Emission Trading and climate change

Page 243 of 377 FirstFirst ... 143 193 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 293 343 ... LastLast
Results 12,101 to 12,150 of 18819
  1. #12101
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    65
    Posts
    3,893

    Default

    The smart money is moving out of coal, it still has demand especially coking coal for steel production and higher grade coal in power generation. Coal has now moved into over supply with the likelihood that we will see further drops in the coal price and closure of marginal mines. It is simply old technology, banks are starting to walk away from funding new mines because the risk profile is to high. Coal will still be with us for a long time to come but the muddle headed idea that we can mine and transport our brown coal reserves at a price that leaves a decent profit is looking shaky at best. Gas,another fossil fuel looks a far better investment bet at the moment.

  2. #12102
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Gas,another fossil fuel looks a far better investment bet at the moment.
    Yes, but what most people don't realise is that gas means coal seam gas, which means a patchwork of wells covering arable land, water syphoned off from farming and ecology for fracking, and ground water contamination and destruction of farm/agricultural viability in many cases. One day, Australia will be like Roma, Queensland, all over:

    https://www.google.com/maps/@-25.985...!3m1!1e3?hl=en

    Or this (Texas):

    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  3. #12103
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Yes, but what most people don't realise is that gas means coal seam gas, which means a patchwork of wells covering arable land, water syphoned off from farming and ecology for fracking, and ground water contamination and destruction of farm/agricultural viability in many cases. One day, Australia will be like Roma, Queensland, all over:

    https://www.google.com/maps/@-25.985...!3m1!1e3?hl=en

    Or this (Texas):

    looks like your stuffed either way, better start rubbing 2 sticks together & keep panicking.
    inter

  4. #12104
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    looks like your stuffed either way, better start rubbing 2 sticks together & keep panicking.
    Make fun if you wish - whatever - we're all "fracked" together, for better or worse.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  5. #12105
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Joe Hockey says wind turbines 'utterly offensive', flags budget cuts to clean energy schemes

    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-...502-zr3co.html

    Yet Hockey doesn't mind if the fossil energy companies frack Australia to death and is continuing their multi-billion dollar dollar subsidies. Maybe he thinks coal seam gas fields are aesthetically decorative like his grandmother's lace doilies.

    I like the irony that wind turbines not only produce energy without contributing to climate change, but they take energy out of the climate system - excess energy that is there as a result of the burning of fossil fuels.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  6. #12106
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Make fun if you wish - whatever - we're all "fracked" together, for better or worse.
    Of course I will make fun of it, how can anything you fellows come up with be treated in any other way, so I'll just file it with the other things that I have no need to worry about, like the idea that CO2 will cause catastrophic warming with not a shred of proof.
    inter

  7. #12107
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    I'll just file it with the other things that I have no need to worry about
    Sorry to hear that you don't have many years left, Inter. Commiserations.

    (...and I'll just make fun of your unwillingness to apply yourself to rational discussion...)
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  8. #12108
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Sorry to hear that you don't have many years left, Inter. Commiserations.

    (...and I'll just make fun of your unwillingness to apply yourself to rational discussion...)
    hopefully I have a a few more left in me than the CO2 hoax has left. The rational discussion departed long ago with your inability to provide anything of substance & it has progressively gotten funnier since, the mileage we get from it is phenomenal.
    inter

  9. #12109
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    hopefully I have a a few more left in me than the CO2 hoax has left.
    The only CO2 hoax I know about is the one that human emissions of CO2 do not affect climate and that hoax is dead, except perhaps in your imagination. But it's your imagination and you're allowed to have it.

