Forums > Kitesurfing General

Climate Change, yes again!

Reply
Created by COL > 9 months ago, 22 Dec 2009
COL
NSW, 550 posts
23 Dec 2009 12:13AM
Thumbs Up

www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=59547
As a parent of young children, I’m horrified by the story of Rachel & the Gladstone stingers, & also am loathe to hijack her story. But still, I see this as a symptom of a bigger picture.
In the 1980’s in Bowen, way up north, there were signs erected warning of the dangers of marine stingers, although it was a rare occurrence for people to actually come in contact with them. Over the years the stingers, the cane toads, the crocs, have slowly but surely been migrating further south with each new year. Marine stingers would have been unheard of in Gladstone in years past. Yet we brush these facts off as just peculiar events. The reason is that our climate is changing. Historically evolution has been natures way of coping with a changing climate. Living things have, over time, changed in response to there changing environment. But never in the history of our planet has our climate been subjected to such a sudden shock as it is at the moment, and the fact is that evolution is struggling to cope. There will be winners and losers but species are dying out faster than ever before, & that is surely bad for our ecosystems.
Other countries have moved on from the debate of whether humans are responsible for this rapid change, and are taking steps to attempt to limit our impact. Australia’s fossil fuel industry is worth billions to our economy each year. It has immense power, a massive war chest & a strong interest in maintaining it’s income stream. Likewise, of all the “Renewables” talk you read about of other countries, Iraq doesn’t rate a mention either.
The Greenies have already given up on their preffered target of 250 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere limit as being unachievable, & their new target of 450 ppm in no way assures that we can avoid catastrophic climate change.

I'm not a "Greenie" but I am very concerned, listening to the "Respected" environmental scientists. I work in the fossil fuel industry. The coal fired power station in which I work consumes 25000 tonne of fuel per day. Can you imagine how big a pile 25000 tonne is. Every day. In China they are commissioning a similar sized coal fired power station to this every single week. Newcastle Australia is the largest coal exporting port in the world. Over the next few years they plan to double it’s capacity. In the Hunter Valley the open cut mines have become so vast the mining companies don’t even bother trying to hide them behind tree barriers or earth mounds any more as it’s just become pointless.
I feel for Rachel & her family, but I worry for us all.
Colin

bennie
ACT, 1258 posts
23 Dec 2009 12:49AM
Thumbs Up

yes, yes all good points but putting a great big tax on everything with no real benifit to the environment is hardly constructive, infact it's the opposite, destructive as there will be less money about to tackle the real problems. co2 is not a poision. It's one of the building blocks of life. Taxing it is like taxing water.
The gladstone stingers are in all probability caused because of more localised issues, not co2 emissions

Tell me, how will billions of hard earned aussie dollars lining the pockets of a new beuraucratic world govt(oligarchy) will help the environment?.As much as you would like it to be a good outcome, it will not be. Do you really think they will have Australias best interests in mind? Do you want them to make decisions on our behalf? because that is what our elected representative is trying to sign up to.

Human induced climate change is not a scientific consensous, in fact it is far from it, climate change on the other hand is consensous, climate is allways changing.
Heres a little fact for u. Did you know that since the mars icecaps were first measured they have reduced in size by 1/3, is that because of co2 emissions too? The biggest impact on our climate comes from the sun, yet that is overlooked by the consensous gang.Not however by the majority of respected climatologists.

Don't get me wrong I care about the environment as much as the next person, but what government is trying to acheive is just wrong. There are better ways to go about reducing pollution, and becoming a more sustainable race without giving up our independance and sovereignty.

Trant
NSW, 601 posts
23 Dec 2009 1:27AM
Thumbs Up

bennie said...

yes, yes all good points but putting a great big tax on everything with no real benifit to the environment is hardly constructive, infact it's the opposite.


COL didn't actually mention the ETS at all, just that we should reduce Carbon emissions.
2 points

1) Yes, there is a "consensus", here's a Wiki entry listing all the statements from the major science organisations. They all concur that Anthropological Global Warming is happening. Unless you know something I don't?
2) A similar ETS scheme has been used before and worked. The US used a ETS scheme to reduce Sulphur emissions to reduce Acid Rain.
www.epa.gov/airmarkets

At some point this thread will contain countless Youtube videos, I'm looking forward to seeing the same points over and over again



bennie
ACT, 1258 posts
23 Dec 2009 2:26AM
Thumbs Up

http://greenhoax.com/docs/senate%20report.htm

these are just the "tip of the iceberg" of experts in their respective fields who argue against HUMAN induced climate change.


