Emission Trading and climate change

Page 63 of 377 FirstFirst ... 13 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 113 163 ... LastLast
Results 3,101 to 3,150 of 18819
  1. #3101
    2K Club Member chrisp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    Here's a reminder of an oversimplified explanation:

    (....)

    The numbers never lie, but lot's of people lie about the numbers.
    I'll say they do. The reality is that both the minimum and maximum temperatures are rising.

    glob_jan-dec-error-bar_pg.jpg

    (from: Recent Climate Change - Annual Average Global Surface Temperature Anomalies 1880-2008 | Science | Climate Change | U.S. EPA )

    Maybe you had better fudge your numbers again - oops, sorry, you stated that numbers were made up.

    But don't let the facts (i.e. the real temperature records) get in the way of a good story (i.e. your made up numbers).

  2. #3102
    1K Club Member jago's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    ....
    Posts
    1,411

    Default Reasons required

    It seems that the last 236 pages could have been saved and this one page explained the lot, state of knowledge

    State of Knowledge | Science | Climate Change | U.S. EPA

    well except the bit about an ETS ...lol

  3. #3103
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,389

    Default

    Let’s assume two random temperature measurements in one place over Time 1 and Time 2:

    If the above example makes any sense to anyone, either mathematically or logically, could they explain it to me?

    :(Does an alcohol thermometer measurement taken in Alaska in the winter of 1915 compare to a digital thermometer reading at Kalgoorlie last week?

    No, but when the alcohol thermometer in Alaska was replaced with a more modern one the two were likely checked against each other and any inaccuracies of the old one could be calculated and its readings adjusted. Would you consider this sort of adjustment to be fraud? Nobody is trying to say that all past records are 100% accurate. This is why scientists are using multiple sources of information to get the best picture possible.

  4. #3104
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Objection your honour.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vin View Post


    ...I am unaware of any proof of anything...
    Are you a defense lawyer?

  5. #3105
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Thanks mate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Nice post that one!

    So true
    Yeh, I kinda like it too.

    Shows how easy it is to get whatever answer you want from various data by making different assumptions (Hockey Stick anyone?).

    Looks like some of the lads above take it kinda seriously though.

    You'd think I insulted them or something.

    Just to clarify people, I am not saying that the temperature has not risen over the last 150 years, it is inevitable that temperature has to either go up or down over whatever arbitrary time period you pick. Pick one yourself, we have rough data going back about 500 million years.

    I am saying that our accuracy in measuring temperature globally is far from accurate, let alone calibrated or standardised, and anyone that argues it is an accurate representation of reality is an idiot.

    Then, as for the arbitrary assumptions made in the "adjustment" and presentation of this data, words fail me at the farce that this theory has created.

  6. #3106
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default You guys are funny.

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisp View Post

    But don't let the facts (i.e. the real temperature records)
    You guys are better than Seinfeld.

  7. #3107
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Putting the numb back into numbers.

    Quote Originally Posted by jago View Post
    It seems that the last 236 pages could have been saved and this one page explained the lot, state of knowledge

    State of Knowledge | Science | Climate Change | U.S. EPA

    well except the bit about an ETS ...lol
    I'm just curious about something, there's lots of numbers to explain this lovely story, or "State of Knowledge".

    "1 Throughout the science section of this Web site, use of "virtual certainty" (or virtually certain) conveys a greater than 99% chance that a result is true. Other terms used to communicate confidence include “extremely likely” (greater than 95% chance the result is true), "very likely" (greater than 90% chance the result is true), "likely" (greater than 66% chance the result is true), “more likely than not” (greater than 50% chance the result is true), “unlikely” (less than 33% chance the result is true), “very unlikely” (less than 10% chance the result is true), and “extremely unlikely” (less than 5% chance the result is true). These judgmental estimates originate from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007)."

    I don't suppose you'd know how these mathematical probabilities were derived.

    Here's a hint:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post

    The numbers never lie, but lot's of people lie about the numbers.

  8. #3108
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Toot toot.

    All aboard the new gravy train...

    "THE five climate change experts Julia Gillard hopes to inform public opinion on the issue will be paid an average of $300,000 a year."

    $1.5m for climate chiefs

    I better get my resume ready.

  9. #3109
    1K Club Member jago's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    ....
    Posts
    1,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    All aboard the new gravy train...

    "THE five climate change experts Julia Gillard hopes to inform public opinion on the issue will be paid an average of $300,000 a year."

    $1.5m for climate chiefs

    I better get my resume ready.
    Thats cheap I would have expected alot more dosh...bugger I'm not getting out of bed for that!

  10. #3110
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default I'm cheap.

    Quote Originally Posted by jago View Post
    Thats cheap I would have expected alot more dosh...bugger I'm not getting out of bed for that!
    But not much to do for the dosh mate.

