So much for global warming

[WinstonWolfe]

Alan Kohler is often very lucid.
THe short article below on global warming is worth the read.

His point about Labor flailing around pretending to do something, having no adverse consequences is wrong.

There are private enterprise coal fired power plants that are right now, not investing in essential maintenance to keep the stations delivering coal for the next 15-20 years, because Rudd et al prefers to twiddle his fingers and not clarify whether the plants will be allowed to operate that long. Meanwhile, there's no backup power plan.



A monumental failing

The 10-year old international project to stop global warming has descended into a complete shambles; we can now only hope that it’s not true, and that the skeptics are right.

But no matter who is right, we can be sure of one thing – there is little hope that an agreement to replace the failed 1997 Kyoto Protocols can be forged in Copenhagen in December. That’s despite the fact that the two Kyoto holdouts – America and Australia – are now on board, at least in principle................................ click title to read the rest

 

[Aaron Sice]

fact : atmospheric CO2 is rising and has done so, steadily and alarmingly, since the mid 1700s.
fact : the amazon basin is being destroyed - earth's #2 CO2 filter.
fact : atmospheric CO2 does trap heat from the earth directionally radiating out into space.

fact : the earth's largest oxygen machine is the ocean, but it is NOT a CO2 filter.
fact : 10sqm of lawn has the same CO2 filtering capacity as 1 medium tree.
fact : atmospheric CO2 also does a WONDERFUL job of reflecting heat back out into space.
fact : the hole in the ozone layer moves around the southern hemisphere.

ponder those points for a minute, then add these.

increasing sea ice in the south.
decreasing sea ice in the north.
record high temps in the northern hemisphere
stable temps in the southern hemisphere.

there has been a SHIFT in world ocean currents. the atlantic ocean current is slowing to a crawl which is allowing heat to build up in the ocean in the northern hemisphere. this affects weather patterns, ice drifts (the whole north pole is an ice drift), stored (latent) heat, affects fish stocks, affects rainfall and more importantly - affects the release of oxygen from the ocean.

the earth will attempt to balance this heat sink with simple physics - so it gets colder in the southern hemisphere.

the COMPLETE lack of sunspot activity point to a darker and more worrying cause, evident by the increased noctilucent clouds over the EU. the sun has entered cycle 24 - not the end of the world, but certainly set to explain the recently dry winters and balmy summers as a return to regular EMF readings are expected over the next 5-9 years.

there's more that affects this planet than just the 6 billion silly little mammals that discovered they could burn things.

 

[Patosan]

Excellent video ... thanx for posting it.

I just wanted to share this video with you all about "Global Warming Inc"

Hope you find it informative!

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/453.html

 

[quoll]

My view is we don't have enough data. The earth managed to cover it'self in ICE thousands of years ago, what is the normal temperate range for this planet?

How much impact does Man have on the temperate variation?

The news article was a good read thanks for posting.

Cheers
Graeme

 

[Aaron Sice]

i think we just like to think we can make a difference, when in reality, the only difference we can make is the amount of airborne carbon particles we put in the air.

 

[Pushka]

My view is we don't have enough data. The earth managed to cover it'self in ICE thousands of years ago, what is the normal temperate range for this planet?

Amen, agree with you totally! We dont have enough data!

 

[vincenzo]

My view is we don't have enough data. The earth managed to cover it'self in ICE thousands of years ago, what is the normal temperate range for this planet?

How much impact does Man have on the temperate variation?

The news article was a good read thanks for posting.

Cheers
Graeme

But thousands of years ago the worlds population was realtively miniscule compared to today, and the polution being generated would have been next to nothing back then, just some animals farting, and heaps of plants to more than compensate for that. Now we have cars, factories, explosions, heaps of bad stuff.

Allthough global warming does seem to be real, i'm more worried about world war III, or are up to WWIXIX already?

 

[Ausprop]

I think nature will apply the brakes for us. population levels growing exponentially out of control... like rabbits. not sure how it will all end, but it has to some how

 

[vincenzo]

True.

As they say, life's a b|tch.

 

[Pushka]

But thousands of years ago the worlds population was realtively miniscule compared to today, and the polution being generated would have been next to nothing back then, just some animals farting, and heaps of plants to more than compensate for that. Now we have cars, factories, explosions, heaps of bad stuff.

Except that for thousands of years dinosaurs roamed the earth. If a cow releases enough methane gas for people to suggest that perhaps cattle should be banned, imagine the gas produced by those T Rex's!