Don Aitkin, PhD, Professor, social scientist, retired Vice-Chancellor and President, University of Canberra, Australia
Syun-Ichi Akasofu, PhD, Professor of Physics, Emeritus and Founding Director, International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, U.S.
William J.R. Alexander, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa; Member, UN Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000
Bjarne Andresen, PhD, physicist, Professor, The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Geoff L. Austin, PhD, FNZIP, FRSNZ, Professor, Dept. of Physics, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Timothy F. Ball, PhD, environmental consultant, former climatology professor, University of Winnipeg, Canada
Ernst-Georg Beck, Dipl. Biol., Biologist, Merian-Schule Freiburg, Germany
Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen, PhD, Reader, Dept. of Geography, Hull University, UK; Editor, Energy & Environment journal
Chris C. Borel, PhD, remote sensing scientist, U.S.
Reid A. Bryson, Ph.D. D.Sc. D.Engr., UNEP Global 500 Laureate; Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research; Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography, and of Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, U.S.
Dan Carruthers, M.Sc., wildlife biology consultant specializing in animal ecology in Arctic and Subarctic regions, Alberta, Canada
Robert M. Carter, PhD, Professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
Ian D. Clark, PhD, Professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa, Canada
Richard S. Courtney, PhD, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.
Willem de Lange, PhD, Dept. of Earth and Ocean Sciences, School of Science and Engineering, Waikato University, New Zealand
David Deming, PhD (Geophysics), Associate Professor, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Oklahoma, U.S.
Freeman J. Dyson, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J., U.S.
Don J. Easterbrook, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Geology, Western Washington University, U.S.
Lance Endersbee, Emeritus Professor, former Dean of Engineering and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Monasy University, Australia
Hans Erren, Doctorandus, geophysicist and climate specialist, Sittard, The Netherlands
Robert H. Essenhigh, PhD, E.G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University, U.S.
Christopher Essex, PhD, Professor of Applied Mathematics and Associate Director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, Canada
David Evans, PhD, mathematician, carbon accountant, computer and electrical engineer and head of 'Science Speak', Australia
William Evans, PhD, Editor, American Midland Naturalist; Dept. of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, U.S.
Stewart Franks, PhD, Associate Professor, Hydroclimatologist, University of Newcastle, Australia
R. W. Gauldie, PhD, Research Professor, Hawai'i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, School of Ocean Earth Sciences and Technology, University of Hawaii at Manoa
lee C. Gerhard, PhD, Senior Scientist Emeritus, University of Kansas; former director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey, U.S.
Gerhard Gerlich, Professor for Mathematical and Theoretical Physics, Institut f?r Mathematische Physik der TU Braunschweig, Germany
Albrecht Glatzle, PhD, sc.agr., Agro-Biologist and Gerente ejecutivo, INTTAS, Paraguay
Fred Goldberg, PhD, Adj Professor, Royal Institute of Technology, Mechanical Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden
Vincent Gray, PhD, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001,' Wellington, New Zealand
William M. Gray, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University and Head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, U.S.
Howard Hayden, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Connecticut, U.S.
Louis Hissink M.Sc. M.A.I.G., Editor AIG News and Consulting Geologist, Perth, Western Australia
Craig D. Idso, PhD, Chairman, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Arizona, U.S.
Sherwood B. Idso, PhD, President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, AZ, USA
Andrei Illarionov, PhD, Senior Fellow, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, U.S.; founder and director of the Institute of Economic Analysis, Russia
Zbigniew Jaworowski, PhD, physicist, Chairman - Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland
Jon Jenkins, PhD, MD, computer modelling - virology, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Wibjorn Karlen, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden
Olavi K?rner, Ph.D., Research Associate, Dept. of Atmospheric Physics, Institute of Astrophysics and Atmospheric Physics, Toravere, Estonia
Joel M. Kauffman, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemistry, University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, U.S.
David Kear, PhD, FRSNZ, CMG, geologist, former Director-General of NZ Dept. of Scientific & Industrial Research, New Zealand
Madhav Khandekar, PhD, former Research Scientist Environment Canada; Editor "Climate Research" (03-05); Editorial Board Member "Natural Hazards, IPCC Expert Reviewer 2007
William Kininmonth M.Sc., M.Admin., former head of Australia's National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological organization's Commission for Climatology
Jan J.H. Kop, M.Sc. Ceng FICE (Civil Engineer Fellow of the Institution of Civil Engineers), Emeritus Professor of Public Health Engineering, Technical University Delft, The Netherlands
Professor R.W.J. Kouffeld, Emeritus Professor, Energy Conversion, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
Salomon Kroonenberg, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Geotechnology, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
Hans H.J. Labohm, PhD, economist, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations), The Netherlands
The Rt. Hon. Lord Lawson of Blaby, economist; Chairman of the Central Europe Trust; former Chancellor of the Exchequer, U.K.
