Always wondered where and why so many climate deniers get their talking points. And also why there are so many denialists poxing up the net.
Turns out around a quarter of the Twitter denial comments are produced by Bots.
Now isn't that intriguing?
Check out the story.
Study finds quarter of climate change tweets from bots

A study by researchers at Brown University has found a quarter of posts about climate change on Twitter were written by bots.

Bots are computer programs that can masquerade as humans to post or send messages on social media.

Researchers discovered tweets posted by bots created the impression there was a high level of climate change denial.

The paper detailing the finds has not yet been published and was first reported by The Guardian newspaper.

The research team analysed 6.5 million tweets from the period surrounding President Donald Trump's June 2017 announcement that he was removing the United States from the Paris climate accord.

The finding showed 25% of tweets on climate change were likely posted by bots. Most of those tweets centred on denials of global warming or rejections of climate science.

"These findings suggest a substantial impact of mechanized bots in amplifying denials messages about climate change," the authors of the reporter wrote, according to The Guardian.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-51595285
Click to expand...
I don't know about bots but I have well over 100 individual clients, from all walks of life, so called deniers, and so called alarmists. (I have resolved to refrain from such labels from now on)

Interestingly I have in my circle of influence quite a few PhDs..

While admittedly none are actual climate scientists, there are some geologists, an important component of climate research.

Interestingly, only the economics professor is holus-bolus on board with the whole worst case climate scenario.

Also interestingly we are able to have robust discussions with out name calling and I respect him immensely for that. <Sidebar>

The vast majority, while admitting they could never admit as much in their institutions, are either sceptics or moderates.

I guess I'm lucky in my trade in that I am not operating in an echo chamber. I get to hear all sorts of opinions on climate and politics. 90% are intelligent and capable of critical thought. The same 90% are disdainful of the largely political argument that encapsulates the climate argument.

In my world at least, many of which are capable of interpreting scientific data, there is criticism of the data end gamr especially so with regards to political imperatives. There is an overriding belief there is a political end game.

FWIW
 
What interests me is the cult like fervour, with which the CC believers, require constant reinforcement of their beliefs.
I mean it isn't as though them endlessly repeating themselves, is going to change anything and the other thing that is scary is the fanatical way they attack anyone who questions their belief.
Of course they can believe anything they want, but if someone they meet is disinterested or is still not one way or the other, they are branded as a denier and persecuted.
It really isn't a healthy situation, that people can can be so self absorbed with a belief, that anyone who isn't fully committed to the belief should be attacked.
History shows, this level of fanaticism usually ends badly.:2twocents
 
sptrawler said:
What interests me is the cult like fervour, with which the CC believers, require constant reinforcement of their beliefs.
I mean it isn't as though them endlessly repeating themselves, is going to change anything and the other thing that is scary is the fanatical way they attack anyone who questions their belief.
Of course they can believe anything they want, but if someone they meet is disinterested or is still not one way or the other, they are branded as a denier and persecuted.
It really isn't a healthy situation, that people can can be so self absorbed with a belief, that anyone who isn't fully committed to the belief should be attacked.
History shows, this level of fanaticism usually ends badly.:2twocents
Click to expand...

Belief ? How about simple scientific evidenced reality ?
1) Humanity is releasing millions of years of buried CO2 into the atmosphere through fossil fuel use

2) CO2 (and other Greenhouse gasses) trap the Suns energy and the extra CO2 is adding an enormous additional heat load to the planet

3) The current result is the biggest quick increase increase in global temperatures ever seen. Scientific research of ice core records can attest to that.

4) The continuation of this process will result in accelerating temperatures which will undermine almost all current ecosytems and destroy the conditions which have allowed our current civilizations to flourish.

This is the summation of the work of an overwhelmingly number of climate scientists, biologists , glaciologists and anyone else who has studied the situation.

Why would you just say this represents a mere "belief" as if another "belief" which is a bit more user friendly could be substituted ?

Does this expertise count for nothing ? On what basis are you suggesting should we just consider them as just "opinions "and "a belief" that may very well be quite wrong ?

Climate crisis: 11,000 scientists warn of ‘untold suffering’
This article is more than 3 months old
Statement sets out ‘vital signs’ as indicators of magnitude of the climate emergency
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...sis-11000-scientists-warn-of-untold-suffering
 
explod said:
How about some references to where and when it has been clearly demonstrated that it has happened to the current/recent extent such as this before.

