Resisting Climate Hysteria

[sneak'n]

Not really.

It just demonstrates that ETS is pretty much a tax grab and a nice earner for vested interests at the expense of the broader community; with no outcome on co2 levels. That much is patently obvious.

Tax is collected by governments for redistribution on a reasonably equitable basis for many essential services. How is that at the expense of the broader community?
Who are these other "vested interests"?
On what basis do you conclude there will be no outcome on CO2 levels?

In any case, the pirate ship "global warming" has been holed beneath the water line and taking water fast. It's as good as sunk. Gu'mints will have to think up another method of perpetual alarm quickly...

As shown in other threads, this is not the case at all. The gathering evidence is stronger by the year. Those arguing to the contrary are bereft of scientific support of their case and delve in distractions to the principal theme.

 

[wayneL]

Tax is collected by governments for redistribution on a reasonably equitable basis for many essential services. How is that at the expense of the broader community?
Who are these other "vested interests"?
On what basis do you conclude there will be no outcome on CO2 levels?

Oh come on rederob! This has been discussed at length on this forum already; as well as a million other places in the public domain. If you honestly have to ask this.....

As shown in other threads, this is not the case at all. The gathering evidence is stronger by the year. Those arguing to the contrary are bereft of scientific support of their case and delve in distractions to the principal theme.

It IS groundhog day! :sleeping:

Confirmation bias anyone?

 

[Mofra]

As shown in other threads, this is not the case at all. The gathering evidence is stronger by the year. Those arguing to the contrary are bereft of scientific support of their case and delve in distractions to the principal theme.

If you are up to date with the bulk of scientific research on the subject, then even if you do believe in global warming why would you support a levy that in effect taxes only CO2 producers?

 

[sneak'n]

Oh come on rederob! This has been discussed at length on this forum already; as well as a million other places in the public domain. If you honestly have to ask this.....

It IS groundhog day! :sleeping:

Confirmation bias anyone?

A simple "present the evidence" request is all I seek.
The fact that many people who know little about the detail discuss matters and come to baseless conclusions counts for very little.
If you read this forum on ETS you would get the impression that countries don't want to get involved in carbon trading/emission abatement. Nothing is further from the truth.
The difficulty is getting agreement on a raft of technical issues, let alone quantum and timing.
Few countries are willing to "go first" as there is a real and immediate cost to them. The greater issue, however, is about the longer term costs of not acting sooner.

 

[bellenuit]

The evidence that human activity is causing global warming is much stronger than previously stated and is found in all parts of the world, says a study that attempts to refute claims from sceptics.......

The study said the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had understated mankind's overall contribution to climate change.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...essures-sceptics/story-e6frg6so-1225837488998

 

[wayneL]

The evidence that human activity is causing global warming is much stronger than previously stated and is found in all parts of the world, says a study that attempts to refute claims from sceptics.......

The study said the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had understated mankind's overall contribution to climate change.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...essures-sceptics/story-e6frg6so-1225837488998

That article appeared in all MSM papers around the world.

Exactly what new information has this "study" (spits on the ground) brought to light?

Nuttin'

Nada

Zero

It is just a re-interpretation of existing information. It is a statement of religious faith - a tardy and futile defensive parry from an absolute PR hiding in recent months.

The AGW faithful will cheer and point, the rest of us will roll our eyes.

 

[explod]

We had a big shower here in Melbourne today, struth, they closed the races at Fleminton and the football, and Flinders Street became a billabong for the Yarra.

Climate change ??? G/G would say its the Athiest's convention and the anger of God

Been very humid here in Victoria the last three weeks, worse than Darwin and everyone was saying Global Warming, he he he....nothing like a shower to fix that

 

[bellenuit]

Exactly what new information has this "study" (spits on the ground) brought to light?

Nuttin'

Nada

Zero

From the article....

The panel assessed more than 100 recent peer-reviewed scientific papers and found the overwhelming majority had detected clear evidence of human influence on the climate.

Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring and attribution at the Met Office, who led the study, said: "This wealth of evidence we have now shows there is an increasingly remote possibility of climate change being dominated by natural factors rather than human factors."

....

The study found that since 1980, the average global temperature had increased by about 0.5C and that the Earth was continuing to warm at the rate of about 0.16C a decade. This trend is reflected in measurements from the oceans. Warmer temperatures had led to more evaporation from the surface, most noticeably in the sub-tropical Atlantic, Dr Stott said.

 

[wayneL]

Recent <> new.

Where are the references?

 

[noirua]

Recent <> new.

Where are the references?

If we have to have lots of references ASF could look like 'Wikipedia'. Then there would have to be stars put in indicating 'reference needed'. I suppose we should reference sometimes but all the same, there are our search engines to see if information is correct, if not, cite the fact.

 

[wayneL]

If we have to have lots of references ASF could look like 'Wikipedia'. Then there would have to be stars put in indicating 'reference needed'. I suppose we should reference sometimes but all the same, there are our search engines to see if information is correct, if not, cite the fact.

