Ot. Hallelujah and praise the lord

[bad boy bubby]

View attachment 29989

No wonder he shat himself
I wonder if he copped a finger bum???

 

[millersnose]

Absolutely. you get some crap ones like any other line of work . Thats why I always stress Scientific method Statistical analysis of data and consenses . Theres lots of people that can rise to fairly high levels of a discipline with hard work and a good memory but they never really understand things I could give you some anecdotal stories illustrating that but i wont waste you time . Suffice to say the 1 or 2 percent of scientists on the denialists side ussually are being well paid by companies with vested interests.or Alan Jones for an "interview"

ok so richard lindzen and judith curry are 'crap ones' despite being some of the most cited climatologists in history

and i suppose chris landsea is corrupt?

 

[Eion]

Who replaces Scomo when the Party kicks him out? Prior to the election polls were not all that great for him. I say one Peter Dutton, he is a Qlder, ex corrupt cop, redneck lover, would knife Scomo in an instant. Mr potato head for Pm for sure...just to really let everyone groan at how shit this country has become.

It’s basically impossible to kick out a sitting pm now, on either side. It would take some massive controversy.

 

[BatteredFlake]

ok so richard lindzen and judith curry are 'crap ones' despite being some of the most cited climatologists in history

and i suppose chris landsea is corrupt?

Im gobsmacked !! Finally a reasonable argument (Albeit coveniently short ) from a denialist . I was beginning to think I needed to tell you what was required to have any credibility. I dont follow every thing about Global warming ,dont have time.so I will need to check further unlike you lot who fire from the hip at anything. I can however think of several things right now that are not necessarily relevant but any one seeking real truth would consider . 1.
Consenses in such a broad range of disciplines needed to understand climate change is important .
2.Going with "The Flow" is not really something a highly qualified scientist is looking for to make a lasting name for himself and sit up amongst the Giants Like Einstein, Darwin, Newton .....Darwin had some pretty good scientists questioning his theory of Natural selection , Like Frenchman Le marck for example.. Question for all the smart arse denialists here . How many dont beleive in Darwins theory of Evolution and natural Selection .?
3.Coolum and Quigs have made the most sensible posts here . Id rather err on the side of caution and try and look after the planet than follow the absolutely idiotic reasoning of Mankind cant effect Climate . As Quigs has correctly stated it is absolutely proven we effected OZONE layer of the earths atmosphere . Only an idiot would so glibly dismiss our influence on Climate.

 

[BatteredFlake]

Oh yeah . An American relative a couple years ago sent me a similar recommendation about a qualified Australian Scientist who was rubbishing mans effect on climate change Global warming etc . I did a bit of research on him and his work and found I wouldnt buy a used car from him ,inspite of his credentials . Not saying this lot that Millers put up are as bad, but like I say Consenses in Science is a little different to DS's Majority rules ! crap!. and Surelys " they go with the flow"

The most cited climatoligists is hardly surprising given the left wing rightwing politicalization and polarization of Climate change and Global Warming and the fact there are so few Deniers amongst credible Scientists

Other thing Australians likes to think they punch above their weight in international affairs , and as "the best country on earth" I beleive we do . So the "we have no effect cause we only add 1 %" ( as well as being questionable given effects of our exported coal Iron ore etc to other countries) is also a big cop out . Not an excuse I want to give to my grand kids.

 

[Defer to the coifed]

Would you bring grand kids into this doomed world? Crazy if you do with all us deniers running about, planning how we going to kill them

 

[President Trump]

Global warming is just an excuse to meddle in people's lives, confiscate their wealth and suppress their freedom. None of the predictions of global warming doom have come true and they've been predicting it for 30-40 years now.

 

[millersnose]

Im gobsmacked !! Finally a reasonable argument (Albeit coveniently short ) from a denialist . I was beginning to think I needed to tell you what was required to have any credibility. I dont follow every thing about Global warming ,dont have time.so I will need to check further unlike you lot who fire from the hip at anything. I can however think of several things right now that are not necessarily relevant but any one seeking real truth would consider . 1.
Consenses in such a broad range of disciplines needed to understand climate change is important .
2.Going with "The Flow" is not really something a highly qualified scientist is looking for to make a lasting name for himself and sit up amongst the Giants Like Einstein, Darwin, Newton .....Darwin had some pretty good scientists questioning his theory of Natural selection , Like Frenchman Le marck for example.. Question for all the smart arse denialists here . How many dont beleive in Darwins theory of Evolution and natural Selection .?
3.Coolum and Quigs have made the most sensible posts here . Id rather err on the side of caution and try and look after the planet than follow the absolutely idiotic reasoning of Mankind cant effect Climate . As Quigs has correctly stated it is absolutely proven we effected OZONE layer of the earths atmosphere . Only an idiot would so glibly dismiss our influence on Climate.

