Carbon Tax.Its a BIG Con!!!

[BA GT-HO]

What amuses me about this is after spending a month in Jakarta where you cannot see up to 500 metres in front of you due to SMOG and POLLUTION some days, people actually think this tax will make a difference.

You can be driving your Prius, solar panels on your roof, a wind powered generator in your yard, only eat beef from cattle that don't fart, living a 'carbon neutral' lifestyle, but over in Indonesia some farmer is burning a giant mound of garbage, completely offsetting what you have saved.

Waste of time and money.

Next.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by snappy

Dr Friis-Christensen and Dr Lassen (Danish Meteorological Institute)
Dr Richar Lindzen (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Prof William Happer (Princeton)

lol, not even a handful, but really you could have done better:

Richard Lindzen, where does one start? His yearly discredited theories on climate sensitivities, or his ties to big oil and tobacco , how much did he get payed to talk on 2ue?

Prof William Happer (Princeton), sorry not a climate scientist, nor has he done any research into the climate , see http://www.skepticalscience.com/even...-mistakes.html


Dr Friis-Christensen and Dr Lassen (Danish Meteorological Institute), they did a paper 20 years ago, here’s what HE had to say on it recently:
By 2009, a number of leading experts, including one Nobel laureate, had concluded that the graphs of Friis-Christensen and Svensmark showing apparent correlations between global warming, sunspots and cosmic rays were deeply flawed. Friis-Christensen agreed that any correlation between sunspots and global warming that he may have identified in the 1991 study has since broken down. There is, he said, a clear "divergence" between the sunspots and global temperatures after 1986,which shows that the present warming period cannot be explained by solar activity alone

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by snappy

Also many peer revieved scientists are undecided if the planet warming abit is a bad thing yet . An the concensis due to research from ice drilling is any changes wont be seen for 800 years .

oh really, list them and quote them on how it will be a good thing.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by snappy

Your kidding right japans 30yo nuclear plant has just been hit by one of the biggest earthquakes the planet has ever seen followed by a tsunami and it didn't go in to meltdown . What more proof of them being safe do you need do they need to survive armageddon or something
Ask the japs what the going to build to replace it , ten bucks says its not going to be a windmill

Er um.... didnt go into meltdown??? Indeed, im almost sure it did as reported adnauseum. Even the Japanese gov is asking questions about the goings on at the power station.

[mik]

the thing about this tax that worries me is nearly every thing we do creates pollution, i`m sure they will find a way to tax you even for having sex, they can tax you for using any fuel/energy, if you buy something processed, transported, refrigerated, if your a farmer and your cows fart they can tax you, surely everything must go up in price.
i see some companies that just won`t be able to reduce their carbon foot print and will just disappear or go elsewhere because its already costly to do business in oz.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I suggest you keep in touch with news developments, the government hasnt announced this yet. Garnaut's latest report suggested $26 tonne, much less than initially thought would be needed to see a change in consumption of Australians. So far govco has been following Garnauts lead and my best bet they are going to go for this low figure ................. etc.

.

You have put a great effort into your response but this is still where the whole tax sell is falling down from the g'ment. No one knows what the tax is and what it means to the average blow, how much it is going to cost us and for what outcome. Alot is still guess work with no direction coming from the top and is not the way it should be but people are still saying blindly saying yes. No one knows and the electricity companies will not loose out. They will actually make money from it and are not concerned about it at all.

Here is an idea ...... the pollies put out what they intend to do and how it is going to work ..... then go to the polls.

[Charliewool]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Actually no... one of those nutters doesnt believe in the carbon tax and opposes it

One nutter? Ok, I'll stand corrected.
I'll ask again.... Do we really believe that the hard core of the Labor party honestly BELIEVE in this Co2 agenda??
Or is it because of their DEAL with the Greens to get them over the line??

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by BA GT-HO

What amuses me about this is after spending a month in Jakarta where you cannot see up to 500 metres in front of you due to SMOG and POLLUTION some days, people actually think this tax will make a difference

i had similar thoughts in manila recently

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Charliewool

One nutter? Ok, I'll stand corrected.
I'll ask again.... Do we really believe that the hard core of the Labor party honestly BELIEVE in this Co2 agenda??
Or is it because of their DEAL with the Greens to get them over the line??

Whatever they do is gonna bite them in the rear. You have one side who say its too much and the other that says its not enough. This thing ruins current governments. Mind you the way they're going about it is stupid as all it does is causes unneeded speculation on quite a serious topic.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

i had similar thoughts in manila recently

.... and Shanghai & Beijing and a few more industrial places down south. Vietnam wasn't too pleasant either in the clean air stakes. All these places would be having a chuckle ..... stupid aussies.

[Shelby1965]

Originally Posted by davway

The tax will be passed.
Death warrant or not, its coming.

