Climate Change Arguing

[Socrates2]

3. I don’t believe the lie pushed by the UN, a body that doesn’t represent the best interests of humanity, so as to enslave and impoverish mankind.

What's this mean? Is this a conspiracy theory you found online?

 

[Socrates2]

Lol

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexep...e-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/#390ce5c33f9f

Where did most of the 97 percent come from, then? Cook had created a category called “explicit endorsement without quantification”—that is, papers in which the author, by Cook’s admission, did not say whether 1 percent or 50 percent or 100 percent of the warming was caused by man. He had also created a category called “implicit endorsement,” for papers that imply (but don’t say) that there is some man-made global warming and don’t quantify it. In other words, he created two categories that he labeled as endorsing a view that they most certainly didn’t.
The 97 percent claim is a deliberate misrepresentation designed to intimidate the public—and numerous scientists whose papers were classified by Cook protested:
“Cook survey included 10 of my 122 eligible papers. 5/10 were rated incorrectly. 4/5 were rated as endorse rather than neutral.”
—Dr. Richard Tol
“That is not an accurate representation of my paper . . .”
—Dr. Craig Idso
“Nope . . . it is not an accurate representation.”
—Dr. Nir Shaviv
“Cook et al. (2013) is based on a strawman argument . . .”
—Dr. Nicola Scafetta
Think about how many times you hear that 97 percent or some similar figure thrown around. It’s based on crude manipulation propagated by people whose ideological agenda it serves. It is a license to intimidate.
It’s time to revoke that license.

Lol ,the Stalinist propaganda machine is out.Stop posting your BS fake news champ!

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

Right this thread is to talk about the election, you've come here to accuse everyone who disagrees with you of being virtually sub-human. You live in an ivory tower and your only access to the world is via bigfooty clearly.

I believe in science I don't believe in climate change, Idgaf what toilet you use if you believe and attempt to present as the gender you claim, Australia is for Australians immigrate legally and try to integrate and we can be the best of friends ask for Australia to change to match the shithole you left from and you can gtfo. Pretty close to what most Australians voted for I guess

If you believe in science then you believe in climate change. Go into any legitimate scientific institution in the world and tell them you don't believe in climate change. They will argue, correctly, against you.

 

[Fat Yak]

climate change is the greatest hoax since y2k.

 

[Lebbo73]

Lol
Lol ,the Stalinist propaganda machine is out.Stop posting your BS fake news champ!

There’s no fake news there Chump. The 97% bs is just that. Pretty well like a lot of posts in this thread.

 

[Poor Form]

climate change is the greatest hoax since y2k.

Wrong, greater than y2k for sure.

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

I also believe my eyes, and when the crew of a cruise ship heading to Antarctica tell me that its ******** and ice shelves that collapsed in 2012 have actually grown rather than completely disappear as predicted i pause for thought.

You base you're skepticism on the warming climate on your eyes and on hearsay evidence from some random cruise ship. Okay....

 

[Lebbo73]

If you believe in science then you believe in climate change. Go into any legitimate scientific institution in the world and tell them you don't believe in climate change. They will argue, correctly, against you.

I do believe in climate change. The climate has been changing since the beginning of time. It just isn’t man made.

 

[Collingwoodity]

If you believe in science then you believe in climate change. Go into any legitimate scientific institution in the world and tell them you don't believe in climate change. They will argue, correctly, against you.

That's fine. But what next?

Reduce the population? Reduce emissions? Ban plastic? Wind power? Plant more trees?

What else needs to be done?

Are these things scientifically going to reverse climate change?

I for one believe that we should reduce pollution, including plastic and emissions, but will those actions reverse climate change?

 

[Forward Press]

That's fine. But what next?

Reduce the population? Reduce emissions? Ban plastic? Wind power? Plant more trees?

What else needs to be done?

Are these things scientifically going to reverse climate change?

I for one believe that we should reduce pollution, including plastic and emissions, but will those actions reverse climate change?

Reducing carbon dioxide and methane emissions by themselves would have a significant impact - increasing use of public transport, cleaner fossil fuels (eg transition from coal to gas), change in livestock techniques etc. Reducing our dependence on plastics would also slow down consumption of fossil fuels as they are used in the manufacture of plastics.