Have you read "The Sixth Extinction" by Richard Leakey" published about 15 years back, an eye opener.

Since then we see the waters from the north of Europe and north Asia stop flowing with millions of people and farmers driven from their lands. Now if it had all happened suddenly before these places would not have been settled by humans in the first place. The Pacific islands have been settled happily for over 100,000 years but now are being washed away by rising waters and unprecedented storms.
Click to expand...
It is interesting how a bit of what's really going on is ignored.
 
basilio said:
Belief ? How about simple scientific evidenced reality ?
1) Humanity is releasing millions of years of buried CO2 into the atmosphere through fossil fuel use

2) CO2 (and other Greenhouse gasses) trap the Suns energy and the extra CO2 is adding an enormous additional heat load to the planet

3) The current result is the biggest quick increase increase in global temperatures ever seen. Scientific research of ice core records can attest to that.

4) The continuation of this process will result in accelerating temperatures which will undermine almost all current ecosytems and destroy the conditions which have allowed our current civilizations to flourish.

This is the summation of the work of an overwhelmingly number of climate scientists, biologists , glaciologists and anyone else who has studied the situation.

Why would you just say this represents a mere "belief" as if another "belief" which is a bit more user friendly could be substituted ?

Does this expertise count for nothing ? On what basis are you suggesting should we just consider them as just "opinions "and "a belief" that may very well be quite wrong ?

Climate crisis: 11,000 scientists warn of ‘untold suffering’
This article is more than 3 months old
Statement sets out ‘vital signs’ as indicators of magnitude of the climate emergency
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...sis-11000-scientists-warn-of-untold-suffering
Click to expand...
If it is more than a belief you would just accept it, rather than constantly having to re post it, if it is fact well then it is, why keep re posting the same fact?
Obviously you are trying to prove it, otherwise 'evidence' wouldn't need to be re posted endlessly?
Isn't it time we just started posting events, that can be conclusively linked to climate change, rather than just another person, who says yet again it is happening?
 
sptrawler said:
If it is more than a belief you would just accept it, rather than constantly having to re post it, if it is fact well then it is, why keep re posting the same fact?
Obviously you are trying to prove it, otherwise 'evidence' wouldn't need to be re posted endlessly?
Isn't it time we just started posting events, that can be conclusively linked to climate change, rather than just another person, who says yet again it is happening?
Click to expand...
I posted evidence the other day and it was totally ignored. We often put up actual facts as they happen.

Most of you just won't accept reality. The scientists are telling us on tested and re rinsed facts.

Of course if you are like sko m your glasses have the cross in the way.
 
explod said:
I posted evidence the other day and it was totally ignored. We often put up actual facts as they happen.

Most of you just won't accept reality. The scientists are telling us on tested and re rinsed facts.

Of course if you are like sko m your glasses have the cross in the way.
Click to expand...
What if we do accept the science, but question some of what is posted as evidence, as being very marginal.
Do we have to applaud every article put up, regardless of what we think of it?
Why can't it be questioned?
Why is it so important, that there has to be 100% agreement, or else the person is deemed a denier and ridiculed, then bombarded endlessly with any article that has the words climate change in it.
 
Interesting problems developing for Australia, regarding emissions, as gas exports go up so do emissions and labor say exports of coal will thrive under their target.
Sounds as though some form of clever accounting will be required.:xyxthumbs
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...ions-amid-new-coal-fight-20200223-p543jp.html
From the article:
Both the Coalition and Labor are engaged in fierce internal debates over future emissions reductions targets, as the Morrison government wrestles with demands for it to adopt a carbon-neutral 2050 policy to take to the United Nations climate summit in Glasgow in November.

Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese declared on Sunday that Australia's coal export industry could continue to thrive under the target that Labor adopted last week, with the party also riddled with internal divisions over the message its ambitious policies send blue-collar workers in coal-mining regions.

Emissions from electricity generation fell for a third year in a row, down 2 per cent, while during the December quarter emissions in the National Electricity Market fell to their lowest level since records began in 2001.

But emissions generated by exports have increased 54 per cent on 2005 levels and are now 39.1 per cent of Australia’s total emissions.
 

Similar threads

basilio
What does Lloyds think is happening?
2
Replies
22
Views
5K
springhill
springhill
2020hindsight
  • Poll
Which IPCC Scenario is your guess?
2
Replies
32
Views
10K
2020hindsight
2020hindsight
Top