Climate Change Arguing

[Socrates2]

Nuclear power would replace our fossil fuel power generation, it won't disrupt anything and doesn't require a shift or leap in technology.

The world had already done the trial run of nuclear power plants, there's over 450 in operation now producing clean power. All we had to do was get on board with that in 2006 and our emissions would be half what they are now. Not to mention that a national scale infrastructure project like that would have seen our economy massively boosted during the time of the GFC.

The pacific island nations should turn their attention to their neighbor in China (27x the emissions than Australia) or Japan (Over 3x the emissions than Australia) rather than trying to score political points with their people by pressuring Australia who, because of people who hold your position, is seen as a soft target.

Nothing Australia can do will help the pacific islands, but China could. Full nuclear plant roll out there would be massive.

What do you think happens when a pacific island nation squares up to China?

There's much better alternatives to nuclear and you know it.How about making it mandatory for all new homes to have solar panels? Too logical to work and the nutters would start a fear campaign somehow.( like you are sucked in by fear campaigns. )

 

[Socrates2]

Renewables are now cheaper than oil but some of you want to waste money because you hate lefties , what a joke!

Wind, Solar Are Now The Cheapest Sources Of Power Generation | OilPrice.com

Thanks to falling costs, unsubsidized onshore wind and solar have become the cheapest sources of electricity generation in nearly all major economies in the world

oilprice.com

 

[Better Loosen Up]

What are you trying to say mate?

Well, you've been screaming out for a qualified scientist throughout this whole thread, yet when one finally engages with you, you choose to continue to quote everyone else other than them. I'm sure you're just taking your time to reply with a well thought out, constructive and intelligent response though right?

 

[Taylor]

There's much better alternatives to nuclear and you know it.How about making it mandatory for all new homes to have solar panels? Too logical to work and the nutters would start a fear campaign somehow.( like you are sucked in by fear campaigns. )

Such as the fear about nuclear? Thousands of reactors operating for decades without an issue but because three have had a problem we have to sacrifice the world over it.

Oil, gas and nuclear fuel are primarily storage mediums for energy. They maintain that storage quite well in that you could leave them in a room and return in ten years and the energy in them is still roughly the same.

That's not the same for direct to grid renewable sources yet. We can't afford to have unreliable power, people will literally die because of it.

 

[Socrates2]

Well, you've been screaming out for a qualified scientist throughout this whole thread, yet when one finally engages with you, you choose to continue to quote everyone else other than them. I'm sure you're just taking your time to reply with a well thought out, constructive and intelligent response though right?

Just condense it for me, are you saying climate change is not happening?

 

[Socrates2]

Such as the fear about nuclear? Thousands of reactors operating for decades without an issue but because three have had a problem we have to sacrifice the world over it.

Oil, gas and nuclear fuel are primarily storage mediums for energy. They maintain that storage quite well in that you could leave them in a room and return in ten years and the energy in them is still roughly the same.

That's not the same for direct to grid renewable sources yet. We can't afford to have unreliable power, people will literally die because of it.

Lol, stop the nuclear rubbish mate, it's typical backward thinking, it's not 1980 anymore. I think we should bulld a reactor for a trillion dollars as long as it's next to your house.Have you heard about Fukishima yet, it will never happen again apparently lol. It's much safer than solar! Lol. Battery storage and lithium supply is the main game now, everthing else is yesterday man's BS.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Just condense it for me, are you saying climate change is not happening?

Why would you want me to condense this for you? I'm sure with your vastly superior intelligence that you portray in this thread (mind you, there doesn't appear to be much evidence in here to confirm that), his post is not difficult to understand. Also, I'm not saying anything personally, though I did find his post quite interesting yet not surprising.

I am much more interested however to hear your response to Crankitup post...

 

[Taylor]

Lol, stop the nuclear rubbish mate, it's typical backward thinking, it's not 1980 anymore. I think we should bulld a reactor for a trillion dollars as long as it's next to your house.Have you heard about Fukishima yet, it will never happen again apparently lol. It's much safer than solar! Lol. Battery storage and lithium supply is the main game now, everthing else is yesterday man's BS.

I'd have a nuclear power plant in my back garden and feed the power back into the grid, make a fortune.

Meanwhile, have you ever seen what happens to a lithium ion battery when it's pierced? The size of the battery required to keep a factory going.. now imagine someone puts a forklift into it. It will be like hell opened up.

 

[Socrates2]

Why would you want me to condense this for you? I'm sure with your vastly superior intelligence that you portray in this thread (mind you, there doesn't appear to be much evidence in here to confirm that), his post is not difficult to understand. Also, I'm not saying anything personally, though I did find his post quite interesting yet not surprising.

I am much more interested however to hear your response to Crankitup post...

