Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Humid said:

I think it just got a run around every time old mate Col was heading to an election

Most importantly, the Barnett government is tapping into long-held anxieties not unique to Western Australians, that there simply is just not enough water. Somehow, then, more should be conjured. “Give the people water and their votes will follow,” wrote Clive Hamilton of the policies of the Howard government. With the 2013 state election due in one of Perth’s hottest months, a thirsty city might well favour the party that turns on the tap.

Click to expand...

Funny how you guys can't get behind something, that was only going to cost $9billion and would have introduced new sustainable agriculture all the way down the West coast,
Yet you cheer on spending $50 billion, to put in a replacement telephone network, so that the telecommunication industry can charge us more, for something we already had.
Is there any wonder we are in a mess, I guess CY O'Conner had the same problem in his day.

sptrawler said:

Funny how you guys can't get behind something, that was only going to cost $9billion and would have introduced new sustainable agriculture all the way down the West coast,
Yet you cheer on spending $50 billion, to put in a replacement telephone network, so that the telecommunication industry can charge us more, for something we already had.
Is there any wonder we are in a mess, I guess CY O'Conner had the same problem in his day.

Click to expand...

Are you talking pipeline or canal?
A canal would of been an environmental disaster

Humid said:

Are you talking pipeline or canal?
A canal would of been an environmental disaster

Click to expand...

The original plan was for a pipeline, pumping stations and holding dams on the way down, similar to the Kal pipe idea.
As IFocus said it was expensive water a lot dearer than desalination( from memory 6 times), the only way that it was going to be feasible was to use NG pumps, that meant getting gas up to the Ord which wasn't practical.
So the idea was shelved, but then those that liked the idea came up with plan B which was a canal, as far as I can remember this was never taken seriously.
Way to much evaporation, biological contamination and maintenance problems.
The whole idea was chucked out, as it got very little public support and resulted in a lot of ridicule.
Then the LNG find off the coast of the Kimberly came, which my guess is solved the problem of pumping, all that was required was getting the processing onshore.
The benefits were three fold, a gas and petrochemical plant could be built at Broome which gave jobs and had great access to Asia for export, it would have caused investment and employment in Broome which has massive social problems and it would have made it feasible to start moving water down to areas like Camballin.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2018-05-30/pastoral-industry-remembers-jack-fletcher/9812634
The Kimberly soil is extremely fertile and only requires permanent water, to have massive yeilds.
Anyway the rest is history, we don't have an extended grain growing area, we don't have a petrochemical industry, Broome still has no jobs and social upheaval and the gas is being taken 200klm offshore with no real benefit to Australia at all.
But Woodside etc are killing the pig, so all is good, Barnett is a dick and everyone rejoices.

This could apply to a number of threads...
The Likelihood of Virus induced recession, possibly global is ... well; looking like a headlight in the tunnel.
The New Deal, Roosevelt's, dug the US out of the depression.
The irony if 'The Green New Deal' was to do the same for the world this time around.
The joy of watching the conniptions of the knuckle draggers of the AGW un-aware/concerned back waters.
And the joy of the overall result.
Just like the New Deal everyone richer. even the plonkers.

At last an article that I think sums it up well.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-03/global-warming-mass-extinction-psychological-impact/11923370

One particular pertinent point IMO:

Climate change deniers will typically denounce any discussion of mass extinction as histrionic doomsday talk, while some climate change believers argue that discussing mass extinction now is precipitous and dampens the optimism that we can turn global warming around with a positive "can-do" spirit.

Who would have thought that both camps have a psychological mindset in common?

A naive optimism that human beings are just so clever that it will all turn out OK.

As I have repeatedly said, the World will continue on, when humans are gone.
If global warming is caused by humans, and we keep multiplying the problem is multiplying.

orr said:

The Likelihood of Virus induced recession, possibly global is ... well; looking like a headlight in the tunnel.
The New Deal, Roosevelt's, dug the US out of the depression.
The irony if 'The Green New Deal' was to do the same for the world this time around.

Click to expand...

What I do find amusing is the media.

Those publications which panic most about climate change are downplaying the virus. Virus shows one of the problems with globalisation you see.

Those who downplay climate change are ramping the virus to the max. Doing so highlights problems with globalisation you see.

Australian media rarely engages in outright biased reporting but bias is a routine occurrence in terms of what stories are run and where they are placed. All of them do it - for anyone who disagrees I suggest attending a few press conferences will change your view.

Fear not, depending whether you like your news to Fair’ or Limited, we’re about to see the drought reduced slightly or we’re about to see Sydney “smashed” once again by a bit of rain. Even Melbourne’s going to cop this smashing it seems with some showers forecast.

