Coalition victory how?

[Socrates2]

No, you said reducing emissions globally by 1.3% makes a difference.

I want to know what that difference is.

You and others carry on about "climate change action" - so, please tell me to what extent this "action" will change our climate?

Look it up yourself, make sure it's peer reviewed science.

 

[Socrates2]

and that 1.3% will be more than wiped out by increases from China and India.

When there’s a globally agreed approach we should be a part of it.

You don't understand the science, look it up.

 

[AbrahamS]

You don't understand the science, look it up.

Seems like the maths is too tough for you.

 

[Kram]

What's your point here? I've given the answer. It reduces emmissions by 1.3% which makes a difference.

Oh it's useless, a waste of time. Once the Sun burns out, this planet is doomed! You're just wanting to make sure we Australians spend our last days using inferior products.

 

[Socrates2]

Seems like the maths is too tough for you.

No, I've had a good look at it and can understand it.Here ,look under Physical Evidence and Effects. It's all referenced .
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change

 

[Socrates2]

Oh it's useless, a waste of time. Once the Sun burns out, this planet is doomed! You're just wanting to make sure we Australians spend our last days using inferior products.

I can how you guys roll now.
This is the pattern I see forming
1/ Deny Climate Change
2/ Say there is some small climate change maybe but it's not man made
3/ Admit there is Climate Change, but say that its too late to do anything then advocate coal.
People one day will look back on these threads and be gobsmacked .

 

[Fagan Pride]

I can how you guys roll now.
This is the pattern I see forming
1/ Deny Climate Change
2/ Say there is some small climate change maybe but it's not man made
3/ Admit there is Climate Change, but say that its too late to do anything then advocate coal.
People one day will look back on these threads and be gobsmacked .

Literally nobody has followed that pattern in this discussion.

 

[Socrates2]

Literally nobody has followed that pattern in this discussion.

Yeah your playing with semantics again .
It's pretty obvious I meant over a lifetime not one thread.
Am I correct in saying you and your friends have followed this pattern? You used to deny climate change didn't you?

 

[Fagan Pride]

Yeah your playing with semantics again .
It's pretty obvious I meant over a lifetime not one thread.
Am I correct in saying you and your friends have followed this pattern? You used to deny climate change didn't you?

I’ve never once denied the climate is changing. It’s always changing, you can’t prevent that.

 

[GoldenSky]

Look it up yourself, make sure it's peer reviewed science.

Why can't you tell me what that difference is?

How can the left literally construct a whole "end of days scenario" about Australia not taking "action" to reduce our emissions and then NOT tell us what the result of that "action" is?

Reducing our emissions by the maximum (which currently is 1.3% of global emissions), please tell me what the effect on Australia's climate will be?

I mean, we need more rigorous debate and discussion here than lefties and Penny Wong simply parroting cliches for 10 years "we believe in climate change, the other side do not" and "climate change is real".

 

[Socrates2]

Why can't you tell me what that difference is?

How can the left literally construct a whole "end of days scenario" about Australia not taking "action" to reduce our emissions and then NOT tell us what the result of that "action" is?

Reducing our emissions by the maximum (which currently is 1.3% of global emissions), please tell me what the effect on Australia's climate will be?

I mean, we need more rigorous debate and discussion here than lefties and Penny Wong simply parroting cliches for 10 years "we believe in climate change, the other side do not" and "climate change is real".

So by your reasoning, no other country should reduce emmisions either , and we agree to stuff up the planet?

 

[Socrates2]

Why can't you tell me what that difference is?

How can the left literally construct a whole "end of days scenario" about Australia not taking "action" to reduce our emissions and then NOT tell us what the result of that "action" is?

Reducing our emissions by the maximum (which currently is 1.3% of global emissions), please tell me what the effect on Australia's climate will be?

I mean, we need more rigorous debate and discussion here than lefties and Penny Wong simply parroting cliches for 10 years "we believe in climate change, the other side do not" and "climate change is real".

I've said 1.3% five times are you deaf?

 

[GoldenSky]

I've said 1.3% five times are you deaf?

1.3% is the effect on Australia's climate?

Huh?