Dunno what your point is, sounds like you are desperate to do some point scoring onna serious issue. Scientific consensus is what you should go on, not some random outlier who is on the take. Like I say the world has accepted the consensus science, accept for Trump voters Malcom Roberts, Pauline Hanson, Andrew Bolt, Neil Mitchell, Peter Dutton and other assorted Aholes.Are you telling me the world is wrong and Pauline Hsnson is right? You need to get with the program and get behind renewables- if you care anything about your children or nephews and neices. Have a look at the CSIRO graphs for me can you?

 

[Socrates2]

Alright guys, thanks for the 'debate' and enjoy your summer, all the best but don't fall into an ideological trap, it's not worth it.

 

[JackOutback]

Spotting a problem is the easiest thing in the world. Fixing it? That's where the professionals live.

Nuclear power would go a long way to fixing it. If we had kicked into that gear as soon as "An Inconvenient Truth" came out in 2006 they would already be built and operating now. We would have 35% less emissions right now.

We would also have a basis for clean electrical transport solutions, rather than electric cars that charge from coal power. The house plug would be green power.

Potentially another 19% of our emissions right there. Let's halve it though and assume that trucks wouldn't be able to go green.

That's 44.5% of Australia's emissions cut out since conservatively (ten year construction time) 2016. Next year we will be at nearly two whole years of Australian emissions anti-nuclear campaigning has cost the planet. 380,000,000 tonnes.

Fixing a problem is even harder when self-interested parties deliberately try to muddy the issue for personal gain, which is why we have got nowhere in the past decade. Nuclear offers a potential solution as well as its own risks.

 

[ablett09]

Lol, I'll listen to the robust science thanks boss not those of you who are gullible. I really don't think you understand the concept of science.It's boring measurements and data with conclusions.The whole world has moved on from this debate apart from Trump voters and right wing heroes on bigfooty.

Believing in something just because someone says so without evidence or understanding of the facts is not science its religion.

You don't even know the legitimacy of the surveys that claim 97% of scientists believe in man made climate change. How easy is it to rig those surveys ?

I will give you 3 scientific facts.

1.The earth warms on it own.
2.The earth has never been able to produce more food.
3.Cold weather causes more health problems than hot weather.

Right wing parties are outperforming left wing parties across most of the western world. The world has rejected climate change extremism.

 

[Socrates2]

Believing in something just because someone says so without evidence or understanding of the facts is not science its religion.

You don't even know the legitimacy of the surveys that claim 97% of scientists believe in man made climate change. How easy is it to rig those surveys ?

I will give you 3 scientific facts.

1.The earth warms on it own.
2.The earth has never been able to produce more food.
3.Cold weather causes more health problems than hot weather.

Right wing parties are outperforming left wing parties across most of the western world. The world has rejected climate change extremism.

Mate, you're right off chops, just stop this rubbish.What scares me is I think you believe it!

 

[ablett09]

Mate, you're right off chops, just stop this rubbish.What scares me is I think you believe it!

Can you tell me which of my 3 scientific facts are false? Your climate experts agree with them all.

 

[Sainteric]

Lol, lookout Ma the disinformation police have been let out. You have a answer for everything, no one has mentioned not burning off as the main cause gmab, what's your science background mate? I suppose we need more coal, more land clearing and more cotton farmers lol. What's yr opinion on windfarms and solar? Too dangerous? Lol why bother mate you sound ridiculous

Typical greeny devoid of logic

 

[Socrates2]

Typical greeny devoid of logic

Give it up champ, you're out of your depth and keep your BS pseudo-science to yourself, it's not a laughing matter. It's about scientific consensus not what your favourite media personality says.

 

[Sainteric]

Spotting a problem is the easiest thing in the world. Fixing it? That's where the professionals live.

Nuclear power would go a long way to fixing it. If we had kicked into that gear as soon as "An Inconvenient Truth" came out in 2006 they would already be built and operating now. We would have 35% less emissions right now.

We would also have a basis for clean electrical transport solutions, rather than electric cars that charge from coal power. The house plug would be green power.

Potentially another 19% of our emissions right there. Let's halve it though and assume that trucks wouldn't be able to go green.

That's 44.5% of Australia's emissions cut out since conservatively (ten year construction time) 2016. Next year we will be at nearly two whole years of Australian emissions anti-nuclear campaigning has cost the planet. 380,000,000 tonnes.

Nuclear power? Thorium Reactors more money for fission research.

OR

Stick your head in the sand , lie about renewables being cheaper than coal based on a spot price that's been subsidised by someone buying 90% of theoretical output at a much higher price. That generates nothing between 6 and 9pm when most of the demand is.

 

[ablett09]

Give it up champ, you're out of your depth and keep your BS pseudo-science to yourself, it's not a laughing matter. It's about scientific consensus not what your favourite media personality says.

You are confusing religion for science.

