Global Warming

[eZyT]

What's the specific quote related to that?

As far as I'm aware, his argument is that there are implausibilities in evolution theory that are better explained by creationism.

I accept that his beliefs probably colour his opinions, but am unaware of any religious references in his published scientific work.

God making the earth in 7 days is as central to creationism

as natural selection is to evolution.

you could pretend you dont think god made the earth in 7 days while spruiking creation theory,

but that would be like pretending you dont think Dustin Martin was important, while regaling the merits of our 11th premiership.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Making something up to explain something unknown to appear all knowing to ignorant masses is religion in a nutshell.

I haven't read the book, but I don't think it's a case of "We don't understand this, so... God".

Besides, we're talking about data from satellites. Religion doesn't come into it.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

God making the earth in 7 days is as central to creationism

as natural selection is to evolution.

you could pretend you dont think god made the earth in 7 days while spruiking creation theory,

but that would be like pretending you dont think Dustin Martin was important, while regaling the merits of our 11th premiership.

It's like Richmond supporters or anything else, there are degrees of fanaticism. I don't think he's one of those born-again hallelujah praise-the-Lord quote-the-Bible types.

 

[eZyT]

Besides, we're talking about data from satellites. Religion doesn't come into it.

well it does.

If a GWS supporter starts talking to you about football history and culture, you tune out and dismiss the opinion as vastly diminished.

As is the case when a creationist offers scientific data.

 

[eZyT]

It's like Richmond supporters or anything else, there are degrees of fanaticism. I don't think he's one of those born-again hallelujah praise-the-Lord quote-the-Bible types.

I have held the opinion for about 30 years

that a scientist who believes that god created the world in 7 days

has serious neurological deficiencies.

so Im going to discount every single thing they say,

and hope like hell they are not a Richmond supporter.

Creationism and Climate Change denial go together like a urinal and yellow deodorising biscuits

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

If a GWS supporter starts talking to you about football history and culture, you tune out and dismiss the opinion as vastly diminished.

I read that as GWS = Global Warming Supporter and typed up a completely different response!

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

I have held the opinion for about 30 years

that a scientist who believes that god created the world in 7 days

has serious neurological deficiencies.

If Spencer actually says he believes that then I'll label him nuts myself.

 

[Giardiasis]

My understanding of it is that no-one owns the sea, unlike land rights, so therefore the discussion of private investment is probably a difficult one. I'm not sure they've ever really gone down a licencing arrangement for farming in a similar way that offshore oil goes through but maybe that's the way. At the moment there isn't a way to do this, my point about the government is that maybe they should be looking at this as an option. Ie. the government goes through a process where they lease the sea to farming companies, however they need to ensure that the method of farming is sustainable which they haven't done with land farming.

I don't know a lot about this but it was certainly something from the doco that really made me sit up and listen due to the significant benefits it has on the seas (reduced temps and reduced acidity) and hence the benefits that this has for not only the worldwide environment but particularly from an Aussie POV protecting the natural environment of the Great Barrier Reef.

I come from a slightly different viewpoint to you in terms of subsidisation. If the sea keeps warming and keeps becoming more acidic a lot of tourist $'s will disappear from the Australian economy so should be reviewed within that framework. If there is a net benefit to the country by subsidising sea farming in order to protect the benefits of the tourism economy then it makes sense to me that should subsidisation be required (and I have no idea if it does) then it should be provided as the net benefit is greater (ie. reviewing based upon NPV etc).

Yeah I recognise the issue of a lack of private property rights regarding the sea, so a leasing arrangement seems the most appropriate.

