Church Of Climatology

[Sprint XR8]

Global warming? Don't wait up! The Earth has her own tricks to keep the carbon count in control
By IAN PLIMER, PROFESSOR OF GEOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...t-control.html

[charles_wif_xf]

I have to say, it is so refreshing to see people waking up and realising that ETS/Copenhagen is yet another attempt at a totalitarian one world government move.

I was a bit behind the eight ball when it came to the facts about Copenhagen, but I'm up to speed now. There is nothing there that will help the environment, nothing what so ever. Like others have mentioned, if the environment is to be the benefactor of all this posturing and posing, a massive tree planting will do far more (as a carbon sink) for the environment. And all for little to no financial cost.

As for Lord Monckton... if I ever run into him...

[rodderz]

Originally Posted by charles_wif_xf

I have to say, it is so refreshing to see people waking up and realising that ETS/Copenhagen is yet another attempt at a totalitarian one world government move.

We all know that a lot of conspiracy theories are full of rubbish, and that some with truth to them still can't be believed 100%, but this one world govt thing does seem to have a lot of truth behind it. Check out doco's and writings from a few years ago and what has been written 5 years ago is now coming to the fore. Google search Bilderberg, New World Order, Rothchild, there is a lot of meeting going on with some very high ranking officials, world leaders and CEO's involved. A lot of things seem to happen behind closed doors with some kind of agenda enclosed within it.

If they were just sorting out a good way of saving the environment, why the secrecy, lack of media coverage and public involvement? Surely such a good deed would hold them in high regard with the public. It's great that a lot more people are finding out about it now and speaking up as to whats going on. I would love to see an interview with Rudd, Obama or Turnbull asking the hard questions and see what the response is.

[Work Horse]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

You should be commended on the job you're doing holding up the fort while all your supporters find more evidence...... oh hang on it's just pretty much you in this and other similar threads that seems to be spouting "conspiracy theory" at every post.

You know what I find most enjoyable is watching people such as yourself who believe what they're told and march along like all the other good little lambs that are the first to call "conspiracy theory".

Not one person that questions any of this "science" had yet used that word to my recollection, they have accused the "scientists" of lieing, or manipulation of data (which is as good as proven now : ) or that something just isn't right. Not one of them has called it a conspiracy, I could be wrong and I'm sure you'll probably go to great length to find such a quote from one of the posts.

Is it just that you're scared of the truth?? Kind of like the "poofter bashers" (sorry if that word offends) that were said to be scared of being homosexual themselves so instead tried to prove their allegiance to the straight community by bashing gays. I mean it's really quite similar, to quote Shakespeare "Thou doth protest too much me thinks".

And because I'm one of the most vocal it's easier to point your arguments at me, not because I was first to post, you obviously read through the rest to realise that there were other posts. But it's like the old battles, take out the leader, or in this case discredit him and the others will crumble. Well unfortunately there is no leader, as soon as one man drops another will take his place.

We believe strongly in what we are saying, no doubt just as you do, however we like you also believed what we'd been told at one time, until of course some things just didn't add up. We asked why, we looked for reasons, none were available but the truth is slowly coming to the surface, trouble is when it does finally come fully out it might be too late to turn back from knee jerk reactions.

I posted a question to MRFGXR6 regarding a post he made about CO2 and the hole in the ozone layer. You answered "first", as in before he did, so I responded to you as well as the person the question was directed at. I was not talking to you, you pursued me.

As for you being the leader of the opposing side of something I'm attacking? I was joking with you about the content of MRFGXR6 posts. They are full of conspiracy theories and you seemed to be supporting him. Everyone is welcome to their opinion, but I will call them as I see them.

Originally Posted by XRQTR

What's wrong with a little bit of discussion and allowing the public some knowledge into what exactly is involved within the treaty, why if you have nothing to hide you don't have full or even partial disclosure.

Why??

Scholars will ruin this world, thinkers will get it back.