    All the works already done by the IPCC.

    It's just about convincing idiots like me that it's all real.

  11. #3111
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default This should reduce emissions.

    Remember this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    The greenie solution?

    "Beer drinkers will pay more from Monday with a tax grab of 21c for a full-strength slab of 24 cans - taking the total excise on the carton to $14.28."

    Taxes on beer and alcohol to rise again on Monday | Herald Sun

    Another emission reduction plan to compensate for having no climate change policy?

  12. #3112
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Gee whiz, greenie computer models that don't work?

    "LABOR'S push to cut greenhouse gas emissions through the use of energy efficiency schemes was yesterday dealt another blow when building industry heavyweights discredited the star ratings being applied to hundreds of thousands of homes...

    ...
    They said owners were not aware that mandatory software tools -- used to calculate whether a planned new house could achieve the minimum five-star energy efficiency rating necessary to obtain approval for construction -- gave vastly different results for the same house under identical conditions.

    It is another setback for the government while it is still trying to quell criticism after the shelving of its emissions trading scheme, the disintegration of the home insulation program and green loans scheme, and the subsequent findings that both were fatally flawed, costing lives and taxpayers' money due to poor planning and execution.


    It also comes after Labor's latest environmental announcements -- the 150-person citizens assembly to forge a national consensus on action on climate change and the cash-for-clunkers green car replacement scheme -- were widely criticised...


    ...The results show that the three software tools, including the original model designed by the CSIRO, were inherently unreliable...


    ...It also means the stated objective of the federal government to cut greenhouse gas emissions in houses is in serious question...


    ...Climate Change Minister Penny Wong declined to comment..."

    Energy star ratings in disarray | The Australian


    Debacle!


    What's wrong Penny, cat got your tongue?

  13. #3113
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Making used car saleman look good.

    " WOULD you buy a used cash-for-clunkers gimmick from this woman?...

    ...
    What can we do that is as silly, so utterly pointless, so open to rorting? Something that has some tenuous, however remote, tie to green, saving-the-planet mushiness -- although heaven forbid it required substantive, painful action?...

    ...Obama's cash-for-clunkers was unabashedly all and only about stimulus. It failed on those "merits" alone: simply and expensively and so disruptively, bringing forward some new vehicle purchases. Albeit, thank-you-very much, on the taxpayer's dollar.

    It didn't even try to make the ludicrous pretence of being "green." Whereas Down Under, it's a case of: sorry, we won't give you a real climate change policy, so here's a meaningless cash-for-clunkers substitute...

    I have to say I'm conflicted. A symbolic waste of $400 million seems a reasonable price to pay, if that's the case, for meaningful inaction on the climate change charade.

    In this same category is Gillard's perfectly secular but Augustinian coal-fired power policy. Lord, or perhaps Gaia, give me carbon-less purity, but just not yet.

    In short, it's an announcement of a government that hasn't got a clue..."


    Julia Gillard's more off than Gough Whitlam | The Australian



  14. #3114
    The Master's Apprentice Bedford's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Yarra Valley Vic oz
    Posts
    8,238

    Default

    It's often referred to as wasting taxpayers dollars with these schemes, but isn't it mostly over seas borrowings now? My concern is, if this is so, that we become in debt to over seas banks for essentially non income producing assets, totally relying on tax dollars for interest and principal repayments on a failed scheme. What does the government put up as collateral for these loans?
    Posted by John2b, And no, BEVs are not going to save the planet, which doesn't need saving anyway.

  15. #3115
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default An excellent question.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bedford View Post
    It's often referred to as wasting taxpayers dollars with these schemes, but isn't it mostly over seas borrowings now? My concern is, if this is so, that we become in debt to over seas banks for essentially non income producing assets, totally relying on tax dollars for interest and principal repayments on a failed scheme. What does the government put up as collateral for these loans?
    Thanks for a great summary of our current national disgrace.

    The answer to your collateral question is our future! We the taxpayers now will be paying taxes into the future just to service this massive debt. No hospitals, no schools, no environmental R&D, no good social policies, just increased taxes going to interest payments and debt payments.

    Here's some words from Shrek:

    "Labor will never deliver a surplus under Kevin Rudd. Labor will not do so because even after last year’s budget with a $54 billion deficit, which was the biggest spending budget in a generation, and even after last year’s budget where the government predicted the end of the world as we know it—so even under the terms of those budget parameters—in this budget the government has increased spending by $26 billion.

    If you thought they were throwing in the steak knives, wait because there is more. There is a 2010-11 budget that will spend an extra $26 billion. In fact, the 2010-11 budget forecasts a massive $40.8 billion deficit. It took 25 minutes for the Treasurer to get the words out last night of a deficit of $40.8 billion. Do you know why?

