Climate Change

[superyob]

I don't think that anyone could logically argue that pollutants don't have a negative effect on the earth, just the claim that our climate is changing because of them.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

I just love threads like this!!

Since you have taken an interest, please define what I call "too deep". I really am keen to know.

Your post is full of of speculation and contradiction.

Just jot down a list for me where I suggested that humans have had zero impact on the climate (tbh, I don't think they have btw) - but you made the statement so feel free to share with us what I said.

So we get a Carbon Tax..... but the majority of the world, and indeed it's biggest polluters, don't. For the sake of the minuscule contribution Australia might have made to pollution on a global scale, left wing fanatics are happy to roll the dice on the word of people with a blindingly obvious agenda that may well completely destroy the economic and social wealth of this great country.

There are no facts, or even reasonable quantities of data to suggest that anything is actually happening to this planet that is out of the norm in what really could be billion year cycles. No facts, just a sales pitch with annoying hysteria.

It might be entertaining for you to talk about everything we don't know about global warming whilst still riding the wagon and I can assure you it is equally fun to sit back knowing that at the very least, I can reason why I don't believe it. Unfortunately you, and everyone else on the bandwagon cannot. Because all of it is based on nothing but thin air, greed and feeling good about having a cause.

It was pretty good timing for the lunatic in Tasmania to pipe up this week and tell us all about how the Coal Industry is directly responsible for the Queensland Floods - how amazing must Jones have been to predict the recent drought and subsequent deluge back in 1953? Clever man to not only know weather inside out and back to front but to be able to predict with incredible accuracy that China would surge up and Australian Coal Miners would fuel the fires to build their Nation. The very result of which would be the real reason it rained...but best he kept all that to himself ay?

Find me a chart (they do exist) where we can look at 1000 years of temps and I'll give you a swag of reasons why they are true and we have a problem, or why they are bogus and we don't.

The only fact is that there are no facts to support the hysteria. When there is, come and talk to me about what I'll be doing to try and do my bit.

Save the forests, stop polluting our waterways, farm smarter, look to renewable energy and stick to good, wholesome, tangible and common sense ideas.

[irish2]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/1...next-30-years/

There are lots of studies citing cooling effects. The simple fact is the only way to stop man doing damage to our planet is to limit population. This should have happened about 5 billion people ago.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Maybe before sprouting comments like this you should do some research into the whole carbon tax thing.... The idea didnt spawn here in Australia and is being pushed WORLD WIDE by self serving rich people.... Australia is simply stupid enough to follow the idea....
The term carbon TRADING is self explanitary... if you dont understand that this whole scheme is designed to make corporations TRADE in carbon shares.
Big business is pushing the ajenda.
Hardly a "socialist" idea...

I humbly accept your patronising chastisement for daring to offer an opinion and being foolish enough to believe that a tax initiative by a socialist government is actually a socialist ideal. Off course self serving rich people want a tax on their industries and Australia is stupid. By the way, agenda has a 'g' in it, didn't has an apostrophe and explanatory... need I go on?

[Jim Goose]

This isnt a socialist government, please again do some reasearch.

The Obama administration has also been described as "socialist", please wake up to the fact that if people who dont like being in opposition make rediculas comments they are not always true... and are designed to simply scare people who just nod and believe what pollititions tell them

[Ben73]

I work for a coal train company and like V8's.... so do you think I believe this crap??

I am not just saying this for the sake of it, last year I spent hours and hours researching it and found lots of information for and against man made climate change.
The evidence AGAINST man made climate change was a hell of a lot more believable. The graphs and statistic were all there, and parts were not left out like they were in the stats saying we are ruining the earth.

Carbon occurs in the earth naturally. Nature puts out much more carbon then us, so even if carbon was ruining the world, our output is so insignificant that it wouldn't affect the big picture.

But the thing is we are not doing it, the earth has been in a warming period for quite a long time, before cars and factories were invented. And eventually the earth will stop warming and will begin to cool, then watch all the environmentalist say that carbon makes the earth colder and it needs to be taxed to stop global cooling.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by Scott

Since you have taken an interest, please define what I call "too deep". I really am keen to know.

My post wasn't entirely directed at you. I used your quotes to make a point that people make definite statements about a subject of which they dont have enough knowledge to do so - it was a general observation. I dont know how you define "too deep", its irrelevant to my broader point anyway because as I said, it wasn't directed solely at you.