How is it my treaty and how could I not disclose anything?


There is a thread on the ETS here http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...=11280185http:
I made the first post with a link to the green paper CPRS.
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/publ...reenpaper.aspx
It's not my idea but I am interested in "rational" discussion about it.

[olfella]

Originally Posted by rodderz

I would love to see an interview with Rudd, Obama or Turnbull asking the hard questions and see what the response is.

So would I, but having seen the way Rudd works the crowd at his 'question' time he will not be put under the pump. You can also see this by the way he chooses to have his 'live' interviews with.

As for Turnbull, he just labels anyone with a differing opinion a 'skeptic' and therefore not worth listening too. Apparently in his private business life he was the boss but that no way makes him (or Rudd for that) a leader.

Can't say how Obama would go, but being a 'skeptic' I don't think we will ever know the truth or the real reasons.

[Hillbilly F Truck]

Originally Posted by Green X

"As a country we have to do something to reduce out emisisons, with Australia being the 12th worst in terms of Emissions per capita (based on 2 year old Data), and only just being higher then the US"

I suspect thou a country as sizable and wide spread as Aus will have X amount of Co2 output to support it's residents/ infrastructure, Re a small country with the same if not more people will have less Co2 output due to population and infrastructure being more centralized, Australia also runs on high emissions industry like Mining Oil& Gas, refining not to mention coal power generation.

To put Australia's emissions into perspective,

This is an excellent, tangible illustration of what we’re are dealing with respect to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme by using measurements over a kilometre as an expression of percentages....It puts the entire debate into a context that people can understand. Let’s take a walk over that one kilometre The first 770 metres are Nitrogen. The next 210 metres are Oxygen. That’s 980 metres of the 1 kilometre. 20 metres to go. The next 10 metres are water vapour. (A Greenhouse Gas).... 10 metres left. 9 metres are argon. Just 1 more metre. A few gases make up the first bit of that last metre. The last 38 centimetres of the kilometre – that’s carbon dioxide. A bit over one foot. (or 300 millimetres) 97% of that is produced by Mother Nature. It’s natural. God did it. Out of our journey of one kilometre, there are just 12 millimetres left. About half an inch. Just over a centimetre. That’s the amount of carbon dioxide that global human activity puts into the atmosphere. And of those 12 millimetres Australia puts in .18 of a millimetre. Less than the thickness of a hair. Out of a kilometre. As a hair is to a kilometre – so is Australia’s contribution to what Mr Rudd calls Carbon Pollution. Imagine Brisbane’s new Gateway Bridge, ready to be officially opened by Mr Rudd. It’s been polished, painted and scrubbed by an army of workers till its 1 kilometre length is surgically clean. Except that Mr Rudd says we have a huge problem, the bridge is polluted – there’s a human hair on the roadway. We’d laugh ourselves silly. There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about. We are already addressing them (feverishly in many respects) and should reasonably continue to do so. It’s hard to imagine that Australia’s contribution to carbon dioxide in the world’s atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. A major, job-destroying new tax on just about everything is NOT the way to blow that hair away.

[XRQTR]

Originally Posted by Work Horse

I posted a question to MRFGXR6 ....
edited to save space.......
"rational" discussion about it.

Obviously you missed this then, it's also there in post #102, just in case you want to check back.

Originally Posted by XRQTR

See that's what a community does, it helps each other.