    Because the fact of the matter is that, when they actually deliver a surplus according to their own forecasts, by that stage this government would have borrowed over $700 million a week to fund their deficit. That is $100 million per day, every day, to fund their deficit. Then the hard task of repaying the $93 billion starts.

    What is it with Labor and $90 billion debts? Anna Bligh now has apparently something like $90 billion of debt in Queensland. Paul Keating left $96 billion of debt. If a change of government does come at the next election, how much is the Labor Party debt going to be? Around $90 billion.

    It is something that is fixed in the DNA of the Labor Party: leave the debt and get the coalition to do the hard yards of paying off the debt. That is because the Labor Party loves to spend money."

    The Hon. Joe Hockey :: Shadow Treasurer

  16. #3116
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Well worth reading the whole story on this one.

    "THE Prime Minister appears to be driven by narrow calculations of political advantage...

    ...
    The same is true of earlier leaks from within Kevin Rudd's kitchen cabinet, the Gang of Four, on the subject of the emissions trading scheme. While her mantra over the past 18 months has been "delay is denial", it was she who had reportedly argued most strenuously for deferring an ETS for at least three years, and persuading a reluctant Rudd. An alternative slush fund for buying off wavering constituencies was proposed instead: the first version of the mining tax...

    ...But she remains electorally vulnerable in the sensible centre of Australian politics because it's widely understood that, whether it takes the form of an ETS or a carbon price, decisive action is bound to be both costly and ineffectual.

    Out of those twin imperatives came the announcement of a citizens' assembly, 150 people chosen at random to deliberate on climate change policy for a year and decide on a course of action. It was an idea recycled from NSW Labor and within a few days a Galaxy poll found 62 per cent of respondents said it was a turkey...


    ...Originally implemented in Germany and last year in the US, it holds out the promise of reducing emissions and petrol consumption through government subsidy. But the environmental benefits are mostly of the illusory, feel-good kind and hugely expensive -- as even the opinion pages of The Age conceded -- and the program is likely to be stillborn.


    Advocates of the scheme never take into account the additional energy and resources consumed in replacing a car before the end of its useful life. Writing in Friday's Australian, Oliver Marc Hartwich described the German policy as "one of the most bizarre and wasteful programs ever to be implemented by any government. Instead of scrapping hundreds of thousands of perfectly functional cars for imaginary benefits, the prime minister would be better advised to scrap her lunatic proposal."...


    ...Why, they're asking, choose to reactivate the issue this time around rather than waiting to see how the climate debate develops during the next term? Why use your first statement as Prime Minister to express disappointment "that we have not yet been able to put a price on carbon"?


    Why formalise a lopsided deal with the Greens that raises more questions than it answers and creates voter anxieties about extreme and ill-considered policy?


    There are a few more questions they'll be pondering. Doesn't Gillard understand the Greens can't deliver their supporters' second preferences? Or that with enhanced numbers in the Senate they would make governing from the centre almost impossible?..."


    Cabinet leaks show depth of Gillard's problems | The Australian


    Yes, well worth read.


    I guess if you enviro-warriors want action on climate change you have to put your full support behind any real action policies out there.

  17. #3117
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Well done Shrek.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post

    Here's some words from Shrek:

    Labor will never deliver a surplus under Kevin Rudd.
    And they never did!

    And the future prediction award goes to........SHREK!


  18. #3118
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Who woulda thunk.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    ...But she remains electorally vulnerable in the sensible centre of Australian politics because it's widely understood that, whether it takes the form of an ETS or a carbon price, decisive action is bound to be both costly and ineffectual.
    Who would have thought that all these massive taxes would feed straight through to us poor taxpayers.


    "The head of Coles says he does not believe having to pay a levy to fund the Coalition's proposed paid parental leave scheme would push prices up for consumers.

    The Coalition has committed to funding the scheme by imposing a 1.7 per cent company tax levy on the nation's biggest businesses.

    The Government says it will push up food prices.

    But the managing director of Coles, Ian McLeod, has told ABC's Sunday Profile the levy would have a relatively small impact.

    "In overall terms I'm probably more concerned about the rising utility bills that are emerging through Australia, with electricity rates rising at almost 20 per cent," he said.

    "That's going to have a much more material impact in terms of our cost base than any sort of other changes to government policy either one way or the other."..."


    The real “Coles and Woolies tax” is Gillard’s | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

    Well people, if you want a huge spike in your bills, and a lowering of your standard of living, for absolutely no environmental effect, you know what to do.

  19. #3119
    The Master's Apprentice Bedford's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Yarra Valley Vic oz
    Posts
    8,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    Thanks for a great summary of our current national disgrace.

    The answer to your collateral question is our future! We the taxpayers now will be paying taxes into the future just to service this massive debt. No hospitals, no schools, no environmental R&D, no good social policies, just increased taxes going to interest payments and debt payments.
    Thanks Doc, I understand what you mean by the long term (our Grand kids) still repaying the debt, but I don't see that as collateral.