Originally Posted by Scott

Your post is full of of speculation and contradiction.

Maybe some speculation, but if you could point out the contradiction that would be appreciated.

Originally Posted by Scott

So we get a Carbon Tax..... but the majority of the world, and indeed it's biggest polluters, don't. For the sake of the minuscule contribution Australia might have made to pollution on a global scale, left wing fanatics are happy to roll the dice on the word of people with a blindingly obvious agenda that may well completely destroy the economic and social wealth of this great country.

Valid point about Australia adopting a carbon tax before other countries though, and I think its this lack of agreement thats the biggest factor holding back the implementation of these kinds of measures. The question is how much will it cost not to act now? Unfortunately this question is all but unanswerable.

Originally Posted by Scott

There are no facts, or even reasonable quantities of data to suggest that anything is actually happening to this planet that is out of the norm in what really could be billion year cycles. No facts, just a sales pitch with annoying hysteria.

It might be entertaining for you to talk about everything we don't know about global warming whilst still riding the wagon and I can assure you it is equally fun to sit back knowing that at the very least, I can reason why I don't believe it. Unfortunately you, and everyone else on the bandwagon cannot. Because all of it is based on nothing but thin air, greed and feeling good about having a cause.

The theory of Human caused climate change is based on a body of evidence gained by scientific study. The theory that its not caused by human activity is also based on scientific study. So you've just decided to believe one theory over another, just like I have. Doesn't make you any more wrong or right than the next guy who believes the other theory.

Originally Posted by Scott

The only fact is that there are no facts to support the hysteria. When there is, come and talk to me about what I'll be doing to try and do my bit.

Facts?? Where are the facts to support humans aren't to blame? All we have is evidence - evidence that supports both points of view. Forget for a moment what you and I or anyone else believes. All I'm saying is, shouldn't we at least exercise some caution? Strive towards an emission free society?

If it turns out climate change is caused by humans, we wont get any facts confirming it until its far too late. If we get facts down the track that it isn't caused by humans, and steps made to reduce emissions were in vain, then we're left with clean and renewable energy supplies. There will be a cost involved sure, but these changes need to be made irrespective of the causes of climate change. Regardless of your views, its irrefutable logic.

[rodderz]

I think the climate rotates around in cycles, proven by the earth's history of various large scale weather patterns- ice age, droughts, inland seas etc. The part we are now living in is only a pimple on the bum of it's history, but it does show that cycles can change minute levels.

The other thing is that the tropical regions of the world, between the Tropic of Capricorn and Cancer, determine a lot of weather that happens either side of them. Take the recent floods in Vic and Tas that was a low which came down from QLD as an example. Usually we get weather from WA which has crossed the desert and makes our weather drier, it depends on the cycles of the weather as to what the weather in various places will be.

[superyob]

I am of the belief that Ms Gillard advocated for a Russian style of government here in Australia, when she was younger and is indeed a Fabian Socialist. This by itself may not make the Australian government a socialist one, but if you look at her prescription for a climate change committee, where only 'true believers' were welcome, the resemblance with a Russian style state becomes obvious, to me anyway.

Sorry, this is in response to the last post by Jim Goose.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by superyob

I am of the belief that Ms Gillard advocated for a Russian style of government here in Australia, when she was younger and is indeed a Fabian Socialist. This by itself may not make the Australian government a socialist one, but if you look at her prescription for a climate change committee, where only 'true believers' were welcome, the resemblance with a Russian style state becomes obvious, to me anyway.

Sorry, this is in response to the last post by Jim Goose.

Russian state? they were once Communists when they were the USSR.
As for now?

You keep thinking small scale and believe that this thing about carbon taxes etc started here in Australia.

The people behind all this is big business and those involved in the stock market... again, hardly the realm of socialists, commies or tree huggers...
The Australia government caught onto this as a way to yet again sting peoples pockets.... like just about every other 1st world country out there. It isnt limited to this country...

And again do you honestly believe that if the other side gets voted in they will not introduce it?? We have already seen that "voting" them out doesnt change a thing...

[Scott]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

All we have is evidence - evidence that supports both points of view.

No, we don't have that at all. We have an incredible financial juggernaut trying desperately to convince us that the world is ending, citing 0% data as the proof. And I mean 0% literally, you need to go back through a lot of zeros to find a digit to round.