Personally I prefer to stick to facts but I guess that doesn’t sell papers or generate clicks in sufficient volume.

If we stuck to the facts and took a scientific approach then as a society we could fix this most certainly.

Smurf1976 said:

What I do find amusing is the media.

Those publications which panic most about climate change are downplaying the virus. Virus shows one of the problems with globalisation you see.

Those who downplay climate change are ramping the virus to the max. Doing so highlights problems with globalisation you see.

Australian media rarely engages in outright biased reporting but bias is a routine occurrence in terms of what stories are run and where they are placed. All of them do it - for anyone who disagrees I suggest attending a few press conferences will change your view.

Fear not, depending whether you like your news to Fair’ or Limited, we’re about to see the drought reduced slightly or we’re about to see Sydney “smashed” once again by a bit of rain. Even Melbourne’s going to cop this smashing it seems with some showers forecast.

Personally I prefer to stick to facts but I guess that doesn’t sell papers or generate clicks in sufficient volume.

If we stuck to the facts and took a scientific approach then as a society we could fix this most certainly.

Click to expand...

Over the last 7-8 years I have been saying to my adult kids and almost adult grandchildren that we are living in "the age of superlatives" every thing is a disaster, a world first, worst in two years, record hot weather (in the past 3 years), smashed etc etc

Now that we really do have something that could require a seriously attention catching word we are so inured to them they are ignored.

The continual need for an eye catching headline has driven editors to extremism.

My daughter said that on social media, if a reader stays on that item for 60secs then it is a smash hit

macca said:

Over the last 7-8 years I have been saying to my adult kids and almost adult grandchildren that we are living in "the age of superlatives" every thing is a disaster, a world first, worst in two years, record hot weather (in the past 3 years), smashed etc etc

Now that we really do have something that could require a seriously attention catching word we are so inured to them they are ignored.

The continual need for an eye catching headline has driven editors to extremism.

My daughter said that on social media, if a reader stays on that item for 60secs then it is a smash hit

Click to expand...

So true macca, I was talking to a mate who is getting close to retirement, but is nervous because of the market.
He was saying it seems as though a once in a lifetime event, happens every five years and in between those we are doomed with global warming.
The downside of 24/7 news coverage is, the public is inundated in it, so is the rest of the World, Australian tourism bookings down 30% since December.
Well would you pay to come here? according to the media, what isn't burnt to a crisp, is now flooded and there will be every chance you will be ordered to stay inside with no food or toilet paper because the shops have been stripped bare.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/hol...3-p546g1.html?js-chunk-not-found-refresh=true
From the article:
Phillipa Harrison, managing director of Tourism Australia, told the 2020 Visitor Economy Forum on Tuesday the Australian industry had been booming before 2020 and was on track to double visitor numbers in 10 years.

But the bushfires had brought an equivalent of $6.5 billion in negative global media coverage and research showed that had deterred international travellers.

Well now, 1.9 billion acres In Oz, 27 million burned, better not go there, we only have 1.8billion acres to look at.

The way the media seems to be approaching all this, it's akin to someone who when asked if they think an item of clothing is good won't answer without first checking the label. If they like the brand then it's good, if not then it's bad. If no label then they won't be able to answer the question.

There are people who really are like that and in the context of fast fashion it's no big deal but it's serious when someone's position on a scientific matter such as climate change or viruses forms their opinion based on how it fits within some predetermined view and not on the basis of any factual information.

This approach means that, in practice, a form of religion has replaced science when it comes to how society's approaching such matters. In a world built upon science and technology that's not a positive sign at all.

Smurf1976 said:

Those publications which panic most about climate change are downplaying the virus. Virus shows one of the problems with globalisation you see.

Click to expand...

That surprises me. True I mostly (but not solely) read The Guardian.
No way they are are downplaying the effects of the corona virus. They have a running blog on the virus which brings together all the unfolding events and then substories that expand.
Too much news perhaps...
https://www.theguardian.com/au?INTCMP=CE_AU

Yes, it's actually the opposite. The media downplaying climate change are also downplaying the virus.

What I'm finding is, the whole incident is showing that the media just circulate and regurgitate the same information, there isn't any of them trying to join the dots IMO.
But we have been indoctrinated, into the believe all of what you read system, where the free thought function has been switched off in the human reader.
Now all we have to get to is the normal"it's the Governments fault".

Smurf1976 said:

This approach means that, in practice, a form of religion has replaced science when it comes to how society's approaching such matters. In a world built upon science and technology that's not a positive sign at all.

Click to expand...