The subsidisation suggestion though is where I have an issue. You aren’t considering the bigger picture here. Let’s take as a given the loss of dollars to the tourism industry is real and the government subsidises sea farming as you want (ignoring the immorality and illegitimacy of such government action), how will they pay for it? They won’t raise taxes, people hate that, so they will pay for it by loaning money, which will come from the reserve bank. The reserve bank will simply create the money out of thin air and loan it to the government, and this in turn will raise interest rates throughout the economy higher than they would otherwise be. Simple NPV analysis can hardly take the effect of this on the wider economy as it distorts market prices in specific ways that can't be predicted. All one needs to know is that any requirement for government subsidisation for economic activity to take place in a certain productive endeavour is uneconomic because if the private sector isn’t interested it is because consumers demand for other things is greater. By subsidising sea farming, the government is taking resources from the real pool of funding in the economy and diverting it away from more productive (i.e. higher demand from consumers) areas. The government can alleviate this problem in only one way: reduce its role in the economy.

 

[Brodders17]

Yeah I recognise the issue of a lack of private property rights regarding the sea, so a leasing arrangement seems the most appropriate.

how do you lease something that noone owns? or are you suggesting a government should 'own' the sea? then make business arrangements to lease to other (private) businesses? in which case they would be competing with other private businesses.

 

[Giardiasis]

how do you lease something that noone owns? or are you suggesting a government should 'own' the sea? then make business arrangements to lease to other (private) businesses? in which case they would be competing with other private businesses.

I’m assuming the areas of sea in question would fall under public ownership claimed by a government. Otherwise there is nothing for the government to subsidise in the first place.

 

[lamb22]

Giardiasis reminds me of the toaster in Red Dwarf.

 

[mrposhman]

how do you lease something that noone owns? or are you suggesting a government should 'own' the sea? then make business arrangements to lease to other (private) businesses? in which case they would be competing with other private businesses.

They already operate like this in the oil and gas industry. I think broadly it is based upon the lines of which parts of the sea are essentially within maritime borders of countries.

 

[AngryAnt]

Giardiasis reminds me of the toaster in Red Dwarf.

 

[tigersnake]

I’m assuming the areas of sea in question would fall under public ownership claimed by a government. Otherwise there is nothing for the government to subsidise in the first place.

if there was a have your cake and eat it too PRE hall of fame, this would be straight in. Love it!

 

[Brodders17]

I’m assuming the areas of sea in question would fall under public ownership claimed by a government. Otherwise there is nothing for the government to subsidise in the first place.

You assume it would or think it should?

 

[Giardiasis]

You assume it would or think it should?

Assuming. I needed to do that to better address mrposhmans argument about subsidisation, as private ownership of the seas is not the reality we live in.

For clarity, public ownership is a bogus concept but there are different degrees to which it can be taken. To the extent that decision making can be localised I’d support that, but that doesn’t imply support for public ownership.

 

[eZyT]

Climate Activist set to conduct one of the greatest protests ever tonight .....

Highlight Australia's inaction on climate change,

and disrupt and *smile* off Collingwood and Geelong supporters.

I salute these brave Australian heros.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Climate Activist set to conduct one of the greatest protests ever tonight .....

Showers, possible hail, chance of a thunderstorm. Sounds cold...

 

[Djevv]

The usual, Spencer from UAH.

Latest Global Temps - Roy Spencer, PhD.

Latest Global Average Tropospheric Temperatures Since 1979, NOAA satellites have been carrying instruments which measure the natural microwave thermal emissions from oxygen in the atmosphere. The intensity of the signals these microwave radiometers measure at different microwave frequencies is...

www.drroyspencer.com

That's a pretty interesting website from a guy who is a bonafide expert. Thanks for posting it!

 

[DavidSSS]

Wow, 0.38C rise over the 1981 to 2010 average, that's quite a quick rise, and it has come down since a few years ago.

If we take it back earlier to when we started emitting large amounts of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses the rise is higher (eg: if we take the base point to an earlier period like most scientists).

It's happening and we know it is human caused (because we know, looking at the particular isotopes in the CO2 in the atmosphere, that the increase in CO2 is human caused).

Yet more solid evidence of climate change.

DS