 

[Power Raid]

I can’t see anything that could deliver:
- 50g CO2/kWh or less
- $50-$75 mWh

With the added benefit of reliable, as safe (if not the safest) and responsive than the SMRs. Rolls Royce, Nu-scale and Rosatomprom all leading the way with the first commercial operation in 2020.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Dunno what your point is, sounds like you are desperate to do some point scoring onna serious issue. Scientific consensus is what you should go on, not some random outlier who is on the take. Like I say the world has accepted the consensus science, accept for Trump voters Malcom Roberts, Pauline Hanson, Andrew Bolt, Neil Mitchell, Peter Dutton and other assorted Aholes.Are you telling me the world is wrong and Pauline Hsnson is right? You need to get with the program and get behind renewables- if you care anything about your children or nephews and neices. Have a look at the CSIRO graphs for me can you?

I saw your CSIRO graphs and i thought Crankitup reply to those certainly leaves some doubt. Interesting that you are still avoiding a response to his post. It's pretty clear you're position on this subject is heavily politically driven with a solid helping of confirmation bias.

Crankitup, what is your thought on scientific concensus on this matter?

 

[Crankitup]

Crankitup, what is your thought on scientific concensus on this matter?

I gave up long ago trying to change anybody's stance on the issue. 10 years ago was when I last debated it at length. No one listens to the other side they just cherry pick info that suits their own presuppositions. That goes for both sides. As far as consensus goes, I'll say this. Before 1930 the scientific consensus was that there was 8 planets in our solar system. Then Pluto was discovered and the consensus was that it was 9. Then in 2006 the scientific consensus changed back to 8 again because Pluto was shown to be a dwarf planet. More recently it looks like changing back to 9 again because of a hypothetical 'Planet 9' (as yet undiscovered) which would explain some strange orbits of various bodies at the outer edge of our solar system.

A few decades ago the scientific consensus was that we should completely eliminate butter from our diet and switch to margarine, which was usually (until more recently) full of trans fat. Now the consensus is that trans fat is so bad it should be banned. I could point out hundreds of other examples but I'll leave you with one more. It was scientific sceptics that overcame the prevailing flat-earth orthodoxy of their day and proved the earth was round.

Science is the pursuit of truth, not consensus.

Consensus merely represents the absence of definitive science. If the science was definitive there wouldn't be consensus, there would be universal agreement.

Further reading from an IPCC lead author.

 

[Socrates2]

I saw your CSIRO graphs and i thought Crankitup reply to those certainly leaves some doubt. Interesting that you are still avoiding a response to his post. It's pretty clear you're position on this subject is heavily politically driven with a solid helping of confirmation bias.

Crankitup, what is your thought on scientific concensus on this matter?

You sound like a character from the book 1984 where the truth is manipulated to Big Brothers liking. Maybe your right with your selective use of wonky data and your religious belief that the scientic consequence is wrong ,but maybe you're a bit out of yr depth with scientific data. Having said that, I'll believe the majority climate scientist consensus instead of some alt-right pro coal propaganda. Keep posting though, it's entertaining. Hey everyone Better losen up is a highly intelligent science expert expect for the fact he's never read a science book.The CSIRO and NASA are brainwashing the world! Lol. Donald Trump said so! Lol

 

[Better Loosen Up]

You sound like a character from the book 1984 where the truth is manipulated to Big Brothers liking. Maybe your right with your selective use of wonky data and your religious belief that the scientic consequence is wrong ,but maybe you're a bit out of yr depth with scientific data. Having said that, I'll believe the majority climate scientist consensus instead of some alt-right pro coal propaganda. Keep posting though, it's entertaining. Hey everyone Better losen up is a highly intelligent science expert expect for the fact he's never read a science book.The CSIRO and NASA are brainwashing the world! Lol. Donald Trump said so! Lol

Still not daring to quote Crankitup I see..... "out of your depth" indeed!

 

[Socrates2]

Still not daring to quote Crankitup I see..... "out of your depth" indeed!

Go away troll you're a bit mixed up and obsessive. See you at the climate rally Friday, you can come down and heckle school kids worried about their future, that's the sort of bloke you are.Ring up Neil Mitchell and tell him you saw a protester get out of a car and then call all the protesters hypocrites and then have a good laugh with Neil about it. Then tell Neil that you know more than lifelong scientists because you saw something on the internet! You're priceless champ.

 

[Sainteric]

There's much better alternatives to nuclear and you know it.How about making it mandatory for all new homes to have solar panels? Too logical to work and the nutters would start a fear campaign



Absolutely none, solar panels only work in VIc at capacity on roofs for 3 to in 4 hours
winter and about 6 in summer. They don't replace any coal emissions, and of course don't work in peak. No TV at night cooking on a log fire, it will be great.

The more you post the dumber everyone becomes. Soon everyone will have an IQ of 20, and some people might even believe you!☀☀☀☀☀☀