Global Warming

[Mark351]

The worst thing about that graph above is the trend towards cooler temps over the next 10 years. Maybe I should consider moving to north Queensland.

[calais]

Originally Posted by balthazarr

I didn't say I agree with using a tax to implement policy, but the reality is, taxation - and any associated concessions, exemptions, impositions etc. - has an effect on consumer's and especially business' behaviour. Just look at the Medicare Levy/Private Health Insurance rebate as an example... here there's a carrot (30% off your insurance premium), together with a stick (extra tax payable if you don't have private insurance and earn over a certain amount)... together, they're quite effective at 'encouraging' take up of private health insurance.

Ok, so what you are saying is that taking money away from the population in the way of taxation and concession is the socially accepted way of encouraging change in consumer habits.

I personally prefer other methods to mould consumer change, that isnt based on misinformation and greed, which unfortunately, is not a view held by government.

In order to encourage change in behaviours, a lot of tactics have been employed, ranging from scare campaigns (speeding), to ridiculous taxes (alcopops), to passing laws (NSW Suspension Hooning Laws), all based on nothing more than a desire to raise revenue, for the greatest scam in history, legally robbing citizens by the government who was elected to govern and speak for the majority.

Sadly climate change will just be another tick in the box for the government to legislate against, what was previously legal, in order to generate revenue, in the name of environmental responsibility.

The way I see it, any emissions trading scheme will rake in millions, supposedly to combat climate change, but after all the "thinktanks" and "consultants" have squandered the revenue, the little that is left over will plant a few trees, and close more national parks to recreationists, and then bolster more polititians retirement funds.

This has been proven time and time again with the federal fuel levy, which was to improve road conditions, yet we are still waiting for the Pacific and Bruce Highways to be upgraded from the goat tracks they currently are.
And again, from the medicare levy which was to be used to increase the level and standard of healthcare available to the public, but still, is being squandered as bed numbers fall, emergency waiting times increase, and no more nurses are being employed because of a "budget deficit" despite record revenue levels on both state and federal levels.

I know I have spoken out on this topic, but as I see it, Australia is quickly becoming a nana state, where a lot of free enterprise and liberty is being taken away, to the detriment of what we once were and where we are going as a nation.

[Work Horse]

Originally Posted by calais

the jackboot of democracy .

I love a mixed metaphor :evil3:

[snappy]

Not a bad video this :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ

[calais]

Originally Posted by Work Horse

I love a mixed metaphor :evil3:

Hey thats government for you (tic)

[bluestreak]

I used to be more open minded about this. I've become more sceptical about it recently since I've done some research of my own.

My main problem with the issue is that we as laypeople must rely on the research and studies of specialists. We must also take their word that their results are correct, complete, corroborated and unbiased. My research has shown me that this is not always the case and that it isn't widely acknowledged when mistakes are made.

I find it disturbing that any dissenting voice is howled out as a heretic.

I am suspicious of big business' involvement in the green industry - it's worth trillions, therefore I am dubious of their claims. Anyone remember the Y2K bug? Vested interests made millions from that and it only had a short window of opportunity. This could go on for 80 years before it's confirmed or discredited. Maybe more. Come in spinner.

Whenever the government talks of new tax, my scepticism increases ad infinitum :yeees: . Especially if they claim green aspirations but still cling to coal.

Cheers

:

[platinumXR]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

My main problem with the issue is that we as laypeople must rely on the research and studies of specialists. We must also take their word that their results are correct, complete, corroborated and unbiased.

Well, we don't have to; as you've stated you've done your own research and come to you're own conclusion or theory.

Granted you must rely on statistics and scientific measurements (not theories) to reach this conclusion, but it shows that not all of us are inarticulate, submissive and apathetic.

The majority of 'laypersons' accept these theories as truths because "it was on the news or A Current Affair...so it must be true...mustn't it? Journalist's are the bane of society and should be classified as Hazardous Materials and treated as such. About as polite as I can put it on this forum.

It's just lethargy and apathy as they've [we've] got more important and more immediate problems to focus on. But these same people watch Big Brother and think Funniest Home Video's is a great show...

A generalization yes, but one based on my own observations :

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

I used to be more open minded about this. I've become more sceptical about it recently since I've done some research of my own.

My main problem with the issue is that we as laypeople must rely on the research and studies of specialists. We must also take their word that their results are correct, complete, corroborated and unbiased. :

So you have done some research and have come to your own conclusions? which differ from all the scientific experts that study our atmosphere and weather for a living? and your particular area of expertise is?