Douglas Leahey, PhD, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary, Canada
David R. Legates, PhD, Director, Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware, U.S.
Marcel Leroux, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS
Bryan Leyland, International Climate Science Coalition, consultant - power engineer, Auckland, New Zealand
William Lindqvist, PhD, consulting geologist and company director, Tiburon, California, U.S.
Richard S. Lindzen, PhD, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, U.S.
A.J. Tom van Loon, PhD, Professor of Geology (Quaternary Geology), Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland; former President of the European Association of Science Editors
Anthony R. Lupo, PhD, Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science, Dept. of Soil, Environmental, and Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri-Columbia, U.S.
Richard Mackey, PhD, Statistician, Australia
Horst Malberg, PhD, Professor for Meteorology and Climatology, Institut f?r Meteorologie, Berlin, Germany
John Maunder, PhD, Climatologist, former President of the Commission for Climatology of the World Meteorological Organization (89-97), New Zealand
Alister McFarquhar, PhD, international economist, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.
Ross McKitrick, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Canada
John McLean, Climate Data Analyst, computer scientist, Melbourne, Australia
Owen McShane, B. Arch., Master of City and Regional Planning (UC Berkeley), economist and policy analyst, joint founder of the International Climate Science Coalition, Director - Centre for Resource Management Studies, New Zealand
Fred Michel, PhD, Director, Institute of Environmental Sciences and Associate Professor of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Canada
Frank Milne, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Economics, Queen's University, Canada
Asmunn Moene, PhD, former head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway
Alan Moran, PhD, Energy Economist, Director of the IPA's Deregulation Unit, Australia
Nils-Axel Morner, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm University, Sweden
Lubos Motl, PhD, physicist, former Harvard string theorist, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
John Nicol, PhD, physicist, James Cook University, Australia
Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc., Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, former chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa, Canada
James J. O'Brien, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Meteorology and Oceanography, Florida State University, U.S.
Cliff Ollier, PhD, Professor Emeritus (Geology), Research Fellow, University of Western Australia
Garth W. Paltridge, PhD, atmospheric physicist, Emeritus Professor and former Director of the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies, University of Tasmania, Australia
R. Timothy Patterson, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Canada
Al Pekarek, PhD, Associate Professor of Geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, Minnesota, U.S.
Ian Plimer, PhD, Professor of Geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide and Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia
Brian Pratt, PhD, Professor of Geology, Sedimentology, University of Saskatchewan, Canada
Harry N.A. Priem, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Planetary Geology and Isotope Geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences
Alex Robson, PhD, Economics, Australian National University
Colonel F.P.M. Rombouts, Branch Chief - Safety, Quality and Environment, Royal Netherlands Air Force
R.G. Roper, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, U.S.
Arthur Rorsch, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Molecular Genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands
Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, B.C., Canada
Tom V. Segalstad, PhD, (Geology/Geochemistry), Head of the Geological Museum and Associate Professor of Resource and Environmental Geology, University of Oslo, Norway
Gary D. Sharp, PhD, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, CA, U.S.
S. Fred Singer, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia and former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service
L. Graham Smith, PhD, Associate Professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, Canada
Roy W. Spencer, PhD, climatologist, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville, U.S.
Peter Stilbs, TeknD, Professor of Physical Chemistry, Research Leader, School of Chemical Science and Engineering, KTH (Royal Institute of Technology), Stockholm, Sweden
Hendrik Tennekes, PhD, former Director of Research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
Dick Thoenes, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Chemical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Brian G Valentine, PhD, PE (Chem.), Technology Manager - Industrial Energy Efficiency, Adjunct Associate Professor of Engineering Science, University of Maryland at College Park; Dept of Energy, Washington, DC, U.S.
Gerrit J. van der Lingen, PhD, geologist and paleoclimatologist, climate change consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand
Len Walker, PhD, power engineering, Pict Energy, Melbourne, Australia
Edward J. Wegman, Bernard J. Dunn Professor, Department of Statistics and Department Computational and Data Sciences, George Mason University, Virginia, U.S.
Stephan Wilksch, PhD, Professor for Innovation and Technology Management, Production Management and Logistics, University of Technology and Economics Berlin, Germany
Boris Winterhalter, PhD, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland
david E. Wojick, PhD, P.Eng., UN IPCC Expert Reviewer, energy consultant, Virginia, U.S.
Raphael Wust, PhD, Lecturer, Marine Geology/Sedimentology, James Cook University, Australia
Zichichi, PhD, President of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva, Switzerland; Emeritus Professor of Advanced Physics, University of Bologna, Italy.