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    The rational discussion departed long ago with your inability to provide anything of substance & it has progressively gotten funnier since, the mileage we get from it is phenomenal.
    Glad to be of service! No need to thank me, shucks. Your life is a bit sad then, if you you need this thread for amusement?
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  10. #12110
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    The only CO2 hoax I know about is the one that human emissions of CO2 do not affect climate and that hoax is dead, except perhaps in your imagination. But it's your imagination and you're allowed to have it.
    what galah doesn't realise CO2 has an SOME effect on the climate? The brighter galahs that fly backwards to keep the dust out of their eyes know that every bit of real scientific evidence shows that increasing CO2 levels cannot cause catastrophic or dangerous global warming which the propaganda machine & it's nobody hanger on-erers is trying to push down our throats.
    inter

  11. #12111
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    what galah doesn't realise CO2 has an SOME effect on the climate? The brighter galahs that fly backwards to keep the dust out of their eyes know that every bit of real scientific evidence shows that increasing CO2 levels cannot cause catastrophic or dangerous global warming which the propaganda machine & it's nobody hanger on-erers is trying to push down our throats.
    Then the difference between you and me is what each of us considers catastrophic. I don't think Earth is going to end up like Venus. But lifeforms on Earth have evolved over thousands of years to operate in the climate of the recent past. Very small changes in climate can have very large impacts on the viability of individual lifeforms, including humans. Humans (at least those with financial resources) are more able to adapt than any other life form because of access to technology.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  12. #12112
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Then the difference between you and me is what each of us considers catastrophic. I don't think Earth is going to end up like Venus. But lifeforms on Earth have evolved over thousands of years to operate in the climate of the recent past. Very small changes in climate can have very large impacts on the viability of individual lifeforms, including humans. Humans (at least those with financial resources) are more able to adapt than any other life form because of access to technology.
    Obviously it comes down to those with not much life experience who thrive at being panic merchants.
    regards inter

  13. #12113
    3K Club Member johnc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sale
    Age
    65
    Posts
    3,893

    Default

    Oh dear, the life experience card, can't we do a bit better than that

  14. #12114
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    the life experience card
    Yes, so ephemeral...

    Can I exchange my LifeExperience certificate or card for another package that you have listed on your website?

    ABSOLUTELY!


    Life Experiences :: FAQs
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  15. #12115
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Then the difference between you and me is what each of us considers catastrophic. I don't think Earth is going to end up like Venus. But lifeforms on Earth have evolved over thousands of years to operate in the climate of the recent past. Very small changes in climate can have very large impacts on the viability of individual lifeforms, including humans. Humans (at least those with financial resources) are more able to adapt than any other life form because of access to technology.
    Oh boy, its called evolution its been going on a while now.

    Climate has always changed and always will. Do you really think we have the power to keep it and evolution static?? What are you smoking?
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  16. #12116
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Oh boy, its called evolution its been going on a while now.

    Climate has always changed and always will. Do you really think we have the power to keep it and evolution static?? What are you smoking?
    I am not smoking what you are, that's for sure! The issue under discussion is manmade climate change, which is causing climate change about ten times faster than natural climate change ever occurred on its own. It is known that with natural rates of climate change, many species were unable to adapt. Times that by ten and what effect do you think that will have? In any case, the issue is a tad more significant than you are making out.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  17. #12117
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    At last - Australia is being recognised on the world stage. But not for generosity of spirit, or leading world security. Australia was named as the "dirtiest country" in the developed world. An article titled "The Saudi Arabia of the South Pacific" by U.S.-based tech magazine Future Tense that was published at Slate.com, described how Australia is the worst polluter in the world and referred to the Abbott government's decision to repeal the carbon tax.

    Australia’s environmental movement has been overthrown.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  18. #12118
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    I am not smoking what you are, that's for sure! The issue under discussion is manmade climate change, which is causing climate change about ten times faster than natural climate change ever occurred on its own. It is known that with natural rates of climate change, many species were unable to adapt. Times that by ten and what effect do you think that will have? In any case, the issue is a tad more significant than you are making out.
    LMAO TEN time faster than EVER. You have got to be kidding me right? You seriously believe this stuff? Come on now.

