Printable View
You are espousing the mantra the early settlers spewed forth," the ignorant savage". And you are just as wrong. Our indigenous people knew more about the seasons, the weather , and everything associated with it, than we ever will. Not by computer magic, but by knowing how nature worked. Far too complex a subject to go into here, suffice to say , you are wrong. But it's not too late to learn. You can't be honest if you don't know the truth. Cheers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johndoe
Far be it for me to suggest Aulro members don't know it all, and I'm not suggesting our Science Minister didn't earn her degrees, as opposed to forum members, but this makes more sense than most I've read here.
Australia is wasting time debating the merits of climate change and should instead focus its attention on responding to the impacts it is having on the country, a senior Liberal minister has warned. Key points:
- Karen Andrews wants people to move on from ideological debates about climate change
- The Science Minister says the focus should be on adaptation and mitigation strategies
- She says the science of climate change is settled and is apparent in Australia
Science Minister Karen Andrews said it was time to move on from ideological battles, which she said had robbed the nation of the time and energy needed to respond to climate change."Every second that we spend talking about whether or not the climate is changing is a second that we are not spending on looking at adaptation [and] mitigation strategies," she said.
And that, should be that. But I bet it won't.
Bob, I don't for one minute think that the climate isn't changing and I think that Minister Andrews is on the right track, albeit once again not offering any solutions, just a media statement.
The 'Science of Climate Change in Australia' isn't settled, as no one can categorically state that ' Blah blah WILL happen' and I think this is what a lot of forum members are saying. Until someone comes up with concrete evidence that 'Such and Such Will Definitely Happen' then it's going to be difficult for anyone in power to instigate preventative or recuperative measures, especially based on 'Models', some of which do appear to be rather spurious in their parameters.
what she really means is she doesnt want people to ask questions and just accept policy change without fussQuote:
Originally Posted by bob10
More succinct than I, Eevo.[biggrin]
I disagree with everything in this statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saitch
The science has been out there for a long time now and it is pretty much settled. People accepting the science is a totally different matter to the science.
Anticipation happens now and has been done to a certain level, and that is used for reasonable preparation. Nothing is definate until it actually happens but anticipation based on evidence and what we know is a pretty sensible way to operate. When the weatherman says its going to rain tomorrow, most people that know will leave home in the morning with an umbrella, rather than waiting until its definately raining and then walking in the rain because its too late. The people in power know what is happening, they have been advised of what the implications are and the people in power have to make decisions on how they are going to (or not) respond. But to do nothing based on that advice is to demonstrate seriously lacking leadership skills as anticipation and planning is a key element of that.
Be careful everyone, this thread is heading down a political path.
NO POLITICAL POSTS IN GENERAL CHAT.
Apologies, my response was not at all intended to be political, but can absolutely see how it can easily be taken that way. My response was meant to be in relation to people and leadership as a skill. About effective leaders being able operate using anticipation rather than hindsight. It wasn't meant to be about Scott Morrison.Quote:
Originally Posted by V8Ian
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob10
Having listened to the interview my interpretation is she appears to be suggesting less gasbagging and more "we know it's changing, so we need to learn to adapt and mitigate its effects". A perfectly sensible viewpoint. She makes no comment on whether man is exacerbating the change in climate because that circular argument is getting in the way of getting stuff done (adaptation and mitigation).
I think everyone agrees the climate is changing. On that basis we need to learn to adapt. Harping on about "the science" or who is to blame has a negative outcome in that it takes resources and airtime away from those who want to get on and do it.
In this context "get on and do it" means dealing with issues such as securing water supply, managing bushland to reduce the severity of disasters like the one we are seeing, managing population distribution. All areas which require examination but are being distracted away from by the "you run your A/C all day and drive a 21L diesel tank, so climate change is on you".
That's about it in a nutshell. Well put, really. EDIT. Time to stop looking for blame, time to look for solutions. There's no silver bullet, but we can try to minimise effects in our own backyard. If enough do that, chances are it could make a difference. We won't know if we don't try. Or, we'll never never know, if we don't give it a go. [ Scomo can have that one]Quote:
Originally Posted by BradC