For obvious ethical and economical reasons you cannot murder people or switch over power grids to solar overnight but this doesn't mean you don't try eg encouraging smaller families in LDCs, research into renewable energy sources, reforestation programs etc

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

That's fine. But what next?

Reduce the population? Reduce emissions? Ban plastic? Wind power? Plant more trees?

What else needs to be done?

Are these things scientifically going to reverse climate change?

I for one believe that we should reduce pollution, including plastic and emissions, but will those actions reverse climate change?

You're correct, these things (reduce emissions, cleaner energy, reforestation ) are not going to reverse climate change, but they will hopefully mitigate/limit it.

 

[Socrates2]

I also believe my eyes, and when the crew of a cruise ship heading to Antarctica tell me that its ******** and ice shelves that collapsed in 2012 have actually grown rather than completely disappear as predicted i pause for thought.

Are you part of the bigfooty right wing rat pack because all your crew is likeing your trolling. You must love it.

 

[Collingwoodity]

You're correct, these things (reduce emissions, cleaner energy, reforestation ) are not going to reverse climate change, but they will hopefully mitigate/limit it.

Reducing carbon dioxide and methane emissions by themselves would have a significant impact - increasing use of public transport, cleaner fossil fuels (eg transition from coal to gas), change in livestock techniques etc. Reducing our dependence on plastics would also slow down consumption of fossil fuels as they are used in the manufacture of plastics.

For obvious ethical and economical reasons you cannot murder people or switch over power grids to solar overnight but this doesn't mean you don't try eg encouraging smaller families in LDCs, research into renewable energy sources, reforestation programs etc

That's all fine. I guess I have a problem with how is all that going to be practically implemented.

It's not good enough to simply complain about it. There needs to be practical solutions.

I personally dgaf about coal being that I live in Melbourne and the electricity comes to me so long as I pay my bill, but shouldn't there be a transition period so that coal workers etc can keep their jobs whilst the clean energy is being set up?

Shouldn't the parties have policies to introduce transition to paper and glass to reduce plastic usage?

Without these types of things, complaining and criticising is not helpful imo.

 

[Socrates2]

That's all fine. I guess I have a problem with how is all that going to be practically implemented.

It's not good enough to simply complain about it. There needs to be practical solutions.

I personally dgaf about coal being that I live in Melbourne and the electricity comes to me so long as I pay my bill, but shouldn't there be a transition period so that coal workers etc can keep their jobs whilst the clean energy is being set up?

Shouldn't the parties have policies to introduce transition to paper and glass to reduce plastic usage?

Without these types of things, complaining and criticising is not helpful imo.

I agree, Labor should have had a plan B for the coal workers.They could have easily created jobs building renewable energy infrastructure and promised those jobs to coal workers. No doubt Scomo , Clive Palmer and Newscorp would have attacked the plan to protect their mining interests, but it could have worked.

 

[Forward Press]

That's all fine. I guess I have a problem with how is all that going to be practically implemented.

It's not good enough to simply complain about it. There needs to be practical solutions.

I personally dgaf about coal being that I live in Melbourne and the electricity comes to me so long as I pay my bill, but shouldn't there be a transition period so that coal workers etc can keep their jobs whilst the clean energy is being set up?

Shouldn't the parties have policies to introduce transition to paper and glass to reduce plastic usage?

Without these types of things, complaining and criticising is not helpful imo.

Of course, I am very much a left wing voter wanting governments to do something about climate change but they must account for people's livelihoods and implement sensible economic plans to ease the transition. Telling people in north Queensland to 'suck it up' was electoral poison.

 

[Kram]

I agree, Labor should have had a plan B for the coal workers.They could have easily created jobs building renewable energy infrastructure and promised those jobs to coal workers. No doubt Scomo , Clive Palmer and Newscorp would have attacked the plan to protect their mining interests, but it could have worked.

They are building a solar farm out my way.

200 jobs in its construction, though only 3-5 people required to maintain the thing once finished.

 

[Maggie5]

There's a start. Although you chose to stop quoting that article at an opportunistic time.

"Alex Epstein is founder of the Center for Industrial Progress and author of The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels."

I daresay Alex Epstein has a vested interest when it comes to this topic. Let's see what Science Societies have to say about it:

Statement on Climate Change from 18 Scientific Associations
"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver."