    This is why the credibility of warmists scientist is lower than that of a used car salesman.

    I guess some people are more gullible than others, particularly if they figure there is a moral high ground to be attained by believing this stuff.
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  19. #12119
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    At last - Australia is being recognised on the world stage. But not for generosity of spirit, or leading world security. Australia was named as the "dirtiest country" in the developed world. An article titled "The Saudi Arabia of the South Pacific" by U.S.-based tech magazine Future Tense that was published at Slate.com, described how Australia is the worst polluter in the world and referred to the Abbott government's decision to repeal the carbon tax.

    Australia’s environmental movement has been overthrown.
    They can say what they like its not true. For one thing CO2 is not a pollutant.

    And the only thing the environmental movement has been overthrown by is the lefties and luvies.

    check this insightful video http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/2...mate-activism/

    Yeah Yeah Yeah we all know you hate WUWT so save your fingers. Please try to keep your comments to the video.
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  20. #12120
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    LMAO TEN time faster than EVER. You have got to be kidding me right? You seriously believe this stuff? Come on now.
    In the context of the current ecology of the planet it is true, and you or anyone else has never shown it to be not true. It is irrelevant if climate has changed faster at a time when the planet wasn't habitable.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  21. #12121
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Yeah Yeah Yeah we all know you hate WUWT so save your fingers. Please try to keep your comments to the video.

    Scientists are realists, not warmists. By all means, shoot the messenger and try to claim the high moral ground with your silly, ignorant position.

    I guess some people are more gullible than others. Some actually go to WUWT for "information" LMFAO.

    I ask you agin Rod, while do those who deny AGW need to fabricate and falsify stuff in a way that is so easily disprovable? For example, the WUWT claim to be "the most visited site on climate change" is out by a factor of >10 times as I have shown previously! (#11965) Why the need to tell lies? And why would you believe someone who has the irresistible need make false claims?
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  22. #12122
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    why would you believe someone who has the irresistible need make false claims?
    Because, even as he claims to accept the basic science, WUWT supports his opinion. It's simply far easier to ignore the non-science spewing from that site than to change an opinion.

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


  23. #12123
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    In the context of the current ecology of the planet it is true, and you or anyone else has never shown it to be not true. It is irrelevant if climate has changed faster at a time when the planet wasn't habitable.
    we can see you displaying your ignorance again for all to see, the warming rate around 12,000 years ago was in the region of 4'C over a hundred or so years & not a thirsty carbon consuming human society yet established but inhabited by humans well and truly! And your well & truly wrong again!
    inter

  24. #12124
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    we can see you displaying your ignorance again for all to see, the warming rate around 12,000 years ago was in the region of 4'C over a hundred or so years & not a thirsty carbon consuming human society yet established but inhabited by humans well and truly! And your well & truly wrong again!
    That's what I like about you Inter - you make contributions that are easy to verify. It is a pity that the information out there doesn't agree with your claim. In the temperature reconstuctions I could find, not one has anything remotely approaching 4 degrees per century 12,000 years ago, or anything approaching the current rate of change in the past 20,000 years ever. Rather than focussing on character assassination, how about you provide some basis to your claims. Otherwise everyone reading your posts can be forgiven for thinking you are just making stuff up...



    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  25. #12125
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    That's what I like about you Inter - you make contributions that are easy to verify. It is a pity that the information out there doesn't agree with your claim. In the temperature reconstuctions I could find, not one has anything remotely approaching 4 degrees per century 12,000 years ago, or anything approaching the current rate of change in the past 20,000 years ever. Rather than focussing on character assassination, how about you provide some basis to your claims. Otherwise everyone reading your posts can be forgiven for thinking you are just making stuff up...