And on the other hand, there are people that look at the stories being shoved down our throats and say - "hang on, you stand to make a crap load of money out of this... out of my pocket. Show me any credible evidence to support what you are trying to make me believe and then I'll listen. Until then, I will put your emails over here with the Nigerian ones....".

The latter has the fact that there is no evidence - and that is one more fact than the spruikers.

When there is enough money at stake, people will say and do whatever they can to further their own means. One cannot forget the impact the miners had on our last election - they decided they could not support a Labour Govt so they set about changing the result. Had Juuuulia not handed them the keys to the country - for ever, they would have put Abbot in. No question at all and such is the power they wield.

[superyob]

I have never suggested that the carbon tax was originally conceived in, or limited to Australia, just that our government is planning to introduce it to further their socialist ideas. Now, you have had a crack at me before for seemingly making unevidenced claims, but now you are telling me that ‘The people behind all this is big business and those involved in the stock market...’ Where is your evidence? Please explain.

‘The Australia government caught onto this as a way to yet again sting peoples pockets.... like just about every other 1st world country out there.’ At least we agree on something

As for the ‘other side’, I doubt that they would introduce this tax but then, I have been wrong before.

Sorry again. This is again in respnse to Jim Goose.

[Adamz Ghia]

I'm a believer in natural climate change, and agree the world warms and cools all the time, there's data going back millions of years supporting this. I have a book with all the references, I'm not gunna try and find it this time of night it'll have to wait.

But I also look at it from another perspective. It's a fact we will run out of fossil fuels. I see no problem with governments accellerating the adoption of cleaner, more efficient ways of powering our economy. Why the hell should we leave it till the very last minute and rely on other countries for it? In saying that, such a scheme would need to start now and be implemented in a way that would not destroy us competitively with the rest of the world. We have the brains to develop this technology, we export our talent all the time. Well why not keep our brains at home and rather than lead the world in cutting emissions by 1% total output that will have NO effect on the planet, lets lead the world post oil.

PS sorry for any spelling mistakes, my eyes are hanging outta my head, off to catch some z's...

[GazzF6]

Aww god.. It's the Y2K thing again...

If the worlds population keeps getting bigger, then the worlds food sources will also need to get bigger! So more cows/sheep/chickens etc + additional people, for sure that's why the planet is getting hotter!

If the oceans are getting hotter it's because more people are swimming!

Climate change is a myth, and yet another revenue stream for governments...

Like fossil fuels are going to run out, yeah, in about 200 years, then gas will come in and go for another 500 years, when will people realise it's all about money!

10% of the worlds population owns 90% of the wealth.

I do feel for our people on the east coast with massive floods, but we were told about the effects of the Elnino weather pattern that will now impact the southern hemisphere, I for one tend to believe these scientists.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by Scott

No, we don't have that at all. We have an incredible financial juggernaut trying desperately to convince us that the world is ending, citing 0% data as the proof. And I mean 0% literally, you need to go back through a lot of zeros to find a digit to round.

And on the other hand, there are people that look at the stories being shoved down our throats and say - "hang on, you stand to make a crap load of money out of this... out of my pocket. Show me any credible evidence to support what you are trying to make me believe and then I'll listen. Until then, I will put your emails over here with the Nigerian ones....".

The latter has the fact that there is no evidence - and that is one more fact than the spruikers.

When there is enough money at stake, people will say and do whatever they can to further their own means. One cannot forget the impact the miners had on our last election - they decided they could not support a Labour Govt so they set about changing the result. Had Juuuulia not handed them the keys to the country - for ever, they would have put Abbot in. No question at all and such is the power they wield.

Alright your starting to sound ridiculous now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand what you've written; your completely disregarding all the evidence that climate change is human induced because of your belief that each and every scientist producing said evidence is doing so entirely out of a vested interest, such as securing research funds. That every single one of these scientists are corrupt, and on the take, so every single piece of research they conduct can safely be ignored. Meanwhile, all the research from the other side of the debate is completely reliable and produced by scientists with absolutely no vested interests whatsoever?

Is that what your saying? I'd just like to clear this up before we go any further.

[Scott]

You've lost me in your last post and can't seem to comprehend that there is simply not enough data to be making absolute calls on the history of our planets weather patterns for close to 7 billion years. Only guesses and assumptions.

If you take the time to read my earliest posts, you will see that I very plainly stated that recent temperatures show an upward trend of higher highs.... higher than the other highs in the tiny snapshot. I don't know why you're choosing to forget that bit but whatever floats your boat I suppose.

