Climate Change Arguing

[Socrates2]

Well done to all the anti- science ignoramuses on this page for perpetuating a myth and influencing gullible people.You can write on your gravestones 'Spread fake news and denialism which contributed to global warming, was a stooge for the amoral fossil fuel industry and Murdoch media propaganda wing"

I now look back on my 20 years of climate activism as a colossal failure | Tim Flannery

The climate crisis is so severe the actions of the denialists are now an immediate threat to our children

www.theguardian.com

 

[Sainteric]

Standby for a resurgence of the Greens vote as Labor shifts right to back coal mining.Well done to everyone who voted for more coal mines, you can apologise to your children now and explain yourself.

10k votes within 1 km of Sydney and melb cbd

 

[Sainteric]

Well done to all the anti- science ignoramuses on this page for perpetuating a myth and influencing gullible people.You can write on your gravestones 'Spread fake news and denialism which contributed to global warming, was a stooge for the amoral fossil fuel industry and Murdoch media propaganda wing"

I now look back on my 20 years of climate activism as a colossal failure | Tim Flannery

The climate crisis is so severe the actions of the denialists are now an immediate threat to our children

www.theguardian.com

Perhaps have some answers rather than saying no to real solutions, might change people's views.

 

[Lebbo73]

Well done to all the anti- science ignoramuses on this page for perpetuating a myth and influencing gullible people.You can write on your gravestones 'Spread fake news and denialism which contributed to global warming, was a stooge for the amoral fossil fuel industry and Murdoch media propaganda wing"

I now look back on my 20 years of climate activism as a colossal failure | Tim Flannery

The climate crisis is so severe the actions of the denialists are now an immediate threat to our children

www.theguardian.com

People like you should be charged for child abuse. Scaring children with lies and propaganda is evil. The future will not be kind to you and your ilk.

 

[JackOutback]

People like you should be charged for child abuse. Scaring children with lies and propaganda is evil. The future will not be kind to you and your ilk.

Haha, science and research is propaganda and evil?

You'd have been standing at the bottom of Mt Vesuvius denying it was getting any warmer.

 

[Sainteric]

Haha, science and research is propaganda and evil?

You'd have been standing at the bottom of Mt Vesuvius denying it was getting any warmer.

Or doing what the left does stick the finger in a Duke with a thousand holes in it, water pouring in and say they have a solution?

 

[Socrates2]

Or doing what the left does stick the finger in a Duke with a thousand holes in it, water pouring in and say they have a solution?

Do you hate people for trying something? You sit from the sidelines and snipe like a gutless no it all.What's the point of your opinion when you have no solution? You sound like Melbourne's three biggest aholes in Neil Mitchell, Tom Elliott and Andrew Bolt. They are morons who mislead people like you. What's your science background? Do you know what a bunsen burner is ?

 

[Socrates2]

Perhaps have some answers rather than saying no to real solutions, might change people's views.

Your answer is to pretend it's not happening, that's going well isn't it? The answer is there , investment in renewables and the phasing out of the fossil fuel industry. What's so hard about that? What's your solution again??

 

[Sainteric]

Do you hate people for trying something? You sit from the sidelines and snipe like a gutless no it all.What's the point of your opinion when you have no solution? You sound like Melbourne's three biggest aholes in Neil Mitchell, Tom Elliott and Andrew Bolt. They are morons who mislead people like you. What's your science background? Do you know what a bunsen burner is ?

They are not trying, they are pushing an ideology that has no science and no vision

 

[Sainteric]

Your answer is to pretend it's not happening, that's going well isn't it? The answer is there , investment in renewables and the phasing out of the fossil fuel industry. What's so hard about that? What's your solution again??

No it's happening, it serious, the greens don't want to use technology/science/engineering to fix it. They prefer a charade and living in caves.

 

[Crankitup]

No it's happening, it serious, the greens don't want to use technology/science/engineering to fix it. They prefer a charade and living in caves.

Hit the nail on the head. Witness the recent fires in Queensland, all the greenies are blaming climate change rather than the biggest contributing factor, lack of fuel reduction burning. Aside from preventing catastrophic fires, for thousands of years the aboriginals used to do it to keep things open and allow them to hunt better. Light years ahead of greenie understanding.