    Im not clever enough to make stuff up,
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_nB6ytWuj_g...-blue-line.jpg
    but just clever enough to understand a hoax.
    you would really have to wonder how clever you are!
    inter

  26. #12126
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    Im not clever enough to make stuff up
    Putting aside the snide personal remarks which do your argument no service at all, you have overlooked two very significant issues that expose the ridiculousness of your claim anyway:

    1. Greenland is not the world and the temperature record for Greenland is not the temperature record for the world. The global temperature record is the one that matters and that hasn't ever risen at 4 degrees per century in the past 20,000 years.

    2. 12,000 years ago, Greenland was not inhabited. Settlement didn't happen until about 4500 years ago. So human life was not exposed/did not adapt to the rapid temperature changes that occurred in Greenland ~12,000 years ago.

    Repeat, it is irrelevant if climate change has occurred faster than currently, if there was no human habitation at the time.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  27. #12127
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Putting aside the snide personal remarks which do your argument no service at all, you have overlooked two very significant issues that expose the ridiculousness of your claim anyway:

    1. Greenland is not the world and the temperature record for Greenland is not the temperature record for the world. The global temperature record is the one that matters and that hasn't ever risen at 4 degrees per century in the past 20,000 years.

    2. 12,000 years ago, Greenland was not inhabited. Settlement didn't happen until about 4500 years ago. So human life was not exposed/did not adapt to the rapid temperature changes that occurred in Greenland ~12,000 years ago.

    Repeat, it is irrelevant if climate change has occurred faster than currently, if there was no human habitation at the time.
    the clever ones amongst us can read nowhere that this graph is only indicative of Greenland, but is typical of the global average deviation from an arbitrary baseline. Then the really clever ones can work out it backs up my claim & your waffling on with useless irrelevant garbage again.
    ps. The Greenland average temps over that period are in the vicinity of -49'C with an increase of around 12'C so it's really easy to know the difference. https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&r...11914628425294
    inter

  28. #12128
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    the clever ones amongst us can read nowhere that this graph is only indicative of Greenland, but is typical of the global average deviation from an arbitrary baseline. Then the really clever ones can work out it backs up my claim & your waffling on with useless irrelevant garbage again.
    If you spent less time composing denigrating remarks against those you don't agree with and more time looking at the data before you post, you would see that the time scale on your graph is nonlinear. Below is your linked graphic (look at the x-axis timescale - it is compressed 100 times in the past compared to the present!), and under that is much the same data with a linear timescale. And under that is the same data graphed (with revised timescale) on your own linked website. The rapid global temperature rise you postulate occurred 12,000 years ago is not evident in your own data sources, whereas the present rapid warming is evident - just the opposite of your claim!






    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  29. #12129
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    It is amazing how news censorship is alive and well in Australia even though we think we are in a free country. Media news services all covered Bishop's embarrassing address to the UN Climate Council in NY National statement - United Nations Secretary-General’s Climate Summit, Speech, 23 Sep 2014, Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, The Hon Julie Bishop MP.

    But what wasn't reported was the mass walkout by UN delegates. Dear old Julie was talking to herself!

    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  30. #12130
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    Did they walk out in protest or was it just lunchtime? She could make a New York hotdog seem appealing.

  31. #12131
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    Did they walk out in protest or was it just lunchtime? She could make a New York hotdog seem appealing.
    A bit of both as far as I understand.

    https://twitter.com/AustraliaVote/st...52660139892736

    Australia's climate stance savagely condemned at New York summit
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  32. #12132
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    If you spent less time composing denigrating remarks against those you don't agree with and more time looking at the data before you post, you would see that the time scale on your graph is nonlinear. Below is your linked graphic (look at the x-axis timescale - it is compressed 100 times in the past compared to the present!), and under that is much the same data with a linear timescale. And under that is the same data graphed (with revised timescale) on your own linked website. The rapid global temperature rise you postulate occurred 12,000 years ago is not evident in your own data sources, whereas the present rapid warming is evident - just the opposite of your claim!






