Resisting Climate Hysteria

[trainspotter]

A POX ON YOUR HOUSE (or body in this case)

The danger is due to climate change, which is causing frozen corpses in Siberia to thaw. Some of those bodies could have been infected with smallpox before they died, and experts fear the disease could remain in suspended animation because of the cold conditions.
Last week, scientists from France and Russia said they had managed to revive a 30,000-year-old virus called Pithovirus sibericum, which had been frozen in Siberia’s vast tranches of permafrost. That has very obvious implications for smallpox.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...ng-back-smallpox/story-fn5fsgyc-1226851404396

Wasn't there a movie about this with Kurt Russell as the lead actor ?? No wait ... that was "The Thing" :

 

[basilio]

A POX ON YOUR HOUSE (or body in this case)



http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...ng-back-smallpox/story-fn5fsgyc-1226851404396

Wasn't there a movie about this with Kurt Russell as the lead actor ?? No wait ... that was "The Thing" :

Interesting stuff. I think I remember a similar concern with people who died from the 1919 Spanish Flu epidemic being thawed out. The concern was with people who had died in Alaska or Siberia. The scientists actually did do this to learn more about the virus and help us fight any similar pandemics

It's quite conceivable that viruses like smallpox ect could survive in a frozen state. Very tough little buggers...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/09/AR2005100900932.html

 

[basilio]

Nice to see a clear, succinct of te4h climate change debate.

Climate change body chief: 'bad guys' won when the 'good guys' lay down

Bernie Fraser says ‘brazen falsehoods’ and ‘misinformation’ have confused a switched-off and fed-up public

One of the country’s most experienced policy thinkers draws a brutal conclusion about Australia’s climate change debate: the “good guys” have lost the argument because they failed to contest untruths peddled by “bad guys”, including the federal government.

Bernie Fraser, the chairman of the independent climate change authority, which the Abbott government intends to abolish, is a softly spoken former governor of the reserve bank and former secretary of the federal treasury, not known for simplistic assessments of major policy discussions.

But he is clearly frustrated at what he believes has been the wilful misleading of a confused and increasingly fed-up public by politicians and industry groups who, he says, deliberately spread misinformation about climate science and the policies that might reduce Australia’s emissions.

The “bad guys” are winning because their “brazen falsehoods”, “untruths” and “misinformation” are often going unchallenged.

“The good guys are way behind and seem to be not making up ground,” he says, in an interview with Guardian Australia ahead of a speech he will make to the national press club on Thursday. “The public generally are getting bored with it all and switching off. The problem seems to be to be that the bad guys are spreading untruths and exaggerations and assertions without a lot of hard evidence and serious debate, cheered on by the big companies who make similar assertions and repeat those assertions without thorough debate.”

http://www.theguardian.com/science/...hief-bad-guys-won-when-the-good-guys-lay-down

 

[wayneL]

Nice to see a clear, succinct of te4h climate change debate.



http://www.theguardian.com/science/...hief-bad-guys-won-when-the-good-guys-lay-down

....and Bernie's credibility as a cc expert is?

Bad guys, good guys.... Pffffft what a wanker.

 

[explod]

....and Bernie's credibility as a cc expert is?

Bad guys, good guys.... Pffffft what a wanker.

Bernie Fraser a wanker wayneL, excuse me???

just for a minute think about what you have said.

For ASF to have (he he your name starts with a W) you as a moderator beggars belief and is why i bother little here anymore.

We work in areas to gain results.

 

[trainspotter]

....and Bernie's credibility as a cc expert is?

Bad guys, good guys.... Pffffft what a wanker.

Bernie is squawking cause the Libs are going to abolish the Climate Change Authority which Bernie happens to be the Chairman of the board. A budget of 6.2 million last year to splash about on wanky TV adverts telling 23 million people that we produce too much carbon on a global level. There are more people in prison in the USA and there are more people living in Shanghai than inhabit Australia.