If you'd be good enough to post up anything, a simple chart will do, that supports your theory then I'll be happy to demonstrate how and why it is absolutely fallible in producing a reliable result.

I've been generous enough to share the reasoning and facts behind my position, it would be nice if you would do the same.... something other than "99% of all Doctors agree"...

Which brings me back to your last post.... I suppose all the Doctors and the AMA that so publicly endorsed the tobacco industry were on the up and up too? That was small fry compared to this.



You hang on to your ideals, I'll hang on to mine.

Oh, and for shits and giggles, I loved your first post when you [re] joined the forum after years of absence.
http://fordforums.com.au/showpost.ph...9&postcount=43

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

All I'm saying is, shouldn't we at least exercise some caution? Strive towards an emission free society?

If it turns out climate change is caused by humans, we wont get any facts confirming it until its far too late. If we get facts down the track that it isn't caused by humans, and steps made to reduce emissions were in vain, then we're left with clean and renewable energy supplies. There will be a cost involved sure, but these changes need to be made irrespective of the causes of climate change. Regardless of your views, its irrefutable logic.

I agree with this. We have come along way in trying to be cleaner, but what if all of us (including in China) were driving big block V8s with twin 4 barrel carburetors running leaded fuel? Give everyone their own dirty coal power station, since it has no effect, and why bother having insulated houses? We should just crank our heaters to the max and leave all the windows open at the same time. To say it has zero effect would be stupid. It's stupid that Global Warming - whether people agree with it or not, takes ALL of the attention of environmental matters. There are health concerns with pollution. Go in to a cold winter climate, in a valley and you can see what inversion does with pollution. That happens in Salt Lake City, where I lived through one winter. What about acid rain and killing forests and animals? What about building and destroying habitats? Humans destroy ecosystems. If we're not even 0.0001% responsible for climate change, then finally we get to pat ourselves on the back. So even if man-made global warming is a myth, there are plenty of reasons to still be environmentally responsible. You should be able to do that without any impact on lifestyle. I have no problem with chopping down trees and consuming wood for construction, fires and other uses as long as we make sure we don't consume more than what grows back, or what we help grow back. Renewable resources are exactly that. Renewable. But they are not infinite. So that's what ****** me off about global warming, is that is all that people focus on with the environment. If they don't believe in it, they seem to think there is zero impact on everything. Yes, I see the points on the other side of the table too. I hate the notion that some think that if everyone just drove a Prius, and became a hippie, then the world will be safe. I don't have a problem with people making products that are environmentally responsible, and then making a profit from it. I have a problem with people marketing something that isn't any better, and then governments supporting it, trying to tell everyone that it is better. Is carbon taxes and off-set donations really 100% going to that which is said to be used for? If so, then that's fine. Or is it just to make extra profit, and use the buzz word "green?" - In the case of an airline. They offer the carbon offset payment. What if that becomes mandatory? But the airlines have already lost our trust with increased fees everywhere else, like paying for snacks and your baggage. Would we trust this offset program?I bet most people would not. I hope I have come across as balanced here. If not, I will sum up here. Yes, humans damage the environment - and we need to fix that, there is a lot more to it than just global warming, and yes, people and companies profiteer from the word "green," and phrases like "help stop global warming."

[colinl]

Unfortunately if we worked on facts alone we wouldn't get very far. Much of the physics that we use is based on theory not fact. They haven't been proven, but we still accept their validity because the theory mirrors observations and actions.

I mentioned earlier, our impact on the world has up until the last 50 years been very small. The last 50 years have seen incredible growth in manufacturing and a massive change in lifestyle. It is now common for families to have multiple cars (I've got 4 cars and a bike). We all travel much further more often. We travel long distances regularly for holidays, and we spend hours a day commuting to work. To be realistic I don't think you could expect to see any massive changes at this point.

Climate cycles are well known, and the climate change research isn't using them as direct evidence, they understand these cycles, but what they are observing doesn't fit with the nature of the natural cycles. The evidence comes from wide ranging studies and diverse groups of researchers. To be honest, many of you guys sound like the same people that used to claim smoking wasn't bad for you, or asbestos was completely safe.

Some links that might or might not be of interest. The NASA one includes a wide range of referenced studies and links to some of them.

NASA

CSIRO

This next one is from a scientist answering many of the criticism made against the independence of their study.

scientists responce

[GT 160]

Whether it's man made or climatic cycles the planet is changing, and not for the better. Any idiot can see that.