Of course we must rely on the testimony of specialists!, rather than the collective thoughts of mates at the pub! There are checks and balances in the scientific community, one scientist publishes findings in scientific journals etc, and there will be a swarm of other ones going through it with a tooth comb looking for errors, contrivances and lack of proper scientific method and in many cases will attempt to replicate the method to see if the same results can be obtained. That's how scientific research works, there is even more cutos involved for scientists if they expose bad science, and the bigger the name the better.

[GT69]

Originally Posted by torbirdie

So you have done some research and have come to your own conclusions? which differ from all the scientific experts that study our atmosphere and weather for a living? and your particular area of expertise is?

Of course we must rely on the testimony of specialists!, rather than the collective thoughts of mates at the pub! There are checks and balances in the scientific community, one scientist publishes findings in scientific journals etc, and there will be a swarm of other ones going through it with a tooth comb looking for errors, contrivances and lack of proper scientific method and in many cases will attempt to replicate the method to see if the same results can be obtained. That's how scientific research works, there is even more cutos involved for scientists if they expose bad science, and the bigger the name the better.

Im a painter, If you ask me if your house needs painting, and i need work, what am i going to say to you?

[cob115]

as soon as i herd Al toe jam gorr and loonies on the left raming it down every ones neck i knew it was bull !!!!!!,another, the end of the world is nere ,do what i say NOT WHAT I DO,or your all going to die in hell.Sorry to bring politics into it ,but thats how this whole load of poo was started(buy loony leftys) .When u look at who is pushing it !!and there makeing lots of $$$$$$$$$ from it out of our taxs!! ,
Sorry to the belivers but i dont give a rats bum how much carbon is pushed out ,this is a real diversion from more pressing problems faceing us

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by platinumXR

Journalist's are the bane of society and should be classified as Hazardous Materials and treated as such

True

Originally Posted by GT69

Im a painter, If you ask me if your house needs painting, and i need work, what am i going to say to you?

My point exactly

Originally Posted by torbirdie

So you have done some research and have come to your own conclusions? which differ from all the scientific experts that study our atmosphere and weather for a living? and your particular area of expertise is?

Firstly, Im not talking about actually doing any of the science myself. As you've said, there are scientists who do that for a living.

Secondly, you seem to be under the misapprehension that the entire scientific community is in agreement about Global Warming. It is not. There are those that believe Global Warming is an actual phenomenon and there are those that don't. Even amongst those that agree Global Warming is occurring, there is disagreement about the cause. All we hear about in the mainstream media is Human Caused Global Warming. Why? Because that's where the money is to be made.


Forgive me for being sceptical and not believing everything I hear or see in the media. You're on the Forum so I'll take an educated guess and say you've got access to the internet. It's a magical tool that can lead you to all sorts of information if you're prepared to go and look for it yourself.

Originally Posted by torbirdie

...There are checks and balances in the scientific community, one scientist publishes findings in scientific journals etc, and there will be a swarm of other ones going through it with a tooth comb looking for errors, contrivances and lack of proper scientific method and in many cases will attempt to replicate the method to see if the same results can be obtained. That's how scientific research works, there is even more cutos involved for scientists if they expose bad science, and the bigger the name the better.

Believe it if you want to. One of the reasons I've become more sceptical is because I have found discrepencies in findings and methods. They have been exposed and published and are available to anyone willing to search. Didn't get much more than a 2" x 3" article in the daily paper, and no attention at all on nightly news.

You would think there are checks and balances and that scientists get "cutos" (kudos) for exposing bad science. You'd be wrong. This has become the religion of the day, where the IPCC is the new Spanish Inquisition and any non believers will be burned at the stake.

However, to clarify my original post:

Originally Posted by bluestreak

I used to be more open minded about this. I've become more sceptical about it recently since I've done some research of my own.

You will note at no point did I say what I actually believe. I merely stated my suspicion of the motives of those that are pushing this lucrative cause. I still keep an open mind, I certainly don't have my head in the sand, but I am not willing to believe what they said "just coz"

Cheers

:

[onfire]

I think global warming is a topic, where those who are passionate about the subject are willing to speak their minds openly and freely, regardless of which ever camp they are in. To lay claim that 90 something percent of Australian's believe global warming is due to human influence, I'd laugh if I wasn't so concerned facts like these are openly published. I'd be hard pressed to find someone who believes the theories Al Gore and co. present, let alone cares at all either way.

From greenies, to uni students, to rock stars.. seems their war is still against the system, the shock and awe opinions are the weapons and climate change is simply a battle front.

Global warming or climate change, is just as much political, if anything.

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

True


Secondly, you seem to be under the misapprehension that the entire scientific community is in agreement about Global Warming. It is not. There are those that believe Global Warming is an actual phenomenon and there are those that don't. Even amongst those that agree Global Warming is occurring, there is disagreement about the cause. :

Absolute fallacy, people that dont wont to accept the facts try and create an illusion that there is disagreement out there and that scientific thought is divided on the issue.


