No carbon tax and no direct action would be the best outcome of all.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...but-taxes-doomed/story-fn9qr68y-1226715513999
The Coalition would emerge with 39 and possibly 40 votes in the chamber of 76 on both major decisions. (the carbon and mining taxes)
But The Australian can reveal that likely senators from the Liberal Democratic Party and Family First are intent on rejecting the "direct action" policy if the Coalition seeks to legislate the scheme
Greens leader Christine Milne warned that Labor would be jettisoning an emissions trading scheme if it supported the repeal of the carbon tax.“
Now is not the time to cave in to Tony Abbott, to cave in to powerbrokers in the Labor party,” Senator Milne said.
Labor decides to keep digging on its carbon policy.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...dition-of-replacement-ets-20131101-2wqc9.html
I am certain I will hear from rumpole about this post as just another Andrew Bolt rant but the facts are there and cannot be denied.
[/url]
Well they can actually.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2004/12/1206_041206_global_warming.html
Plenty of other sources. It is true that volcanoes can severely effect the temperature though.
Humans Dwarf Volcanoes for CO2 Emissions
Nov 27, 2012 03:00 AM ET // by Jessica Marshall
THE GIST
- Human activities emit roughly 135 times as much climate-warming carbon dioxide as volcanoes each year.
- Volcanoes emit less than cars and trucks, and less, even, than cement production.
- Climate change skeptics have claimed the opposite.
Colossal, mind-bogglingly hot and capable of spewing billowing clouds of flight-grounding smoke and searing, molten lava, volcanoes are spectacular displays of the massive forces at work inside our planet. Yet they are dwarfed by humans in at least one respect: their carbon dioxide emissions.
Despite statements made by climate change deniers, volcanoes release a tiny fraction of the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by human activities every year.
In fact, humans release roughly 135 times more carbon dioxide annually than volcanoes do, on average, according a new analysis. Put another way, humans emit in under three days the amount that volcanoes typically release in a year, according to the best estimates of volcanic emissions.
NEWS: Climate Change Impact: Underestimated?
"The question of whether or not volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activity is one I get more than any question in my email from the general public.' said Terrence Gerlach, a retired volcanologist, formerly with the Cascades Volcano Observatory, part of the US Geological Survey in Vancouver, Wash. Even earth scientists who work in other areas often pose him the question, he said.
To lay out a clear answer, Gerlach compiled the available estimates of CO2 emissions from all global volcanic activity on land and undersea and compared them with estimates for human emissions. He published the compilation in Eos, a publication of the American Geophysical Union.
It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.
Ian Plimer’s ‘Heaven + Earth’ ”” Checking the Claims
Ian G. Enting
Version 2.2
ARC Centre of Excellence for
Mathematics and Statistics of Complex Systems
The University of Melbourne
Overview
Ian Plimer’s book,
Heaven + Earth ”” Global Warming: The Missing Science claims to demolish the theory of human-induced global warming due to the release of CO2and other greenhouse gases. Overall:
1) it has numerous internal inconsistencies;
2) in spite of the extensive referencing, key data are unattributed and the content of references is often mis-quoted.
Most importantly, Ian Plimer fails to establish his claim that the human influence on climate can
be ignored, relative to natural variations. Ian Plimer’s claim that the human influence on climate can be ignored, relative to natural variations, seems to rest on three main strands of argument:
a: the extent of natural variability is larger than considered in ‘mainstream’ analyses;
b: changes in radiative forcing from greenhouse gases have less effect than determined in
‘mainstream’ analyses;
c: the IPCC uses a range of misrepresentations to conceal points a and b
Among the many errors made in attempting to establish these claims, are cases where Plimer:
• misrepresents the content of IPCC reports on at least 15 occasions as well as misrepresenting the operation of the IPCC and the authorship of IPCC reports;
• has at least 28 other instances of misrepresenting the content of cited sources;
• has at least 2 graphs where checks show that the original is a plot of something other than
what Plimer claims and many others where data are misrepresented;
• has at least 10 cases of misrepresenting data records in addition to some instances (included in the total above) of misrepresenting data from cited source.
Noco you attempt to use Ian Plimers book "Heaven and Earth" as a reference to dismiss arguments concerning the nature and recent cause of global warming.
I have already highlighted one of the biggest lies Ian Plimer offers to defend his case. But in case you (or perhaps others ?) are interested the whole book has been dissected to demonstrate the speciousness of his arguments. There is an excellent paper from Melb Uni which for anyone interested in facts is worth reading.
[/B]
http://www.complex.org.au/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=91
I tried to find out the credentials of Jessica Marshall but did not have much luck.
She obviously is a Greenie Alarmist and appears to be expressing an opinion without any evidence.. Noco
Noco can you stop being completely dumb. It just doesn't become you.
Jessica Marshalls "qualifications " are irrelevant in terms of the question of how much CO2 volcanoes emit. The relevant authority is the volcanologist she interviewed in the story. And anyway you can find that information 1oo times over on the net. It is earth science knowledge.
The point I was making was that Ian Plimer, a Geologist by training, just ignored that knowledge to come up with a totally fictional story of how Volcanoes were the main contributor to CO2. On top of that lie much of his book is simply further distortions and lies. The reference I gave details hundreds of large and smaller instances of these lies. Did you consider reading it ?
The reference you have offered is similarly totally, complete and utter garbage. Why do I say that ?
Essentially because it is authored by Christopher Monckton.
He has demonstrated a total lack of integrity in the climate change debate. He lies and lies and lies. Much in fact like Ian Plimer. I think they share the same lie factory.
I would believe absolutely nothing that comes from Monckton without other evidence. I have attached a presentation from a scientist who took the trouble to go through a typical Monckton presentation and itemize slide by slide where the guy doctored graphs, made up figures etc.
Cheers
http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham/
_____________________________________________________________________
http://climatecrocks.com/2011/08/10/more-monckton-lies-deranged-national-press-club-claims/
Avery short simple video which shows how Monckton has no credibility. (Except of course with people who want to believe his rubbish)
So dumber, did you check out the topher .com ........The 50:1 project and all the other interviews?
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?