climate change

  1. 20

    i just looked out the window and i am a little afraid as i think the climate just changed again....A TAX WILL STOP CLIMATE CHANGE.....

    the Club of Rome were really onto it back in the 50' ya rockafella.....Tax us please so we can stop this horrible climate change....

    its those bloody cows and humans doing the damage...

    That big orange thing in the sky,forget about that,it's got nothing to do with it.....

    wondering why they show the black soot coming out of the chimneys when that is no Co2,hmmm...

    Polar bears dead yet?

    Hmmm,i thought it was global warming....or dimming...oh no now its just climate change....

    hows that ozone hole going anyway....?

    Thats right friends.....Climate change is NEW....never before has it happened on the earth right,hmmm...

    These mad owned scientists take models with a tiny bit of data and give us crazy projections.don't look at the BIG picture....

    Its like taking a one day stock chart in minute increments and ignoring the weekly,monthly yearly pattens....

    All Hail the Elites.......

    1 like
  2. 3.9k

    An interesting thing to note is that two of the biggest pollutants created by man were invented by the same person - Thomas Midgley, jr. Chloroflourocarbons and leaded petrol were both his brainchilds.

    One of his inventions eventually killed him. Not CFC's or lead, but a contraption he invented to help himself get out of bed strangled him accidentally at the age of 55.

    He was a great marketer, though. Apparently he held a press conference to demonstrate the apparent safety of the lead that went into petrol. In this demonstration, he poured it over his hands, then breathed from a bottle of the chemical for sixty seconds. He then said that he could do this every day without any problems at all. He was careful later, to avoid mentioning to the press that he neede nearly a year to recover from the lead poisoning brought on by this demonstration.

    1 like
  3. 3.6k


    see links...


    "...Unfortunately, this type of presumptive misunderstanding is seen all too often. Someone doesn't understand a certain aspect of climate science which is understandable considering the complexities of our climate. Rather than investigate further, they assume a flaw in the climate science or worse, an act of deception. This response is often more a reflection of the gap in their own understanding than any flaw in the climate science. For further demonstration, here are the two most common examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect in the climate debate.

    The most common example is the argument, "why don't climate scientists look up and see that big, fiery ball in the sky - don't they realise the sun drives climate?" In actuality, climate scientists have noticed the big, fiery ball in the sky that provides almost all our climate's energy. Consequently, there are a multitude of peer-reviewed studies examining the sun's role in global warming. These studies have independently come to the conclusion the sun has not shown enough trend to have contributed significantly to recent global warming. More recent papers using the latest data have found the sun is actually moving in the opposite direction to climate. Eg - the sun has been cooling while the climate is warming.

    The second most common example of the Dunning-Kruger effect is "don't climate scientists realise climate has changed naturally in the past?" If one peruses the peer-reviewed science, they'll find that yes, climate scientists do realise that climate has changed in the past. There is a whole field of science devoted to examining and understanding past climate change: paleoclimatology. And what scientists find in the Earth's past is that the planet is highly sensitive to changes in energy imbalance. When our climate loses or gains heat, positive feedbacks amplify the temperature change. This is one (of many) lines of evidence that tell us our climate is sensitive to CO2 forcing...."

    1 like
  4. 20


    yep a tax will save us..... :wink:

  5. 6.9k

    I fail to find anything in your post that is concrete. In fact most is grossly flawed to say the least. I have spent many years following the Global Warming & Climate Changing theories and I kept coming back to the same conclusions;

    1; Planet Earths climate does change and in both directions. Its not magic either.

    2; All other planets with an atmosphere have changes too. So we are not alone.

    3; As we, as inhabitants of this planet, continue to rip out, burn, gouge & rape the so very important rain forests and pollute our water ways of which both have and will continue to upset the balance of, all things great and small, all that we have become so use to in these modern times.

    4; Air born particulate matter from emissions, fires and dust etc. rarely gets a mention. Just to add on this point I have noticed over 4 decades that when I peer out to sea towards the horizon I have definitely seen without any doubt in my mind the thin brownish line that used to hover just above the horizon change to become a much thicker black band and now I am seeing from time to time 2 bands, one above the other. Does this keep in heat or does it stop heat coming in, or vice versa?

    5; Finally the big one, i.e. SOLAR FORCING & the effect(s) it has on cloud formation. Impossible to ignore if one understands how it actually works & plays a definite role in changes to climate. To mention, as you have, that the sun has been cooling while our climate is warming is laughable. Can you please supply the name of that courageous individual that flew out & into the suns interior & stuck a thermometer up its date? Fair dinkum rot!

    The link I have provided is run & used by many that have an open mind and are willing to see through our political smoke screen where CO2 induced climate change is concerned.