If you want to read what each of these 18 societies have to say individually (I'm sure you can guess):
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

It's a scientific consensus and disingenuous and flat-out wrong to suggest otherwise.

I didn't misrepresent anything. Show me where I did. Even Alex Epstein would laugh at your ridiculous assertion that climate change is a Communist conspiracy. Anyway post some compelling factual evidence that climate change is a Commumist conspiracy taught by Communist universities or I'll put you on ignore so I can focus on people interested in rational conversation.

Little bit more on the author of that article, which personally I would ignore. Vested interest and belongs in the conspiracy thread.

Alex Epstein is the author of the New York Times best-selling book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels and an expert on energy and industrial policy. Called “most original thinker of the year” by political commentator John McLaughlin, he champions the use of fossil fuels like coal, oil, and natural gas and has changed the way thousands of people think about energy. He has risen to prominence as the nation’s leading free-market energy debater, promoting a philosophy that is “anti-pollution but pro-development.” He challenges many popularly held ideas about energy, industry, and the environment, including the big picture benefits (and costs) of fossil fuels and nuclear power. He draws on cutting-edge research and original insights to offer an alternate perspective on the energy debate and shares eye-opening thoughts into how fossil fuels and technology will improve the lives of people – safely, cleanly, and effectively – for years to come.

John McLaughlin political commentator that gave him a big rap is a TV personality.

 

[Maggie5]

That's all fine. I guess I have a problem with how is all that going to be practically implemented.

It's not good enough to simply complain about it. There needs to be practical solutions.

I personally dgaf about coal being that I live in Melbourne and the electricity comes to me so long as I pay my bill, but shouldn't there be a transition period so that coal workers etc can keep their jobs whilst the clean energy is being set up?

Shouldn't the parties have policies to introduce transition to paper and glass to reduce plastic usage?

Without these types of things, complaining and criticising is not helpful imo.

What you have posted is exactly what most of us want.

Both parties to work together and look for solutions but sadly they are too far apart.

 

[Man0gwaR74]

You're correct, these things (reduce emissions, cleaner energy, reforestation ) are not going to reverse climate change, but they will hopefully mitigate/limit it.

Yeah maybe by about 0.00000001% coz Industry would be the main contributor of it by a looong way and this is my point about these Lefties making it an issue to hinder our conscience with. It's ridiculous!

 

[Doc_]

This election will be the death of the far right of the liberal party.

This fact worked out well for you.

What % of Human Biologists think there's only 2 genders?

100%.
Because, biologically, .............there's only 2 genders.

Most of your so called “ far right” posters come across as reasonable, middle of the road people. Good, ordinary Australians for want of a better description. Your problem is that you’re posting in a bubble, supported by other posters and some moderators with left wing views, similar to your own.

Left wing zealots flock to forums like this; they revel in it. However their representation in here, and the radical views they often espouse are out of all proportion to that which they enjoy in the wider community. It seems you have come to believe that your views, and those of your supporters are widely shared across the community. I’m sorry, but they’re not. If anything the people you describe as “ far right “ are actually the vast majority of the populace, and fall into the middle ground.

Are you part of the bigfooty right wing rat pack because all your crew is likeing your trolling. You must love it.

So this is about likes?
You'll do well here son, preaching to the choir.

 

[RICHOLEGEND12]

Yeah maybe by about 0.00000001% coz Industry would be the main contributor of it by a looong way and this is my point about these Lefties making it an issue to hinder our conscience with. It's ridiculous!

The majority of emissions come from electricity.. which yes is used by Australian industry... but if our electricity was generated with clean energy rather than fossil fuels that would have a massive effect on emissions.

 

[HairyO]

If you believe in science then you believe in climate change.

You also believe in genetically modified foods, coal seem gas, and there are only 2 sexes.

Unless its really about politics.

 

[JackOutback]

People who believe climate change is a hoax by scientists never seem to question any of their other discoveries like, you know, medicine and stuff. Get sick and they are all in on science.

 

[ItsGameTime]

A lot of it is a hoax from what I have heard.

 

[HairyO]

Yeah I do. I think GMO scepticism is rational though.

All scepticism should be considered rational. Outside of a few "laws", the rest are "theories".