Rita Panahi has a shot at Robbo

Remove this Banner Ad

No. It's cyclical. Obviously it will always freeze in winter.. and melt in summer. It's to what degree this happens that is important. And it's also important to look at the depth of said freeze/melt. Surface stuff (which is what you are referring to) isn't important so much as what's happening to the longer, older and larger sheets of ice.

The thing is this (And I am not completely convinced about the science at all): Earth is all we have. That's it! There is nowhere else for us to run if we **** this up. It makes sense that we minimise pollution, and maximise the health of the planet that we all need to survive. If there is a 1% chance of us creating a situation that would see the earths ocean rise (and thus destroy millions of peoples homes), then we have to do everything in our power to ensure that doesn't happen. You see, let's say we get down the track a few years and haven't changed our ways, it will be impossible to turn back. If we start being pro-active now, hopefully we will be in a much better position - but even if climate change isn't real, does any of this hurt?. This is one case we can't afford to go "Oops, if only we'd done something sooner".

The reluctance to move to cleaner fuels by government is ******* frustrating. The reluctance by fossil fuel corporations to see the writing on the wall and move to diversify is no less so.

Regardless of the science, it just makes ******* good sense to protect our planet, and move towards renewable power sources.
More or less where I stand on this issue. That we should minimise our footprint on the Earth is a truism for me, I don't need climate change as extra motivation.
 
You'd have to invite DapperJong to that meetup or he'll probably nuke it in retaliation but hey bring Lance and Donsrule along. Leave Mxett and 60sbomber outside with neutralguy and some of the other arch foamers. Pick up the pieces on the way out
I'll pay for a plane ticket down if I get to meet bombers4life he would be a massive laugh
 
Isn't it interesting the way a footy forum discussion has degenerated into a discussion about climate change?

To my mind, regardless of where you stand on the issue, at least Bolt and Panahi provide a point of difference and an alternative view than the majority of the media which tends to err on the left side with these environmental issues.

Good on them I say for having the courage of their convictions.

And if she's holding to Slobbo to account as well - even better!!
Convictions can be more dangerous than lies, unfortunately, and that applies all round.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Thats true abt the Antarctic growth. Whilst the artic shrinks. Making a mockery of the sense of global averages. They also discovered that some sections of the Antarctic that were reducing in size were likely caused by rising under sea thermals, and not CO2.
Why were the undersea thermals rising?
 
Sounds valid. I look forward to reading the peer-reviewed article that confims it.
I wasn't sure if your question was genuinely inquisitive or not. Now I got it. Anyway, the science of the inner earth and core, and where the incredible heat it holds comes from is freely available out there on the interwebs and while some details may be contested the general theories seem to be well accepted. Some estimates say this heat is equivalent to that of the surface of the sun, which sounds ludicrous on first hearing. But there you go.
 
More or less where I stand on this issue. That we should minimise our footprint on the Earth is a truism for me, I don't need climate change as extra motivation.
Stop climate change. Stop polluting the environment.
Climate change is a myth. Keep polluting the environment.

Take the climate change parts out and it's one hell of a strange argument.
 
But then you go an employ those very techniques yourself, firstly by using a pejorative like "high priests of climate change", and now trumping that by claiming that people accuse climate change sceptics the same way rapists are accused.

Sure, some people might decry any kind of measured scepticism (which is vastly different to your blanket claim that everyone does) but if you're going to rail about that then I can't see how engaging in the same behaviour helps your cause

Are you aware that a person who believes entirely in Anthropogenic Global Warming but believes in a solution other than wealth redistribution was hounded out of a position at a WA University?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Stop climate change. Stop polluting the environment.
Climate change is a myth. Keep polluting the environment.

Take the climate change parts out and it's one hell of a strange argument.
'Keep polluting the environment, keep living unsustainably',

leave global warming out and there are still plenty of good reasons not to do these things
 
Big oil won't allow that as long as they're making squillions out of it.
Well at the moment big oil's commodity has dropped from $100+ per barrel to just over $30. So they aren't making as much as they used to. ;) Like car manufacturers are putting more time and thought into non fossil fuel cars (because they can see the writing on the wall), so too will oil companies need to redirect their focus. Perhaps start investing some of those squillions into green energy?
 
leave global warming out and there are still plenty of good reasons not to do these things

Correct.

Have you ever been somewhere really untouched and unpolluted? It is bloody glorious.
 
Well at the moment big oil's commodity has dropped from $100+ per barrel to just over $30. So they aren't making as much as they used to. ;) Like car manufacturers are putting more time and thought into non fossil fuel cars (because they can see the writing on the wall), so too will oil companies need to redirect their focus. Perhaps start investing some of those squillions into green energy?

I wonder how much their squllions will be worth when our species is living out some kind of Waterwold-esque apocalypse
 
Hawking thinks that in 100 years we will be living on other Planets and in 1000 years we will have left this one completely
Yeah, he also poo-poohed his first theory too.

Easy to say "she's right, we wont even be living on earth in 100 years, heck the consequences of pollution and fossil fuels". We won't be here so who cares right? o_O
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top