 

[Socrates2]

They are not trying, they are pushing an ideology that has no science and no vision

Lol, why bother replying mate? You are an anti-science propaganda machine with an answer for everything. Your replies make no sense so why bother writing anything?

 

[Socrates2]

Hit the nail on the head. Witness the recent fires in Queensland, all the greenies are blaming climate change rather than the biggest contributing factor, lack of fuel reduction burning. Aside from preventing catastrophic fires, for thousands of years the aboriginals used to do it to keep things open and allow them to hunt better. Light years ahead of greenie understanding.

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

 

[Crankitup]

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

If you don't know that the lack of fuel reduction burning (caused by pressure from Green groups) is a major cause, then whilst I agree with many of your football opinions I'd be wasting my time trying to talk science with you.

 

[Engimal v3]

Hit the nail on the head. Witness the recent fires in Queensland, all the greenies are blaming climate change rather than the biggest contributing factor, lack of fuel reduction burning. Aside from preventing catastrophic fires, for thousands of years the aboriginals used to do it to keep things open and allow them to hunt better. Light years ahead of greenie understanding.

To me that would suggest that they're looking for a solution for the overall problem, rather than looking to minimise damage.

 

[Socrates2]

If you don't know that the lack of fuel reduction burning (caused by pressure from Green groups) is a major cause, then whilst I agree with many of your football opinions I'd be wasting my time trying to talk science with you.

You don't have a science background do you ? Funny how every environmental problem is the Greens fault! That's why your uneducated opinion can't be taken seriously because you blame the Greens for everything like a Murdoch parrot. Murdoch ,Alan Jones ect don't give a frick about the people ,the environment is just a way for them to make money don't you get that ?

 

[Crankitup]

You don't have a science background do you ? Funny how every environmental problem is the Greens fault! That's why your uneducated opinion can't be taken seriously because you blame the Greens for everything like a Murdoch parrot. Murdoch ,Alan Jones ect don't give a frick about the people ,the environment is just a way for them to make money don't you get that ?

Actually I do. Do you? I studied for a Bachelor of Scence at UWA.

 

[Socrates2]

Actually I do. Do you? I studied for a Bachelor of Scence at UWA.

Ok,you should be able to understand these graphs then. Do you trust the CSIRO or do you think they just make up random numbers?

Temperature

Enlarge image
Anomalies in annual temperature over land in the Australian region. Anomalies are the departures from the 1961–1990 standard averaging period.

• Australia’s climate has warmed by just over 1 °C since 1910, leading to an increase in the frequency of extreme heat events.

Australia’s weather and climate continues to change in response to a warming global climate. Australia has warmed by just over 1 °C since 1910, with most warming since 1950. This warming has seen an increase in the frequency of extreme heat events and increased the severity of drought conditions during periods of below-average rainfall. Eight of Australia’s top ten warmest years on record have occurred since 2005.

Enlarge image
Number of days each year where the Australian area-averaged daily mean temperature is extreme. Extreme days are those above the 99th percentile of each month from the years 1910–2017. These extreme daily events typically occur over a large area, with generally more than 40 per cent of Australia experiencing temperatures in the warmest 10 per cent for that month.

 

[Taylor]

Perhaps have some answers rather than saying no to real solutions, might change people's views.

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.

 

[Crankitup]

Ok,you should be able to understand these graphs then. Do you trust the CSIRO or do you think they just make up random numbers?

Temperature

Enlarge image
Anomalies in annual temperature over land in the Australian region. Anomalies are the departures from the 1961–1990 standard averaging period.

• Australia’s climate has warmed by just over 1 °C since 1910, leading to an increase in the frequency of extreme heat events.

Australia’s weather and climate continues to change in response to a warming global climate. Australia has warmed by just over 1 °C since 1910, with most warming since 1950. This warming has seen an increase in the frequency of extreme heat events and increased the severity of drought conditions during periods of below-average rainfall. Eight of Australia’s top ten warmest years on record have occurred since 2005.