The number of scientists that are part of proper scientific institutions that disagree about the causes and effects of global warming, you can count on one hand. Perhaps you might list just one here?

Before you do:
Do be very careful about carefully checking the background/qualifications /who is financing them etc.

Many people still remember back to how cigarette companies managed to buy off doctors to create an illusion that it was just hysteria that smoking caused cancer.

[onfire]

Pay a man a million dollars to prove humans are the only cause of climate change, bet your bottom dollar he will.

[calais]

Originally Posted by onfire

Pay a man a million dollars to prove humans are the only cause of climate change, bet your bottom dollar he will.

That would make him both an oxygen thief and a liar....... But hey, money to made right?

[GK]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

You seem to be under the misapprehension that the entire scientific community is in agreement about Global Warming. It is not. There are those that believe Global Warming is an actual phenomenon and there are those that don't. Even amongst those that agree Global Warming is occurring, there is disagreement about the cause. All we hear about in the mainstream media is Human Caused Global Warming. Why? Because that's where the money is to be made. :

In agreement with you totally.

It's the loud people with the MSM backing whose views are constantly parroted to us as fact. It is anything but. There is serious disagreement about the whole deal. It's just not allowed to be shown in the MSM.

Originally Posted by bluestreak

This has become the religion of the day, where the IPCC is the new Spanish Inquisition and any non believers will be burned at the stake.

Very true. Just look at how sceptics are treated by the media. There is no real debate allowed. It's assumed as fact.

Troubling times ahead indeed. Open thinking and debate will be more and more squashed and state sponsored ideals will be pushed and pushed.

GK

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by GK

There is serious disagreement about the whole deal. It's just not allowed to be shown in the MSM.

A challenge to you also GK, provide the name of just a couple of reputable scientist that shows serious disagreement.
Fortunately for us, just not anyone who wants to deny global warming(based on their own research? bluestreak?) is given the floor in our daily news bulletins or current affairs shows.
Unfortunately there isnt much for them to report to please the skeptics. But everyday there are countless accounts of the effects of warming to report: shrinking artic ice and glacial melt is fact, as is the thawing of the tundra as well as rising salinity levels in Australian wetlands due to the rising sea levels, the list is near endless.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by torbirdie

Fortunately for us, just not anyone who wants to deny global warming(based on their own research? bluestreak?) is given the floor in our daily news bulletins or current affairs shows.
Unfortunately there isnt much for them to report to please the skeptics. But everyday there are countless accounts of the effects of warming to report: shrinking artic ice and glacial melt is fact, as is the thawing of the tundra as well as rising salinity levels in Australian wetlands due to the rising sea levels, the list is near endless.

BUT ...

Unfortunetly for us ...... anyone who has an agenda to push on climate change is given the floor in our daily news bulletins or current affairs shows.

Climate change is a business and news worthy ..... saying its not there is not worth mentioning.



| [/url] |

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by auslandau

BUT ...

Unfortunetly for us ...... anyone who has an agenda to push on climate change is given the floor in our daily news bulletins or current affairs shows.

Climate change is a business and news worthy ..... saying its not there is not worth mentioning.

Yes, there are opportunities for those that can provide "green" initiatives, unfortunately that is no direct proof of the conspiracy theories of the "head in the sand" brigade. Bring evidence to the table/forum rather than just sitting there like red necks taking shots at anything that moves.

[bluestreak]

Oh dear.

I'm not going to argue with you torbirdie. I've got two teenage kids that also can't be told anything because they know it all, so I see it as a less than productive exercise in complete futility. You're obviously very passionate about this subject, so to bring any alternative view to the table will just keep stoking the fire.

I have changed my mind after reviewing the original post (who believes Global Warming is real?) and I will come out and state that I don't believe it. Verifiable and published data shows that the earth has in fact cooled by 0.6 degrees C.

Feel free to go nuts and have the last word if you need to, but this is the last I'll say on it as I'm not here to hijack the thread.

Cheers

:

[xtremerus]

The global warming theory all starts from the IPCC initial report. The IPCC is just another UN committee of old discarded politicians with its own agenda. It altered the wording of scientific reports to suit its agenda.

[Gaz]

there are always going to be year to year variations. It is the long term average that you need to consider.

While there was a drop in global temperatures a few years ago, the average for the whole period is a rise. As is the graph below, while there was a drop in temperature in the 2000's (compared to the previous years) this 'dropped' temperature is still above the average temperature.



You say people have a vested interest in proving climate change. I ask you, who has the BIGGER vested interest in proving or disproving it? The start up companies for alternate technologies or the companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars who stand to lose this market if global warming is correct.


