-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Global Warming
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
I think Australia should make a proportional response to what the rest of the world is doing about CC.
So if the rest of the world is chucking rubbish out their car windows, we should do the same? Got it
I don't agree they are the same kind of thing. International agreements are not reducible to some simplistic moral quandary. Only the simple would equate the two.
Only one side is mudslinging Djevv, the posts are great from both sides until it turns personal and then listen to their justifications once called out. L2 puts up with too much and he should not have to, that is pretty much where i come from regardless of CC position.
The mudslingers sling on all threads with their patronising replies so good luck to them anyway.
Having said that i to am now a "denier" amoungst other things due to the fact i dont appreciate the "personal mud slinging" even though its not my personal opinion.
I am Centre Right at the moment based more on the left losing their position and their current loose supporter base.
Hope the smoke has dissipated and people can enjoy the summer again.
You realise that in asking Australia to take extreme measures with emissions you actually sentence the vulnerable to death. There is a moral quandary worthy of you.
Are the vulnerable the same as the down trodden, who all they have to look forward to is to live in poverty, or are they people who had the misfortune to be born into the wrong caste?
Meanwhile,
The planet warms up.
L2R2R, can you explain to me how this is a socialist agenda? Seriously, are the socialists somehow warming the planet (if so, how is that not human activity warming the planet
).
What is this socialist agenda you talk of?
DS
The planet warms up.
L2R2R, can you explain to me how this is a socialist agenda? Seriously, are the socialists somehow warming the planet (if so, how is that not human activity warming the planet
).What is this socialist agenda you talk of?
DS
Meanwhile,
The planet warms up.
L2R2R, can you explain to me how this is a socialist agenda? Seriously, are the socialists somehow warming the planet (if so, how is that not human activity warming the planet
What is this socialist agenda you talk of?
DS
I think it has to do with the way countries are being asked to deal with CC according to their wealth rather than their emission %. We have talking about it in the last few pages.
Can you tell me how this will result in the CO2 mitigation which is allegedly desired? It will certainly result in wealth redistribution ie socialism.
By vulnerable I meant the elderly, the infirm, the poor and the very young who will all suffer if we take Australia off cheap reliable power (ie thermal coal). The problem is far, far worse if you look at doing the same in the third world.
The elephant in the room is human beings.
There were 1 billion people on the planet 200 years ago, as of April 2019 the world population was 7.7 billion.
It's estimated that there are 1 billion cars in use in the world. China has over 300 million registered cars.
Human beings will eventually make themselves extinct.
There were 1 billion people on the planet 200 years ago, as of April 2019 the world population was 7.7 billion.
It's estimated that there are 1 billion cars in use in the world. China has over 300 million registered cars.
Human beings will eventually make themselves extinct.
Meanwhile,
The planet warms up.
L2R2R, can you explain to me how this is a socialist agenda? Seriously, are the socialists somehow warming the planet (if so, how is that not human activity warming the planet
What is this socialist agenda you talk of?
DS
1. Your chart is the *smile* I can't abide. Where is the post-1998 hiatus? Gone, like the 1940-60 decline, the pre-1900 warmth and the Medieval Warm Period because your venerable climate models didn't predict it and couldn't even produce it when retrofitted!
2. Search this thread for Edenhofer.
I was trying to find a description for Lee's posting style, I think I may have nailed it.
"Smugnorant"
Feel free to highlight anything you've just quoted that's untrue.
I honestly wasn't fishing. Regardless of whether you're left or right, the evidence accepted by the world's climate scientists is that the earth is warming, and human activities are contributing to it.
That is an apolitical statement.
If you consider it to be a left wing statement, you're going to consider any media that reports it left wing.
The political arguments come about in how we should respond to it. Again, there is advice on how to mediate the change which is scientifically based, but it's a societal and therefore political discussion.
There are those who, whether through ignorance or vested interests, want to deny the science. I don't see that as a political opinion. It's more of a conspiracy theory.
OMG questioning the thermometers now are we? What next, are you going to trot out the UAH satellite data to somehow state that the land based temperature measures are all wrong? That would be a surprise since, last Tuesday, you said that Spencer's readings essentially agree with HadCRUT 4. So Spencer is wrong too now is he? Maybe he is in league with the BOM and their nefarious plot to measure daily temperatures over a 24 hour period.
Now, on another one of your assertions: where is the medieval warm period? Simple, it ended about 630 years prior to the period covered by the graph I posted.
I don't know or care who Edenhofer is.
The science is not capitalist, socialist, communist, anarchist, medieval, liberal, neo-liberal or feudal. It is science and the best science we have tells us that the best explanation we have for observed climate change is human activity which is altering the chemical composition of the atmosphere such that the greenhouse effect is enhanced, leading to warming.
The policy response however is more interesting. Look at both the Garnaut Report and the Stern Report from the UK. In their modelling of the problem of how we approach solutions to climate change both refer specifically to the "Prisoners' Dilemma". The Prisoners' Dilemma is a tool used by neo-liberal economists not only to attempt to explain economic behaviour, but also to suggest how we should behave. Basically it posits the notion that we should all act as individuals seeking to maximise our own gain, even at the expense of others. The policy responses of Garnaut and Stern are based on this neo-liberal conception of the world and they are suggesting policies such as cap and trade and a price on carbon - these are neo-liberal policies.
Djevv: can you explain how the wealth of rich counties is not tied to emissions? It is we who have benefited from burning the bulk of fossil fuels, we need to take more responsibility for the burning of fossil fuels as we are he ones who have done this. Of course, we could turn this to our benefit by leading the world in developing renewable energy and we could help our economy by exporting technology and energy, this especially applies to Australia as we have such extensive opportunities to generate energy from solar and wind. This is an opportunity not to be missed.
DS
My response was more of a reaction to the post that immediately followed your post that I quoted.