    I suppose what I mean is, has the government issued the title to Australia (or part thereof) with a filthy big red stamp on it stating MORTGAGED TO some overseas bank? which could expose the country to a repossession.

    Keep in mind I have no idea how the loan to value ratio of 90 billion compares to what Australia is worth.

    Thanks.
    Posted by John2b, And no, BEVs are not going to save the planet, which doesn't need saving anyway.

  20. #3120
    1K Club Member jago's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    ....
    Posts
    1,411

    Default

    90 billion is about 9% of GDP so reasonable. Of assets that's a different matter it's a minimal debt.

  21. #3121
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Perhaps this thread should be renamed to:

    Dr Freud's one man Liberal Party Echo Chamber.

    Nice job Doc, do you get a commission?

    Back on topic, here is the current state of the Arctic Sea Ice Volume Anomoly over at PIOMAS:



    Full size available over at the PIOMAS site.

    Meanwhile, the latest Sea Ice Extent image from NSIDC:



    Yes, sorry its so small, the full size is on the site.

    Strange how the ice going down matches the temperature going up, don't you think? Sure puts the claims of shenanigans on the temperature record into perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud
    All the works already done by the IPCC.
    You know that the IPCC collates the research, it doesn't actually do the research, don't you Doc? Of course you did.

    woodbe.

  22. #3122
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post
    Perhaps this thread should be renamed to:

    Dr Freud's one man Liberal Party Echo Chamber.

    Nice job Doc, do you get a commission?

    Back on topic, here is the current state of the Arctic Sea Ice Volume Anomoly over at PIOMAS:



    Full size available over at the PIOMAS site.

    Meanwhile, the latest Sea Ice Extent image from NSIDC:



    Yes, sorry its so small, the full size is on the site.

    Strange how the ice going down matches the temperature going up, don't you think? Sure puts the claims of shenanigans on the temperature record into perspective.



    You know that the IPCC collates the research, it doesn't actually do the research, don't you Doc? Of course you did.

    woodbe.
    Sea Ice Page | Watts Up With That?


    Oh but wait Antony Watts is a monster that could not provide any reliable information right? Even if it comes from credible sources such as you have posted above. Just his graphs put it all in the correct prospective. Not a cherry pick like yours.

    The truth hurst eh.

    No way is there going to be an ice free Artic any time soon buddy.
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  23. #3123
    2K Club Member chrisp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Sea Ice Page | Watts Up With That?


    Oh but wait Antony Watts is a monster that could not provide any reliable information right? Even if it comes from credible sources such as you have posted above. Just his graphs put it all in the correct prospective. Not a cherry pick like yours.

    The truth hurst eh.

    No way is there going to be an ice free Artic any time soon buddy.
    Rod,

    You can argue (or deny) all you like about the rise of CO2, the impact of the CO2, the source of CO2, the extent of the ice caps, the thickness of the ice caps, seasonal variations, etc.

    You can even argue about the calibration of the thermometers and weather stations if you like.

    However, if the world is warming, there will be less ice in the world as a whole. If there is less ice, where does the ice go? Yep, it melts, turns to water and eventually ends up in the sea. What happens to the sea level when it gets this extra water? Yep, you guessed it, the sea level will rise.

    So has the sea level risen?

    recent_sea_level_rise.png

    (From: Current sea level rise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )

    How do you explain the increasing sea level if the world isn't warming?

    Gee, the CO2 measurements (showing increasing CO2 in the atmosphere) and temperature measures (showing the earth warming) by those lefty, socialist, corrupt (via government research grants) scientists seem to concurrence with the fact that the sea level is rising too.

    Or do you think that the sea level rising has been fudged too?

    Perhaps, just maybe, the AGW theory is true.

  24. #3124
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default They're going to repossess us!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bedford View Post
    Thanks Doc, I understand what you mean by the long term (our Grand kids) still repaying the debt, but I don't see that as collateral.

    I suppose what I mean is, has the government issued the title to Australia (or part thereof) with a filthy big red stamp on it stating MORTGAGED TO some overseas bank? which could expose the country to a repossession.

    Keep in mind I have no idea how the loan to value ratio of 90 billion compares to what Australia is worth.

    Thanks.
    Hope this helps (crude explanation, cos this stuff gets complicated and needs its own thread):

    The government sells "bonds" that are kinda like temporary shares in Australia. No hard assets are put up as security, as cash flow is used for security. Us taxpayers are that cash flow. (Kinda like a business with high turnover, but few assets i.e E-bay). When you have sovereign debt crises (ie. Iceland, Greece), it means the government has less cash flow coming in than payments going out. We all know this as bankruptcy.