His aim was to cut emissions by 25% by the year 2020 which would cost the economy approx 27 billion over 7 years in carbon credits alone ! (based on a rate of $30 per tonne)

So not necessarily an expert on climate but more along the lines of getting his hands on some of that filthy lucre that Al Gore is so intent on selling everyone in the form of carbon credits

 

[basilio]

....and Bernie's credibility as a cc expert is?

Bad guys, good guys.... Pffffft what a wanker.

Bernie Frasers credibility is 40 years as one of the most respected policy analysts in Australia. In short he demands evidence to back up assertions and can smell BS a mile off.

Even on this thread we agreed (?) that moving quickly to renewable energy resources made sense simply because of energy security issues and pollution issues.

Smurf amongst others pointed out that even a small risk of substantial/catastrophic results from Climate change is unacceptable. We certainly wouldn't accept a small risk of catastrophic failure in any other system we developed (cars, planes, bridges.)

But clearly these almost self evident facts are insufficient to even move the debate along in a positive direction

Only in this fact free "debate" have we allowed people to get away with repeating lies after lies, misrepresentation and distortion beyond belief.

________________________________________________________

Actually I forgot a couple of other "debates" with similar characteristics. The role of smoking with regard to health and effects of unrestricted gambling on our societies. And of course Creationism

 

[wayneL]

TS

Nail
Head
Hit

Bernie is an economist after all.

I just found his argument fallacious and amateurish.

I stand by my comments, what a wanker.

 

[wayneL]

Plod, basilio

Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy, as a climate expert, Bernie makes a good economist...

...another soft science which breeds experts in retrospective analysis. Even then, most curve fit and data mine to appear credible, though thoroughly undeserved.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I would agree with wayneL that Bernie is not the brightest star in the firmament.

He is a bit stuck at times.

To the matter at hand, it has been the hottest summer I have ever experienced here in Townsville and I need to re-examine the evidence the hairy legged have put forward for weather change.

gg

 

[basilio]

Frankly Wayne you don't care who made Bernie Frasers speech

It wouldn't matter if it was the entire school of Climate Scientists from every University in the world.

It wouldn't matter if it was Pope Francis, Putin, Merkel, Cameron and Obama singing in tune off the same hymn sheet.

It just seems that many people will not countenance even the possibility that we have a serious problem on our hands with human induced CC. And to defend that position you will trash any argument from any person regardless of skills or competence.

You don't have to be Climate scientist to effectively examine the arguments and evidence peddled to refute the work of Climate Change scientists. You just need a keen, clear open mind. The arguments just don't hold water.

Period.

 

[wayneL]

The categorization of good guys and bad guys in this debate is childish and asinine, not to mention a reprehensible load id camel dung... absolutely silly.

....and downright unscientific.

 

[explod]

The categorization of good guys and bad guys in this debate is childish and asinine, not to mention a reprehensible load id camel dung... absolutely silly.

....and downright unscientific.

Goodness gracious, and Holy Mary Mother of God save us.

The only one being childish and ungratious is yours truly. Starting to feel the pressure from peers ole pal.

As a sky and earth watcher from childhood it is in australia, 80 percent drier in most places, the frogs have mostly dissappeared, it is very much hotter, there is more cloud at times due to heat, causing much more wild wind. The plover chicks did not make it out of this spring.

Anecdotal, yes but, have a good hold of science and making of the planet from 5 billion years back.

The way it all evolved is so amazing and sensitive that i do know to ignore our footprint, in particular fossill fuel usevas we are doing is suicidal. To not at least give it a little thought in this way dear wayneL is the real meaning of hysteria.

 

[basilio]

Always interesting to look at appeals to expertise on issues.

Tony Abbott or Ken Henry, Bernie Fraser and Ross Garnaut - who do you believe?

Date
March 13, 2014 - 4:21PM

Ken Henry, Bernie Fraser and Ross Garnaut are lions of Australian economics. They carry more intellectual and institutional weight then most of us mere mortals put together.

So if they broadly agree on any course of action we should all probably sit up and listen, right?