Originally Posted by Donny

the tax is coming whether we like it or not..

And will be quickly removed as easily as were the WORK CHOICES LAWS....

..along with the present Government!!!!

[GasoLane]

I would have thought that warning signs would have gone up when the Gov appoints someone, who is a wizard with money, ( Ross Garnaut is a Professor of Economics and former senior economic adviser to Bob Hawke) starts telling us that a carbon tax is a GOOD thing!

[mik]

hmm i dunno Shelby1965, i agree the JOOOLYA will likely get the kyber pass , but if Libs get in i`m betting they won`t let the goose that lays the golden go in hurry, time will tell.

[Bent8]

Two words.... Lord Monckton

This guy has done his research and was recently in Australia to discuss the topic.

For those that don't like to read, a recent youtube video for your convenience.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11vGoETThFA

The rest, here's an excerpt from a debate he won last year at the worlds most prestigious debating society...

"Lord Monckton said that real-world measurements, as opposed to models, showed that the warming effect of CO2 was a tiny fraction of the estimates peddled by the UN’s climate panel. He said that he would take his lead from Lord Lawson, however, in concentrating on the economics rather than the science. He glared at the opposition again and demanded whether, since they had declared themselves to be so worried about “global warming”, they would care to tell him – to two places of decimals and one standard deviation – the UN’s central estimate of the “global warming” that might result from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration. The opposition were unable to reply. Lord Monckton told them the answer was 3.26 plus or minus 0.69 Kelvin or Celsius degrees. An Hon. Member interrupted: “And your reference is?” Lord Monckton replied: “IPCC, 2007, chapter 10, box 10.2.” [cheers]. He concluded that shutting down the entire global economy for a whole year, with all the death, destruction, disaster, disease and distress that that would cause, would forestall just 4.7 ln(390/388) = 0.024 Kelvin or Celsius degrees of “global warming”, so that total economic shutdown for 41 years would prevent just 1 K of warming. Adaptation as and if necessary would be orders of magnitude cheaper and more cost-effective."

Source: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/2...-oxford-union/

[Charliewool]

Originally Posted by Shelby1965

And will be quickly removed as easily as were the WORK CHOICES LAWS....

..along with the present Government!!!!

Know what?... Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it... Lambs to the slaughter.

[snappy]

Originally Posted by sudszy

oh really, list them and quote them on how it will be a good thing.

I couldn't i don't take notes on video's and literature but Ive read i many of times i also know our climate commission supports this

[Franco Cozzo]

How is slapping a tax on something going to fix an issue? The only "issue" it fixes is the Government's wallet not being fat enough.

Also whats it going to do if only Australia does this?

I vote we go nuclear power and become a republic.

And then I woke up and changed hands.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Bent8

Two words.... Lord Monckton

This guy has done his research and was recently in Australia to discuss the topic.

one word.....charlatan
some easily pace videos for the layman, see:

http://climatecrocks.com/2010/04/11/...kton-part-one/

http://climatecrocks.com/2011/02/21/...bunkum-part-2/

[snappy]

charlatan that's rich
he has earned his voice you have not earned the right to discredit him .
He has been right on many occasion's and i thank him and you should to because he exposed that contract draft at Copenhagen that if we signed we
would of lost our sovereign rights along with the rest of the world .
An for the record i believe in climate change .
But this thread is not about that its about a carbon tax we need to keep this thread on topic .

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by snappy

charlatan that's rich
he has earned his voice you have not earned the right to discredit him .
.

earnt his voice....conning people, charlatan fits the bill nicely.

Earnt the right?????
Ive provided sources evidence that discredits him, dispute the videos if you can be bothered. Monckton has threatened all sorts of legal actions to criticisms, but he wont go near those two video producers, wonder why, because they are right!

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by sudszy

one word.....charlartan
some easily pace videos for the layman, see:

http://climatecrocks.com/2010/04/11/...kton-part-one/

http://climatecrocks.com/2011/02/21/...bunkum-part-2/

Ain't it a bugger when you edit a spelling mistake and still get it wrong ?

Charlatan...

[snappy]

Originally Posted by sudszy

earnt his voice....conning people, charlatan fits the bill nicely.

Earnt the right?????
Ive provided sources evidence that discredits him, dispute the videos if you can be bothered. Monckton has threatened all sorts of legal actions to criticisms, but he wont go near those two video producers, wonder why, because they are right!

No different to what you are doing conning people - Just his voice is important

I read the first two paragraphs in those links and i could of swapped al gore with moncton and the shoe would still fit.
He has given a voice to many scientist that were unable to have their work peer reviewed and just because he has raised many good points he has been attacked .
You forget climate science is still not 100% it 90% with a long bow men like him are important to the debate and it is important his opinions or finding are scrutinized . To complete the research

[gs1973]

Originally Posted by sudszy

earnt his voice....conning people?