    AOFM link in quote below explains more. Now, let's say Bank of China buys $1 billion dollars of these bonds over a ten year period, conveniently called 10 year bonds. Then Australia gets to keep the $1 billion dollars for ten years to pay the bills, but pays interest on this either quarterly or bi-annually. Current interest rate on these bonds is about 5.2%. So in a nutshell, Australia pays Bank of China $52 million per year for ten years, then gives them back the $1 billion dollars. All up, costs us $520 million dollars.

    Now, if we use this to build something productive or income producing, it would be worth the effort and the expenditure. I personally don't think the $900 cheques, pink batts scheme, green loans scheme, school halls scheme, cash-for-clunkers scheme etc.etc. is really worth it.

    Now, we do not have $1 billion in bonds, these muppets have racked up over $90 billion net debt in under two years! To cut a long story short, we gotta find $50 billion in interest plus the $90 billion in principal over the next ten years. Pretty much require a $14 billion dollar surplus every year for a decade. Remember now, this is with current spending ratios. No new schools, hospitals, infrastructure etc unless we want to increase the debts.

    Think of this as having a massive credit card debt. You may still be earning money, but if you spend money on something rather than paying your debt, you are in effect buying this item on your credit card, then paying interest on it at your debt interest rate.

    We have mortgaged our future. As long as taxes keep going up, we should be fine.

    Another way is to sell the assets to pay the debt, like Medibank is scheduled for sale. John Howard was roundly criticised for selling assets to pay off Labors last debt. How well would we have handled the current financial crisis had this not been done? I figure better to sell the furniture than lose the house. Ask the Greeks what they reckon?

    (The AOFM numbers are gross debt).


    (RBA: CGS Bond Prices - June 2010)


    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post

    Just start here:

    AOFM – Home

    (Total Commonwealth Government Securities
    on Issue - $147,133m)


  25. #3125
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default I support the no ridiculous taxes party.

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post
    Perhaps this thread should be renamed to:

    Dr Freud's one man Liberal Party Echo Chamber.

    Nice job Doc, do you get a commission?
    Nah mate, this one's a freebie.

    I'm in the pocket of big oil, so got plenty of dosh already.

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post
    You know that the IPCC collates the research, it doesn't actually do the research, don't you Doc? Of course you did.

    woodbe.
    Of course! I meant they had done the work "of collating the research".

    That's just my maverick renegade style again.

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post

    Yes, sorry its so small, the full size is on the site.

    woodbe.
    That's ok mate, it's probably all this cold weather.

  26. #3126
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post

    Strange how the ice going down matches the temperature going up, don't you think? Sure puts the claims of shenanigans on the temperature record into perspective.

    woodbe.
    Yes, this will happen from time to time. The fun questions are how much heat for how much melt. Then the really fun questions, what's causing the heat. But it's nothing to do with the inaccurate temperature record, that's just humans being lazy.





    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Sea Ice Page | Watts Up With That?

    Not a cherry pick like yours.
    A polite understatement my friend.

    3 months or 30 years, on a 4,500,000,000 year old planet.

  27. #3127
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,389

    Default

    To put this in another perspective look at the debt to GDP ratio of other countries
    List of countries by public debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    It's only wikipedia so the accuracy may not be spot on but close enough I think. Japan is notable at 189%, most of Europe is over 60% including Germany. Singapore at 113% is the same as Greece.

    We have had much higher debt in the past, like most nations we emerged from WW2 with debt of over 100% of GDP. The post war boom still happened. While $90 bill sounds like a lot it is equal to less than two years of mining royalties under the old scheme.

    Many nations with both right and left wing govts borrowed in response to the global meltdown. No one found an easy solution to the problem. There were no magic answers. The current opposition said that under the circumstances that they would have borrowed also. If you believe only one side of politics can stuff up you weren't paying attention during the Howard years.

  28. #3128
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisp View Post

    How do you explain the increasing sea level if the world isn't warming?
    There was too much in this to break it down.

    Please read this:

    Spurious Correlations


    Quote Originally Posted by chrisp View Post

    Perhaps, just maybe, the AGW theory is true.
    After you read the link, you'll hopefully realise that "perhaps" and "maybe" are correct, but not proof.

  29. #3129
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Home is here

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    To put this in another perspective look at the debt to GDP ratio of other countries
    I don't live in other countries, I live here.



    If any pollies waste our money, they're gonna be held accountable!

  30. #3130
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    Sea Ice Page | Watts Up With That?


    Oh but wait Antony Watts is a monster that could not provide any reliable information right? Even if it comes from credible sources such as you have posted above. Just his graphs put it all in the correct prospective. Not a cherry pick like yours.

    The truth hurst eh.

    No way is there going to be an ice free Artic any time soon buddy.
    Well look at that. Watt's has a page on the ice without any text from the serial misinformer Mr Goddard. Good for him.