Putting aside the hilarious irony of lauding consensus while at the same time lauding Einstein and Darwin for the moment it is suffice to say consensus is not how science works

And in any case the views on the scientific community on such a chaotic and little understood mechanism like climate are varied from those that think warming will be calamitous to those who think it will be small to those who think it will be beneficial

However let’s for the moment assume the tabloid version you ascribe to is correct

The point is what will be the policy response given the developing world is ..well..developing
They are building hundreds of fossil fuel plants and any reduction in Australia will have zero effect
All that is happening is that rent seeking companies like General Electric and many others are lobbying governments to legislate in favour of their products and to further subsidise their vast profits
Any solution to your tabloid version of gw has to recognise reality
You guys should really be only lobbying for huge domination and subsidisation of nuclear power not carbon credits
It’s just common sense

 

[millersnose]

Oh yeah . An American relative a couple years ago sent me a similar recommendation about a qualified Australian Scientist who was rubbishing mans effect on climate change Global warming etc . I did a bit of research on him and his work and found I wouldnt buy a used car from him ,inspite of his credentials . Not saying this lot that Millers put up are as bad, but like I say Consenses in Science is a little different to DS's Majority rules ! crap!. and Surelys " they go with the flow"

The most cited climatoligists is hardly surprising given the left wing rightwing politicalization and polarization of Climate change and Global Warming and the fact there are so few Deniers amongst credible Scientists

Other thing Australians likes to think they punch above their weight in international affairs , and as "the best country on earth" I beleive we do . So the "we have no effect cause we only add 1 %" ( as well as being questionable given effects of our exported coal Iron ore etc to other countries) is also a big cop out . Not an excuse I want to give to my grand kids.

The entire ipcc process and national academy processes are geared towards and designed to define “the flow”
This is politics not science
I may point out the “the grandkids “ argument is quite silly. The climate they will inherent will have nothing to do with electric cars mandated by the Australian government and pretending any Australian political party has a policy platform that can affect climate, even in you tabloid version of gw, is rediculous

 

[Surely]

Oh yeah . An American relative a couple years ago sent me a similar recommendation about a qualified Australian Scientist who was rubbishing mans effect on climate change Global warming etc . I did a bit of research on him and his work and found I wouldnt buy a used car from him ,inspite of his credentials . Not saying this lot that Millers put up are as bad, but like I say Consenses in Science is a little different to DS's Majority rules ! crap!. and Surelys " they go with the flow"

The most cited climatoligists is hardly surprising given the left wing rightwing politicalization and polarization of Climate change and Global Warming and the fact there are so few Deniers amongst credible Scientists

Other thing Australians likes to think they punch above their weight in international affairs , and as "the best country on earth" I beleive we do . So the "we have no effect cause we only add 1 %" ( as well as being questionable given effects of our exported coal Iron ore etc to other countries) is also a big cop out . Not an excuse I want to give to my grand kids.

If you are a scientist who doesn’t go with the flow you get harassed , don’t get your papers published, get labeled denier and quite often lose your job.

So who’s going to come out and question the science ?

 

[millersnose]

Well here’s a petition by 9000 PhD holders and 31000 in total

http://www.petitionproject.org/?mod=article_inline

Claiming there are no dissenters to agw is as silly as claiming there isn’t a huge body of scientists subscribing to agw

 

[Surely]

Unfortunately the science proffered by the doomsday preppers is always meticulous top quality stuff

Like the following




An argument, made by those who deny man made Global Warming, is that the Carbon Dioxide that is being released by the burning of fossil fuels is actually good for the environment. Their argument is based on the logic that, if plants need CO2 for their growth, then more of it should be better. We should expect our crops to become more abundant and our flowers to grow taller and bloom brighter.

However, this "more is better" philosophy is not the way things work in the real world. There is an older, wiser saying that goes, "Too much of a good thing can be a bad thing." For example, if a doctor tells you to take one pill of a certain medicine, taking four is not likely to heal you four times faster or make you four times better. It's more likely to make you sick.

https://skepticalscience.com/Increasing-Carbon-Dioxide-is-not-good-for-plants.html

Too much CO2 is bad because of a saying, who could possibly argue.

 

[millersnose]

Idiots

Haven’t they ever heard of pumping co2 into greenhouses to accelerate growth

 

[Surely]

Idiots

Haven’t they ever heard of pumping co2 into greenhouses to accelerate growth

Yeah they have, but apparently in the real world insects eat them more

 

[Marchad]

Global warming is just an excuse to meddle in people's lives, confiscate their wealth and suppress their freedom. None of the predictions of global warming doom have come true and they've been predicting it for 30-40 years now.

Exactly and the people with the biggest carbon footprint are the ones peddling this nonsense.

 

[Defer to the coifed]

Could you imagine a what it would hae been like hundreds of years ago, when some mob turns up on a boat with a book in their hand, written by their professors , & start reading it & banging on about how if you don't change your lifestyle, it will be the end of the world?
Well, yes I do. I know exactly how it feels.