stamp
QLD, 2765 posts
23 Dec 2009 7:40AM
Thumbs Up

please take it here.

www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=3

you know nothing will be solved, you will all just use quotes and stats to prove how right you are and go around in a circle. again

Andrash
WA, 637 posts
23 Dec 2009 9:42AM
Thumbs Up

What we did to our seas and their habitats is probably just as (if not more) disastrous than global warming. And this is an area where we can definitely make a big difference.....yes, were little has been done to stop slaughtering animals to extinct, or poisoning our oceans with our wastes. At the end what matters is what we CAN do, not whether what we say is right or wrong.....and, yes, this topic has been discussed here a lot before.....so unless we start coming up with practical implementable ideas and actually do something, we just feed the mind in its never ending circles....yaahn...

getfunky
WA, 4485 posts
23 Dec 2009 11:26AM
Thumbs Up

There is abuse of statistics and hype on both sides of the argument and it is all too easy for either side to fill a list of 'experts' or graphic presentations.

However, anyone - scientist, housewife, garbo, whatever - who thinks +6 billion greedy humans are not having an enormous detrimental impact on our planet, is wearing deeply tinted rose glasses, or a believer in fairies and goblins I reckon.

Here is a bucket of sand:





You can either use it to brace against the rising tide or stick your head in it.



BTW Bennie - as i suspected when i followed your link, the term used is "Global warming" a misleading and skewed poll perhaps? Climate change is very diiferant in meaning to the simplified "Global warming" term that pretty much all n sundry agree is inaccurate.

Gotta ask yourself if the site is interested in accuracy why are they using a loaded and out of date term?

Also who funds the research that each of these lab coat folks do? The all mighty funding dollar vocalises many and also silences many. Yes, I mean on both sides of the argumant also.

Finally, if we react strongly to reduce/re-use/recycle and lesson our reliance on poluting fuels/waste/manufacturing methods/lifestyles, then climate change turns out to be naff, what is the worst thing we have done? Helped to clean up the planet and change our laughably selfish and unsustainable ways? Not such a bad outcome really.

FlySurfer
NSW, 4453 posts
23 Dec 2009 3:09PM
Thumbs Up

Here I am, the moment you've all been waiting for!

After getting stoned last night I've come to the conclusion that we have 2.1 options.

1.- We kill each other... this will allow fittest people to live more comfortably, and the weak will be in heaven or get another chance later on.

2.- We all down grade... live in tents, ride bicycles and eat a bowl of rice a day. This will buy us some time.

2.1.- We down grade, and invest everything the human race has on Space Exploration. Yup let's face it, we have exceeded the carrying capacity of Earth and we need mo'space.


Personally I think we should start by making ALL packaging biodegradable.
That also means no products can enter Australia with non biodegradable packaging.

Aorta
VIC, 244 posts
23 Dec 2009 3:13PM
Thumbs Up




getfunky
WA, 4485 posts
23 Dec 2009 7:06PM
Thumbs Up

Never trust a bloke who couldn't face the time for his pony was up 20 yrs ago.

I can say that cause mine is due for the pasture any day! Still I don't have more hair at the back - than on top of my melon. Michael Bolton school of hair design?

Oh, and we are heading for hadies in a hand basket the way we nonchalantly abuse this precious planet.

Aorta
VIC, 244 posts
23 Dec 2009 10:53PM
Thumbs Up

You don't have to trust him, he is a comedian (now deceased) expressing a point of view.

