Is this the end of the Greens?

Remove this Banner Ad

Why is it a joke that I think it's a driver of AGW? Because it's only 0.04%? Or it just is a joke because you said so? You're really not making much sense here.

Actually why not have a read of a summary of actual science (don't worry I don't actually think you'll click on the link and read it with an unbiased eye): http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-higher-in-past.htm
It is a nice theory but no proof whatsoever that CO2 levels are a driver of AGW.
 
It is a nice theory but no proof whatsoever that CO2 levels are a driver of AGW.

Somebody does not understand the definition of "theory" in a scientific context. Why am I not surprised.

To steal a line from Tim Minchin, do you have the same attitude towards the theory of gravity? Maybe then those denying science as just a "theory" could float the * away.
 
Somebody does not understand the definition of "theory" in a scientific context. Why am I not surprised.

To steal a line from Tim Minchin, do you have the same attitude towards the theory of gravity? Maybe then those denying science as just a "theory" could float the **** away.
This is not even in the same ballpark when it comes to comparisons.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This is not even in the same ballpark when it comes to comparisons.

Maybe if you keep saying that it'll make it true. They're both comprehensive explanations of a wide array of evidence in a particular area of nature. That is they're a theory.

But keep running around making absurd statements with nothing to back them up. It makes you look really intelligent.
 
Me too-ing the Liberals on everything swing voters like will probably make Bill Shorten the Prime Minister but will continue to drive progressive voters away.
Labor's Prime Minister in 20 years will have Greens in his/her cabinet.
 
Maybe if you keep saying that it'll make it true. They're both comprehensive explanations of a wide array of evidence in a particular area of nature. That is they're a theory.

But keep running around making absurd statements with nothing to back them up. It makes you look really intelligent.
What do you Eco-Loons have to say about the settled science not predicting the cessation of warming for 17+ years? Or every climate model that predicted doom, being wildly off as the years have rolled on?

Other Eco-loons have been doing their best to deny there had been a cessation of warming, but eventually it became too difficult for them to keep lying.
 
What do you Eco-Loons have to say about the settled science not predicting the cessation of warming for 17+ years? Or every climate model that predicted doom, being wildly off as the years have rolled on?

Other Eco-loons have been doing their best to deny there had been a cessation of warming, but eventually it became too difficult for them to keep lying.

 
What do you Eco-Loons have to say about the settled science not predicting the cessation of warming for 17+ years? Or every climate model that predicted doom, being wildly off as the years have rolled on?

Other Eco-loons have been doing their best to deny there had been a cessation of warming, but eventually it became too difficult for them to keep lying.
In my experience, people who refuse to recognise the reality of global warming are gooses with no scientific education. They're the right wing equivalent of anti vacc crazies.
 
In my experience, people who refuse to recognise the reality of global warming are gooses with no scientific education. They're the right wing equivalent of anti vacc crazies.
You should have added keyboard warriors that look like clowns who also refuse to recognise climate change is a reality.
 
Maybe if you keep saying that it'll make it true. They're both comprehensive explanations of a wide array of evidence in a particular area of nature. That is they're a theory.

But keep running around making absurd statements with nothing to back them up. It makes you look really intelligent.

Maybe if he closes his eyes, taps his heels together three times and thinks to himself, there's no place like home! he may end up in Tony's Wonderland where everyone is straight and the sun revolves around their flat earth.
 
Maybe if he closes his eyes, taps his heels together three times and thinks to himself, there's no place like home! he may end up in Tony's Wonderland where everyone is straight and the sun revolves around their flat earth.

We're all in Tony's ******* wonderland right now. Where the nutbag anti-wind brigade get a commissioner but a person pointing out a coal mine not following existing laws is environmental terrorism. At least the wonderland is collapsing in front of our eyes.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

All this wailing, and gnashing of teeth because Greg Hunt failed to do his job properly. I suspect it's all moot anyway, Adani is going to have as much chance of funding this coal mine, as James Hird has of coaching again.

aBORT is trying to use this as a political wedge. Forget the obvious facts, we'll lose 10,000 jobs crap, environmental lawfare etc etc. Despite the fact it was Hunt who withdrew the proposal, despite their being <500 jobs. Despite many big investors easing out of coal. Its not a growth industry anymore.

