Emission Trading and climate change

Page 227 of 377 FirstFirst ... 127 177 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 277 327 ... LastLast
Results 11,301 to 11,350 of 18819
  1. #11301
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey180 View Post
    If any government was serious about the environment they would be rewarding people for 'going green' not penalising everyone via a tax.
    Where would the government get the money form to reward those going green? From government revenue, of course, but where does that come from - TAX! So the reward is still penalising everyone via taxes - doh!

    The difference with the way the carbon "tax" was set up is that it was revenue neutral - i.e. the government did increase revenues from it, but returned the revenue to taxpayers vie concessions &c-.

  2. #11302
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,627

    Default

    Celebrate! Australia’s carbon [dioxide] tax is GONE!

    17 July, 2014 by Simon 9 Comments







    12 Votes


    Crack open the bubbly!
    The carbon tax, that utterly pointless environmental gesture that would have done nothing for the climate, has been repealed today in the Senate. Good riddance.
    The toxic tax, together with the originally planned emissions trading scheme, has claimed, over the years, about half a dozen senior politicians, including Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Malcolm Turnbull, all of whom have shackled themselves to the altar of climate change alarmism, and paid the price.
    The Australian reports:
    THE carbon tax has been repealed, fulfilling Tony Abbott’s “pledge in blood” to abolish the landmark Gillard government scheme.
    The Senate passed the government’s amended carbon tax repeal bills by a margin of 39 votes to 32 at 11.14am, with only the Labor Party and the Greens opposing their passage into law.
    It was the Senate’s third attempt to pass the repeal legislation.
    The vote was held as Bill Shorten gave a clear pledge to take a new carbon pricing mechanism to the next federal election, due in 2016, in the form of an emissions trading scheme.
    They never learn, do they? Idiots. You can add Shorten to the above list of climate victims.
    Share this:


    Science is never settled,
    it advances one funeral at the time.
    Max Planck

  3. #11303
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    258

    Default Emission Trading

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post

    The difference with the way the carbon "tax" was set up is that it was revenue neutral - i.e. the government did increase revenues from it, but returned the revenue to taxpayers vie concessions &c-.
    I still fail to understand how putting a price on carbon reduces emissions.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

  4. #11304
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    I can see you don't get it at all, the Government has scrapped a tax, it is spending more than it earns so it has compounded an existing problem. It has no real solutions to its spending problems because Palmer has the LNP on a leash, not just the mincing poodle but Hockey and Abbott. There are no winners in this, if business confidence remains at its current low levels and supermarket prices don't shift beyond normal fluctuations then all you have is bigger deficit and no real gain. Tax is just tax sport, to little the country goes broke to much and pubic consumerism collapses and business takes a dive. It is not a single issue what a pathetic response, winners losers, what a joke, we are all in this together did anyone win or lose of course not, it is just a decision in time it is not a beginning or end on its own account.
    more bla, bla bla, bla bla! They are just going to have to grow some spine & close the multinational company tax loop holes which bleed this country dry of billions & billions of $ a year, everybody else is paying their fair share, instantly this would put the country in a better monetary balance position. And no, we don't have to follow any other nation in doing this to stop the greed!
    regards inter

  5. #11305
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,307

    Default



    What a great day.
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  6. #11306
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey180 View Post
    I still fail to understand how putting a price on carbon reduces emissions.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
    thats exactly how the majority of the senate sees it also, so your not on your own, only dolts & soon to be wannabes are clinging to the sinking raft of idiotic ideas. The first sign of failure is believing their own lies!
    regards inter

  7. #11307
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    bla bla bla! the people have spoken & your in the minority, you lost!
    Science doesn't care about popular politics or who is on the minority.
    “The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” Neil deGrasse Tyson Quotes (Author of Death by Black Hole)

    Which means that Intertd6, Rod and Marc still get the benefits of science based technology, such as the opportunity to participate in this debate suing the internet, even though they do not believe the science that underpins it - the same science that predicates global warming as a consequence of burning off fossil energy originally stored over billions of years in the space of a few decades and the CO2 emissions that result...

  8. #11308
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    The first sign of failure is believing their own lies!
    So how long does the current LNP government have, td6?

  9. #11309
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post

    What a great day.
    I take it you are well over 70, live off a self managed super fund (share market based) and don't eat food. Yeah, it's a great day...

  10. #11310
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey180 View Post
    I still fail to understand how putting a price on carbon reduces emissions.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
    The basic economic theory behind this is that if something costs more people will use less of it. So when electricity prices rise we tend to buy more of the things that will reduce our energy consumption eg energy efficient appliances, solar hot water and solar panels. Also we change our behaviour, become more aware of turning off lights, get rid of the second fridge etc.

    Even though the tax is gone its impact will continue. Many people believe that energy prices will not fall significantly and may even continue to rise sharply. So the demand for energy efficient appliances, solar hot water and solar panels will continue.
    Less power usage=less emissions

  11. #11311
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey180 View Post
    I still fail to understand how putting a price on carbon reduces emissions.
    Because it is designed to tilt the market in favour of reduced or non-carbon energy sources.

    Firstly by adding a premium to power prices that gets consumers thinking about using less power to save their cash.

    Secondly by enticing investment in low carbon technologies.

    Companies that build power plants would be more likely to invest in low carbon power as a result.

    The genie is out of the bottle and you can't cram it back. Australia's energy use from CO2 producing power stations has reduced during the carbon tax, solar PV prices have fallen and there is a large and growing installed base. Wind power is already a significant contributor to the grid. Even rabid CC deniers have been sucked into installing Solar PV on their roofs to their own and alternate energy's benefit.

    Those who want to ignore the science are increasingly alone. They are on their own shrinking island.


  12. #11312
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Dear ol' Johnny was the most profligate spender in Australia's history. Even Intertd6's great-grandchildren will still be paying the debt back...