Look, I think you need to slowly back out of here, read up on the "science" and get back to us - we're over the Penny Wong style cliches about "climate change is real" - we actually want a proper discussion here on the FACTS.

 

[Socrates2]

1.3% is the effect on Australia's climate?

Huh?

Look, I think you need to slowly back out of here, read up on the "science" and get back to us - we're over the Penny Wong style cliches about "climate change is real" - we actually want a proper discussion here on the FACTS.

Oh sorry, I didn't realise Australia had a magic shield around its borders .Climate change doesn't have borders so it has to be a group effort.What you're proposing is that Australia is some how superior to other countries and shouldn't contribute.

 

[AbrahamS]

Oh sorry, I didn't realise Australia had a magic shield around its borders .Climate change doesn't have borders so it has to be a group effort.What you're proposing is that Australia is some how superior to other countries and shouldn't contribute.

You’re suggesting the opposite and that we should somehow lead the way. Others are saying to you if we go it alone in such a manner it would be worth as much as a beer fart in a windstorm.

 

[Socrates2]

You’re suggesting the opposite and that we should somehow lead the way. Others are saying to you if we go it alone in such a manner it would be worth as much as a beer fart in a windstorm.

Lead the way? Do you understand that we are the second highest per capita co2 emmisions in the world? There are 195 countries in the world and we are second from the bottom.

 

[AbrahamS]

Lead the way? Do you understand that we are the second highest per capita co2 emmisions in the world? There are 195 countries in the world and we are second from the bottom.

We live on a large landmass that isn’t densely populated. This generally means more transport to get goods and services to the population. However given our population is small our total contribution is minimal. The climate isn’t concerned about “per capita” only in absolutes.

 

[AbrahamS]

Why can't you tell me what that difference is?

How can the left literally construct a whole "end of days scenario" about Australia not taking "action" to reduce our emissions and then NOT tell us what the result of that "action" is?

Reducing our emissions by the maximum (which currently is 1.3% of global emissions), please tell me what the effect on Australia's climate will be?

I mean, we need more rigorous debate and discussion here than lefties and Penny Wong simply parroting cliches for 10 years "we believe in climate change, the other side do not" and "climate change is real".

Because they’ll use any issue possible to add a tax, increase government power/control or both.

 

[kranky al]

Awesome. That's how we should be behaving. 2 major parties full of grown ups that accept that when a party brings a clear policy forward to an election and wins, then they have a mandate.

We've been stuck in this lethargic mode as a country since 2014 when Labor started to play class warfare and appeal to the twitter crowd, and the media ran along with that, as if they were in government...no surprise our economic malaise matches up perfectly with that time period. We've had socialists running policy in this country even when the Liberals have been in government.

F
U
(
k

M
E

 

[Socrates2]

We live on a large landmass that isn’t densely populated. This generally means more transport to get goods and services to the population. However given our population is small our total contribution is minimal. The climate isn’t concerned about “per capita” only in absolutes.

Yeah whatever

 

[maryjames]

Yeah whatever

Why whatever? Can’t handle the facts?

 

[Socrates2]

Why whatever? Can’t handle the facts?

No ,totally the opposite MaryJane, it was a whatever to a ridiculous comment.I'm glad your on the thread we need high ranking scientists like yourself to chime in.

 

[maryjames]

No ,totally the opposite MaryJane, it was a whatever to a ridiculous comment.I'm glad your on the thread we need high ranking scientists like yourself to chime in.

I’ve got a family member who is a real scientist with all this s**t and I gladly debate him for laughs..

 

[AbrahamS]

I’ve got a family member who is a real scientist with all this **** and I gladly debate him for laughs..

So it sounds like only per capita emissions count. Sweet, deport a few people, cull interstate transport and we’ll be sweet.

Either that or it is total emissions that count and anything Australia does won’t make any difference as the decrease will be more than swallowed up by China’s increase.

Perhaps you can clear it up....

 

[Engimal v3]

Default votes.

Went home to my family for the long weekend. They all told me they voted Liberal because they always have. Mum told me a few weeks back she thought all the senators went in a contest to see who the new PM was. My sister thought Shorten was the PM, and Morrison just became the new one after the election.

Default votes are a hell of an asset to the Coalition.