 

[gooram]

My view is we don't have enough data. The earth managed to cover it'self in ICE thousands of years ago, what is the normal temperate range for this planet?

How much impact does Man have on the temperate variation?

The news article was a good read thanks for posting.

Cheers
Graeme

Fair to say that earth didn't cover itself in ice, this was most likely caused by a meteorite or volcano eruption. Ok so a volcano eruption IS caused by the earth... but my point being of course, that it wasn't from "normal" temperature fluctuation.

 

[topcropper]

Fair to say that earth didn't cover itself in ice, this was most likely caused by a meteorite or volcano eruption. Ok so a volcano eruption IS caused by the earth... but my point being of course, that it wasn't from "normal" temperature fluctuation.

I'd say it would be fair to say the earth did cover itself in ice. The world is currently in an iceage that started a few million years ago. Before that there was long periods where there was no ice whatsoever on the planet. We are currently in an interglacial period that has so far lasted 10 thousand years, and coincidently [or I think not really] the same period of time human civilization has existed. The simple fact is that all life thrives in hotter times and cooler times brings death and suffering and famine.



I've had a gutfull of winter, and I've had a gutfull of this global warming crap. Most people would associate Australia as being a hot place. Well I love summer much more than winter. I don't like winter at all really. I hate it. If I wasn't going to be a farmer on the Liverpool Plains till I die, I'd move to Queensland. Stuff the cold!

So imagine how people in England or Canada must feel? Or Tasmania? They'ed be gleefully cheering it on!

I reckon the reason for all this dithering and stalling and carryon from major nations in the global warming debate is simple. Most of the powerfull countries in the world know deep down that a few degrees warmer in temperature would be a flippen good thing but their not game to say it out aloud. And they are right. Increased temperatures and increased CO2 levels will increase food production and it may even increase this wonderous time we currently have left in this interglacial period that has gone for a much longer time than normal before we head back into the iceage that is the 'normal'.

The plain and simple fact is that increasing temperatures are good, and falling temperatures are what's to be afraid of.


See ya's.

 

[aussierogue]

yeh but

I think global warming just speeds the ice age cycle. The ice age will come sooner so please no warmer weather!

 

[aussierogue]

Heres how I see it

The industrial revolution to climate change is a bit like easy credit to the the price of assets.

Before both the industrial revolution and the credit boom we could try and predict future events based on the past to a certain extent.

The credit market boom has seen the equity and property markets explode into new territory. The speed and size of asset booms have been immense and currently shows no sign of letting up. This in my opinion has been mostly man made and a function of papershuffling (credit)

Same thing with the Industrial revoltion. In the passgae of time this period has been just a blip but our Industrialisation has happend quickly. A massive man made change to the environment (which is unquestionable).

So in my mind the qurestion is more about rates of change and our inability to accuratly forecast the future. The global warming phenom currently happening (if you belive) is man made and thats what makes it dangerous.

And its the speed of change in things like co2 emmissions and the crazy weather patterns that should ring some warning bells.

Some true believers will insist asset booms will go on forever just as some will believe that the world can keep being polluted with no obvious effects.

 

[Witzl]

Alan Kohler is often very lucid.
THe short article below on global warming is worth the read.

His point about Labor flailing around pretending to do something, having no adverse consequences is wrong.

There are private enterprise coal fired power plants that are right now, not investing in essential maintenance to keep the stations delivering coal for the next 15-20 years, because Rudd et al prefers to twiddle his fingers and not clarify whether the plants will be allowed to operate that long. Meanwhile, there's no backup power plan.



A monumental failing

The 10-year old international project to stop global warming has descended into a complete shambles; we can now only hope that it’s not true, and that the skeptics are right.

But no matter who is right, we can be sure of one thing – there is little hope that an agreement to replace the failed 1997 Kyoto Protocols can be forged in Copenhagen in December. That’s despite the fact that the two Kyoto holdouts – America and Australia – are now on board, at least in principle................................ click title to read the rest

Yet another LOL at the failings of the Krudd govt.
At least little Johnny was thinking ahead and investigating a move to Nuclear power as a viable, safe and *comparatively* clean power source.