    IMF says Howard Most Wasteful Spender
    That is by far the funniest thing I have read on these pages so far! But to some it is legitimate because they can't grasp a simple balance sheet of the countries finances, no wonder they can't grasp the CO2 hoax!
    regards inter

  13. #11313
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Installed, unsubsidised renewable generation is already cheaper that non-renewables such as coal and gas - without even taking into account the massive subsidies / tax concessions the fossil energy industries get. And that is just the plant cost, renewable "fuel" is essentially free, unlike coal and gas which has to be dug up out of the ground and transported to the generator. Carbon tax or not, it is unlikely that any new fossil energy plants will be built in Australia.

    Renewable energy now cheaper than new fossil fuels in Australia | Bloomberg New Energy Finance

  14. #11314
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post
    Because it is designed to tilt the market in favour of reduced or non-carbon energy sources.

    Firstly by adding a premium to power prices that gets consumers thinking about using less power to save their cash.

    Secondly by enticing investment in low carbon technologies.

    Companies that build power plants would be more likely to invest in low carbon power as a result.

    The genie is out of the bottle and you can't cram it back. Australia's energy use from CO2 producing power stations has reduced during the carbon tax, solar PV prices have fallen and there is a large and growing installed base. Wind power is already a significant contributor to the grid. Even rabid CC deniers have been sucked into installing Solar PV on their roofs to their own and alternate energy's benefit.
    That was what it was designed to do, but what it actually did was drive manufacturing out of this country & if we weren't digging up & selling our resources feverishly we would be in the realms of Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Iceland........ & broke.
    regards inter

  15. #11315
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    That is by far the funniest thing I have read on these pages so far! But to some it is legitimate because they can't grasp a simple balance sheet of the countries finances, no wonder they can't grasp the CO2 hoax!
    Let's say there is an asset that generates revenue that goes into government consolidated revenue, reducing the need for taxes. Howard sells the asset for a one-time revenue bonus, but now the asset that was once public owned sends its profits to private, not public benefit. The public now has to pay more for the uses of the asset it once owned and more in taxes to offset the loss of revenue from said asset. Someone who "can't grasp a simple balance sheet of the countries finances" might think they are better off since Howard. Look at how household debt escalated during the Howard years (statistics from the Reserve Bank of Australia):


  16. #11316
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    So how long does the current LNP government have, td6?
    I don't really care, But I think they will get a second term, only because there is a good balance of power in the senate to keep them in check from self imploding from idiotic policies, which from history is the political sword they fall on that brings them undone.
    regards inter

  17. #11317
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    That was what it was designed to do, but what it actually did was drive manufacturing out of this country & if we weren't digging up & selling our resources feverishly we would be in the realms of Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Iceland........ & broke.
    Open your eyes! The carbon "tax" hasn't had a poofteenth of the impact of the Abbott government in damaging business confidence in Australia - and Abbott's first year isn't even up yet...

    BTW, digging stuff out of the ground and exporting the profits offshore (the only kind of business that has benefited under Abbott) is the kind of business that Australia would be better off without!

  18. #11318
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    258

    Default Emission Trading

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Installed, unsubsidised renewable generation is already cheaper that non-renewables such as coal and gas - without even taking into account the massive subsidies / tax concessions the fossil energy industries get. And that is just the plant cost, renewable "fuel" is essentially free, unlike coal and gas which has to be dug up out of the ground and transported to the generator. Carbon tax or not, it is unlikely that any new fossil energy plants will be built in Australia.

    Renewable energy now cheaper than new fossil fuels in Australia | Bloomberg New Energy Finance
    Ohhhh, the PV scheme and Clean energy council are nothing but a joke. Sure it's beneficial to the environment, I'll give them that and that is a massive bonus. They also did a great job of lining their own pockets in the process, and will continue to do so now all the rebates and tariffs have been cut.

    Not to mention how the clean energy council and labour conducted their business in relation to contractors. Talk about an expensive exercise only to have it now fall flat on its face.

    But that's ok, the governments revenue keeps flowing from PVs installed on people's roofs that were paid for by them. All is well.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

  19. #11319
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey180 View Post
    They also did a great job of lining their own pockets in the process, and will continue to do so now all the rebates and tariffs have been cut.
    Who is "they", who is in charge of "they" and how is "they" organised?

  20. #11320
    Novice Yande's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Age
    62
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Well now at least I understand this Forum. Previous statements such as "The Chinese just want to conquer the world" took me by surprise. But now I realise just how many shiny tails, living off their super, with nothing better to do than sprout about their latest reno, and right leaning beliefs, spend their time here..

    So the Tax is gone... Wooppee, now I can burn the electrics day and night.. Especially as i am going to be $550 better off!! (No tony didn't say that, Bill did, apparently.) And according to most here, I need have no regard to the CO2 emissions I create. Unreal. Burn the plastic. Recycle?? No Too hard. Burn..

    Honestly, of late, it is embarrassing being a 7th generation Australian.. One only has to look at the clowns telling us what is right... Abbott, Hockey, and that douzy.. Pine.. If you voted for them fine.. I'm just smarter than most.

  21. #11321
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Science doesn't care about popular politics or who is on the minority.
    “The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” Neil deGrasse Tyson Quotes (Author of Death by Black Hole)

    Which means that Intertd6, Rod and Marc still get the benefits of science based technology, such as the opportunity to participate in this debate suing the internet, even though they do not believe the science that underpins it - the same science that predicates global warming as a consequence of burning off fossil energy originally stored over billions of years in the space of a few decades and the CO2 emissions that result...
    You lost on that one too, as nothing has been proven on your front & actually if the average temperature since 1998 doesn't start to rise it will fade into a distant memory of other similar urban myths throughout history!
    regards inter

  22. #11322
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    You lost on that one too, as nothing has been proven on your front & actually if the average temperature since 1998 doesn't start to rise it will fade into a distant memory of other similar urban myths throughout history!
    Huh? You are the one quoting an urban myth.

  23. #11323
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Who is "they", who is in charge of "they" and how is "they" organised?
    Well obviously, them, they & you are not us.
    regards inter

  24. #11324
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Huh? You are the one quoting an urban myth.
    we could only hope that that could be the final word from what appears to be a cult following, aptly called so because there is no conclusive proof! The basis of all cults.
    regards inter

  25. #11325
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    we could only hope that that could be the final word from what appears to be a cult following, aptly called so because there is no conclusive proof! The basis of all cults.
    So that's it? Your final word as apostle of the it ain't happening cult? Be sad to see you go, Intertd6 - will miss your blow-off valve "PSSSSHHHH" sound when you let off...

