Emma Thompson on Global Warming

[The Speaker]

itt people post graphs which back up the side of the argument they've already decided is right

also, emma must be right, she's besties with stephen fry

 

[Malifice]

Yeah all this non existent global warming is killing us. But hey, at least the models keep going up, that's a win right..? Lol.

Lol. Go back 100 years.

Amusingly, the Coalition showed their true colors this week:

Mr Dutton quipped that a late-running Canberra meeting was on “Cape York time”, a reference that has been interpreted as insulting to the region’s indigenous people. Mr Abbott replied: “We had a bit of that up in Port Moresby.”

Mr Dutton added: “Time doesn’t mean anything when you’re about to have water lapping at your door,” prompting laughter all round — until Social Services Minister Scott Morrison noticed the ABC cameraman’s boom above their heads.

http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...ns-racist-banter/story-fns0jze1-1227524004873

Jesus Christ.

 

[Grin]

Wow, you calling someone ignorant!

Its absurd to think there will be 4c warming by 2030. Its absolute crap, yet certain sections of the media are happy to peddle this nonsense.



Yes, to show what a joke the IPCC models are.

There has been bugger all warming since '98 and suddenly we are going to get 4c warmer in the next 15-35 years?

Yep sure. Amazingly some actually STILL believe this.

Your form of religion doesn't believe in science.
The conscious super deity, the market, will look after all. But only if your really, really believe.

Having said that, I remember when foolish right wing drones were trying to convince everyone else through the mindless regurgitate of propaganda, that tobacco and asbestos weren't harmful

You victims of propaganda, aimed at conning the naive and easily led, never seem to learn from your mistakes, so are doomed to repeat them.

Those of us who live in the real world however, need to start planning for the future and try and minimise the damage caused by man made global warming.

 

[medusala]

Your form of religion doesn't believe in science.

Pathetic. There is NO science that gives rise to a 4c temp increase, merely crap models, which have been shown to have no predictive value. You appear to have absolutely no idea on the topic, merely a propensity to regurgitate nonsense from the ABC and Fairfax.

You victims of propaganda, aimed at conning the naive and easily led, never seem to learn from your mistakes, so are doomed to repeat them.

Humour from SRP's version of Pavlov's dog.

 

[alchemy333]

Lol. Go back 100 years.

Amusingly, the Coalition showed their true colors this week:



http://www.news.com.au/national/pol...ns-racist-banter/story-fns0jze1-1227524004873

Jesus Christ.

Long enough back for you...?

Reconstructed global temperature over the past 420,000 years based on the Vostok ice core from the Antarctica (Petit et al. 2001). The record spans over four glacial periods and five interglacials, including the present. The horizontal line indicates the modern temperature.

 

[romeohwho]

Pathetic. There is NO science that gives rise to a 4c temp increase, merely crap models, which have been shown to have no predictive value. You appear to have absolutely no idea on the topic, merely a propensity to regurgitate nonsense from the ABC and Fairfax.



Humour from SRP's version of Pavlov's dog.

Well are you saying the ABC and Fairfax make stuff up?

 

[Malifice]

Long enough back for you...?

Lol

 

[medusala]

Well are you saying the ABC and Fairfax make stuff up?

They will give airspace to utter numpties (just as the BBC did with Emma Thompson). The Guardian is even worse.

 

[romeohwho]

They will give airspace to utter numpties (just as the BBC did with Emma Thompson). The Guardian is even worse.

Ah well, thank goodness for the HUN then.

 

[Grin]

Pathetic. There is NO science that gives rise to a 4c temp increase, merely crap models, which have been shown to have no predictive value. You appear to have absolutely no idea on the topic, merely a propensity to regurgitate nonsense from the ABC and Fairfax.

And Asbestos and Tobacco aren't harmful.
You wing nuts, victims of propaganda aimed at conning mindless ideologues, never learn from your mistakes. Unfortunately when proven wrong, as you always are, the adults have to pick up the pieces and pay for the damage caused the stupidity of those conned, time and again, into believing that all credible scientists are part of some great big global conspiracy. A communist plot to take over the world.

You're the right wing equivalent of an anti-vacc crazy.

 

[Mcveigh]

meds taken over from dan26 these days?

 

[Eastern Rangers]

This thread is proof that the question of warming isn't that relevant to the individual. Views from either side are shaped not by the science and it's limitations but by the needs of their preexisting ideological prejudices.

Meds is right in some extent that the moral panic of some isn't justifiable within a reasonable discourse, but on the same side of things Meds response is like that of most reactionaries. Political opposition for the sake of it.

 

[Reppie]

How is it such people get any air time. A completely idiotic statement, yet the BBC gives her oxygen.

Even worse is the Guardian's effort in bold, lol at 4c warming by then. Does anyone actually believe any of this any more? Where is Bit Pattern?

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...hompson-got-right-and-wrong-on-climate-change

Actress and Greenpeace activist Emma Thompson was interviewed on BBC Newsnight about Shell’s drilling in the Arctic and associated climate change threats. In the interview, Thompson made some inaccurate statements about the timescales associated with those climate threats. However, her concerns are generally justified.

"if they take out of the earth all the oil they want to take out, you look at the science – our temperature will rise 4 degrees Celsius by 2030, and that’s not sustainable."

So, Thompson was off by three to four decades. However, because of the lag between the time when we emit greenhouse gases and when their full warming influence in realized, the highest emissions scenario considered in the latest IPCC report suggests we would commit ourselves to 4°C warming by 2050

Global warming...really... been cooling for years.
Maybe get outdoors more often.