Utter nonsense!

You are suggesting that assertions need not have any corroborating evidence. That is ludicrous.

 

[bellenuit]

Utter nonsense!

You are suggesting that assertions need not have any corroborating evidence. That is ludicrous.

Wayne. Do you mean assertions like the following, which I noticed didn't come with any corroborating evidence:

It is just a re-interpretation of existing information. It is a statement of religious faith - a tardy and futile defensive parry from an absolute PR hiding in recent months.

It is a newspaper article. You would need to go to the source to validate what is being reported.

 

[sneak'n]

Utter nonsense!

You are suggesting that assertions need not have any corroborating evidence. That is ludicrous.

Mr L, you continually make unsupported statements, and rely on apparent information from unnamed sources on many occasions to support your beliefs (with the exception of unexplained references to Pielke Snr).
Not one single reply from you to my requests has ever indicated that you understand the science.
Since the last IPCC report there have been dozens of scientific conferences where hundreds of peer reviewed papers were presented, many relating to climate and the causes of its change. Only the most radical of these papers ever sees the media latch on, and that probably gives this thread some life.
Those with a lot of time on their hands (and a bit of download available) can get a wonderful perspective on the role carbon plays by watching this: http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml
Science is seldom absolute, especially when such a huge range of complex factors are at work in a dynamic system. But the simple bottom line when it comes to hypothesising about global temperature changes is that carbon dioxide is always large in the frame.

 

[Calliope]

If the rains and flooding in Western Qld and NSW is a result of climate change, I say bring it on.

The health of the Murray-Darling river system is dependent on big floods, not government regulations.

 

[Tink]

We had a big shower here in Melbourne today, struth, they closed the races at Fleminton and the football, and Flinders Street became a billabong for the Yarra.

Climate change ??? G/G would say its the Athiest's convention and the anger of God

Been very humid here in Victoria the last three weeks, worse than Darwin and everyone was saying Global Warming, he he he....nothing like a shower to fix that

Yep was a shocker here yesterday explod

One of my friends rang me that her cars windscreen got shattered and dints in her car. She couldnt believe the size of the hailstones.

 

[wayneL]

Mr L, you continually make unsupported statements, and rely on apparent information from unnamed sources on many occasions to support your beliefs (with the exception of unexplained references to Pielke Snr).
Not one single reply from you to my requests has ever indicated that you understand the science.
Since the last IPCC report there have been dozens of scientific conferences where hundreds of peer reviewed papers were presented, many relating to climate and the causes of its change. Only the most radical of these papers ever sees the media latch on, and that probably gives this thread some life.
Those with a lot of time on their hands (and a bit of download available) can get a wonderful perspective on the role carbon plays by watching this: http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml
Science is seldom absolute, especially when such a huge range of complex factors are at work in a dynamic system. But the simple bottom line when it comes to hypothesising about global temperature changes is that carbon dioxide is always large in the frame.

Rederob,

You misunderstand. I'm not trying to sell an incorrect and now discredited hypothesis, you people are. I don't have to prove or disprove anything as there are ample sources already doing do.

Meanwhile the opportunity to address the correct causes of climate change and environmental damage slips by as policy makers and vested interests seek to profit rather than promote sustainability.

 

[sneak'n]

Meanwhile the opportunity to address the correct causes of climate change and environmental damage slips by as policy makers and vested interests seek to profit rather than promote sustainability.

You might wish to elaborate on "the correct causes of climate change" so that we have a starting point for policy makers who, to your mind, seem somehow more interested in profiting from than solving.
The logical flaws and irrationality of your statements cause me to wonder why I have bothered to reply!

 

[noirua]

Resist climate hysteria, certainly yes. However, if you burn coal smoke comes off and if you burn millions of tonnes of it, then whole cities are covered in it and the result is a coughing and sick nation.

 

[noirua]

Utter nonsense!

You are suggesting that assertions need not have any corroborating evidence. That is ludicrous.

Fair enough if that's what you think I said. However, it was more a criticism of always wanting a citing if the view posted isn't liked much. I'm more understanding of the tiredness brought on by long distance travel that renders us all a touch poseur maybe - no pother intended but respect.

 

[wayneL]

Re Carbon Trading Schemes:

http://www.france24.com/en/20100305...t-rich-off-trading-scheme-study?quicktabs_1=0

AFP - Europe's system for industrial carbon quotas has enriched the continent's biggest polluters, with ten firms together reaping permits for 2008 alone worth 500 million euros, a new report revealed.

Dominated by steel and cement makers, the same "carbon fat cats" stand to collect surplus CO2 permits that -- at current market rates -- could be worth 3.2 billion euros (4.3 billion dollars) by 2012, it said.

This is roughly equivalent to the entire EU investment in renewable energy and clean technology under its economic recovery plan...