    Watts missing (sic) is the Arctic Ice Volume Anomoly from PIOMAS:




    This is the graph that you know, shows how much ice is there rather than how far it has spread. I wonder why he would leave that out? Any ideas spring to mind Rod?

    Cherry pick indeed.

    I don't know about an ice-free Arctic, Rod, but it's sure looking like we'll have one with bugger-all summer ice pretty soon.

    woodbe.

  31. #3131
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,389

    Default

    If any pollies waste our money, they're gonna be held accountable!

    Couldn't agree more. But isn't it just more than wasting money? What about our capacity to defend ourselves? Is that as important as how much we owe? I have some concerns over the preparedness of our defences, most, but not all, relate to decisions made during the Howard years. The poor decision making and administration of existing contracts have left us in a vunerable position. Recently the Seasprite naval helicopter contract was cancelled. This should have happened years ago. There are reports that most of the Collins class submarines are unfit to put to sea. We also bought some second hand Abrams tanks that are too heavy to pass over any bridges in this country. But that doesn't matter because the number of engine room fires means that they are not safe to use anyway. The joint strike force fighters that we have contracted to buy most likely will go over budget and behind schedule. Until then we will have to manage with aging F/A 18s and antique F 111s. Neither what we have or what we intend to buy appear to match the current Mig our neighbours already have. If we are attacked by a fleet of war canoes we are in trouble.

    Howard squandered ten years of mining boom prosperity on what? We have nothing to show for it, no adequate defence, no high speed broadband, no solution to Murray Darling issues, no investment in infrastructure. Just a lot of middle class welfare schemes, tax benefits, subsidised health insurance, child care and a baby bonus for any millionaire that wants it. At the same time employment for people with disabilities dropped by 30% as they were systematically weeded out of the public service under "economic rationalist" principles.

    People with short memories or selective recall have forgotten the flaws of the Howard years. Does anyone recall the rorts that happened under the gun buyback scheme? The cost of some of the National Party porkbarrel schemes? Does anyone know how federal disability funds for education are accounted for? Of course you don't because there is no requirement to account for it. Anyone buy any T2 Telstra shares from Honest Johnny, the ones that are now worth less than half what they cost?
    Selective amnesia?

    Not trying to overlook or minimise the flaws in the current govt, just attempting to jog a few memories and counter the bias in some comments.

  32. #3132
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,389

    Default

    How do you explain the increasing sea level if the world isn't warming?

    That's easy, rain is produced magically by the sky fairy which makes the sea levels rise. He did this once before so there is a historical precedent for it. That time it rained for forty days and the sea levels rose a great deal. Only one family survived by building a boat and putting two of each of the worlds eighty million different species on board. Then magically the water disappeared. Millions of people believe this but there is a lot less evidence for it than there is for global warming. Logical creatures we are not.

  33. #3133
    Soldiers Earned Your Right To Free Speech watson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Avoca Victoria
    Age
    78
    Posts
    2,614

    Default

    And they included a pair of bloody termites too

  34. #3134
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post
    Well look at that. Watt's has a page on the ice without any text from the serial misinformer Mr Goddard. Good for him.

    Watts missing (sic) is the Arctic Ice Volume Anomoly from PIOMAS:




    This is the graph that you know, shows how much ice is there rather than how far it has spread. I wonder why he would leave that out? Any ideas spring to mind Rod?

    Cherry pick indeed.

    I don't know about an ice-free Arctic, Rod, but it's sure looking like we'll have one with bugger-all summer ice pretty soon.

    woodbe.
    Woodbe I have already won one bet on the ice free summer, but they didnt pay up! Funny that!

    However I would be very happy to place another wager to say that we will NOT have an Ice free summer in the Artic in the next five years. I would be hapy to extend that bet to 30 years but I doubt I will be here to collect.

    I wont happen mate NO WAY. BTW I have zero confidence in any graphs produced to show warming etc. ZERO. I am tipping that I am not the only one to feel this way.
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  35. #3135
    2K Club Member chrisp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    BTW I have zero confidence in any graphs produced to show warming etc. ZERO.
    So, out of interest, do you have 'confidence' in graphs that show what you like to believe?


  36. #3136
    3K Club Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    3,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe
    I don't know about an ice-free Arctic, Rod, but it's sure looking like we'll have one with bugger-all summer ice pretty soon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    However I would be very happy to place another wager to say that we will NOT have an Ice free summer in the Artic in the next five years.
    Ask someone else to bet with you Rod, I've been to the arctic, and its bloody cold in summer even with the warming. From my previous comment, clearly I think that there will be some ice there for a long time. There just won't be much of it.

    Besides, betting on disasters isn't my idea of a nice way to behave.

    woodbe.