 

[wibble]

This

Democracy is going to destroy us all

Only smart and morally superior people like wibble can see it

If only we had a left greens ogliarchy to make us live correctly we could make the weather nice and get rid of nasty mining

Anyone who disagrees is a science denier

Well, clearly there is no point discussing climate change with people who refuse to believe the science. It is like discussing evolution with creationists, the benefits of vaccines with anti-vaxers, cancer treatments with faith healers, or geology with flat earthers and new world creationists.

Plenty of people in the world believe Aids is an invented thing used by western agencies and the U.N. to impose western ideals (things like "germ theory") on their populations.

I hope there is a mass case of millions of scientists and government and international agencies around the world, agreeing to lie on climate change for "jobs for life" (like there is ever a lack of urgent problems that need scientific approaches, so that we need to invent more...). I hope that our recent, lived experiences of mild Autumns and late seasons and multiple "once in a century" floods are anecdotal, and not a sign of climate change.

But I fear these hopes would be based on ignorant optimism, and as a duty to my children I must do everything I can to listen to the science and make informed decisions about the world I want for them (caring about my children's future may indeed make me smart and morally superior, though hopefully there are billions of others on the planet who are similarly smart and morally superior).

People are free to be as ignorant as they like.

For the rest of us, we need to have meaningful discussion about what, if anything, can be done to make sure our children and grandchildren have the best possible chance of meaningful lives, with as little adverse effects from climate change as we can manage.

 

[wibble]

Global warming is just an excuse to meddle in people's lives, confiscate their wealth and suppress their freedom. None of the predictions of global warming doom have come true and they've been predicting it for 30-40 years now.

Well, 30 years ago it was predicted that world average surface temperatures would today be about 0.6 degrees (Celsius) warmer, and today it is about....0.6 degrees (Celsius) warmer (under a "some effort to reduce greenhouse gasses scenario", which has happened).

Unfortunately, some of the predictions on things like melting of glaciers and arctic shelves did not take into account changes to currents from less salinity, and fewer reflected rays from less "white" surface, so these have melted at a higher rate than predicted.

We have plenty of excuses already for meddling with lives (only recently the Australian people said it was not appropriate to meddle with who you personally choose to marry, and the government, with notable exceptions such as our PM, was dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century and stopped meddling in that particular aspect), confiscating wealth (I am taxed at a much higher rate than many wealthy "business owners", such as our awesome local minister for water corruption, who set up an offshore business to take his $50 million dollar inside deal from his coalition mates, thus avoiding tax, which would have gone to supporting the nearby private schools for the wealthy nearly as much as to the local public school for the disabled that my son goes to), and suppressing freedom (such as locking up children to prevent people smuggling, with no evidence that it does that, and then threatening aid providers with jail if they report on the terrible conditions those children are in, even kicking them out of their jobs with no due process, suggesting they are coercing asylum seekers into asking for medical help, if they dare highlight the sexual abuse and torture facing locked up children). This government has shown it has no problems doing any of those things, it doesn't need the excuse of making a better future for our children to do them.

 

[wibble]

Could you imagine a what it would hae been like hundreds of years ago, when some mob turns up on a boat with a book in their hand, written by their professors , & start reading it & banging on about how if you don't change your lifestyle, it will be the end of the world?
Well, yes I do. I know exactly how it feels.

I guess many people feel like that. Many probably rejected the paltry efforts of Shorten to convince them otherwise because they feel like that.

There is hope for you though. You don't have to feel like you are an ignorant savage from hundreds of years ago surrounded by brow beating professors.

You can read the science for yourself.

And the lifestyle changes don't have to be dramatic at all. If we change where our power comes from, or move to cleaner, nicer machines, that shouldn't really impact your day to day experiences.

The real failure of Labour, the Greens, Get Up and other "left" (Labor not really being left at all, in my view) groups, is they don't sell the opportunities of a cleaner future.

Obviously even without talking about carbon and climate change, smog free cities will be nicer.

Being able to engage with international countries and firms that are moving towards climate friendly technologies will enhance our economy and trade opportunities, rather than leave us isolated on a world stage.

People displaced from carbon industries should have many future proof opportunities in green technology industries, without their local communities having the costs of production outsourced to them, as happens now with coal industries.

And reliable, green energy gives business stability for planning future growth, which has been sorely lacking for the last 10 years or so, and is a major concern currently for business groups.

The doom and gloom bits of the scenarios are distressing, but don't focus on those if you don't like hearing about "the end of the world".

Focus on how some small changes to industries, that are unlikely to affect you except maybe make things a bit nicer, are our best chance of not passing on this doom and gloom to the next generations.

As a bonus you can do some of that "virtue signalling" the coalition warns us about and feel good about how you have done some serious reading and analysis of the science, and have decided to back sensible change that will go some small way to making the world a better place.

 

[Surely]

Well, 30 years ago it was predicted that world average surface temperatures would today be about 0.6 degrees (Celsius) warmer, and today it is about....0.6 degrees (Celsius) warmer (under a "some effort to reduce greenhouse gasses scenario", which has happened).

It helps when you adjust past temperatures down.

They also said there would be no snow in England and parts of San Francisco underwater, amongst a host of other shit.