For instance the permafrost in Siberia and Alaska has started to thaw for the first time in 11,000 years !! due to a 3c+ temp rise.

If the permafrost and peat bogs in artic regions continue to melt and increase methane emissions than we can forget carbon taxes, emissions etc because there will be no going back.

It's estimated that the Siberian bog (world's largest) contains around 70 billion tonnes of methane which is the equivalent to emitting 1.7 trillion tonnes of Co2, more than humans in the past 200 years. Methane is 30 times more potent than c02.

[colinl]

I tend to agree with a couple of other guys here. I don't know the validity of the science, I do tend to think common sense tells me that we will make some sort of impact, after all every change has a flow on effect. I also can't see why we shouldn't make a little more effort living in a way that has less impact on the environment. As for the carbon tax, It probably isn't ideal. It has probably been designed to encourage big business to come on board, because their power and ability to fight against something they don't want will see nothing ever change. Look how long and how much evidence it took for them to act on smoking or asbestos. The carbon tax might have a number of flaws with it. I don't think that is greatly important, what is important is that we take some action. Nothing we have ever done has been exactly right first go, but once we start it can be modified and improved upon. Ford make a pretty good product now. It would never have got anywhere if they sat around debating the best way to design the product. You have to say at some stage "lets just do it this way". As a result they then have a platform that over the years improves and eliminates the negative aspects of the first design.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by fitzwa

Whether it's man made or climatic cycles the planet is changing, and not for the better. Any idiot can see that.

For instance the permafrost in Siberia and Alaska has started to thaw for the first time in 11,000 years !! due to a 3c+ temp rise.

If the permafrost and peat bogs in artic regions continue to melt and increase methane emissions than we can forget carbon taxes, emissions etc because there will be no going back.

It's estimated that the Siberian bog (world's largest) contains around 70 billion tonnes of methane which is the equivalent to emitting 1.7 trillion tonnes of Co2, more than humans in the past 200 years. Methane is 30 times more potent than c02.

So what you are saying in the planet is changing, we really have no idea what will actually happen and there is nothing we can do about it except run around crying "the sky is falling, the sky is falling".

It this has already all happened 11,000 years ago and we are looking at it possibly happening again then it obviously did not wipe us out.

I wonder if there was a greenhouse tax 11,000 years ago whether it would not have happened......

[Charliewool]

Originally Posted by fitzwa

Whether it's man made or climatic cycles the planet is changing, and not for the better. Any idiot can see that.

For instance the permafrost in Siberia and Alaska has started to thaw for the first time in 11,000 years !! due to a 3c+ temp rise.

If the permafrost and peat bogs in artic regions continue to melt and increase methane emissions than we can forget carbon taxes, emissions etc because there will be no going back.

It's estimated that the Siberian bog (world's largest) contains around 70 billion tonnes of methane which is the equivalent to emitting 1.7 trillion tonnes of Co2, more than humans in the past 200 years. Methane is 30 times more potent than c02.

Codswallop

[CAT600]

When we burn fossil fuels, arent we just re-releasing co2 that was at one time in the atmosphere anyway?.... my understanding is that in a high co2 environment, plant life flourishes and traps the co2. Then when it dies the co2 in the tree's remains trapped and over time buried where is is then turned into oil and gas under huge pressure.... of course the earth would naturally cool due to less greenhouse gases keeping less heat inside the atmosphere.

But what I dont get (and i'm trying not to be faceitious or ignorant), can someone explain how re-releasing a naturally occuring molecule is actually "killing" the planet? (extinction of species as a separate issue please.. I do agree that this is a problem).

Daniel

[colinl]

My understanding is limited on CO2. But possibly the difference is the rate of release. It is one thing to have it trapped within trees and then being released over time through natural processes as opposed to large scale release over very short periods (relatively). Logic dictates (Live long and prosper), that the rapid release of CO2 and the ever dwindling effect of the natural CO2 scrubbers like trees means a build up of CO2 in our atmosphere, what effect this has I have no idea, but I feel certain that there must eventually be an effect.

[Flaming Mo]

Originally Posted by colinl

To be honest, many of you guys sound like the same people that used to claim smoking wasn't bad for you, or asbestos was completely safe

That may be true, I acknowledge that. But to be fair your sentence could also be modified to read;

“To be honest, many of you guys sound like the same people that repeatedly claim the doom of civilisation due to [insert apocalyptic prophecy here]” e.g – volcano eruptions, aids, ozone layer, bird flu, famine)

The growing list of failed IPCC predictions doesn’t help either. To be honest, one real thing we know for sure is that ‘experts’ have repeatedly underestimated the resilience of mother earth and the human race.