[BA GT-HO]

Originally Posted by Hillbilly F Truck

To put Australia's emissions into perspective,

To put Australia's emissions into perspective,

Quote:
This is an excellent, tangible illustration of what we’re are dealing with respect to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme by using measurements over a kilometre as an expression of percentages....It puts the entire debate into a context that people can understand. Let’s take a walk over that one kilometre The first 770 metres are Nitrogen. The next 210 metres are Oxygen. That’s 980 metres of the 1 kilometre. 20 metres to go. The next 10 metres are water vapour. (A Greenhouse Gas).... 10 metres left. 9 metres are argon. Just 1 more metre. A few gases make up the first bit of that last metre. The last 38 centimetres of the kilometre – that’s carbon dioxide. A bit over one foot. (or 300 millimetres) 97% of that is produced by Mother Nature. It’s natural. God did it. Out of our journey of one kilometre, there are just 12 millimetres left. About half an inch. Just over a centimetre. That’s the amount of carbon dioxide that global human activity puts into the atmosphere. And of those 12 millimetres Australia puts in .18 of a millimetre. Less than the thickness of a hair. Out of a kilometre. As a hair is to a kilometre – so is Australia’s contribution to what Mr Rudd calls Carbon Pollution. Imagine Brisbane’s new Gateway Bridge, ready to be officially opened by Mr Rudd. It’s been polished, painted and scrubbed by an army of workers till its 1 kilometre length is surgically clean. Except that Mr Rudd says we have a huge problem, the bridge is polluted – there’s a human hair on the roadway. We’d laugh ourselves silly. There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about. We are already addressing them (feverishly in many respects) and should reasonably continue to do so. It’s hard to imagine that Australia’s contribution to carbon dioxide in the world’s atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. A major, job-destroying new tax on just about everything is NOT the way to blow that hair away.

That is brilliant. Where is that from?

[olfella]

I was reading Senetor Bernardi's speech to the Senate regarding Climate Change and this para stuck out
Amazingly, Kevin Rudd, the enforcer and sergeant-at-arms of the Copenhagen conference, confessed he had not even read the Copenhagen treaty; yet he was prepared to sign up to assigning some of Australia’s sovereignty and billions of taxpayer dollars to the United Nations—an unelected and unaccountable body. What sort of leader commits to something that he cannot even be bothered to read and consider? It is the same leader who brings this pointless and hopeless CPRS into this parliament. By committing ourselves to this flawed policy now, Australia is condemning itself to the certainty of higher prices, job losses, damaged industry and a decaying economy, while indulging the gargantuan ego of an increasingly erratic and volatile Prime Minister.
Full speech can be found at http://www.senatorbernardi.com/climate_change/
Amazing, simply amazing.

[XRQTR]

Funniest thing I heard today was the Dalai Lama making a speech telling Australians that short term economic pain was worth it if it meant halping the environment.

Now seeing as his home has no real industry to speak of, other than sherpas maybe, and that the ETS is pretty much about supporting and propping up third world countries, which correct me if I'm they are, then why wouldn't he be telling us that we're being selfish and should think of the "environment", perhaps he means his environment.

So the way I see it is that here's a foreigner as good as saying that this will hurt the Australian economy and yet KRudd still doesn't even know what the bloody thing says sheeeesh.

And before you jump on this with your CT rants Workhorse, just think about it for a moment, they are now using someone that can tug at the heart strings of many Australians to try to get this through. Rather than allow people the opportunity to see it for themselves they still try to use emotion to get people to make a decision on something that could potentially be detrimental to our economy, the DL doesn't care about our economy, unless he has shares in mining

[Mr Hardware]

Originally Posted by BA GT-HO

That is brilliant. Where is that from?

http://www.busseltonmail.com.au/news...t/1682288.aspx

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

http://www.busseltonmail.com.au/news...t/1682288.aspx

A good article and really simplifies the way to look at our CO2 contribution to the climate.

[Grunter]

Originally Posted by Hillbilly F Truck

To put Australia's emissions into perspective,

Which to put that into perspective, equates to roughly enough CO2 from man made sources to equal the weight of 2,573 Sydney Harbour bridges every year.

Funny how the same figures can be made to look insignificant or unbelievably enormous.

[xy500]

Originally Posted by Grunter

Which to put that into perspective, equates to roughly enough CO2 from man made sources to equal the weight of 2,573 Sydney Harbour bridges every year.