    I wonder what happened to the Greenland tripe? Conveniently dropped when the ruse was discovered as usual! Then all you can provide is two irrelevant graphs, the first one about Antarctic average temps, then another that doesn't even come within the time frame mentioned originally, now that's clever! But I'm sure that type of garbage works for your usual captive audience who can't tell the difference.
    inter

  33. #12133
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    I wonder what happened to the Greenland tripe? Conveniently dropped when the ruse was discovered as usual! Then all you can provide is two irrelevant graphs, the first one about Antarctic average temps, then another that doesn't even come within the time frame mentioned originally, now that's clever! But I'm sure that type of garbage works for your usual captive audience who can't tell the difference.
    inter
    Still nothing to say except personal denigration? No evidence for your claims? Your own links refute your claims. Surely you can do better than that.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  34. #12134
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    The Younger Dryas: Relevant in the Australian region?
    "this review suggests that there is no conclusive evidence for cooling, or indeed any distinctive climate patterning, during the Younger Dryas Chronozone in Australia."

  35. #12135
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Still nothing to say except personal denigration? No evidence for your claims? Your own links refute your claims. Surely you can do better than that.
    I suppose you could always not try it on all the time & see how that works for you, because what your doing now obviously isn't working & is beyond the ridiculous!
    the graph I presented is linear between the year markers, an easy mistake to make for some who just can't quite grasp the change in scales along time axis. Your imagination appears to be running rampant again with your gross overstatement in the use of language in relation to your ridiculous ploys.
    inter

  36. #12136
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    I suppose you could always not try it on all the time & see how that works for you, because what your doing now obviously isn't working & is beyond the ridiculous!
    Thanks for the additional personal denigration. My character obviously needs it.

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    the graph I presented is linear between the year markers, an easy mistake to make for some who just can't quite grasp the change in scales along time axis.
    Whether the time frame is linear between the year markers or not it does not support your contention, namely that global temperature were changing at 4 degrees per century. Not even close. Not even far. Just made up crap.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  37. #12137
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Thanks for the additional personal denigration. My character obviously needs it.

    Thats rubbish, grow up!


    Whether the time frame is linear between the year markers or not it does not support your contention, namely that global temperature were changing at 4 degrees per century. Not even close. Not even far. Just made up crap.
    keep digging that hole for yourself, its so entertaining

    "Measurements of oxygen isotopes from the GISP2 ice core suggest the ending of the Younger Dryas took place over just 40–50 years in three discrete steps, each lasting five years. Other proxy data, such as dust concentration, and snow accumulation, suggest an even more rapid transition, requiring about a 7 °C (13 °F) warming in just a few years.[6][7][28][29] Total warming in Greenland was 10 ± 4 °C (18 ± 7 °F).[30]


    The end of the Younger Dryas has been dated to around 11.55 ka BP, occurring at 10 ka BP (radiocarbon year), a "radiocarbon plateau" by a variety of methods, with mostly consistent results:


    11.50 ± 0.05 ka BP: GRIP ice core, Greenland[31]
    11.53 + 0.04
    − 0.06 ka BP: Krakenes Lake, western Norway[32]
    11.57 ka BP: Cariaco Basin core, Venezuela[33]
    11.57 ka BP: German oak/pine dendrochronology[34]
    11.64 ± 0.28 ka BP: GISP2 ice core, Greenland[28]
    "
    Inter

  38. #12138
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    Thats rubbish, grow up!
    Grow up yourself and stop posting derogatory personal attacks and innuendoes.