[GT 160]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

Codswallop

Codswallop huh ?

Then enlighten me with the knowledge of your numerous science degrees.

Google, "permafrost melting" and i'd guess that out of the 200,000 hits someone has more of an idea than you.

[3vXT]

Originally Posted by colinl

It seems a little like religion. People have set ideas and that is that, they will take evidence that supports their view and forget evidence that doesn't.

That's some nice generalising there.

All of the churchies I know are pretty open minded (i'm not a churchie myself). The people you are describing come from all walks of life, some of them are religious and some aren't but your comment doesn't ring true for everyone that subscribes to a particular set of beliefs. I'm sure if you took a good look around on ford forums (or similar) you'd find people that "will take evidence that supports their view and forget evidence that doesn't". It doesn't mean everyone on here or at church on Sunday shares the same ignorance.

EDIT: As for global warming I can honestly say that I don't really care either way. It's popular to drive a prius and use the re-useable bags (I do the latter anyway) and its popular to make as much noise as you can so everyone knows you don't believe and aren't being fooled by the evil government. I'll wait until both sides are finished trying to tell the world they are right or until the wheels fall off the bandwagons (probably around the 12th of never) and then i'll weigh in.

[colinl]

Originally Posted by Flaming Mo

That may be true, I acknowledge that. But to be fair your sentence could also be modified to read;

“To be honest, many of you guys sound like the same people that repeatedly claim the doom of civilisation due to [insert apocalyptic prophecy here]” e.g – volcano eruptions, aids, ozone layer, bird flu, famine)

The growing list of failed IPCC predictions doesn’t help either. To be honest, one real thing we know for sure is that ‘experts’ have repeatedly underestimated the resilience of mother earth and the human race.

The earths resilience is truly astounding. I have no issue with that. Though like all things it will have a limit. Why push to it, when simple modifications and cleaner living can fairly easily be done?

[colinl]

Originally Posted by ken2903

That's some nice generalising there.

All of the churchies I know are pretty open minded (i'm not a churchie myself). The people you are describing come from all walks of life, some of them are religious and some aren't but your comment doesn't ring true for everyone that subscribes to a particular set of beliefs. I'm sure if you took a good look around on ford forums (or similar) you'd find people that "will take evidence that supports their view and forget evidence that doesn't". It doesn't mean everyone on here or at church on Sunday shares the same ignorance.

EDIT: As for global warming I can honestly say that I don't really care either way. It's popular to drive a prius and use the re-useable bags (I do the latter anyway) and its popular to make as much noise as you can so everyone knows you don't believe and aren't being fooled by the evil government. I'll wait until both sides are finished trying to tell the world they are right or until the wheels fall off the bandwagons (probably around the 12th of never) and then i'll weigh in.

Apologies if that remark offended, it wasn't meant to be taken that way. When it comes to religion I can be a little insensitive as it isn't something that I understand. When I have spoken to various religious people they normally express that their belief is an act of faith and requires no proof. I was only intending to say that some of the comments here seemed to mirror that act of faith and that they would be unlikely to change. Some of them seem to cling to a couple of isolated examples as why they believe climate change is a myth and ignore a vast amount of research that doesn't support their belief.

[trippytaka]

Originally Posted by flappist

Absolutely correct.

There is more energy in one cyclone than has been generated by man since the invention of the wheel.

One volcanic eruption spews more CO2 than we ever have and there have not been any REALLY BIG eruptions for centuries....

Look, this thread is out of control with completely unfounded claims. I've tried to sit back and just watch, but I can't.

Form what ever opinion you want about climate change, but come to that opinion based on REAL evidence, not things you have heard on forums, or heard your mates say at the pub! Do some research before posting and stop misconceptions, like the idea that volcanoes pump out more CO2 than humans, from being spread.

The facts: Humans pump out far more C02 than volcanoes!

Pinatubo is estimated to have belched 42 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere in 1991. Globally, according to the US Energy Information Administration, human activity contributed 29,195 million tonnes of CO2 to the air in 2006 - nearly 700 times as much as Pinatubo's colossal cough.

ABC report on volcano CO2