Anything to get the focus off the facts.
 
aBORT is trying to use this as a political wedge. Forget the obvious facts, we'll lose 10,000 jobs crap, environmental lawfare etc etc. Despite the fact it was Hunt who withdrew the proposal, despite their being <500 jobs. Despite many big investors easing out of coal. Its not a growth industry anymore.

Anything to get the focus off the facts.

They seem to be giving this "lawfare" thing a fair workout. I wonder what bright spark came up with that one.

If they spent as much time governing as they did coming up with braindead slogans, designed to get the parrots (some of which frequent this very board) to endlessly spew it out of their mouths, we might actually start moving somewhere as a nation.
 
They seem to be giving this "lawfare" thing a fair workout. I wonder what bright spark came up with that one.

If they spent as much time governing as they did coming up with braindead slogans, designed to get the parrots (some of which frequent this very board) to endlessly spew it out of their mouths, we might actually start moving somewhere as a nation.

On that point, when did promoting the correct application of the law become a bad thing?
 
all laws should be applied at the relevant minister's discretion. Courts are merely a relic of a bygone age

So the separation of powers has no value?

You will need to explain this as i feel like a good laugh for the day. Ask countries like North Korea whether separation of powers is worthwhile or not.
 
So the separation of powers has no value?

You will need to explain this as i feel like a good laugh for the day. Ask countries like North Korea whether separation of powers is worthwhile or not.

It's like revoking citizenship, it shouldn't be up to the courts to decide points of law when Tony Abbott has perfectly good ministers who are able to decide what the law should be based upon whatever short term goals Abbott may or may not be persuing at the time.

Perfectly reasonable I'd have thought.
 
I think Abbott underestimates climate change. If he loses the next election, it could well be for his ignorant views on the issue. For all Rudd's faults - he had a firm understanding of climate change. If only Gillard and Swan didn't have their own personal agenda, we'd already have a practical climate change policy in place.
 
It's like revoking citizenship, it shouldn't be up to the courts to decide points of law when Tony Abbott has perfectly good ministers who are able to decide what the law should be based upon whatever short term goals Abbott may or may not be persuing at the time.

Perfectly reasonable I'd have thought.

"Tony Abbott has perfectly good ministers".

Stopped reading as soon as i read this. Not worth the effort.
 
"Tony Abbott has perfectly good ministers".

Stopped reading as soon as i read this. Not worth the effort.

You should have kept going, I think you may have worked out my angle by the end of it.
 
I think Abbott underestimates climate change. If he loses the next election, it could well be for his ignorant views on the issue. For all Rudd's faults - he had a firm understanding of climate change. If only Gillard and Swan didn't have their own personal agenda, we'd already have a practical climate change policy in place.
Yep. It is natural and it has been occurring for millions of years!
 
We're all in Tony's ******* wonderland right now. Where the nutbag anti-wind brigade get a commissioner but a person pointing out a coal mine not following existing laws is environmental terrorism. At least the wonderland is collapsing in front of our eyes.
Tones and George are going to introduce a bill to parliament that will stop "environmental vigilantes" from being able to challenge "development".

This mob have no understanding of democracy, the separation of powers nor the concept that without clean air, clean water or clean soil, we die. If any of these imperatives aren't available, we die!

Who cares though if your an Abbott type, they are all going to heaven! Who gives a f**k about what you do to the planet now, it's all about making filthy lucre whilst you're on this earth, after all, according to the Assemblies of God, it's all about pursuing the "prosperity scriptures" and in order to be loved by God and be a true Christian, you've got to be making money!
 
I won't agree with everything Richard says but he is the first greens leader I can stand to listen to. He seems very measured and actually has thought through what he says. I won't vote for him but if there ever was someone to bring the greens further into the mainstream I can see him leading the way.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top