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    "Measurements of oxygen isotopes from the GISP2 ice core suggest the ending of the Younger Dryas took place over just 40–50 years in three discrete steps, each lasting five years. Other proxy data, such as dust concentration, and snow accumulation, suggest an even more rapid transition, requiring about a 7 °C (13 °F) warming in just a few years.[6][7][28][29] Total warming in Greenland was 10 ± 4 °C (18 ± 7 °F).[30]
    So you are back to talking about Greenland and erroneously extrapolating local temperature records to global temperatures?
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  39. #12139
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,412

    Default

    100 reasons why climate change is natural

    HERE are the 100 reasons, released in a dossier issued by the European Foundation, why climate change is natural and not man-made:

    By: Charlotte Meredith
    Published: Tue, November 20, 2012
    1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.
    2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.
    3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.
    4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.
    After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions
    More...
    Climate change lies exposed
    The Romans were producing greenhouse gases
    Prince Charles in climate change warning
    5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.
    6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.
    7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.
    8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.
    9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming
    10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.
    11) Politicians and activiists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago
    http://www.renovateforum.com/newrepl...reply&p=949278
    Fear is the foundation of most government.
    John Adams

  40. #12140
    4K Club Member Marc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    13,412

    Default

    The Global Warming Inquisition Has Begun

    by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

    A new “study” has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) which has examined the credentials and publication records of climate scientists who are global warming skeptics versus those who accept the “tenets of anthropogenic climate change”.

    Not surprisingly, the study finds that the skeptical scientists have fewer publications or are less credentialed than the marching army of scientists who have been paid hundreds of millions of dollars over the last 20 years to find every potential connection between fossil fuel use and changes in nature.
    After all, nature does not cause change by itself, you know.
    The study lends a pseudo-scientific air of respectability to what amounts to a black list of the minority of scientists who do not accept the premise that global warming is mostly the result of you driving your SUV and using incandescent light bulbs.
    There is no question that there are very many more scientific papers which accept the mainstream view of global warming being caused by humans. And that might account for something if those papers actually independently investigated alternative, natural mechanisms that might explain most global warming in the last 30 to 50 years, and found that those natural mechanisms could not.
    As just one of many alternative explanations, most of the warming we have measured in the last 30 years could have been caused by a natural, 2% decrease in cloud cover. Unfortunately, our measurements of global cloud cover over that time are nowhere near accurate enough to document such a change.
    But those scientific studies did not address all of the alternative explanations. They couldn’t, because we do not have the data to investigate them. The vast majority of them simply assumed global warming was manmade.
    I’m sorry, but in science a presupposition is not “evidence”.
    Instead, anthropogenic climate change has become a scientific faith. The fact that the very first sentence in the PNAS article uses the phrase “tenets of anthropogenic climate change” hints at this, since the term “tenet” is most often used when referring to religious doctrine, or beliefs which cannot be proved to be true.
    So, since we have no other evidence to go on, let’s pin the rap on humanity. It just so happens that’s the position politicians want, which is why politics played such a key role in the formation of the IPCC two decades ago.
    The growing backlash against us skeptics makes me think of the Roman Catholic Inquisition, which started in the 12th Century. Of course, no one (I hope no one) will be tried and executed for not believing in anthropogenic climate change. But the fact that one of the five keywords or phrases attached to the new PNAS study is “climate denier” means that such divisive rhetoric is now considered to be part of our mainstream scientific lexicon by our country’s premier scientific organization, the National Academy of Sciences.
    Surely, equating a belief in natural climate change to the belief that the Holocaust slaughter of millions of Jews and others by the Nazis never occurred is a new low for science as a discipline.
    The new paper also implicitly adds most of the public to the black list, since surveys have shown dwindling public belief in the consensus view of climate change.
    At least I have lots of company.
    Spencer: The Inquisition | Watts Up With That?
    Fear is the foundation of most government.
    John Adams

  41. #12141
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Grow up yourself and stop posting derogatory personal attacks and innuendoes.

    you really cant can't tell the difference can you? Your seriously funny.



    So you are back to talking about Greenland and erroneously extrapolating local temperature records to global temperatures?