His point is that the planet is not ****ed, humans are, so he scoffs at people trying to "save the planet" because they are not trying to save the planet, they are trying to make humans life more comfortable.
Humans have been around for maybe 200,000 years, Earth 6 Billion years.
The planet has been through all kinds of disasters and what humans can do will be but a minor blip on the life cycle of the planet, if humans disappeared tomorrow, there would barely be a trace of us in 10,000 years.

interesting video on life after man >10,000 years


Jimmyz
NSW, 446 posts
23 Dec 2009 11:16PM
Thumbs Up

That's nice Bennie, a list of names? - are you a sheep?

Please please show me some CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC report convincingly refuting climate change, I am yet to see one.

George Carlin is wonderful with his words, but his act has a few flaws; for example to suggest that rich liberals only want rid of climate change because now it's in their back yard, who do you think are the stakeholders in the taxed corporations?

To answer your question:

A tax on carbon dioxide will have the effect of lowering the amount of C02 emitted by raising the marginal cost of production such that the profit maximizing quantity of produce decreases - the result is less pollution. Simply put it is to compensate for the cost that the company does not incur (but should) in order that the market be economically efficient.

Aorta
VIC, 244 posts
23 Dec 2009 11:32PM
Thumbs Up



Jimmyz said...

That's nice Bennie, a list of names? - are you a sheep?

Please please show me some CREDIBLE SCIENTIFIC convincingly refuting climate change, I am yet to see one.


I don't think he is refuting climate change, just the diagnosis that it is anthropogenic.

Its quite clear the climate is changing, but its also quite clear that the climate has changed throughout the history of the planet and is cyclical. (medieval warm period, ice ages etc)

Personally i don't know what to believe, there is valid points on both sides of the coin.
However i think our priority should be to tackle pollution and have better management of resources (animal, vegetable and mineral) more so than this apparent excess of CO2.




sir ROWDY
WA, 5353 posts
23 Dec 2009 8:43PM
Thumbs Up

I don't think anyone refutes "climate change", I think what people disagree with/ dislike, is;

1. The hidden agendas and ulterior motives of the big heads using "climate change" as a convenient excuse/mask for commandeering tax payers (sheeples) funds.

2. That "climate change" is caused by man. Climate change is a fact of nature, it was always present and always will be whether man exists or not.

gruezi
WA, 3464 posts
23 Dec 2009 10:03PM
Thumbs Up

I agree with you Rowdy, you are one smart dude.

We humans are nature too and there are too many of us. We might eventually kill everything including ourselves, but nature and the planet will move on.

Jimmyz
NSW, 446 posts
24 Dec 2009 2:25AM
Thumbs Up

Ok, granted there is a natural course of change, however the rate of change being observed is far beyond the probabilistic distribution of the natural rate of change, and this 'structural break' has a high correlation with industrialization.

Remember these guys are professionals, it's not likely they made the assumption that we live with static climates in the first place...

There is a scientific theory and fitting empirical evidence, how much more do people want!?

Oh the planet will survive... we won't and nor will however many species. I don't think the phrase 'saving the planet' was ever to be taken literally anyway.

sir ROWDY
WA, 5353 posts
24 Dec 2009 12:47AM
Thumbs Up

www.infowars.com/climate-gate-is-your-fight/

Aorta
VIC, 244 posts
24 Dec 2009 9:57AM
Thumbs Up

Jimmyz said...

Ok, granted there is a natural course of change, however the rate of change being observed is far beyond the probabilistic distribution of the natural rate of change, and this 'structural break' has a high correlation with industrialization.

Remember these guys are professionals, it's not likely they made the assumption that we live with static climates in the first place...

There is a scientific theory and fitting empirical evidence, how much more do people want!?



The official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, for the years 1998-2005 show that global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease)

Have a read of this article regarding your so called empiricle evidence of a warming planet.
www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3624242/There-IS-a-problem-with-global-warming...-it-stopped-in-1998.html
(published 09 Apr 2006)

COL
NSW, 550 posts
24 Dec 2009 10:01AM
Thumbs Up

That's an impressive list Bennie, perhaps you could include a list of their sponsors.
In the immortal words of our beloved environment minister
" And if you blue sky mining company won't come to my rescue. Who's gonna save me? "
It's not that I don't trust them, trust is irrelevant.
Like Exon & James Hardy, they are profit driven companies.
I have a pretty impressive list of my own.
David Suzuki
Tim Flannery
I suggest all should read Tim Flannery's "The Weather Maker's"
The mere fact that he is pro nuclear would indicate to me he is a neutral observer.
Even if you take the view of ' Maybe it's an issue, maybe another Y2K fizzer'
Surely it's only being prudent to do what we can just in case. You insure your house don't you, even though you're not expecting it to be torched.
Another quote " Trust in God, but row away from the rocks"
Col