Earnt the right?????
Ive provided sources evidence that discredits him, dispute the videos if you can be bothered. Monckton has threatened all sorts of legal actions to criticisms, but he wont go near those two video producers, wonder why, because they are right!

I just wasted 10 good minutes of my life watching that one way biased trash.. So it was the warmest January since the 90's? What was the Carbon level in the atmosphere then? What was the average January temperature 500 years ago? Once again, what will introducing a Carbon tax in Australia do to world Carbon levels? Just admit it, JACK ALL! I don't doubt for one minute we will get this Tax, I hope it's everything you have dreamed of and more Suds..

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by gs1973

I just wasted 10 good minutes of my life watching that one way biased trash.. So it was the warmest January since the 90's? What was the Carbon level in the atmosphere then? What was the average January temperature 500 years ago? Once again, what will introducing a Carbon tax in Australia do to world Carbon levels? Just admit it, JACK ALL! I don't doubt for one minute we will get this Tax, I hope it's everything you have dreamed of and more Suds..

So layman videos are beneath you: So why not do a search on monckton and his misunderstanding/misrepresentation of climate sensitivities, and his reliance on dodgy data from Richard Lindzen, or you really dont want to know?

[snappy]

sudzy tell me what good this carbon tax will bring ?
We have been over the negatives many times in this thread but no positives that i can remember .
My personal view is it more about wealth redistribution then the environment
and its implementation through last election is borderline on treason

[TheInterceptor]

We do need Carbon to live. More importantly, our civilisation needs oil to survive.

I beleive oil is very much running out and it is critical that the govornment shift their focus from taxing us for the umpteenth time to looking into a replacement for oil.

Here's a thought. If theres no oil, how are we going to eat? Trucks cant deliver to Woolworths/Safeway. Hell there wont even be food to deliver since we import just about everything from OS, and plane's/ship's need oil to run.

And another. Wont even be many clothes around, polyester for starters, is made from oil, plastics are made from oil...

Thats just a sliver of it. We as a nation are going to fail if govco dont begin to change their priorities.

Food for thought.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Hi Dan, hopefully you aren't the same poster as Cheap, who I suspect is really Andrew Bolt or Alan Jones, his arithmetic skills(lack there of) leads me to suspect he is Mr Jones.

One only has to go to the transcipt of an interview between Bolt and Flannery to see that this is a common taunt/question tried on by the denialist brigade to unsuspecting pollies. Christine Keneally basically lost the election(she was gone anyway) when the question was put to her on how much their green policies would reduce co2 levels/world temps, she had no idea and looked all the more fool for it.
Fortunately Flannery wasnt caught off guard, but this didnt stop Bolt making strawmen from his answers.

To cut to the chase, as I said before:Best that we can do now if we stop co2 emissions today is to keep levels at the present 392ppm

Co2 levels are not going to drop in the short term(next 10-20 years) even if we stopped man made emissions today, the co2 we have put into the atmosphere basically has no where to go. Scientists haven't been able to give accurate predictions of how long it would take for the system to restore itself, some even agree that the system cant be restored, we have reached a new equilbrium.

All we can do is talk about reducing the size of the increase and the extent of the temperature rise.

Pretty sure you said you own a Ford Territory. Not the most fuel effective car now is it.

[Auslandau]

Lindzen is the saviour and Monckton is the devil ..... it is a matter of what religion you want to follow I suppose and whether you want to be one of the flock or would rather wait for the facts on the matter and then make up your mind.

I prefer to ask "At what cost" rather than "At any cost" ..... especially when the outcome is still very much a myth. If we did things because the g'ment says we should without being asked on matters such as these when the opposite was stated before the last election ..... I suppose that comes down to living in a dictatorship. We aren't there just yet, close it seems ..... but an issue as important as this deserves an election.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by snappy

sudzy tell me what good this carbon tax will bring ?
We have been over the negatives many times in this thread but no positives that i can remember .
My personal view is it more about wealth redistribution then the environment
and its implementation through last election is borderline on treason

Unfortunately, the issue of what happens if we dont reduce co2 emissions is lost on people here, they are only worried about how much it will cost? Its about as stupid as people complaining about having to take time off work to get treatment for cancer.

1. By taking what is really a small step we can lead in stopping the world from the path of self destruction that is occuring.

2. Australia can adjust its processes to a low carbon future and be innovators and actually profit from that innovation rather than being left behind with coal that no-one will touch and no other way of making a living for ourselves.

[gs1973]

Originally Posted by sudszy

So layman videos are beneath you: So why not do a search on monckton and his misunderstanding/misrepresentation of climate sensitivities, and his reliance on dodgy data from Richard Lindzen, or you really dont want to know?

No but seriously, what were the average January temperatures 500 years ago and the 500 before that, ad nauseum?