Funny how the same figures can be made to look insignificant or unbelievably enormous.

thats an estimated output, and by no means fully represents actual emissions

[XRQTR]

Seeing as carbon trading has actually been going on now already for a few years, I'd like to know if some of these figures have been offset by trading schemes already in place. In this case they wouldn't represent "actual" emissions rather emissions after carbon offset trading was calculated into it/out of it.

[XRQTR]

Not sure if this ones been put up yet

Al Gore

[Franco Cozzo]

Wouldn't water vapour be more of an issue, since it holds in much more heat than Co2 does for the same amount? Hydrogen powered cars would put you back in the same boat as we "supposedly" are in now.

[xy500]

Originally Posted by XCPWSF

Wouldn't water vapour be more of an issue, since it holds in much more heat than Co2 does for the same amount? Hydrogen powered cars would put you back in the same boat as we "supposedly" are in now.

yes but carbon dioxide is a much more effective greenhouse gas than water - which is a greenhouse gas, but also has greenhouse effects as a liquid and a solid. methane is another greenhouse gas that has even more effect than either carbon dioxide or water. 200 or so times the effect of water or something along those lines, but is only present in one thousanth the concentration lol

[BA-Fan]

Any one tune into the ABC last night? Lateline last night grilled an opposing Liberal member yet favoured turnbull in their interview?

[cs123]

Originally Posted by SM0KED

Any one tune into the ABC last night? Lateline last night grilled an opposing Liberal member yet favoured turnbull in their interview?

Are you talking about Michael Johnson? The machinations in Liberal camp are as much about factional wars as they are about the ETS.

Here is the show in case anyone missed it. http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/

I'm going to put a fiver on cuddly Joe to win with the ETS getting passed by conscious vote in the senate, which will be a disaster. The liberals must develop a policy on this, whether for or against. If not they will be destroyed by the electorate.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by cs123

... The liberals must develop a policy on this, whether for or against....

Slightly off topic however I always thought the role of the opposition party in a 2-party democracy was to present the opposite view to the govt to allow a debate to bring out the merits or otherwise of both proposals. Not play party politics

Guess we don't have a perfect democracy working here afterall :monkes:

[Yellow Fire]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Slightly off topic however I always thought the role of the opposition party in a 2-party democracy was to present the opposite view to the govt to allow a debate to bring out the merits or otherwise of both proposals. Not play party politics

Guess we don't have a perfect democracy working here afterall :monkes:

I'd love to see the libs force a double dissolusion on this rather than fight amongst themselves. In an election setting they would have a better chance of explaining an opposing view (if thats the stance they choose to take).

[MO]

Just in on Aunty,Tony Abbott is now the new LP leader,is the ETS now dead in the water.

[Yellow Fire]

Originally Posted by MO

Just in on Aunty,Tony Abbott is now the new LP leader,is the ETS now dead in the water.

Oh geez the vote was 42-41. That's not a good sign for resolving tension & uniting the party. More fireworks to come?

[XDV800]

Posted in wrong thread

[cs123]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Slightly off topic however I always thought the role of the opposition party in a 2-party democracy was to present the opposite view to the govt to allow a debate to bring out the merits or otherwise of both proposals. Not play party politics

Guess we don't have a perfect democracy working here afterall :monkes:

We have many parties. ALP, Nats, Libs, Greens, etc.

The job of the major opposition parties is to provide an alternative to the govt. This may or may not involve opposing bills but is better though of as keeping the govt honest. A poor opposition results in a poor govt.

If the Libs had no policy on ETS then how would you decide to vote for them? They need a policy.

Looks like I lost my money, Tony Abbott is the new leader.....

[MO]

Originally Posted by yzfr101

Posted in wrong thread

Please explain?

[XDV800]

I posted in the wrong thread.

[rodderz]

Fran Bailey they said could of been the vote that tied it up but she was absent...must of been having her nap as usual?

[Fev]

apparently she was off sick