  37. #3137
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Crisp & Woodbe.....you are wasting your bandwidth on our two friends. Frankly, you would be better served using it and your skills elsewhere rather than shouting across the gorge saying something akin to you're on the wrong road.....they are so far down it anyway they ain't coming back.

    And besides......their individual opinions aren't that crucial anyway. So there's not much to be gained by bashing away at them...
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  38. #3138
    quality + reliability - 3k Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    4,312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisp View Post
    So, out of interest, do you have 'confidence' in graphs that show what you like to believe?

    I don't have a lot of confidence in any of the "AGW science" as it is mostly politically driven, both ways. The entire thing is a shambles, with so much in terms of money and credibiltiy riding on the long term outcome. However it cannot be said that the science is settled, it will not be settled in our lifetimes IMO.
    GREAT PLASTERING TIPS AT


  39. #3139
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Another time, another place...

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    If any pollies waste our money, they're gonna be held accountable!

    Couldn't agree more. But isn't it just more than wasting money?
    Many of the programs you higlighted that deserve more funding are definitely worthy. Didn't see any Rudd/Gillard revolutions in there though? ETS? CPRS? Carbon Tax?

    BIG difference between investment and waste!

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    Howard squandered ten years of mining boom prosperity on what? We have nothing to show for it...
    Er, zero net debt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post
    Paul Keating left $96 billion of debt.
    Short memories indeed, don't spose you know how much interest we all paid last time? Add that on top.


    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    Not trying to overlook or minimise the flaws in the current govt, just attempting to jog a few memories and counter the bias in some comments.
    No possible risk of overlooking these flaws champ.

    But just to get back to the point, the reason the for these new "greenie" taxes is to pay back this massive debt, not to achieve any environmental outcomes. That is my reason for raising this issue. Without massive new taxes to cover the wasteful spending of these idiots, we are not looking good. Whose gonna fund all the health and social policies then?

    Greenie smokescreen just gives this tax grab a "moral" facade!

  40. #3140
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Disaster!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by woodbe View Post
    Ask someone else to bet with you Rod, I've been to the arctic, and its bloody cold in summer even with the warming. From my previous comment, clearly I think that there will be some ice there for a long time. There just won't be much of it.

    Besides, betting on disasters isn't my idea of a nice way to behave.

    woodbe.
    Gee, if all the Arctic ice flaoting at the North Pole melts, how much will the ocean rise?

    Just curious as to the scale of this impending DISASTER?

    Poor Santa.

  41. #3141
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Just for fun?

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentButDeadly View Post
    So there's not much to be gained by bashing away at them...
    A man's gotta have a hobby.

  42. #3142
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Too true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rod Dyson View Post
    I don't have a lot of confidence in any of the "AGW science" as it is mostly politically driven, both ways. The entire thing is a shambles, with so much in terms of money and credibiltiy riding on the long term outcome. However it cannot be said that the science is settled, it will not be settled in our lifetimes IMO.
    Yeh, IMHO, this farce currently sits between astrology and scientology.

    I respect these two much more though, as they at least acknowledge they are belief systems.

    Uh oh, take cover!

  43. #3143
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,389

    Default

    Whose gonna fund all the health and social policies then?
    We can fund it out of all the money we are saving on fuel for the submarines, tanks and planes that are not safe to use. If an invader shows up you can be first in line to attack them armed with your zero net debt. Or we could all use the money we got from the gun buyback scheme to bribe them to invade elsewhere. Or we could just pray that nothing happens, it's the only weapon we have left. Pity it's totally useless.

    Anyway the good news is you won't have to pay the taxes for long. Seems like the god botherers have decided it's all coming to an end....on May 21 2011.
    Request a Free 'Judgment Day May 21, 2011' Bumper Sticker
    Labor has nothing on religions when it comes to fleecing the flock.

  44. #3144
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Moving forward.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    We can fund it out of all the money we are saving on fuel for the submarines, tanks and planes that are not safe to use. If an invader shows up you can be first in line to attack them armed with your zero net debt. Or we could all use the money we got from the gun buyback scheme to bribe them to invade elsewhere. Or we could just pray that nothing happens, it's the only weapon we have left. Pity it's totally useless.
    Getting a little off the track here, but all sides have questions to answer:


    IMHO, we have AAA security, Access, Area and ANZUS. It's very difficult to get a large force here, once here it's very difficult to secure, and while this is happening, the yanks will nail you in the rear (sorry Kiwi's, you guys can fire a few shots too). All decent military strategic plans factor these three in for us.

    But moving forward to the game at hand:

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    Anyway the good news is you won't have to pay the taxes for long. Seems like the god botherers have decided it's all coming to an end....on May 21 2011.
    Request a Free 'Judgment Day May 21, 2011' Bumper Sticker
    Labor has nothing on religions when it comes to fleecing the flock.
    You mean religions like AGW Theory:

    And:


    Perhaps some words from your opponents are appropriate:


    Rest assured, if invaders do show up, I'll take care of them.