Say we make the necessary changed to life and remove our dependency on oil and it turns out it wasn't real, is it so bad that we become more sustainable and no longer require huge mining projects and foreign oil to run the country?

[xtremerus]

Originally Posted by Gaz

Say we make the necessary changed to life and remove our dependency on oil and it turns out it wasn't real, is it so bad that we become more sustainable and no longer require huge mining projects and foreign oil to run the country?

The materials needed for the alternative energy come from mining and oil.
The money to financial and make them viable as an alternative, will come from a tax on mining and oil. :

[Gaz]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

The materials needed for the alternative energy come from mining and oil.
The money to financial and make them viable as an alternative, will come from a tax on mining and oil. :

Yes, they come from mining (and some cases oil). The best thing about alternatives, after they are built there is either no fuel or very little fuel required.

Once we start building these things, we can then continue to mining using renewable energy.

Lot's of alternatives are either already viable, or very close. Wind is already cheaper than the fossil alternatives, however it's intermittent nature is an issue, but once the energy storage problem is solved we are on a winner.

Solar Thermal is also very close to becoming on par with fossil fuels and int he near future we will see that.


The main reason we see alternatives or renewables as expensive is because of the concessions that are placed on fossil fuel electricity generation. We are not paying anywhere near the 'true' cost of generation. In WA Verge (power generator) is being given $700m a year to cover it costs, we are paying ~21c/kwh for power, factor in this $700 million to that price and we would be paying towards 30c/kwh. This is the true cost of electricity where renewables become seriously viable but people just aren't prepared to cop paying the real cost of electricity.

[Green X]

Originally Posted by Gaz

Say we make the necessary changed to life and remove our dependency on oil and it turns out it wasn't real, is it so bad that we become more sustainable and no longer require huge mining projects and foreign oil to run the country?

Is that a 5.4 liter V8 your driving there Benedict Arnold :

and I'm funding my life on those huge mining projects dammit
Ok, ok ill work on enviro projects but i better not have to take a pay cut!

[ILLaViTaR]

The earth has had loads more carbon in it's atmosphere over the 4 billion years it's been here.

All these scares they give you have a 0.0001% chance of coming to play, but they are possible.

The world doesn't need fossil oils to survive.

Hemp oil is already a superior and more feasible alternative to fossil fuels (Pretty sure it puts out more power, some of the first fords were ran on this.

Solar power, would be feasible if the oil companies didn't keep buying off everyone and their research.

Electromagnetism is where it's at, they've already made some modes of transport with it (just a scooter), it's a self sustaining form of energy/has the same effect.

The oil companies are keeping the global population in the past for their own personal gain.

We could be years ahead in utilising appropriate more logical technology.

[anto]

Originally Posted by torbirdie

"head in the sand" brigade. Bring evidence to the table/forum rather than just sitting there like red necks taking shots at anything that moves.

so anyone that disagrees is a redneck ? nice.

what are your thoughts on Professor Ian Plimer studies on the matter?

here is an article by national Geographic from a while back that poses some intersting questions if you're open minded .

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

[anto]

there are a lot of opposing views by recognised scientists, climatologists and geologists, you just need to look at them with an open mind and make an informed decision. According to the U.S senate commite on Environment and public works there are 700 plus scientists with an opposing view. They are listed http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...1-fc38ed4f85e3

and for the helluvit heres a few more..

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/...ming020507.htm

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=c47c1209-233b-412c-b6d1-5c755457a8af

we need to do away with the worms..

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=63227

...no wait its the mooses fault

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...501145,00.html

and before you say it yes I am aware that they are from conservative sites just as I am aware that Left and Al Gore have declared "The time for debate is over. The science is settled."

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by anto

what are your thoughts on Professor Ian Plimer studies on the matter?

Some info this professor is putting out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfnF7ilVzeo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBT2Q...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrK33...eature=related

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by anto

there are a lot of opposing views by recognised scientists, climatologists and geologists, you just need to look at them with an open mind and make an informed decision.

As i warned people earlier on, research the people you want to climb on board with;

have a read of:
http://www.onepennysheet.com/?p=25274

Many only have a slight disagreement with Al Gore that the book on climate science is closed? Why in the hell are they listening to Al Gore, he isnt a scientist, just a passionate spruiker. Look past the buffonery of Mr Gore, there is much that is not understood about the climate and best guesses are that it will remain that way until the end of time. However, the link between CO2 conc and rising temp levels is very credible, and a decision to take no action based on "we dont know everything" is just irresponsible..

Ian Pilmer: rofl, his qualifications to comment on the climate? A great example of someone trying to make money out of it, because people will pay good money not to believe it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...003900,00.html