    To finish off here, have a think about these scenarios;

    If the Earth was to move in towards the sun by just 20% of an average of orbit distance from the sun, would you agree it would bring about a cataclysmic climate change event. Or what if the earth was to move out from the sun by that same amount. What if the sun just disappeared altogether? Would those changes have an effect? Surely no need for me to answer. Guess what, IT IS OUR OWN SUN. Simply or not so simply all we can do is get used to it as best we can.

    Trader1, you are so so right. A tax on carbon will not save us. It has been designed to create wealth for a minority (as per usual) & to lessen the wealth for the rest of us. Nothing more, nothing less.

  6. 3.6k


    1. I agree, yep no magic involved just physics

    2. Have they? Got a link? Who was the indivdual who when out into space a stuck a thermometer up the other planets (lol jokes)

    Do the other planets have humans produceing GHGs on them?

    3. Too true, I would agree

    4.'Rarely get a mention?' a mention where? Newspapers lol;gbv=2&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=15l3015l0l4452l12l8l0l0l0l0l421l1218l3-1.2l3l0&q=global%20dimming&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=is


    "Can you please supply the name of that courageous individual that flew out & into the suns interior & stuck a thermometer up its date? Fair dinkum rot!"

    Another excellent example of the 'Dunning Kruger effect' Thanks

    Solar activity;q=solar+radiation+measurement&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

    So no thermometers are not used...

    I also agree that a Tax will not help solve the pollution of the atmosphere problem.

    "I have spent many years following the Global Warming & Climate Changing theories and I kept coming back to the same conclusions"

    Dunning Kruger Effected Confermation Bias?

    How do you 'follow' AGW and Climate Change science theories? Do you just read whatever fallacious crap newspapers print or what ever stupid thing that pops into shockjocks heads or do you 'follow' the peer-review literature...?

  7. 61.0k

    i was very,VERY,angry then(1980-2000) but i can't believe i did all that by myself -- must have a twin somewhere !

  8. 6.9k

    I prefer not to follow. I prefer to at least try and decipher anything & everything possible. It can be challenging to say the least.

    At the end of the day I attempt to apply good old common sense added to what I actually see happening to our global environment.

    Trust me, its the sun that is the main culprit or dominant force. End of story.

    If you have any ideas on how to best take advantage, financially, of the governments carbon tax, Im all yours lol.

    :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea: :idea:

    1 like
  9. 61.0k

    patent the idea then sell the usage rights globally :D you might say this silly ,but so is the tax !!

  10. 6.9k

    How about this;

    It is often quoted, The trend is your friend. Well if this trend continues with another weak Solar Cycle, we are in deep doo doo on this planet, guaranteed.

    Then I will have great pleasure in seeing J. Gullible and her so called experts behind the tax on carbon eat their own words. Only problem there is, a Solar Cycle takes approx. 12 years to complete. So, she will be looooong gone thank who ever. The financial loss to individuals will never be recovered. Litigation against these pelicans should be drawn up sooner than later.

  11. 61.0k

    since J & W are busy cutting ex-pollies pensions how about a "performance clause " for the current ones --- should we accept Visa or Master-card as well as cash ???

  12. 6.9k

    And this.

    The trend is clear and dangerous for us all. Definitely not our friend as it sits.

    The boss says I must movenmow. DOH!

    Don't you just luv em. :arrow: :arrow:

  13. 3.6k

    "Trust me, its the sun that is the main culprit or dominant force. End of story."

    Ummmm No thanks I place absolutely NO 'trust' in bare assertions. Data and reasoning please, leave requests of 'faith' to the Presuppositional mob (creationists). I prefer the data accumulated via measurements, not some random bloggers Dunning Kruger effected assertions. End of story. :D

    I would suggest also, much like evolution you wouldn't be able to 'see' the effects of Climate Change because of the timescale involved.

    On the lighter side, I came up with a funny analogy for why the proposed CO2 Tax is 'crap'.

    Ok, lets say I am paid $1000 to everyday to take a s#!t on your bed. You don't like s#!t on your bed so to punish me for doing this I'm forced to pay a fine (tax) of $50 per s#!t.

    So I will NOT stop s#!ting on your bed because I'm still getting $950 per s#!t and the s#!t is still on your bed.


    AS for taking advantage of CO2 Tax. One of my main grips with this tax 'strategy' is that is offers NO incentive to reduce pollution. IMO incentives (tax cuts/breaks etc) for 'green' initiatives need to be looked into.