Aorta
VIC, 244 posts
24 Dec 2009 11:27AM
Thumbs Up

COL said...
Even if you take the view of ' Maybe it's an issue, maybe another Y2K fizzer'
Surely it's only being prudent to do what we can just in case. You insure your house don't you, even though you're not expecting it to be torched.
Another quote " Trust in God, but row away from the rocks"
Col

I agree with you, but as i said earlier, we should be addressing Pollution and resource management, not a naturally occuring gas such as carbon dioxide which is not proven to be causing the heating of the planet at all.

"What this is and always was about is an excuse for global government. This they certainly do not deny. Ban Ki-Moon, the UN Secretary General, penned an op-ed in the New York Times last month in which he called for a global government funded by carbon taxes. The new president of the European Union, Herman van Rompuy, said that 2009 was the first year of global governance, and that the Copenhagen climate conference would be "another step towards the global management of our planet".

Ban Ki-Moons letter
www.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/opinion/26iht-edban.html?_r=1

ADS
WA, 365 posts
24 Dec 2009 8:43AM
Thumbs Up

Well done Rowdy. The contents of that link are incredible!
www.infowars.com/climate-gate-is-your-fight/
Yet the brainwashed masses continue to defend this pack of charlitans.

FlySurfer
NSW, 4453 posts
24 Dec 2009 3:26PM
Thumbs Up

To be honest talk of climate change is really dumb (no offence). Like countless people have pointed out it's always freaking changing, and will always change while the Earth revolves around the Sun.

The CO2 emissions has been the victim of my rants, and it's important that y'all get a clue, cos it's going to effect you and your family in a big way.

Since my last rant in another post I've received numerous messages making analogies with blankets and cars in the Sun... but the truth is that CO2 plays a very small part in warming and it's effectiveness as a GHG is equal to all other single state gases in relation to it's molecular mass.

Climate in the media and politics boils down to this question: Do you want to live in a socialist one world government, where the have nots are supported by the haves?

Last week, China told the world to go f*** its self.
The have nots were furious cos they didn't/wouldn't get the cash they were promised.
The haves said well if we all agree to give, then we will... they couldn't agree cos of China's derailing.

So you see my friends what you read and see on the TV is just to condition you, and has 0 to do with climate.

lotofwind
NSW, 6451 posts
25 Dec 2009 9:04AM
Thumbs Up

We gotta die of something.

You guys can lose sleep over it,Im going for a kite.

Jimmyz
NSW, 446 posts
25 Dec 2009 10:57AM
Thumbs Up

Aorta said...

Jimmyz said...

Ok, granted there is a natural course of change, however the rate of change being observed is far beyond the probabilistic distribution of the natural rate of change, and this 'structural break' has a high correlation with industrialization.

Remember these guys are professionals, it's not likely they made the assumption that we live with static climates in the first place...

There is a scientific theory and fitting empirical evidence, how much more do people want!?



The official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, for the years 1998-2005 show that global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease)

Have a read of this article regarding your so called empiricle evidence of a warming planet.
www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3624242/There-IS-a-problem-with-global-warming...-it-stopped-in-1998.html
(published 09 Apr 2006)




Good point raised, but that article has overlooked an extremely important aspect of global 'warming'.

I suggest you check the variance, it's commonly called global warming, this name is misleading.

Even with a statistically equivalent mean two processes can be very very different.

For example imagine a process in which every day for six months of the year the temp is 25C and the other 6 months it is -25C - the average is 0.

Now imagine a process where for 6 months of the year the temperature is 40C and the other it's -40C the average is still 0.

The existence of seasonal extremes in both summer/winter are capable of producing a 'mean 0' result even if those extremes were increasing.

Furthermore the article does not mention the period over which the averages were obtained. I don't mean from 1998-2005, I mean the number of iterations used to calculate the average, it could be 1 day, 1 month? This may or may not account for short term volatility.

He states that people forecasting 'short-term' horizons of 'doom' are making false claims based on averages obtained from 7 years, while I tend to think this may be plausible - it does not weaken the argument for the existence of climate change when considered beyond this short term constraint.