I have to agree with many of the other posters above - global cooling is something FAAAAAR scarier than global warming.
However, we should still make efforts to be a more "green" civilisation and be a little more eco-friendly with our planet as a whole..... all that effort and money currently being thrown at "global warming/climate change" could be sooooo much better directed at other avenues of reducing our negative impact on the planet (eg - developing green-plastics??)

 

[Witzl]

The industrial revolution to climate change is a bit like easy credit to the the price of assets.

Before both the industrial revolution and the credit boom we could try and predict future events based on the past to a certain extent.

The credit market boom has seen the equity and property markets explode into new territory. The speed and size of asset booms have been immense and currently shows no sign of letting up. This in my opinion has been mostly man made and a function of papershuffling (credit)

Same thing with the Industrial revoltion. In the passgae of time this period has been just a blip but our Industrialisation has happend quickly. A massive man made change to the environment (which is unquestionable).

So in my mind the qurestion is more about rates of change and our inability to accuratly forecast the future. The global warming phenom currently happening (if you belive) is man made and thats what makes it dangerous.

And its the speed of change in things like co2 emmissions and the crazy weather patterns that should ring some warning bells.

Some true believers will insist asset booms will go on forever just as some will believe that the world can keep being polluted with no obvious effects.

i think the evidence is somewhat starting to pile up that shows that humans have nowhere near the impact on climate change that the GW-crowd will have you believe.

I dont think ANYONE is trying to say that we can continue polluting willy nilly.... but the sceptics of GW are just trying to say that we are focusing waaaaaaaaay too much effort and money on something that is steadily being disproven. Yet the GW crowd have their fingers in their ears yelling "lalalalalal!! I CANT HEAR YOU!!"

if you go back well before the industrial revolution, the earth has gone through SEVERAL climate changes of equal or higher rates of change - and survived, and in many cases THRIVED.
I just fail to see how the little old human race has the massive effect that the GW crowd say.

Krakatoa probably spewed out more CO2 and other nasties into our atmosphere than the last 50 years of human civilsation put together - and it did it over just a couple of weeks!

In the year following the [1883 Krakatoa] eruption, average global temperatures fell by as much as 1.2 degrees Celsius. Weather patterns continued to be chaotic for years, and temperatures did not return to normal until 1888.

.... the earth still survived that!

 

[aussierogue]

witzl

I think it is your interpretation that the world is spending way too much time and effort on the IDEA of climate change. I think the response is fairly average. I reckon more money gets spent on Nikes, Mc Donalds or coke a cola every year - so why not climate change?

Here is a question for the skeptices - Lets just accept for a moment that we are excessively polluting the environment (since the induistiral revolution).

How then in your opinion will this manifest itself?

 

[Piston Broke]

Polluting the environment has nothing to do with using scare tactics of first an iceage, then global warming, and now climate change as a means to a political & financial end.
This time round it's carbon emissions trading.
How can you allocate private ownership to carbon emissions for trading?
Do we allocate oxygen emissions next?
Is the only way to reduce CEs trading them?
And in the process giving the biggest polluters credits?
I ain't the only one to whom this all sounds really silly.
It's much easier and cheaper to measure current emissions and tax or charge for higher emissions, and give generous tax credits for lower emissions.
And as if magic, we award those who reduce them.

 

[Mooze]

Have spent the last week in the US - mainly Michigan, although New York as well.
The way of life here is scary. Very little recycling - some glass (10c deposit in MI for some types of glass), some newspaper (no cardboard etc), massive normal garbage bins (think 3 -4 times the size of a normal Aus. wheelie bin) (and they get filled easily despite weekly pickups). Gas guzzlers (massive cars) are still very much the norm (very few normal sedans, have seen only two hatch backs, lotsa pick ups and other bigs cars). Very little packaging is actually recyclable (styrofoam egg cartons, plastic (as in tupperware style) mcdonalds cups, lots of packaging on everything). Also a shift towards plastic rather than paper bags. Air conditioning on all the time (even though it's 25c out). Very little composting. Toilets use gallons of water every flush (no dual flush options).

And that's an "enlightened" (read highly educated, think they're green) household.

If GW is a human caused thing (not debating whether it is or isn't) - we're all screwed if the US doesn't clean up its act.

(on the plus side it's really easy to find quiet tourist spots - anywhere where people have to walk to is almost deserted)

 

[Player]

I haven't conducted any double blinded randomised controlled trials on this topic, however my anectdotal experience and that of my household cohorts has been one of Global Cooling here in Melbourne

A bone warming northern sojourn is beckoning.