  45. #3145
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

  46. #3146
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Apologies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post

    IMHO, we have AAA security, Access, Area and ANZUS. It's very difficult to get a large force here, once here it's very difficult to secure, and while this is happening, the yanks will nail you in the rear (sorry Kiwi's, you guys can fire a few shots too). All decent military strategic plans factor these three in for us.

    Please forgive, I may have led you astray. We may soon have AA security.


  47. #3147
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default What are those crazy greenies up to?

    The Australian Greens believe that:

    "1. climate change poses the greatest threat to our world in human history and requires urgent local, national and global action.

    2. we have only 10-15 years to use our collective human intelligence to address the crisis of climate change and to prevent catastrophe."

    Translation: Scaremongering.

    "10. energy prices should reflect the environmental and social costs of production and use.

    12. the major refurbishment of existing coal fired power stations undermines the effort to increase end-use energy efficiency, demand management and renewable energy."

    Translation: Higher prices for everyone.


    "13. a safe climate will require a return to an atmospheric concentration of 350ppm or lower of greenhouse gases (CO2 equivalents)"

    Translation: The Earths climate has been unsafe for most of the time.





    "14. Australia needs to plan for a future that does not rely on coal export and coal fired electricity."

    Translation: State the obvious and you might sound like you know what you're doing.


    Full story here:

    http://greens.org.au/sites/greens.or...Nov%202009.pdf

  48. #3148
    1K Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Logan Qld
    Posts
    1,389

    Default

    Translation: The Earths climate has been unsafe for most of the time.
    Unsafe for whom? Could you see if you can find some records of real estate prices during the early Cambrian period? I would be interested to see if rising sea levels were affecting the prices of apartments in high rise beach front units at that time.

    It's very difficult to get a large force here
    How large was the force that brought down the World Trade centre?

    That's from the King James Version. How many other versions are there? And if this is the one true word of God, why are these other versions different?

  49. #3149
    Resigned SilentButDeadly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Not here...
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Freud View Post

    "13. a safe climate will require a return to an atmospheric concentration of 350ppm or lower of greenhouse gases (CO2 equivalents)"

    Translation: The Earths climate has been unsafe for most of the time.



    Freud....as the ideal self centred human being that you are....I'm surprised that you use this ridiculous plot as some sort of response. The human timeframe is covered by at most the last pixel on the right hand side....none of what comes before that is irrelevant to the concepts of 'safe' or 'unsafe'...because the human species and its primate predecedents simply weren't there...and they are our concepts....not the environments

    Greens policy is as humanistic as that of any political party.....humans come first (despite what you might imagine). After all, humans are expected by the Greens to vote for the Greens. So when they talk about a safe climate....they mean safe for [S]human civilisation[/S] Greens voters in the first instance....and what they actually mean is ....less risky...
    Joined RF in 2006...Resigned in 2020.

  50. #3150
    2K Club Member Dr Freud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    2,627

    Default Something was causing CO2 emissions?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    Unsafe for whom?
    Dunno, ask Bob Brown, he said it. The Jurassic and Cretaceous periods look comfy?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    Could you see if you can find some records of real estate prices during the early Cambrian period?
    I know some guys who have a computer model for this.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    I would be interested to see if rising sea levels were affecting the prices of apartments in high rise beach front units at that time.
    There must have been heaps of apartments. All those halogens and elevators caused the massive CO2 emissions you can see.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    How large was the force that brought down the World Trade centre?
    I did say it was difficult to get a large force here did I not, not a small one. Just look at all the boats to our north streaming in small groups regularly. I can assure you that the US has the surface naval craft of our large threats tracked, and vice versa (subs are different) and we will certainly hear about if they all start boarding and heading our way. The yanks may sometimes be slow learners, but they certainly learnt from Pearl Harbour.

    But to answer your question, it depends. Assuming you speak of humans, not physics, do you just mean those on the planes, those training and harbouring them, or those agreeing with their ideology?

    But your question, while ambiguous, proves my point. Do you think the US military budget is too small as well? History has proven conventional military forces usually lose asymmetric warfare one way or the other. There are better ways.

    But aside from all the diesel these military machines burn, it's a tenuous (though interesting) link to AGW Theory.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhilT2 View Post
    That's from the King James Version. How many other versions are there? And if this is the one true word of God, why are these other versions different?
    Dunno. Maybe you could go to your local church and ask the preacher. I am certainly not well versed in the answers to these questions. I am however well versed in irony. That's why I posted a quote from those you denounce highlighting the hypocrisy of your position that claims they have cornered the market of doomsday scenarios.

Page 63 of 377 FirstFirst ... 13 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 113 163 ... 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
  •