 

[Reppie]

Wow, you calling someone ignorant!

Its absurd to think there will be 4c warming by 2030. Its absolute crap, yet certain sections of the media are happy to peddle this nonsense.



Yes, to show what a joke the IPCC models are.

There has been bugger all warming since '98 and suddenly we are going to get 4c warmer in the next 15-35 years?

Yep sure. Amazingly some actually STILL believe this.

Selective data.
Scam had been discovered long ago.

 

[medusala]

Meds is right in some extent that the moral panic of some isn't justifiable within a reasonable discourse, but on the same side of things Meds response is like that of most reactionaries. Political opposition for the sake of it.

Its not opposition for the sake of it, it's economic common sense. Australia by itself can make no statistical difference to global temperatures so to act unilaterally in the absence of an international trading system is madness.

The alarmist side peddles lie after lie after lie. It's cheaper to act now being right out there as one of the greatest ones. China etc are going to agree to cuts etc is another one. Another day, another proposed coal mine (in Zimbabwe). Same old story.

 

[Long Live HFC]

This thread is proof that the question of warming isn't that relevant to the individual. Views from either side are shaped not by the science and it's limitations but by the needs of their preexisting ideological prejudices.

Meds is right in some extent that the moral panic of some isn't justifiable within a reasonable discourse, but on the same side of things Meds response is like that of most reactionaries. Political opposition for the sake of it.

i don't necessarily disagree with anything here, but you'd have to wonder how different/improved the actual 'discourse' may have been without the manipulation of the debate by those that sought to deny AGW.

 

[Long Live HFC]

so to act unilaterally.

lol.

 

[medusala]

lol.

Why the lol? Where is this international trading scheme that the ALP banged on about? What carbon price was the ALP relying on for its revenue forecasts? See below, a slight issue. So the revenue estimates were a lie, the international trading system bit was a lie and YET some people still drank the Kool Aid.

http://theconversation.com/explainer-the-difference-between-a-carbon-tax-and-an-ets-1679

The fixed price in Australia in 2014/15 will be $25.40, but the current (May 2013) price in Europe is only 3.40 Euros (about A$4.50).

 

[Long Live HFC]

there are innumerable examples across the world of efforts to mitigate AGW, put a price on carbon, reduce carbon emissions and develop alternative energy solutions. claiming AU acted "unilaterally" is nonsense.

 

[medusala]

there are innumerable examples across the world of efforts to mitigate AGW, put a price on carbon, reduce carbon emissions and develop alternative energy solutions. claiming AU acted "unilaterally" is nonsense.

At $25 a tonne we certainly were. There was no intl trading system for us to link in to. It was an idiotic policy. The ALP were keen to tell us it wasn't about raising money as they gave compensation ie bought votes with the revenue. So they were either faced with a price way out of line with Europe or massive revenue shortfall

So, how about you tell us. Were you actually in favour of this?

And lol at trying to compare mitigation to a carbon tax, you may as well include Direct Action.

 

[Long Live HFC]

At $25 a tonne we certainly were. There was no intl trading system for us to link in to. It was an idiotic policy. The ALP were keen to tell us it wasn't about raising money as they gave compensation ie bought votes with the revenue. So they were either faced with a price way out of line with Europe or massive revenue shortfall

So, how about you tell us. Were you actually in favour of this?

i've never been in favour of an ETS, tbh- when things are good and you're making good profits, why do you care that much about a carbon "tax"? when things have slowed down, you won't need your carbon credits because you're just not polluting as much.

as much as it pains me to say it tony had it right when he said 'why just not make it a simple tax?'. there's good research out of the US that shows big gains in power efficiency (for instance) by putting a price on carbon.

...

but yeah, claiming that AU acted/acting unilaterally is disingenuous at best (deliberate BS more likely).

 

[medusala]

i've never been in favour of an ETS, tbh- when things are good and you're making good profits, why do you care that much about a carbon "tax"?

Why would anyone care about tax?

Nah, sorry, cant think of a reason.

 

[Long Live HFC]

Why would anyone care about tax?

Nah, sorry, cant think of a reason.

it's telling that you pick comments out of context i bet you were doing that for 10-20 years re AGW and how it wasn't happening or it wasn't us or the science was ambiguous etc. you're not fooling anyone.

 

[medusala]

And the AGW trainwreck continues. Power cuts, China lies (and lol at anyone who believed them in the first place) and Antarctic ice increasing.

Does anyone other than Grin still believe in the Armageddon fairytale?


http://order-order.com/2015/11/04/national-grid-appeals-to-industry-to-avoid-black-outs/

The National Grid has asked industrial users to switch to back-up power for the first time ever after multiple power plant failures left it short of supply. It will pay any company that agrees to do so — the first time such a “demand-side reduction” has ever been used. Unfortunately wind is only generating 0.59% of supply today

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/w...than-reported-complicating-climate-talks.html

BEIJING — China, the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases from coal, has been burning up to 17 percent more coal a year than the government previously disclosed, according to newly released data. The finding could complicate the already difficult efforts to limit global warming.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-is-gaining-ice-NASA/articleshow/49625798.cms

WASHINGTON: An increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

Areas of the continent like the Antarctic peninsula have increased their mass loss in the last decades, says a new Nasa study.

The research challenges the conclusion of other studies, including Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) 2013 report which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice

 

[blured]

Look at fanbois getting worked up over the media spin lol