- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,677
- 99,042
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
Maybe they don't want climate change skeptics writing in their paper because they want to report news and not crazed ramblings from the mentally ill.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Maybe they don't want climate change skeptics writing in their paper because they want to report news and not crazed ramblings from the mentally ill.
So so off topic now but strapping tape, denying climate change at this point is like denying evolution. Or gravity. The only people that do it either have a vested interest or are being tricked by someone with a vested interest.
Hey the climate changes, it always has and it always will no one denies that. The science behind climate change collapsed before Copenhagen and really started going downhill with the Hockey Stick debacle. If you want to believe in it that's fine but your position is based on the output from computer models that have been proven to be majorly wrong. Where's your sea level rises? Where's your temperature rises? What always puzzles me is what it would take for someone who is a rusted on believer like yourself to maybe take a step back and realise what you are so scared of happening isn't in fact happening.
So no matter how wrong they got it, it doesn't matter because humans are still causing this climate change because we simply know it couldn't possibly be natural?
A predictive model isn't worth a thing if it can't get anything right. You can keep tuning your model all you want but at the end of the day if the assumptions used in it are completely wrong then it's pointless. As we know with these climate models, they are creating them with the outcome that everything is getting warmer, sea levels are rising and it's all because of co2 yet in the real world there's still 0 proof of any co2 footprint after hundreds of billions of dollars in research.
Hansens original estimate's that if we were to do nothing and let co2 releases go wild and at the worst end we'd be something like 2 degrees hotter by now and that's with 1.5% increase in co2 from humans. We've had since then 2.5% increase in co2 emissions and hardly any temperature rise. The whole basis of this at the start is off by such a magnitude it's ridiculous.
We've had temperature records adjusted multiple times, we've blamed droughts on AGW, we've blamed Earthquakes (haha), we've spent several hundred billion dollars looking for the AGW footprint and nothing. What we do have is model after model who'se output is then studied, reviewed, published and then written about as fact of what's happening. We had the 'ol hockey stick schmozzle, the reefs are dieing schmozzle, the artic ice schmozzle, the 97% of climate scientists agree shmozzle and temperature changes doing nothing unusual than natural variance and still people are pushing this theory. If it were any other scientific theory with this many holes in it it would have been scrapped by now but this one's gone too far with the money train attached to it (just look at the Rio20+ summit - do as we say not as we do) and too many vested interested. Look how stupid we are in Australia with the carbon dioxide tax which won't change the worlds temperature's but it's the fact that people think we can control the worlds temperature's in the first place that shows how stupid it is.
Our CSIRO reminds me of the path the UK's MET office went down, every year they were telling us that it's going to be a long hot summer with record temperatures etc and mild winters. Kept getting it wrong and kept adjusting their data set's (magically always making AGW look worse each time) until they'd ****** their dataset so much they had to admit it was screwed and rebuild it from scratch.
What I love the most about this stuff is even if there is a irrefutable theory about the sun causing earth temperature changes that comes out with irrefutable evidence to back it up (like an apple dropping from a tree) that no matter what, people will still blame co2. Climate changes, temperatures change, there's no correct or right temperature and I do worry there's kids now going through school thinking there is.
Haha. Vegetarian's are invariably for stopping climate change, yet one of the offenders is methane from cows. So should we kill them all and save the environment or let them live and damn it?climate change is ******* bullshit. It's not true, just hippies wanting to get some attention. YOU AINT LIVING IN THE REAL WORLD YOU VEGETARIAN DICKHEADS
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806"I've been a solar physicist for 30 years, and I've never seen anything quite like this," says Richard Harrison, head of space physics at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire.
He shows me recent footage captured by spacecraft that have their sights trained on our star. The Sun is revealed in exquisite detail, but its face is strangely featureless.
"If you want to go back to see when the Sun was this inactive... you've got to go back about 100 years," he says.
This solar lull is baffling scientists, because right now the Sun should be awash with activity.
"We estimate that within about 40 years or so there is a 10% to 20% - nearer 20% - probability that we'll be back in Maunder Minimum conditions."
The era of solar inactivity in the 17th Century coincided with a period of bitterly cold winters in Europe.
Londoners enjoyed frost fairs on the Thames after it froze over, snow cover across the continent increased, the Baltic Sea iced over - the conditions were so harsh, some describe it as a mini-Ice Age.
And Prof Lockwood believes that this regional effect could have been in part driven by the dearth of activity on the Sun, and may happen again if our star continues to wane.
"It's a very active research topic at the present time, but we do think there is a mechanism in Europe where we should expect more cold winters when solar activity is low," he says.
He believes this local effect happens because the amount of ultraviolet light radiating from the Sun dips when solar activity is low.
This means that less UV radiation hits the stratosphere - the layer of air that sits high above the Earth. And this in turn feeds into the jet stream - the fast-flowing air current in the upper atmosphere that can drive the weather.
The results of this are dominantly felt above Europe, says Prof Lockwood.
The AgeSenator Macdonald - who last year slammed Mr Abbott office for excessive control - said many people said to him that the ABC had a ''clear left-Green agenda''.
He said that the ABC went ''on and on about minor matters that are derogatory'', nominating the issue of climate change.
Yes and no. It's not a minor matter, but anything Australia does, short of massively upping the export of Uranium to take Coal stations offline or getting Thorium reactors going, is going to do 2/5th's of bugger all to world emissions. A carbon tax effects manufacturing that can go offshore and would likely relocate to countries with dirtier coal power plants. So yeah, Australia's emissions may go down slightly, but world one's up. That's not a win in anyone, but the ALP / Greens books.Apparently Qld LNP senator Ian McDonald thinks climate change is a minor matter recycled to denigrate the government.
Can we just fix global over population also.....