  26. #11326
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    So that's it? Your final word as apostle of the it ain't happening cult? Be sad to see you go, Intertd6 - will miss your blow-off valve "PSSSSHHHH" sound when you let off...
    Check out this grammar? I hoped wrong!
    You can always tell the cult members from the rest by their religious fervour.
    regards inter

  27. #11327
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    Check out this grammar? I hoped wrong!
    You can always tell the cult members from the rest by their religious fervour.
    regards inter
    Bet you can't even point out the grammar faults

  28. #11328
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default Re: Emission Trading

    Quote Originally Posted by Yande View Post
    Well now at least I understand this Forum. Previous statements such as "The Chinese just want to conquer the world" took me by surprise. But now I realise just how many shiny tails, living off their super, with nothing better to do than sprout about their latest reno, and right leaning beliefs, spend their time here..
    On the other hand, it is the safest place for them. A few dedicated souls distract them here where they have almost no audience and some well made furniture to sit on...so that way they can do less harm elsewhere. Though how much harm they could actually do is debatable...the world is passing most of them by.
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  29. #11329
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Bet you can't even point out the grammar faults
    i bet I can't either! But I can spot a scam from a mile away & the idiots that peddle them!
    regards inter

  30. #11330
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    i bet I can't either! But I can spot a scam from a mile away & the idiots that peddle them!
    regards inter
    OK another one for the Inter absolutely useless posts list, which seems to be nearing 2000, so away you go.

  31. #11331
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    OK another one for the Inter absolutely useless posts list, which seems to be nearing 2000, so away you go.
    absolutely,! we can put it with the English & grammar lessons plus CO2 blarney that it well & truly takes the Micky out of!
    regards inter

  32. #11332
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey180 View Post
    I still fail to understand how putting a price on carbon reduces emissions.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
    Not much to understand, in fact it does not reduce anything...that if you actually think CO2 should be "reduced" at all. I say pump more CO2 anytime. I want to see the greenies cringe.


    Media sheds tears for axed carbon tax


    17 July, 2014 by Simon 13 Comments







    13 Votes


    It’s all too much! Sob!
    The inner-city basket-weaving yoghurt-knitting sandalistas that make up the Fairfax and ABC’s environment desks are already writing the eulogies for their beloved tax.
    First cab off the rank is the ABC’s Sara Phillips (see ACM here), who attributes the public’s lack of enthusiasm to an ignorant fear of the unknown, stoked up by who else? Tony Abbott:
    In the lead-up to last year’s election, Abbott repeatedly told us that the carbon tax would be a wrecking ball through the economy. He told us that electricity prices would be all kinds of terrible as a result of the carbon tax. He told us that the carbon tax wouldn’t bring down Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. It’s a tax, he said. A Great Big New Tax On Everything.
    He was wrong on all of these accounts, of course. But the damage was done.
    ‘Of course’ he was wrong! You fools! She continues:
    But like Shelley’s creation, it was not quite the horrendous beast we feared. The economy continues to defy prediction, quietly growing.
    The latest figures from December show that Australia’s emissions have dropped 0.8 per cent, with most of the fall being explained by a 5 per cent drop in emissions from electricity generation.
    It grew thanks to putting adults in charge of the shop last September, and the removal of that hopeless bunch of pre-schoolers who had spent six years grinding the country into the ground with their incompetence. But nice try, anyway. Just remind me what difference those emission reductions would have made to the climate again… oh, that’s right, zero.
    Fairfax isn’t far behind, with a gushing, tear-stained hymn of praise for the Senate climate warriors of the Left. Be warned, strong stomach required:
    Amid ongoing speculation over Christine Milne’s leadership style and future, the Greens leaders’ Senate performance has been passionate, emotional and, most of all, resolute. Senator Milne had a great deal invested in the legislation that created the price on carbon that kicked in on July 1, 2012. Its abolishment [sic] on Thursday was personal.
    She has spent much of this week seamlessly switching between offering forceful condemnations of the government’s undoing of the legislation and in promising renewed vigour from her minor party in restoring action to address global warming.
    Just moments before the final Senate action that killed the carbon tax 39 votes to 32,Senator Milne appeared very much a political leader determined to keep climate change at the forefront of the political debate.
    “This is a critical moment for our nation and there are a number of new senators in this chamber today,” she said.
    “Their vote today and the vote of every person in this debate will be the legacy of their political career.”
    And with Opposition Leader Bill Shorten committing Labor to campaign on an emissions trading scheme as a central theme of the next federal election, his party’s leader in the Senate, Penny Wong, championed the cause with her usual skill and smooth, calculated passion.
    Another standout performer in this debate has been Tasmanian Labor senator Lisa Singh, grasping her new junior environment and climate change portfolio with gusto.
    The shadow parliamentary secretary was Labor’s most riveting advocate this week for keeping the price on carbon.
    Again, just moments before that argument was lost, Senator Singh delivered a stinging rebuke to the government and those senators who joined with it in repealing the legislation.
    “We are sending this country backwards,” she said.
    “All for what? For playing politics. Playing politics with Australia’s future; playing politics with the environment; playing politics with our children.
    “And it is an outrageous moment in Australia’s history.”
    Too much for my stomach… Pass the sick bag.
    Share this:




    Science is never settled,
    it advances one funeral at the time.
    Max Planck

  33. #11333
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Meanwhile, in the real world:

    - 2013 | BAMS State of the Climate | National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

















    The report uses dozens of climate indicators to track patterns, changes, and trends of the global climate system, including greenhouse gases; temperatures throughout the atmosphere, ocean, and land; cloud cover; sea level; ocean salinity; sea ice extent; and snow cover. These indicators often reflect many thousands of measurements from multiple independent datasets. The report also details cases of unusual and extreme regional events, such as Super Typhoon Haiyan, which devastated portions of Southeast Asia in November 2013.

