ppl will believe what they want to.
Just a question Col, if you are so concerned about climate change, why do you do what you do? No disrespect
Durks: I wish that were true, but most people actually believe what they're first told. I know I did, but a whole series of events lead me to start questioning things... and I started to realize that information is only repeatedly released to mould your thought (public opinion)... I did some basic research in to marketing psychology and other techniques developed by Anna Freud...
Long story short, we're all being lied to on a massive scale and most people are taking it in without questioning it. Everybody kind of knows it but they don't care; truly amazing.
Most countries don't have laws against lying, and those that do their media get around it by buying stories from foreign sources (reuters, bbc).
But I digress from the topic... Climate change... pollution... water management... the only options are to minimize the human stain on the environment.
Jellyfish... a lot of fish eat them, but we eat too many fish. Algae & Jelliyfish like the nitrogen based fertilizers but we use it to grow food.
Maybe the solution is to tax us, so that plebs can sleep at night thinking they're making a difference... I'll lose sleep cos I know it's built on a lie.
Anyway it's been freaking raining for 2 days, and the forecast isn't looking any better!
FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
"50 reasons why global warming isn't natural"http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/12/50-reasons-why-global-warming.html
"What they really believe"
www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/opinion/18friedman.html
"The population delusion"
www.newscientist.com/special/population
"Deniergate: Turning the tables on climate sceptics"
www.newscientist.com/article/dn18279
i think it is delay, delay and keep business as usual
someone invent a clean and cheap fuel and we can all get on with our lives
Isn't one of the main principles of Capitalism Infinite Growth?
GDP, Growth, jobs etc just don't equal Sustainable, zero emissions
The brutal truth is life would have to change CONSIDERABLY for us living the in the land of plenty to make any difference to anything at all.
Someone will use the last barrel of oil (probably for something stupid like heating a towel rack), someone will eat the last fish (if they can catch it) so forth and so on.
Live within your means, slow down, contract, don't expand and perhaps others will do the same because one day we wont have everything we have now.
It's not rocket science, it's Easter Island on a bigger scale.
Personally I keep it simple and reuse old stuff, buy quality that lasts and look at the embodied energy that everything has and above all I've stopped fretting about it.
Cheer up and enjoy living like a King in the land of plenty!
Most Agri oil based products uses almost as much energy as it produces and in some instances a net loss of energy , take one barrel to produce one barrel, not exactly fuel for the future.
As another example . Oilsands in Canada uses 1 barrel to produce approx 3 barrels of oil.
Can't see anychange to how we consume, as pointed out we livein a system where growth and surplus equals society prosperity. Unfortunatly and as everyone knows our resources are finite so eventualy we run out of surplus.
Regardless if you beleive in carbon causing a change in our planet or not the system we live in won't change and so it's a distraction to concerns anyone that thinks of the problems humanity will have in the future. Some people will make squlions in a carbon trade system and some with squilions will lose out , but in today's global economy the money will be circulated back to western society and into your and my pocket simply because we need prosperity in our system for it to remain intact.
I care about the planet, but I dont want to pay for it, If the Chineese wernt allowed to pump out all the dioxins, CO2 heavy metals, pesticides, what ever else industry has to pump out into the air sea and onto the land, I wont get my new kites, LCD/plasma screen, mobile phone, laptop, I-pod, furniture, car, cool surf wear, fridge, washing machine, camera, batteries, power tools, cheap any more, and thats why I will vote for the poly who will make sure we can continue to sell all our resources to China, and and who realy cares about rising sealevels, sure we might lose Lano, but theres enough money to build seawalls to make sure the ocean stays where it is, Gene technology will be so advanced in a couple of years to cure my kids of the child hood cancer they will shurly have a higher chance of getting.
Sleep well Australia, we are in safe hands.
come on guys! grow plants, turn them in to fuel to run our stupid combustion engines?
What next ox, donkey, bicycle?
Does anyone know what E=MC2 means?
So lets get with it. We should all have microreactors/radioisotope generators like those used in Pioneer/Voyager/Viking... I wish I could build my own but the f**king idiots in power won't allow it.
They're even reluctant to try en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
Like I said at the beginning we are going to out grow Earth, so we need to smarten up so we can expand out... and biofuel aint gona get us around the Milkyway!
Folding space is going to require enormous amounts of energy.
Lets all wave our wangs around and see who can flame each other other best!
Lets call each other for all sorts and contemplate(or hypothesize) one anothers intelligence.....
Doesn't make any difference you know.....or how much you know(for that matter).
Things happen...like sh!T happens, you can't do anything about it .... Live it large!
"cause tomoz may not come....
BTW my carton of beer on new years eve will have probably taken 2 barrels of oil(or more) to produce...
...yet to figure out, how this thread relate to kiteboarding......sure you guys have recent injuries, prolonged hangover, or you live far from anything windy and wet...
....good luck to you in sorting your issues out....
first anyone who thinks burning millions tonnes of stuff everyday doesn't make anything to the planet is kidding himself.
even if climate change isn't real, does it means it's ok to pollute air, water, ground and everything else? because there is not only CO2 released when coal and petrol is burnt, there is a lot of sh!t coming with it.
do we wait until we run out of petrol and coal to start thinking what do to do next? or do we use the fossil fuels we have left to build a civilisation that doesn't rely on fossil fuels as soon as possible so the transition will be as easy as possible.
there are studies that found on a level playing ground (same level of subsidies from the government), renewable energy is cheaper that fossil fuels.
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995
Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html
And it will make not an ounce of friggin difference!
Australians could all go back to the ice age and it wouldn't make a bleedin' difference...
That's the point....why even consider a stupid thing like the ETS ?... when it doesn't solve (or change) a flukin thing?!!!!!
sigh>>>
Lol this thread has restarted... but it's late and I can't sleep because there are big waves tomoz and I'm excited :D
Kalavas - there is more 'proof' for climate change than there is against it... simple.
While no it is not strictly proven in the scientific sense it is however proven well beyond reasonable doubt in the legal/debate sense - which is the context of what you are citing, they are two very different conclusions.
This is a matter of risk management on a global scale, how is causation to be proven without the planet/humans succumbing to that which we ought to protect it from in the first place?
At the moment all we know is only known in a probabilistic sense, which is why it is still a theory and not a law. Even if we were 99.99999% sure it existed we could not call it a law until it is 100% proven (ie: conclusively observed) - causation; and by then it would be too late.
Well au_rick it could work to a varying extent, and it's a good point as I myself definitley do not think that the Australian govt. are at all efficient with their spending, so why pay more tax to have it 'wasted'.
The Law of Demand states that we will consume less of these things as their prices increase - the extent to which we do this would depend on their elasticities, which depend on several other factors - wiki it if you need.