Enlarge image
Number of days each year where the Australian area-averaged daily mean temperature is extreme. Extreme days are those above the 99th percentile of each month from the years 1910–2017. These extreme daily events typically occur over a large area, with generally more than 40 per cent of Australia experiencing temperatures in the warmest 10 per cent for that month.

Are you familiar with UHI and compromised temperature stations?

 

[Socrates2]

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? Who is pushing for Nuclear power? Those who will profit from it. You mustn't watch the news because Chernobyl will be contaminated for 100's of years . Fukoshima can't store the contaminated water much longer and will possibly dump it in the Pacific Ocean causing an environmental disaster. It's sheer idiocy when you can use wind, solar ect. Why take such a stupid risk and where are you going to store used reactor fuel? Bury it and hope it doesnt get disturbed? It's another quick money scheme that makes no sense and enriches only a very few people.

 

[Socrates2]

Are you familiar with UHI and compromised temperature stations?

Don't muddy the waters with BS please, you are again denying basic scientific data because it doesn't suit your ant-science agenda, gmab mate.

 

[Taylor]

Nuclear Power? Who is pushing for Nuclear power? Those who will profit from it. You mustn't watch the news because Chernobyl will be contaminated for 100's of years . Fukoshima can't store the contaminated water much longer and will possibly dump it in the Pacific Ocean causing an environmental disaster. It's sheer idiocy when you can use wind, solar ect. Why take such a stupid risk and where are you going to store used reactor fuel? Bury it and hope it doesnt get disturbed? It's another quick money scheme that makes no sense and enriches only a very few people.

So is it about saving the world or stopping rich people making money?

The whole world would sacrifice the entire continent of Australia to nuclear wasteland to turn back warming of the planet as a whole, if it got to that.

 

[Taylor]

Wind and solar aren't developed, installed and used for free either. People have made a lot of money from that.

 

[Crankitup]

Don't muddy the waters with BS please, you are again denying basic scientific data because it doesn't suit your ant-science agenda, gmab mate.

Anti-science agenda? Reminds me of the Climategate e-mail revelations.

I posted the following in another thread, you probably misssed it.

10 years ago when I discussed this issue at length, initially from a totally agnostic perspective with several warmongers I noted that the US Association of State Climatologists had had a couple of Presidents of their Association squeezed out for daring to speak out against the AGW orthodoxy. Despite this in 2002 however, the association voted almost unanimously for a statement shifting the focus of emphasis from CO2, to land use.

Impacts of human-caused land changes on climate are at least as important, and possibly even more important, than those of carbon dioxide," says Roger Pielke Sr., professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University and past president of the American Association of State Climatologists. His group voted in 2002 to issue a statement almost unanimously concurring that climate changes are more complex than CO2 changes and include land use.

You only have to start looking at some of the temperature stations to see they were right;

Let's compare two sites from the same state that have been recording temps for at least 100 years. The first one is a good site (Orland, CA). It still remains unaffected by external man-made influences. The second, (Marysville, CA) is a poor site that has been allowed to become more & more affected by such influences. The temperature trends of each are markedly different. It would be hard to argue that the local man-made factors have played absolutely no part in this.


(ORLAND, CALIFORNIA)






(MARYSVILLE, CALIFORNIA)

Someone who took a good look at the site said - "The Marysville station is located behind the fire department building on a patio. In addition to the sensor being surrounded by asphalt and concrete, its also within 10 feet of buildings, and within 8 feet of a large metal cell tower that could be felt radiating heat. Additionally, air conditioning units on the cell tower electronics buildings vent copious amounts of warm air within 10 feet of the sensor. It is the site reviewers opinion that this USHCN site can no longer provide accurate data and should be removed from the USHCN list"

Same stuff happens here in Australia. Here in Perth our local BOM is so AGW propagandist it's not funny. Some years ago when they weren't seeing the temperature increases they were hoping for, they moved Perth's official temperature station to a much warmer site, further away from the river. If that wasn't enough, in 2011 they changed the thermometer at the new station to a different type, known for reading on the higher side and bingo, in that year Perth experienced record heat.