    Not at all! That's your rubbish argument! My paste does make refeference to Greenland but it in no way means that this is the subject of the reference, which the more astute could plainly see by the references of the data sources, the hint being the Venezuela data
    You have failed again, off to another worthless argument is my prediction!
    inter

  42. #12142
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    [QUOTE=Marc;949281]100 reasons why climate change is natural
    1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.
    [/QUOTE]

    Failed at point one. Not a good start Marc. Can't be bothered reading the rest of the dog whistle libretto.

    Update: I did read the list. A work of serious dementia with so many built in contradictions and blatantly obvious falsehoods LOL. Still doing your bit to promulgate the global warming is not happening fraud, eh Marc?
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  43. #12143
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
    The Global Warming Inquisition Has Begun
    Ha ha, you jest! It’s no longer fashionable to be a climate denier, or to promote climate denial. And it’s proving to be a rather unprofitable position as well.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  44. #12144
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Ha ha, you jest! It’s no longer fashionable to be a climate denier, or to promote climate denial. And it’s proving to be a rather unprofitable position as well.
    Its just human nature to live the lie, for some they would rather be poor & honest!
    inter

  45. #12145
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    Its just human nature to live the lie
    Speak for yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    for some they would rather be poor & honest!
    I know that feeling well.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  46. #12146
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post



    I know that feeling well.
    we all see the gist of post #12140 travelled straight through your head & didn't find much to adhere to!
    inter

  47. #12147
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intertd6 View Post
    we all see the gist of post #12140 travelled straight through your head & didn't find much to adhere to!
    Back to personal attacks and denigration without a word on climate change. Well done.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  48. #12148
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    nsw
    Posts
    4,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John2b View Post
    Back to personal attacks and denigration without a word on climate change. Well done.
    Good to see you wingeing about something your also guilty of! Bravo!
    inter

  49. #12149
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    It’s no longer fashionable to be a climate denier, or to promote climate denial. And it’s proving to be a rather unprofitable position as well.

    More than 340 institutional investors representing $24 trillion in assets on Thursday called on government leaders attending next week's United Nations climate summit to set carbon pricing policies that encourage the private sector to invest in cleaner technologies.

    Firms signing a joint letter include BlackRock, Calvert Investments, BNP Paribas Investment Partners and Standard Bank.
    They want countries to set a price tag on pollution by taxing carbon emission or implementing cap and trade emissions policies to create incentives for investing in cleaner technologies.
    "Stronger political leadership and more ambitious policies are needed in order for us to scale up our investments," the investors' statement said.

    Global investors urge leaders to act on carbon pricing ahead of UN meeting | Reuters

    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

  50. #12150
    4K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Kangaroo Island
    Posts
    4,248

    Default

    Nine billion people are expected to be living on the planet in 25 years and food production will need to spike in order to feed them.

    At the biggest climate conference in history, more than 20 Governments, and 30 organizations and companies announced they would join the newly launched Global Alliance for Climate-Smart Agriculture, which aims to enable 500 million farmers worldwide to practice climate-smart agriculture.

    A similar initiative in North-American will be launched in 2015 to help farmers adapt and improve resilience to climate change.

    Several major companies, including Kellogg's, McDonald's, L’Oréal and Nestlé were among those who signed an ambitious pledge at the New York summit on Tuesday.

    Major corporations have committed to increase the amount of food in their supply chains that are produced with climate-smart approaches - an important step to curb carbon emissions.

    Walmart, the world’s largest grocery store, sells 70 million tonnes of food annually. McDonald’s buys two per cent of the world’s beef, a major source of agricultural greenhouse gas production.

    Signed by more than 150 corporate, government, and civil-society groups, meeting these goals would cut between 4.5 billion and 8.8 billion tons of carbon pollution every year — about as much as the total annual emissions for the U.S., according to the document.

    The agreement marks a growing shift in efforts by corporations to promote sustainability efforts. Environmental issues are becoming more urgent for companies, as climate change begins to affect their bottom line.
    Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it necessary, it is true, does it improve on the silence? - Baba

Page 243 of 377 FirstFirst ... 143 193 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 293 343 ... 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
  •