In the past seven days all three have, in different ways, supported a price on carbon to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that are warming the planet.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...you-believe-20140313-34oxf.html#ixzz2vooG1nBB

 

[trainspotter]

SO are they going to tell that to Qantas? 100 million dollar carbon tax bill wont make people fly less? And it is not going to stop companies from polluting as they can simply purchase carbon credits to offset their emissions and this will then be borne by the consumer. What a stupid way of going about something. Let's tax it to make it more expensive to stop people from using it? Worked for smoking as well. $25 a packet hasn't stopped 'em? ... how about petrol? 40 cents or more is tax. Wine Equalisation Tax .. worked a treat that did ! What a stupid idea

Economists should stay out of things they do not understand

 

[burglar]

... Economists should stay out of things they do not understand

That would make them unemployed! :

 

[burglar]

Bernie Fraser says ‘brazen falsehoods’ and ‘misinformation’ have confused a switched-off and fed-up public

You can't confuse a switched-off and fed-up public!

Frankly Wayne you don't care who made Bernie Frasers speech ...

It doesn't matter "authority", "peer revue" or "consensus"!

It matters only correct or incorrect!

... Putin ...

Mr. Putin is a little bit busy right now.
A matter of détente in the Crimea

 

[basilio]

SO are they going to tell that to Qantas? 100 million dollar carbon tax bill wont make people fly less? And it is not going to stop companies from polluting as they can simply purchase carbon credits to offset their emissions and this will then be borne by the consumer. What a stupid way of going about something. Let's tax it to make it more expensive to stop people from using it? Worked for smoking as well. $25 a packet hasn't stopped 'em? ... how about petrol? 40 cents or more is tax. Wine Equalisation Tax .. worked a treat that did ! What a stupid idea

Economists should stay out of things they do not understand

I think you've lost the plot regarding the reason for the carbon tax TS.

It is NOT intended to necessarily reduce energy use. The main purpose is to make energy that emits CO2 more expensive than non polluting energy sources. It gives the market place a signal that they should get out of coal and into solar/wind/wave whatever. Thats it.

In this particular case almost every economist, left right or centre, would agree that making CO2 emissions taxable is the simplest way to redirect investment to non polluting energy.

The taxes on cigarettes do have an effect on consumption but they also fund extensive programs to encourage people to give up smoking. And of course the gov gets its hands on more cash as well.

 

[trainspotter]

I think you've lost the plot regarding the reason for the carbon tax TS.

It is NOT intended to necessarily reduce energy use. The main purpose is to make energy that emits CO2 more expensive than non polluting energy sources. It gives the market place a signal that they should get out of coal and into solar/wind/wave whatever. Thats it.

In this particular case almost every economist, left right or centre, would agree that making CO2 emissions taxable is the simplest way to redirect investment to non polluting energy.

The taxes on cigarettes do have an effect on consumption but they also fund extensive programs to encourage people to give up smoking. And of course the gov gets its hands on more cash as well.

Are you for real? My electricity bill went up $67 "attributable to the carbon tax" ... I don't see my power supplier going ... "OH DEAR !! We must make it cheaper for TS to have electricity and invest billions of dollars building a solar/wind/wave whatever." ... NOPE ... the user pays !!! They just add it to your bill

What about everyone going solar?? Weren't they supposed to be pumping electricity back into the grid to make the power stations not have to burn so much coal? Got a windfarm at the back of where I live and the capacity is supposed to be able to power 85,000 homes. We have less than 50,000 homes in this area. Did that make my electricity cheaper ??? NOPE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't get me started on my gas bill !!!!!!!!!!!

 

[basilio]

TS just introducing the price on carbon was not going to change things overnight - obviously. But in fact there was a significant change in the sourcing of electricity when the tax began as companies reacted to the charges.

But overall the point of a long term change in pricing is to encourage long term changes in energy production.

But don't take my word for it. Smurf is the resident expert on power generation. Why not hear his understandings?

As for your gas bill ? When that goes through the roof it will be almost solely due to the gas companies finding a way to price our gas at world prices because we are now building LNG gas trains in Queensland...