    Humans shuffing money amounst ourselfs isn't going to stop pollution in the atmosphere. :roll:

    1 like
  14. 3.4k

    those who spend years researching climate change and only find BS that they want to believe hardly deserve a responsebut here goesnow, does global temperature REALLY follow the solar cycle???Since the early 1990s, extensive research was put into determining what role, if any, the Sun has in global warming or climate change.A recent review paper, put together by both solar and climate scientists, details these studies: Solar Influences on Climate. Their bottom line: though the Sun may play some small role, "it is nevertheless much smaller than the estimated radiative forcing due to anthropogenic changes." That is, human activities are the primary factor in global climate change.

  15. 3.4k

    and for a slightly broader view than "the sun did it" try this from the same link i posted belowso yeh, the sun had an impact, but open both eyes noddy

  16. 20

    maybe you should do some research into the origins of this tax.......

    Club of Rome,documented......

    It's a globalist scam....welcome to the 3rd world Australia....

  17. 3.4k


    maybe you should do a bit of reading about managing externalities in economics and finance

    carbon tax, carbon price, direct action and subsidies, take your pick, you are just arguing the most efficient way to price in the major impacts on climate caused by some energy and transport technologies and hence to encourage those who don't impose those costs on society

    but of course you're the sort of guy who would argue you shouldn't have to wear a seat belt and should be allowed to drive drunk if you like

    conspiracy theories, conspiracy theories

    yeh yeh, we all want as small a govt as possible; except the real conservatives in the US, who fund the most expensive army in the world through taxes and subsidise big oil with earmarks

  18. 6.9k

    mjp, Antn, no need to do me this favour but do it for yourself & any others that have questions that you need to ask. You will need to register and then you may ask Dr. Isvalgarrd anything you wish. If you couldnt be bothered with the registration simply go all the way back to the beginning of the Solar Cycle Main Discussion board;action=display&thread=1692 and I can assure you that every question you can come up with will have been asked and answered if at all possible.

    Yaaaaaaaaaawn. Mowing my acre with a push mower is no life. Must get my ride-on back from the boy.Even for you mjp it is NOT that simple. That silly little graph you so kindly shared was from where, the Stanford Solar Centre, well stuff me! Brilliant! I see they have many more as well and a big fat ZERO to back them up. Here is another conjured up by the IPCC First observation I make here is the common denominator of, who is funding these guys, IPCC & SSC?

    So much to learn Im afraid. We know our governments are behind these findings in some way shape or form. We also know that our Governments globally are mostly full of it as they keep getting caught out with their lies & deception but yet most will follow blindly because they are in so called CONTROL/POWER. Its so much more like totally out of control and we must surely know by now that is an actual fact!

    We have blast furnaces here on OZ and many more globally with China still building them. 18-20 % of emissions are what? These things emit 24/7 for up to 20 years. So if it is CO2, will we see them shut down to prevent us all frying here on Earth? I doubt it. Ask Twiggy Forest or Nev Powers if that would be a good thing for their business lol.

    Ostriches everywhere it seems.

    Please do not discount this site, as bare assertions. Simply not the case. The guys there are very passionate with what they do and for no personal gain what so ever.;action=display&thread=1692

  19. 20

    There have been times in the earths long history where Co2 levels have been higher than now who you going to blame for that huh...temperature has gone up on mars,guess thats anthropogenic also right?...there was a time when there was no oxygen on earth hmmm...yep climate change is new...yep a tax will stop it...people with a little common sence can see through this instead of crying that The sky is falling do some real research and look into who will benignity from this bs...

  20. 20
  21. 3.6k

    Cheers SIXPAC, I'll have a look...

    While I sure the Sun has it cycles etc, however when discussing AGW or Human Influenced Climate Change the sun isn't the be all and end all, as far as climate drivers. Of course the Sun is a major part of our climate, without it, well we don't exist.

    However Humans ARE producing GHGs, as I'm sure you are aware GHGs allow more of the Suns energy to enter the climate cycle. So if the Sun increases it energy output (sun spots whatever) AND humans produce GHGs than this is a 'double Whammy' as far as energy in the climate cycle/s.

    There are many 'groups' that have satellites measuring solar radiation, short wavelength entering (absorbed/transmitted) into atmosphere and long wavelength exiting. These measurements have prove that the Earth is increasing its energy budget, the cause GHGs.

    I disagree that governments have any effect on results published in the science literature. Government IMO, like you say are after POWER/CONTROL and they are self serving. So a Government could cherry pick Climate science/s to push a certain agenda. However this doesn't make the science wrong.

    My 'bare assertion' comment was specific to your assertion.

    Anyway I have an interest in most things 'sciencey' so I'll have a visit of the site.

    While we are talking Sun, are you going to be in FNQ in November for the Eclipse? My house in bang on the perfect position. I've got $100 on that it will be raining that day. :D

Your browser is too old for TopStocks and not secure. Please update your browser