Are we being conned about Global warming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waynep

On this argument that whatever Australia does to reduce emissions, it will make little difference to the overall carbon levels, therefore we shouldn't change until the big countries do.

Ok think of it this way : if you were out camping with your family and a big group of 100 down a bit are all defecating in the creek. Would you also do the same because, after all, your little bit extra won't make much difference ?

---

No, but we should not be telling our people that it will make a difference and asking them to make major reductions in living standards when it won't make a difference - that is simply lying, and is what the federal government and the green industry is doing.

That does not mean we should not reduce our reliance on carbon though - Australia's major emissions are from coal fired power stations (although this varies from state to state quite dramatically - Victoria is worst, followed by NSW andd Qld, but Tasmania, SA and WA have very low carbon emissions) and replacing these should be a priority. The only practical replacement at the moment is nuclear power, probably supplemented by wind and possibly solar power. But there are a lot of people who feel strongly against any of these, especially "NIMBY". While the government's carbon sequestration plans seem to be technically feasible, whether they are economically feasible or can be operational in time to be useful is another matter.

And as I commented in another thread - today's society wastes a vast amount of everything - and in my view, to a very large extent this is where the opportunity exists for reduction in our carbon footprint. But to have much effect we need to reduce the breaks given to large scale manufacture and distribution of new goods and put that effort into reuse and refurbishment industries that are mostly very small scale businesses that are drowning in red tape and regulation that is easily handled by large organisations, but are crippling for small organisations (and these regulations and red tape in themselves result in a large amount of waste!).


John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reads90

<snip>
There is a whole green industry makeing millions out of pepole being green .

---

What, and there isn't an industry involved in finding, digging up, transporting and burning fossil fuels like coal :eek:
The NSW State govt approves every single coal mine, regardless of the EIS, or they keep getting EIS's until one is produced in the mines favour.
Why ?
'cause the State is broke ! they need the royalties.
Govt and industry revenues and jobs from consumption far, far outweigh anything the 'green' movement has ever cooked up !

Fact is, and many of you have already said it, the world is verging on, if not already chronically overpopulated. The consumption and ultimately the waste of the emerging economies of India and China is bloody scary, and who are we to deny them access to the things we take for granted, but on a planet with finite resources, finite arable land, finite available water for agriculture what are we to do ?
Stick our heads in the sand and hope it goes away ?

There isn't a lot of dissent in the scientific world on the data presented so far, only quite a small % are sceptical of the conventional climate change theories.

I agree, some of the modelling seems sus, weather, etc is too damned complex for a feeble man made computer to simulate with any accuracy IMO, but just for a moment stop and imagine yourself multiplied 6 billion times, using what you use, think about where all that comes from and how the processes it goes through to get to you, then everything that happens after you dispose of it :eek:

Schemes like the clunker buy back in Germany I feel are seriously flawed. They are only in place, on the pretext of being 'green' to support industry and therefore more consumption. Surely it is 'greener' to repair a vehicle and keep it on the road, in as mechanically sound state (efficient) as possible rather than spend huge resources on the development, design, tooling and production of a new vehicle. In fact this was proven when someone in the US did a life analysis of the Prius vs the Hummer. The Hummer ended up beeing greener over an average vehicle lifetime, as it took into account development as well as disposal.

IMO our problem is consumption. There are far too many of us on this little blue and green globe, with only a finite amount of air, water and minerals.
We've been partying and breeding hard for the two hundred years since the Industrial Revolution now, but someone will have to pay when the music stops.

Re the Y2K bug; that was real, at least in many situations. Of course, with no problem at the end nobody believes you. You're only a hero for fighting a fire, not preventing it.

Re global warming; the only way I'd know one way or the other is to do first-principles analysis myself as there are so many conflicting opinions. I have neither the time nor the academic background to do that.

So I take this view; what if the GW skeptics are correct? Then we can carry on polluting quite happily with no ill effects.

But what if the CC people are correct? Then we need immediate corrective action, and right now. If we don't then we are irreparably damaging the planet. So, on the basis we don't know, and the consequences of denying CC are much worse than the consequences of believing in it, I'm all for reducing consumption etc and support the pro-climate change movement. I think there is more than adequate localised information about the negative effects of pollution, even leaving aside the bigger global warming picture.

It's too big an issue to take a risk.

Made made dont think so.
should we try to not to pollute as much most definetly.

let the caps melt let the sea levels rise.

Australia will get its inland sea back.

this will influence Australia's climate and we will be able to sustain a huge population. Krudd can then be the new self styled dictator of the world as Australia will become all powerful.


Michael.

definitely worth the admittance fee this place...

I think its obvious that we need to care for our planet, and for that reason I am an assiduous recycler, and do whatever I can can to conserve the earth's resources - just ask my kids about me reminding them to turn off lights, computers, to recycle everything. They sometimes think I get a bit carried away. But we have a responsibility to look after the earth, and I want to do the best I can to do so.

But these 'flavours of the month' type of ideas that come out from time to time that people get all excited about and want to impose on others. Then the whole political correctness thing kicks in. You are not allowed to disagree with them or you are labelled a 'climate change denyer' or whatever it is that they're pushing that someone else disagrees with. That's the problem. You are not allowed to disagree! And it is that bullying of others who don't agree that I don't like.

Willem

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I also don't believe that it is to do with carbon emissions etc. I think that data may correlate, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there is a cause/effect happening. I also see that the last 12months or so has bucked the global warming trends.


In my opinion, it is a part of a cyclic trend that is greater than the effects from man and industry. No doubt the poles will reverse shortly aswell, and that will be put down to people pouring green cordial down the sink.

---

I tend to beleive its just a another cycle of what the earth has been going thru since inception, after all history tells us we have had ice ages and warm ups many times previously, man has played a part but probably not as much as the doom& gloom'ers say.

It's pirates.

There is an inverse relationship between number of pirates and global temperature, ie. as the number of pirates in the world has declined global temperatures have risen. The best thing anyone can do to reduce the effects of global warming is to dress as a pirate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wally

It's pirates.

There is an inverse relationship between number of pirates and global temperature, ie. as the number of pirates in the world has declined global temperatures have risen. The best thing anyone can do to reduce the effects of global warming is to dress as a pirate.

---

Interesting ARRHH- gument there :p.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wally

It's pirates.

There is an inverse relationship between number of pirates and global temperature, ie. as the number of pirates in the world has declined global temperatures have risen. The best thing anyone can do to reduce the effects of global warming is to dress as a pirate.

---

:arms::arms::arms:

I knew I had a good reason, just couldn't remember it.

Although, you'd think all of those earrings and tattoos would buoy up the pirate count.

Simon