The problem IMO, with the way sections of the media report, is they project everything in a 'glass half empty' manner.
This in turn plays to a certain type of audience, those who are insecure, nervous, and constantly require reassurance, instead the media keeps feeding their insecurities.
This in turn brings out a sense of panic in these people, which they love to feed, then the paranoia sets in.
The media have probably found this works, to keep a core circulation happening, in an otherwise falling number of readers.
Just my opinion, but all the articles have the same theme, unbelievable sense of woe and someone else to blame for everything.
Just my thoughts.

Knobby22 said:

Yes, it's actually the opposite. The media downplaying climate change are also downplaying the virus.

Click to expand...

I wouldn’t accuse either of factually incorrect reporting but go back to when the travel bans came in and to the extent anyone was challenging it, well certainly the articles I came across weren't from the likes of those who deny climate change. There were at least some who seemed to be seeing it as a trade, borders, race etc ideological issue rather than a health issue.

To the climate though well to the extent there's any bias it's really by means of what they choose to run.

Most would have heard some version of "coal power fails in the heat" since that's had a fair airing via the media.

The facts on that one though are much like saying "drivers of blue cars get cancer". Factually true but very misleading in that blue paint on a car does not cause cancer just as hot weather does not cause a boiler producing steam at 600 degrees to blow a tube. The person would still have got cancer if they'd bought a yellow car and the boiler tube would still have failed if it was snowing outside.

By failing to explain that, the media has created an impression in the minds of a substantial portion of the general public that hot weather causes coal plant to break down. No it does not, that's simply not true. Hot weather cuts the output of gas turbines and solar panels yes and it cuts the rating of transmission lines but it does not cause a boiler to fail.

Now my point isn't really about boilers or coal or viruses but about tribalism. We seem to have come to a point where pretty much any issue is viewed by the media and indeed the general public not based on the facts of that issue but according to where it fits within a broader ideological world view.

For those on one side, anything about coal must always be bad, anything about locking down borders etc is always bad, big business is bad mostly, etc.

For those on the other side, anything about coal is always good, anything about foreigners is at least somewhat suspicious unless they're white skinned and speak English, big business is here to save us and so on.

OK that's a bit of an exaggeration but it's not too far from the truth. Good luck finding any factual comment saying something good about coal in the Age for example. They don't lie, they just choose to not run the story.

In a previous job I've been present (off screen) at various press conferences and so on where there's the Minister speaking etc. It always amazed me how the 3 TV stations which run local news would manage to present a different story given they've all got the same film and were at the same conference. At the extreme, I've seen one commercial station give it the actual headline story and the other didn't even mention it at all. The ABC gave it a run but not as the headline (and that was perhaps the most appropriate - the story was arguably newsworthy, government spending $ millions, but not as the headline unless it was a really slow news day).

My thinking is very much that we'd be far better off as a society without this tribal approach.

Consider the good and bad points of Labor policy. Same with Liberal, Green, National, One Nation and so on. They've all got at least something of value and they all sprout some nonsense too.

Consider the good and bad aspects of coal, wind, gas, hydro, solar and so on. There are definite problems with all of them but they all have some good aspects, they can all do at least part of the job.

Tribalism just leads to perpetual conflict, it doesn't actually provide a way forward with any of this whereas a proper consideration of all the issues in a scientific manner and formulating a plan based around that most certainly can take us forward.

I think it's instructive that the media, weather on climate change or coronavirus, just shouldn't be listened to at all.

It doesn't matter which side, there is always a bulshit narrative. I've even seen proponents of the ketogenic diet propose that the state of ketosis provide some sort of insulation from the worst of the symptoms.... But who the hell knows?

Which begs the question, who should we be the listening to?
That is a really important question which I do not have the answer to.

Maybe nobody does.

wayneL said:

I think it's instructive that the media, weather on climate change or coronavirus, just shouldn't be listened to at all.

It doesn't matter which side, there is always a bulshit narrative. I've even seen proponents of the ketogenic diet propose that the state of ketosis provide some sort of insulation from the worst of the symptoms.... But who the hell knows?

Which begs the question, who should we be the listening to?
That is a really important question which I do not have the answer to.

Maybe nobody does.

Click to expand...

I always though AAP provided good factual reporting. Perhaps that is why they are closing down.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...ose-on-june-26-jobs-lost-20200303-p546dh.html

We are very fortunate in really only having two styles of media, so if one takes the middle ground between the two reporting styles, one finds something resembling the facts. IMO

Knobby22 said:

I always though AAP provided good factual reporting. Perhaps that is why they are closing down.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...ose-on-june-26-jobs-lost-20200303-p546dh.html

Click to expand...

I find that hard to believe Knobby, News Corp is one of the major owners.

sptrawler said:

The problem IMO, with the way sections of the media report, is they project everything in a 'glass half empty' manner.
.

Click to expand...

Thought I would google Australia is already in recession smh and see what came up.
Well it has been predicted to happen for a long time.