    Highlights:

    • Greenhouse gases continued to climb: Major greenhouse gas concentrations, including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane and nitrous oxide, continued to rise during 2013, once again reaching historic high values. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations increased by 2.8 ppm in 2013, reaching a global average of 395.3 ppm for the year. At the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii, the daily concentration of CO2 exceeded 400 ppm on May 9 for the first time since measurements began at the site in 1958. This milestone follows observational sites in the Arctic that observed this CO2 threshold of 400 ppm in spring 2012.
    • Warm temperature trends continued near the Earth’s surface: Four major independent datasets show 2013 was among the warmest years on record, ranking between second and sixth depending upon the dataset used. In the Southern Hemisphere, Australia observed its warmest year on record, while Argentina had its second warmest and New Zealand its third warmest.
    • Sea surface temperatures increased: Four independent datasets indicate that the globally averaged sea surface temperature for 2013 was among the 10 warmest on record. El Nińo Southern Oscillation (ENSO)-neutral conditions in the eastern central Pacific Ocean and a negative Pacific decadal oscillation pattern in the North Pacific had the largest impacts on the global sea surface temperature during the year. The North Pacific was record warm for 2013.
    • Sea level continued to rise: Global mean sea level continued to rise during 2013, on pace with a trend of 3.2 ± 0.4 mm per year over the past two decades.
    • The Arctic continued to warm; sea ice extent remained low: The Arctic observed its seventh warmest year since records began in the early 20th century. Record high temperatures were measured at 20-meter depth at permafrost stations in Alaska. Arctic sea ice extent was the sixth lowest since satellite observations began in 1979. All seven lowest sea ice extents on record have occurred in the past seven years.
    • Antarctic sea ice extent reached record high for second year in a row; South Pole station set record high temperature: The Antarctic maximum sea ice extent reached a record high of 7.56 million square miles on October 1. This is 0.7 percent higher than the previous record high extent of 7.51 million square miles that occurred in 2012 and 8.6 percent higher than the record low maximum sea ice extent of 6.96 million square miles that occurred in 1986. Near the end of the year, the South Pole had its highest annual temperature since records began in 1957.
    • Tropical cyclones near average overall / Historic Super Typhoon: The number of tropical cyclones during 2013 was slightly above average, with a total of 94 storms, in comparison to the 1981-2010 average of 89. The North Atlantic Basin had its quietest season since 1994. However, in the Western North Pacific Basin, Super Typhoon Haiyan – the deadliest cyclone of 2013 – had the highest wind speed ever assigned to a tropical cyclone, with one-minute sustained winds estimated to be 196 miles per hour.

    State of the Climate in 2013 is the 24th edition in a peer-reviewed series published annually as a special supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. The journal makes the full report openly available online.

    Those who want to ignore the science are increasingly alone. They are on their own shrinking island.


  34. #11334
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Not much to understand, in fact it does not reduce anything...that if you actually think CO2 should be "reduced" at all. I say pump more CO2 anytime. I want to see the greenies cringe.
    "Many people who would not dream to claim they understand how antibiotics, microprocessors or immunisations work seem happy to wax lyrical on their views on climate change.
    A politician or media identity who would be laughed out of office if they said “vaccines don't work" or “I am certain the moon is made of cheese" happily speak equivalent rubbish on climate science, believing their views deserve credit.
    I want engineers to build bridges; I want a trained surgeon to operate on hearts and I want some of our decision-makers and commentators to either shut up, or familiarise themselves with climate science well enough to talk sense."
    Professor Andrew Pitman

    ^^Case in point....

  35. #11335
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,627

    Default

    You are here: Home / Climate / ACM retrospective: a look back at six years of climate madness
    ACM retrospective: a look back at six years of climate madness

    18 July, 2014 by Simon 10 Comments
    The climate bureaucracy is reduced to rubble
    This blog started in September 2008, when we were one year into the Kevin Rudd Labor government. It was Labor policy to introduce an emissions trading scheme (ETS), and as we approached the end of 2009, Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull was indicating that he would give it bipartisan support.
    But Coalition backbenchers were stirring, as ACM reported on 20 October 2009:
    Now is the time for all good men (and women) to come to the aid of the Party – in this case, the Liberal party. The backbenchers need to stand up for their principles and not be steamrollered by their worryingly green-tinged leader:
    MALCOLM Turnbull is on a collision course with his own back bench after staking his leadership on a demand that they back his climate change strategy.Several MPs immediately refused to do so.If the partyroom refused to back his strategy of negotiating amendments to the government’s emissions trading scheme, Mr Turnbull said yesterday, the Coalition would “literally be a party with nothing to say … a party with no ideas”, and that was “not the party I am prepared to lead”.
    Throwing down the gauntlet to his internal critics, Mr Turnbull said: “I am asserting my authority as the leader of the Liberal Party and the Leader of the Opposition.”
    “If the partyroom were to reject my recommendation to them, that would obviously be a leadership issue. That’s perfectly plain, perfectly clear,” he told ABC Radio in Adelaide.
    By 20 November, things were beginning to look very grim as Tony Abbott abandons his previous support for the ETS:
    Another major figure in the Liberal party has hardened his position on the ETS, making it even more difficult for Malcolm Turnbull to claim that the party backs his views on climate change:
    MALCOLM Turnbull is facing growing shadow cabinet pressure to vote down the government’s emissions trading bills, with former minister Tony Abbott abandoning his earlier support for the Opposition Leader’s strategy to try to amend and pass the scheme.
    Mr Abbott’s shift, and Liberal Senate leader Nick Minchin’s strong advocacy of the “vote no” view within the Coalition, will make it harder for Mr Turnbull to persuade his shadow cabinet to support the deal expected to be finalised between the government and the opposition by early next week.
    And then, to add to the already explosive mix, came the firecracker that was Climategate, as thousands of emails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia were made public, just days before the start of the Copenhagen climate summit:
    Apparently a huge quantity of highly sensitive emails and data have been “hacked” from the Hadley Climate Research Unit (CRU) in the UK. I haven’t yet had a chance to consider any of them in detail. I am not publishing anything until we know more clearly what their precise legal status is.
    However, I have read some of them and if they are real and not fake, this is absolute dynamite, and will destroy the credibility of the alarmist cause.
    Check out my other posts on this:

    A leadership spill is called, and despite Turnbull not having the numbers, he pulls a trick out of the bag, and claims victory:
    Turnbull refused to comment on the numbers in the party room, but sources indicate that a majority of the party room spoke against accepting the amendments, with numbers approximately 41 – 33 against the government’s proposals.
    But then Turnbull pulls a trick. The usual procedure is for the shadow cabinet to vote on the issue. This they did – in favour of accepting the amendments. The next step is for the issue then to be put to the party room – so according to this, it should have been rejected.
    But what Turnbull did was add in the votes of the shadow cabinet to the party room result, thereby claiming that the “party room” was in favour, at the same time including Nationals front benchers in the shadow cabinet (who were actually against it), but excluding Nationals back benchers, who were also against it!
    It was an astonishing display. Turnbull just kept repeating the phrase “I’m the leader and I’ve made the call”, so desperate is he to satisfy his own green tendencies against the will of the party room. All I can say is, I hope you won’t be leader for long.
    To those in the Liberal party who voted against this climate madness, you cannot let this stand. You know what you need to do.
    Abbott resigned a few days later, scuttling Labor’s plan to get the ETS through parliament. And then came the news we in the climate realist camp were hoping for:
    Liberal Tony Abbott says he will throw his hat into the ring against Malcolm Turnbull tomorrow whether or not Joe Hockey is a contender for the liberal leadership.
    Mr Abbott said after a day of discussions with Mr Hockey, who is in favour of a free vote on the emissions trading scheme, he had decided he needed to challenge whoever may be standing at the Liberal party room meeting.
    The latest bombshell throws yet more confusion into the leadership debacle.
    Mr Abbott had always said he would stand aside if Mr Hockey contested the leadership, but that position has changed because the shadow treasurer isn’t willing to adopt the hard line on the ETS.
    Game on! The vote is set for 1 December. ACM writes:
    The leadership election boils down to this:

    • Malcolm Turnbull – we will have an ETS by the end of the day on a policy vote
    • Joe Hockey – we will have an ETS by the end of the day on a conscience vote
    • Tony Abbott – we won’t have an ETS today

    Come on guys – don’t let us down. There is only one choice.
    In the evening of 1 December, the news comes through that Abbott is the leader. I was following events on my Blackberry, and posted the update from a theatre in North Sydney! Abbott comes outfighting:
    This is precisely what we need – as has been said before, an election campaign is the only way in which the ETS can be exposed for what it is – a tax on everything based on flawed and exaggerated science.
    TONY Abbott will steer the Liberal Party back to its conservative roots with a 2010 election campaignportraying Kevin Rudd as a Whitlamesque big spender whose climate change policies will smash Australian jobs.
    The new Opposition Leader’s first act after ousting Malcolm Turnbull in a partyroom vote yesterday was to scrap his party’s support for Labor’s carbon emissions trading scheme, which he dismissed as “a great big tax”.
    And Mr Abbott immediately moved to repair the Liberals’ shattered relations with the Nationals, embracing their contempt for the ETS after months of Mr Turnbull dismissing their views as irrelevant.
    The UN talks in Copenhagen are an unmitigated disaster, and the ETS was voted down in the Senate. By early 2010, the ETS had been shelved until at least 2013 – and Rudd signs his own death warrant, as ACM reports on 23 June:
    As I watch Sky’s coverage, there is a possible leadership challenge to Kevin Rudd underway in Canberra right now.
    It is being reported that the challenge is being pushed by the right factions in Victoria and South Australia. The question is whether Julia Gillard will agree to be put forward as replacement.
    By the next day, we had a new PM:
    Kevin Rudd has stepped down and Julia Gillard is now Australia’s first female prime minister. In the end, there was no ballot in the Labor caucus room – Rudd realised that he had so little support. Wayne Swan is the new deputy PM.
    The press are pinning Rudd’s downfall primarily on his failure to go ahead with the ETS back in April.
    A disastrous day for Labor, and it will be very interesting to see what Gillard does with the policy nightmares – the mining tax, asylum seekers etc, but in particular the ETS, which may be back on the policy table.
    Days before the 2010 election, Gillard makes her now infamous promise:
    “There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.”
    The result of the 2010 election is on a knife edge, with three independents, Bob Katter, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott holding the balance of power. After several weeks of negotiation, Windsor and Oakeshott back Gillard and Labor, ignoring their conservative electorates:
    Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor, the two witless and gutless independents that handed power to Julia Gillard earlier this week, betrayed their electorates by siding with Labor, as John Styles explains in The Spectator:
    When you enjoy the sound of your own voice as much as the giggling, grinning Rob Oakeshott apparently does, there is always a chance you will say more than you may have intended. So it was during the Independent/maybe-Labor minister’s media conference on Tuesday at which he and Tony Windsor delivered federal government to the Labor-Greens alliance.
    ‘We’ve just had to go through an incredibly unnatural decision to draw some conclusions about lining up with a party that fundamentally we don’t believe with [sic],’ he said, during a typically long, rambling response to a journalist’s question about how the pair of independents could make a decision that was so comprehensively out of step with the conservative nature of their electorates.
    Here was Oakeshott admitting that he was giving crucial support to a party he didn’t believe in. He described his decision as ‘unnatural’. How about bizarre, weird, crazy? How about calling it just plain nuts?
    In February 2011, however, Gillard drops the bombshell – a carbon tax in 2012:
    Climate Madness in its purest form. What we suspected all along has been proved right. Julia Gillard’s promise in August 2010 not to introduce a carbon tax “under the government I lead” was a barefaced lie. How many more has she told? Will we ever find out? She has cynically deceived the electorate on this crucial issue, and should suffer the consequences at the next election.
    JULIA Gillard plans to introduce a carbon price from July 1 next year and defy the Greens by insisting on compensation for the coal and electricity industries, in a move that will infuriate its minority government partner.
    The Weekend Australian understands the government will present its multi-party climate change committee next week with a plan for a fixed carbon price to operate from July 1, 2012, until about 2015-16 when the regime will move to an emissions trading scheme.
    ACM reminds readers what a carbon tax would do:
    So in summary, assuming that the carbon tax is passed into law, let’s remind ourselves what it would achieve:

    • nothing whatsoever for climate
    • nothing whatsoever for global temperatures
    • nothing whatsoever for local temperatures
    • nothing whatsoever for the Arctic
    • nothing whatsoever for polar bears
    • nothing whatsoever for the drought or floods or clyclones
    • nothing whatsoever for the Great Barrier Reef
    • nothing whatsoever for Kakadu
    • nothing whatsoever for Tuvalu and all the other sinking islands
    • nothing whatsoever for the ringtail possum and other cuddly creatures
    • nothing whatsoever for bushfires and heatwaves
    • in fact, nothing whatsoever for anything even remotely related to the climate

    On the other hand it will do the following:

    • everything to damage Australia’s economy
    • everything to damage Australia’s competitiveness
    • everything to increase the cost of living for ordinary Australians
    • everything to make the poorest in society worse off
    • everything to damage emissions intensive industries
    • everything to ensure that our industries move offshore
    • everything to create more unemployment
    • everything to raise electricity, gas and food prices
    • everything to assist a pointless global “deal”
    • everything to advance the cause of global government and global wealth distribution

    Have I missed anything there?
    At the end of June 2012, ACM wrote an editorial on the coming climate madness:
    On Sunday 1 July 2012, the Labor/Green government’s carbon tax of $23 per tonne will finally take effect in Australia.
    We’ve heard all the usual spin from Greg Combet about how other countries are taking similar action and Australia must “catch up”. It’s all @@@@@@@@ as anyone with half a brain could work out. Unfortunately, Combet and Gillard and their Green mates don’t have half a brain between them, so they can’t work it out. In any case, it’s all Green blackmail anyway, to keep Gillard in power.
    Coming at a time when:

    • the European economy could collapse at any moment thanks to any number of bankrupt states teetering on the brink of default,
    • economic confidence in the US is low, and
    • our own resources-run economy is feeling the pinch from decreased demand from China (even ignoring the punishing mining tax),

    to legislate what is essentially the world’s highest carbon tax, when European carbon prices have been falling like a stone, and now stand around $10, is pure climate madness – and what originally gave this blog its name back in 2008.
    And of course, it will do NOTHING for the climate. Our emissions will actually rise. And China and India’s emissions will rise several orders of magnitude more than any notional reduction here in Australia for decades to come. [read the remainder here]
    The broken promise of the carbon tax goes down like Lord Monckton at a Greenpeace fundraiser:
    The vultures are circling. Labor politicians are openly discussing the need for drastic action. Labor primary vote has sunk to 28%. And the carbon tax backflip has a lot to do with it, that and Labor’s desperate agreement with the extremist Greens to form a minority government:
    A LABOR senator says today’s disastrous Newspoll should be a “clarion call” to the party to make dramatic changes or face a decade in the political wilderness.
    Rudd supporter Mark Bishop said the poll, revealing a three point slump in Labor’s primary vote to 28 per cent, should be a wake-up call to the party to respond to the will of voters.
    While stopping short of calling for Julia Gillard to stand down, the West Australian senator said it was clear there was now no prospect of a recovery under current circumstances.
    Gillard was already finished. Prior to the 2013 election, Gillard was dumped, and Kevin Rudd was installed. Despite a brief bump in the polls, the electorate soon remembered that Rudd was a psychopath, and Labor’s electoral chances were zero:
    Rudd is branded an “elitist grub who thinks he is superior to all” by someone who had the misfortune to have to work with him, whereas Abbott is a “gentleman with a capital G”. Following the debate last night, the make-up artist who worked on both Rudd and Abbott wrote on her Facebook page:
    “One of them was absolutely lovely, engaged in genuine conversation with me, acknowledge that I had a job to do and was very appreciative. The other did the exact opposite! Oh boy, I have ever had anyone treat me so badly whilst trying to do my job. Political opinions aside… from one human being to another… Mr Abbott, you win hands down.”
    Just confirms the fact (if such confirmation were needed) that Rudd is a pompous, arrogant, sociopathic bully, disconnected with real people to the point of autism. [via Bolt]
    On 8 September 2013, Australia woke up from the nightmare. The hangover was gone, the headache cleared, and there was a bright future ahead:
    The six-year Labor/Green nightmare is finally over. Tony Abbott is the nation’s new Prime Minister.
    Abbott gave a brief, dignified victory speech, promising to govern for all Australians, in stark contrast to Labor who only sought to entrench division and disunity. Rudd, on the other hand, rambled on for what seemed like an eternity in his concession speech, as if he himself was the victor – delusional to the last.
    Whilst Rudd will not contest the Labor leadership, he will remain in parliament as an ever-present threat of destabilisation.
    Labor’s nightmare has only just begun.
    Then we had the unparalleled joy of seeing the climate infrastructure rapidly demolished, with Tim Flannery and the Climate Commission the first to go:
    The Climate Commission didn’t have one single climate realist on board, and was stacked with Australia’s worst alarmists, Will Steffen, David Karoly and Flannery himself. Far from being an independent climate body, it was a mouthpiece for Labor government propaganda and shameless scaremongering.
    Good riddance to the lot of ‘em.
    UPDATE: Commission’s Twitter account (@ClimateComm) has vanished already! Sad to see the website still there… not for long, however.
    UPDATE 2: The ever-warmist ABC (Anything But Conservatives) gives Flannery space to gnash his teeth and wail about the injustice of it all:
    Professor Flannery, who is also a former Australian of the Year, has defended the commission’s role.
    “We’ve stayed out of the politics and stuck to the facts,” he said. [BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! - Ed]
    “As a result we’ve developed a reputation as a reliable apolitical source of facts on all aspects of climate change. [Stop it!! Stop it!! My sides are splitting!!!!! - Ed]
    “I believe that Australians have a right to know – a right to authoritative, independent and accurate information on climate change. [Er, I think I just wet myself... - Ed]
    “We’ve just seen one of the earliest ever starts to the bushfire season in Sydney following the hottest twelve months on record.” [And, Flannery goes out true to form, with a ridiculously alarmist statement... See ya' later pal. Glad we won't have to hear from you any more - Ed]
    And now, finally, after over 2,700 posts and over 16,000 comments from you, the readers, the carbon tax has gone. I think we can all be proud of our achievement.
    Bill Shorten, however, hasn’t learned his lesson. He has vowed to take carbon pricing to the next election, and as Christopher Pyne rightly says, it will hang like a rotting carcass round his neck until election day.
    As Albert Einstein once remarked, insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results. Shorten is doing precisely that.
    Rate this:






    10 Votes


    Share this:








    Science is never settled,
    it advances one funeral at the time.
    Max Planck

  36. #11336
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    "Many people who would not dream to claim they understand how antibiotics, microprocessors or immunisations work seem happy to wax lyrical on their views on climate change.
    A politician or media identity who would be laughed out of office if they said “vaccines don't work" or “I am certain the moon is made of cheese" happily speak equivalent rubbish on climate science, believing their views deserve credit.
    I want engineers to build bridges; I want a trained surgeon to operate on hearts and I want some of our decision-makers and commentators to either shut up, or familiarise themselves with climate science well enough to talk sense."
    Professor Andrew Pitman
    What do you know, a quote from John I can use.

    Yes,we all want that, real experts to make decisions, real experts to give advice, yet in the case of climate madness and to be honest in many other areas this does not happen.
    First of all there are not many scientist who have real experience. Most just jumped on the bandwagon because it is fascionable and the word "Climate change" is an automatic money allocation mechanism.
    Second, how do you expect any trained surgeon to operate when the tumor is imaginary? Following on the health analogy Global Warming is like an hysterical pregnancy, a lot of swelling yet no baby.
    Oh yes, there are graphs and there is data galore, showing what the politician with the open purse like to hear. That does not make them less hysterical.
    And as far as vaccines, I would like to use that analogy too. There are millions around the world who are vegetarian, build mud and straw houses, claim they are saving the world by pooing in a bucket and producing less CO2 (?) and also claim that vaccines are a conspiracy against their health AND DO NOT VACCINATE THEIR KIDS. Oh yes, there are tens of thousands in Sydney who come to the surgery asking for a certificate of conscientious objectors to take their time bomb kid to school and line up at Centrelink with stretched out hand for the payment for vaccinating their kids. Yes this too, claim that we must reduce CO2 "emissions".
    The world is a funny place, and the greenies are the clowns that make us laugh and sometimes cry.
    Science is never settled,
    it advances one funeral at the time.
    Max Planck

  37. #11337
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yande View Post
    Well now at least I understand this Forum. Previous statements such as "The Chinese just want to conquer the world" took me by surprise. But now I realise just how many shiny tails, living off their super, with nothing better to do than sprout about their latest reno, and right leaning beliefs, spend their time here..

    So the Tax is gone... Wooppee, now I can burn the electrics day and night.. Especially as i am going to be $550 better off!! (No tony didn't say that, Bill did, apparently.) And according to most here, I need have no regard to the CO2 emissions I create. Unreal. Burn the plastic. Recycle?? No Too hard. Burn..

    Honestly, of late, it is embarrassing being a 7th generation Australian.. One only has to look at the clowns telling us what is right... Abbott, Hockey, and that douzy.. Pine.. If you voted for them fine.. I'm just smarter than most.
    What a pathetic post. If you don't like people writing about their renovation, what are you doing here? As far as self funded retirees, you will find that most people posting here are either tradies or owner builders in full time employment. Oh yes with the few exceptions like you I suppose.
    So a 7th generation Australian, is that some sort of badge of honour? Why not use an Australian avatar then? Obviously you would have liked the same mob that delivered the worst 6 years of government we ever had, to win the elections. Wouldn't that be great! Would you like to see a tax on non Australians? perhaps a doubling of Centrelink payments?
    Science is never settled,
    it advances one funeral at the time.
    Max Planck

  38. #11338
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    What a pathetic post. If you don't like people writing about their renovation, what are you doing here? As far as self funded retirees, you will find that most people posting here are either tradies or owner builders in full time employment. Oh yes with the few exceptions like you I suppose.
    So a 7th generation Australian, is that some sort of badge of honour? Why not use an Australian avatar then? Obviously you would have liked the same mob that delivered the worst 6 years of government we ever had, to win the elections. Wouldn't that be great! Would you like to see a tax on non Australians? perhaps a doubling of Centrelink payments?
    A sure sign that you have nothing to counter a person's post is when you decide to insult and abuse them. Unacceptable and reported.

    Try reading the rules.

    http://www.renovateforum.com/f36/for...ad-them-33202/

    http://www.renovateforum.com/f36/whi...ead-too-33200/

    Those who want to ignore the science are increasingly alone. They are on their own shrinking island.


  39. #11339
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,387

    Default

    Marc's post on the history of the Liberal leadership change creates an opportunity to point out how deeply divided the Liberal Party is, not just on climate change, but many other issues as well. How much the electorate dislikes disunity was illustrated yesterday in a by-election in the Brisbane electorate of Stafford. Labor won easily with a swing to them of 20%, not needing Green preferences to take the seat. The greens also increased their vote by 2%.

    I was at a forum last night where John Cook from Skeptical Science was one of the speakers. There was nothing new in his talk that hasn't already appeared on his blog but he did clarify one thing about his consensus paper. The 97% figure refers to the number of papers that support climate change; because many papers have multiple authors the percentage of scientists supporting the consensus is 98.4%

  40. #11340
    Slow but rough Uncle Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    North Cooma, Canberra
    Posts
    5,080

    Default

    *dust's off Mod hat*
    Please guys, leave the insults and negative stuff out of the forum.
    Excuse the pun, but I know it's a heated subject, so we've let a lot slide.
    *doff's Mod hat and stuffs in bottom drawer*

  41. #11341
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    What do you know, a quote from John I can use.