Furthermore there are several people here who tend to clutch onto the bovine logic that because a variable is always changing we are unable to make any inference as to whether the process itself has changed in a significant way over time or not. This is the problem when everyone becomes a professional on a subject in which they lack the relevant knowledge.

Does anyone have any links to where I can find the RAW data? I'd really like to do my own statistical analysis seeing as it's what I spend half my time at uni doing.

lotofwind
NSW, 6451 posts
25 Dec 2009 11:53AM
Thumbs Up

Riseing sea levels are a good thing.

I live 400meters from the beach,if my calculations are right,
In 20 years I should be living beach front......YEAHHHHHH

So every one help me out,
crank up you air cons,
buy a fuel guzzeling v8,
and get rid of your green material shopping bags.

and in return you can come and kite in my front yard

Jimmyz
NSW, 446 posts
25 Dec 2009 12:01PM
Thumbs Up

Found this after thinking and looking for some data unsuccessfully:

"Curiously, the revised monthly means for 1961-90 are exactly the same as those published for 1880-2004, though somehow we doubt that will lead to a rash of headlines stating that the world is really kind of average, temperature-wise."

http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Warming_Look.html

The site seems OK. I don't know how credible their data is, but if you look at it they've come up with the same result as Bob Carter's article yet unlike him they haven't gone ranting and raving in the media.

Nickoff
NSW, 106 posts
26 Dec 2009 2:48PM
Thumbs Up

CO2 is only part of the problem, there is heaps of other greenhouse gasses which are heaps worse then CO2 like methane, when the perma frost melts in countrys like Siberia and Alaska were stuffed

http://www.planetextinction.com/planet_extinction_permafrost.htm

i know the vast majority of people here think climate change is a load of S###, but what if your wrong if you have kids or care what future generations are going to have to deal with then it might be time to change your views.

as a 17 year old who lives 5 meters above sea leavel its hard not to be worried

im sure of one thing though its getting harder to be optimistic

p.s as COL said Tim Flannery's "The Weather Maker's" is worth the read

FlySurfer
NSW, 4453 posts
26 Dec 2009 4:10PM
Thumbs Up

OMG Nickoff there we go again, "climate change"... get this in to your head... you live in a constantly changing biosphere.



Does CO2 have an effect on temperature sure... does pissing in the sea heat it up?

If you're concerned; stop riding in cars/buses/planes in fact any vehicle that has an engine... that goes for electric, even solar electric cos en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell generate WAY more heat than CO2. Turn off you PC, wait Mac... TV, XBox,... and what ever u do don't fart. Stop eating meat, and fish... HELL become a Tibetan Yogi, talk your friends in to become one.

We have far more important issues than CO2... water, pollution, deforestation ...

Nickoff
NSW, 106 posts
26 Dec 2009 4:20PM
Thumbs Up

what ever you reckon flysurfer, im sick of arguing with you
you just an example of one "im right about everything" D###heads who dont care about the future generations

FlySurfer
NSW, 4453 posts
26 Dec 2009 5:00PM
Thumbs Up

Nickoff: I am a D###head and I think I'm right about things I've researched, but the problem is I do care for future generations... that's why I don't want simple people being hurt by their government.

Unfortunately I'm smart enough to see when I'm being conned by pseudoscience, and with basic chemistry, physics and maths I can figure out a lot of things, like that Building 7 (47 floor World trade center building) didn't collapse from an office fire on floors 9 & 11, and that CO2 taxation isn't going to help the environment... blah blah blah

There are countless truths people hold that don't hold up under rational analysis.
I have to put up with ridicule and being labelled a "conspiracy nut" by people who don't want to even listen to evidence if it conflicts with what the media informs them every 15 minutes on the hour... if didn't care I wouldn't bother, and I could invest the time in becoming a CO2 trader.

Trant
NSW, 601 posts
26 Dec 2009 8:04PM
Thumbs Up

FlySurfer said...
There are countless truths people hold that don't hold up under rational analysis.
I have to put up with ridicule and being labelled a "conspiracy nut" by people who don't want to even listen to evidence if it conflicts with what the media informs them every 15 minutes on the hour.


The Media's done well then, they even managed to get Anthropological Global Warming onto the syllabus of my Physics degree in 93-96. Now that's forward planning!



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > Kitesurfing General


"Climate Change, yes again!" started by COL