    Yes,we all want that, real experts to make decisions, real experts to give advice, BLAH BLAH BLAH
    ...and then goes on sprouting logical fallacies and farcical assumptions on an Olympic Gymnastics scale. Classic example of the original quote, if any proof were needed!

  42. #11342
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Exhibit 1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    Yes,we all want that, real experts to make decisions, real experts to give advice, yet in the case of climate madness and to be honest in many other areas this does not happen.
    First of all there are not many scientist who have real experience. Most just jumped on the bandwagon because it is fascionable and the word "Climate change" is an automatic money allocation mechanism.
    Second, how do you expect any trained surgeon to operate when the tumor is imaginary? Following on the health analogy Global Warming is like an hysterical pregnancy, a lot of swelling yet no baby.
    Oh yes, there are graphs and there is data galore, showing what the politician with the open purse like to hear. That does not make them less hysterical.
    Precis: Climate Scientists don't know what they are talking about. Most climate scientists are inexperienced, and they are only there for the money. They have invented Global Warming even though it doesn't exist, it's imaginary.

    Exhibit 2:
    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    And as far as vaccines, I would like to use that analogy too. There are millions around the world who are vegetarian, build mud and straw houses, claim they are saving the world by pooing in a bucket and producing less CO2 (?) and also claim that vaccines are a conspiracy against their health AND DO NOT VACCINATE THEIR KIDS. Oh yes, there are tens of thousands in Sydney who come to the surgery asking for a certificate of conscientious objectors to take their time bomb kid to school and line up at Centrelink with stretched out hand for the payment for vaccinating their kids. Yes this too, claim that we must reduce CO2 "emissions".
    Precis: Vegetarians are more than likely to not vaccinate their kids and are probably greenies. They think vaccines are a conspiracy to damage their health. Vaccine science is real and effective.

    Reflection: The irony of this little tirade is amazing. Someone hasn't joined the dots - the process of science has delivered both vaccines and our understanding of the impact of our CO2 emissions and other inputs on the climate, yet somehow the vaccine science is 'good' and the climate science is 'bad' even though they come out of the same rigorous process. How someone can claim that climate science is based on money grubbing inexperienced scientists who just make stuff up when there is masses of evidence that shows that their pay is not anything to be jealous of, their experience is basically their lifetime plus all the scientists that came before them.

    The only real difference between vaccine and climate science is that we don't have a spare planet to test our climate theories on but we can test our vaccine theories on volunteer subjects and hapless animals.

    Conclusion: If you accept the science of vaccines, you have to respect the science of the climate, even if you are sceptical of the future predictions presented. Doing anything else just displays an unsupportable opinion.

    Those who want to ignore the science are increasingly alone. They are on their own shrinking island.


  43. #11343
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

  44. #11344
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    66
    Posts
    3,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    What a pathetic post. If you don't like people writing about their renovation, what are you doing here? As far as self funded retirees, you will find that most people posting here are either tradies or owner builders in full time employment. Oh yes with the few exceptions like you I suppose.
    So a 7th generation Australian, is that some sort of badge of honour? Why not use an Australian avatar then? Obviously you would have liked the same mob that delivered the worst 6 years of government we ever had, to win the elections. Wouldn't that be great! Would you like to see a tax on non Australians? perhaps a doubling of Centrelink payments?
    I'm eighth generation, don't make an issue of it, you weren't born here, you can't have been because you have continually carried on about being born in a communist country. Those of us who have deep roots with this land have welcomed you here and for once show a bit of respect for the decency you have been shown.

  45. #11345
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    We will see how bill shorton fairs peddling a revived carbon tax to the next election? If he makes it that far!

    regards inter

  46. #11346
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,328

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    We will see how bill shorton fairs peddling a revived carbon tax to the next election? If he makes it that far!
    Climate change is an economic issue, not a political one.

  47. #11347
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Climate change is an economic issue, not a political one.
    climate change is history, past, present & future, CO2 being the cause is just the flavour of the month the the save the cotton wool bud brigade got sucked in by, as they have to believe in something, however far fetched & ridiculous it proves to be!
    regards inter

  48. #11348
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Future history?

    Only for those with access to a time machine.

    For the climate, humans are flavour of the month and sure, we're having an impact. Some of us don't like to admit it.

    Those who want to ignore the science are increasingly alone. They are on their own shrinking island.


  49. #11349
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post
    Future history?

    Only for those with access to a time machine.

    For the climate, humans are flavour of the month and sure, we're having an impact. Some of us don't like to admit it.
    Yes you read it right! What is clear you don't understand the statement! Maybe it will dawn on you one day?

    regards inter

  50. #11350
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Renewable energy is ready to supply all of Australia's electricity

    Using conservative projections to 2030 for the costs of renewable energy by the federal government’s Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE), we found an optimal mix of renewable electricity sources. The mix looks like this:

    • Wind 46%;
    • Concentrated solar thermal (electricity generated by the heat of the sun) with thermal storage 22%;
    • Photovoltaic solar 20% (electricity generated directly from sunlight);
    • Biofuelled gas turbines 6%; and
    • Existing hydro 6%.

    So two-thirds of annual energy can be supplied by wind and solar photovoltaic — energy sources that vary depending on the weather — while maintaining reliability of the generating system at the required level. How is this possible?
    It turns out that wind and solar photovoltaic are only unable to meet electricity demand a few times a year. These periods occur during peak demand on winter evenings following overcast days that also happen to have low wind speeds across the region.
    Since the gaps are few in number and none exceeds two hours in duration, there only needs to be a small amount of generation from the so-called flexible renewables (those that don’t depend on the vagaries of weather): hydro and biofuelled gas turbines. Concentrated solar thermal is also flexible while it has energy in its thermal storage.
    The gas turbines have low capital cost and, when operated infrequently and briefly, low fuel costs, so they play the role of reliability insurance with a low premium.

    Those who want to ignore the science are increasingly alone. They are on their own shrinking island.


Page 227 of 377 FirstFirst ... 127 177 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 277 327 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •