Poor countries cutting more emissions than the rich

[Halcyon Daze]

Oxfam: Developing Countries Pledge Bigger Climate Emissions Cuts Than World's Richest Nations

http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/science-a-environmental/24696-oxfam-developing-countries-pledge-bigger-climate-emissions-cuts-than-worlds-richest-nations-.html

The title says it all...

It's a disgrace that we are dodging our fair share of the responsibility, while developing countries like China and India are putting us to shame.

It's time we took the lead on such big issues.

Thousands have rallied in support of a carbon tax around Australia. Join the stand against those who want to hold us back.

[WoodDragon]

But HD, if we reduce our emissions we won't be able to have 56" flat-screens in every room, and we won't be able to leave the air con on when all the doors are open.

Be reasonable, man.

[Halcyon Daze]

Lol. All this hoo-ha over how a carbon price will destroy our economy and it's 'chicken feed' really.

People who support the carbon tax do it out of principle. And a man without principles is like, like... well just look at Tony Abbott. Lead a mutiny over a carbon emissions and now continues to do everything he can to help the big polluters.

His own kids will suffer from the effects of climate change but does he give a shit?

[Slybacon]

^ Somebody think of the children!

[Blood Trance Fusion]

But HD, if we reduce our emissions we won't be able to have 56" flat-screens in every room, and we won't be able to leave the air con on when all the doors are open.

Be reasonable, man.

 

56"? Mine's only frigging 1-metre across. I'm going home to burn my plastic-recycling-bin to boost the economy and get me a new tele!

[WoodDragon]

Mine's only frigging 1-metre across.

Shit mate, how can you see anything? You'd need a bloody microscope!

[The Dude]

I do not support the carbon tax on principle. I will concede that if the majority of well versed science types have reached a consensus on AGW with carbon as the reason for it then for sure we need to reduce carbon emissions -having said that the power of suggestion and the experimenter effect will mean that even with the most objective minds and the most well controlled tests there will always be an inherent bias in the results; the whole collective is geared to receive certain results it expects.

[edit] not to mention the emotional investment a scientist can inadvertently make in their theory, blinding their objectivity.

Offloading the economic burden to change infrastructure and industry (who have made all the money and should be paying for this change) onto consumers will not change anything. Companies will make dealings with corrupt third world governments (or first world) there will be exemptions and most of all there will be redistribution of wealth just as there always has been with every new economic solution. I have principles, that's why I do not support the tax. Thanks for lumping those against a carbon tax with Tony Abbot, in fact if there is a conspiracy I think that having Abbot on the "skeptics" side is to convince everyone a carbon tax is logical (cuz Abbot is anything but).

I see the way politicians and the media have treated this issue and the hype and scare tactics do not promote intellectual debate, rather alarmist rhetoric, and for those who reject this kind of emotional manipulation they are ironically very emotional in their rejection of the rhetoric, and blind themselves to the truth because of the way a liar twisted it first. Not seeing how they've been manipulated themselves by their hate of manipulation.

If it is as big a problem as the scientific community says it is, then the media and politicians (and their globalist friends they represent) should just fuck off so that people can get together and actually fix the situation without everybody's vested interests getting in the way. Corporates and politicians are merely exploiting a real problem to gain control again. Genocide and ecocide have never been concerns for the elites, but they're important to us, and that's enough for them to manipulate and gain control.

Edited June 10, 2011 by The Dude

[hutch]

Lol. All this hoo-ha over how a carbon price will destroy our economy and it's 'chicken feed' really.

People who support the carbon tax do it out of principle. And a man without principles is like, like... well just look at Tony Abbott. Lead a mutiny over a carbon emissions and now continues to do everything he can to help the big polluters.

His own kids will suffer from the effects of climate change but does he give a shit?

 

There's a sucker born every minute.....or is that educated?

Alarmist has a new name and are starting to play a new game.....I have noticed Browns goons have heard the call and are all over the news forums.....being laughed at mainly but they are doing there best....you'll find it works way better on sites like this.....they get ripped to pieces elsewhere.....

[hutch]

Oxfam: Developing Countries Pledge Bigger Climate Emissions Cuts Than World's Richest Nations

http://www.enewspf.c...t-nations-.html

The title says it all...

It's a disgrace that we are dodging our fair share of the responsibility, while developing countries like China and India are putting us to shame.

It's time we took the lead on such big issues.

Thousands have rallied in support of a carbon tax around Australia. Join the stand against those who want to hold us back.

 

Gore said: “We need bolder action to cut emissions and stop climate change driving generations of children into hunger. All countries must step up and deliver their fair share of the emissions reductions needed. Countries must also ensure the most vulnerable get the support they need to adapt. Rocketing food prices signal climate change red alert”.

You guys are still using the chief alarmist Gore to support your cause.....Its a climate change red alert people.....whoop whoop whoop........I know....why don't you all start holding your breath......though It's not only carbon you are full of.....

[hutch]

^ Somebody think of the children!

 

Yeah...poor little Gracie......think of the sun burn.....

Edited June 9, 2011 by hutch

[hutch]

CSIRO is no longer a respected, independent scientific advisory body, but a politicised mouthpiece for the Labor government and their efforts to "tackle climate change":

CSIRO chief Dr Megan Clark will today join 600 of Australia's top climate change scientists [environmental activists - Ed] at a meeting in Cairns to update the latest observations.

http://www.australia...s-carbon-price/

So we have 600 climate scientists in Australia alone.....what a fucking crock....That is more than are registered as professional AFL players......tax payers dollars in action right there.....hope they all walked to Cairns...

The youtube clip is a fine example of the standard of Climate Scientists we have in this country....600 of them just amazes me.....and I am being asked to trust these guys...yeah right....

[hutch]

Oxfam: Developing Countries Pledge Bigger Climate Emissions Cuts Than World's Richest Nations

http://www.enewspf.c...t-nations-.html

The title says it all...

It's a disgrace that we are dodging our fair share of the responsibility, while developing countries like China and India are putting us to shame.

It's time we took the lead on such big issues.

Thousands have rallied in support of a carbon tax around Australia. Join the stand against those who want to hold us back.

 

How accurate the IPCC? It was just their best guess.

http://wattsupwithth...ata/#more-41371

The trend not quiet as predicted! What if this chart were to continue trending the same way it is now? What then?

Anyone notice how cold it is this year? Breaking records everywhere......must be part of the warming....the part they didn't reckon on until it happened.....and still it just wont do what they say it will....

[Slybacon]

Climaate change^^^^ Remember, glabal warming was scraped.

[Halcyon Daze]

You guys aren't worth trying to educate. We dealt with all that in another thread.

Meanwhile our carbon emissions are reaching new record highs.

I just can't believe that we are letting our politicians get away with it.

I don't think Labour will deliver the tax, they will try to wriggle out of it at the last minute, like they've done before. Anyway even if I'm wrong about that the tax doesn't go far enough. All this debate over tiny cuts.

Will Australia face sanctions in the near future? As the power shift takes place we could be really held accountable. I 'd say America will definitely be made to pay.

RIP America.

[WoodDragon]

Hutch,

I note that Gish Galloping is still your preferred method of engagement, rather than any coherent and carefully referenced specific argument.

On the matter of your post linking to Watts and his claim that the IPCC had their predictions wrong, you might want to know that this is a canard from the stable of the very unstable Monckton, who was thoroughly and completedly refuted on this matter.

Oopsie.

Bacon.

Climaate change^^^^ Remember, glabal warming was scraped.

Thank you for bringing this very important point up.

'Global warming' was indeed scrapped as a common term of usage, and replaced by 'climate change' - by the Republican Party's advisor Frank Luntz, who thought that it would sound less shocking to an American public who didn't want to be confronted with the reality of planetary warming.

The thing is, Luntz went from being a political denier of the science to actively acknowledging that it was correct all along, and that action needs to be taken.

[hutch]

You guys aren't worth trying to educate. We dealt with all that in another thread.

Meanwhile our carbon emissions are reaching new record highs.

I just can't believe that we are letting our politicians get away with it.

I don't think Labour will deliver the tax, they will try to wriggle out of it at the last minute, like they've done before. Anyway even if I'm wrong about that the tax doesn't go far enough. All this debate over tiny cuts.

Will Australia face sanctions in the near future? As the power shift takes place we could be really held accountable. I 'd say America will definitely be made to pay.

RIP America.

 

It's Labor...not Labour and the only reason they would try and wiggle out of it is because the people don't want it...strange that...

The fact that we dealt with this in another thread means what exactly? Your right and we should just move on for the sake of gaia...Not a chance buddy....

[hutch]

http://www.climatech...medium=email

It's a science of CONSENSUS......a science of fraud.....

Scientists trash the scientific method, more evidence disproving global warming theory.

At least the unethical and/or the leftist scientists do. The Scientific Method was invented by Galileo to insure ethical research protocols independent of popular thinking. Galileo was persecuted by the scientific community when his research indicated that the Earth revolved around the sun instead of the sun revolving around the Earth. This contradicted popular consensus of the time. He died penniless, persecuted and correct in the face of overwhelming scientific consensus.

Today ethical scientists abide by the Scientific Method in their research. The unethical scientists and leftists have abandoned that protocol in favor of "consensus". The IPCC, Al Gore and the media keep talking about consensus about Global Warming theories. They don't talk about any proofs derived through the Scientific Method because there are none.

Part of what makes the Scientific Method credible is the solid foundation that requires any scientific hypothesis to be verifiable, testable, repeatable and open to critique by any scientist in the world. In fact scientific journals are published to disseminate research findings and make them open to scientific peers. In response to that, we have scientists complaining around the world that they are "blackballed" from getting their refutation articles printed in scientific journals.

We have had had a Congressional hearing about the widespread censorship preventing scientists from coming forward to expose the fraud. We have had mainstream professors and research scientists complaining that the IPCC suppresses any dissenting articles and does not even report that there are any. We have Nancy Pelosi openly threatening any scientists who don't toe the PC line on global warming to cancel their research grants.

That is not only a violation of scientific protocols and the Scientific Method, it is felony extortion. Similarly, we have had the head of The Weather Channel, Heidi Cullen suggesting that any meteorologist who contradicts the global warming tenants have his credentials revoked. This is also felony extortion. These women have not been called on it much as less prosecuted. Finally in "real science" there are supposed to be control studies or double blind studies done to root out tester bias. So far, I have not discovered any refutation, control studies or double blind studies in the research grants given by Congress.

ENVIRONMENTALISM IS A SECULAR RELIGION

We are also troubled by environmentalists who view it as secular religion. For them it is about faith and feelings. They can't be bothered by facts and logic. Facts and logic do not resonate with them. They have adopted an alternative religion and for them it enables them to have a positive self-image. Whatever is stated in the name of saving the planet is never ever questioned or fact checked. To question it or fact check it to the environmentalist is a Christian's equivalent to heresy. It is if we are denying God's existence. Critics are dismissed, criticized, maligned and rendered irrelevant. For the environmentalist, there is no room for discussion. It is "us against them". The resemblance between radical environmentalists and cults are eerily similar.

What is observed are the global warming cabal's own writings. They characterize themselves as culturally and intellectually superior. They condescendingly refer to anyone who disagrees with them as: "The Cro Magnin Fringe", Deniers, "under-educated" ignorant and so on.

Here are some scientific refutation facts that you should be aware of: Man caused global warming due to increased CO2 is a theory based upon a flawed computer model on the part of the IPCC. That theory posits that CO2 will rise into the atmosphere and stay there for 100 years. The IPCC claims that this will be cumulative and causing a "green house effect" thus causing the earth to warm.

Here is the scientific refutation. CO2 has a specific gravity of 1.52 which means that it is 152% heavier than air and thus sinks to the ground when released. This is why we use it in fire extinguishers. The CO2 sinks to the ground and starves a fire from oxygen. You can't do away with the Law of Gravity. Now it is true that we have wind blown particles of CO2 in the air, just like we have wind blown dust particles in the air. The truth is that when the wind dies down, gravity pulls the dust and the CO2 out of the air and it settles back down to the ground. We went from 300 PPM (parts per million) before the Industrial Revolution to 380 PPM over the last 100 years.

That is an increase of 80 PPM. The fractional equivalent of 80 PPM is 8/100,000ths of 1%. That is a trace amount by any objective standard. Trace amounts are allowed in our food. The FDA even has standards for trace amounts of rat droppings in our food. People urinate in the pool while they are swimming. We all know that and yet we all swim in the pool. The amount of urine compared to the whole volume of the swimming pool is so small that it is not a factor.

BLACK BALLOONS

Black Balloons is the title of a commercial that epitomizes the kind of outright rank fraud being perpetrated by the global warming cabal. You can see it for yourself by simply punching it into your search engine. Gore touted this commercial in a segment with Larry King. It is a slickly and professionally produced commercial with a voice over narration by Tommie Lee Jones. It depicts black balloons ostensibly being filled with CO2 from different appliances.

The balloons fill and then break free from the appliance and float up to the ceiling and out a window joining thousands of other balloons to illustrate how we pollute the atmosphere. What is fraudulent is that they filled those balloons with a lighter than air gas of Helium. If they had in fact filled them with CO2, they would have sunk to the ground. The media never made an outcry over this rank fraud. It is illustrative of the fraud going on the movement.

We are told that we are at a "tipping point" and that we are all in imminent danger thus requiring drastic alterations in our lifestyle, or at least mitigate it with carbon taxes.

Around the world, we put billions of cubic feet of CO2 into the atmosphere from distilling beer, wine and hard liquor. We also put billions of cubic feet of CO2 into the atmosphere from bread making. We even manufacture billions of cubic feet of CO2 to put fizz and taste into our soft drinks. In this country alone, the per capita consumption of soft drinks is an amazing 47.2 gallons.

Ask yourselves, if we are at a dangerous tipping point that requires immediate cutbacks of CO2 into the atmosphere, why are the scientists not asking or demanding that we cease production of these carbon offending products? This is of course a rhetorical question. The answer is obvious. The public would revolt and we would not get any agreement at all to give the radical environmentalists what they are asking for.

In the mainstream media, we have been subjected to numerous scare tactic claims. We have been told that: we are going to have massive flooding due to glacier melt and ice burgs melting, that we are going to have "massive saltwater fish kills" due to that same glacier melting, that polar bears are either going to drown or starve due to the ice pack melting. We were previously told that we were going to have global warming because Freon was eating a hole in the ozone.

FLOODING

One of the big scare tactics by global warming alarmists is massive flooding due to ice melt. They conveniently forget to tell you thatNewton's Third Law of Physics has not been disproved. His law states that: FOR EVERY ACTION, THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION. This means that if we have ice melting due to warming temperatures, there will be an exponential increase in the rate of evaporation from the oceans. This evaporation is part what is called THE HYDROLOGIC CYCLE.

The Hydrologic Cycle simply means that the rivers run into the oceans, the sun evaporates water from the ocean surface, distilling it and removing the salt in the process, the water vapor rises into the atmosphere where it is dispensed in the form of rain or snow which falls on the ground and runs off into the rivers where the rivers run back into the ocean. So in actuality, the oceans would actually decrease in height due to global warming not increase.

Al Gore stated that the floating ice burgs melting would also cause flooding in his movie; AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH. You can disprove this yourselves because of Archimede's Law of Displacement. You simply fill a Styrofoam cup above the rim with ice cubes to simulate ice burgs. You then fill the glass to the rim with water causing the cubes to float like ice burgs. Allow the ice cubes to melt. You will not have any water leaking over the side thus easily disproving Mr. Gore's claim.

SALTWATER FISH KILLS DUE TO FRESH WATER INFUSION

We have been warned that there would be massive saltwater fish kills due to the fresh water infusion into the saltwater environment from melting ice pack. This sounds reasonable on its face. If you go back to the Hydrologic Cycle, we have rivers running into the sea all over the world. Examine TheMississippi River. It is the third largest drainage basin in the entire world. Its flow rate is 4 million gallons per second. Now ice melting could never equal that flow and in spite of it, there are no saltwater fish kills at the mouth of theMississippi River. This is due to the Diffusion Principle. You can be reminded of that Diffusion Principle back to the urination in the pool.

POLAR BEARS DROWNING DUE TO MELTING ICE PACK

If you look up in any scientific text, you will find that polar bears are classified as marine mammals like seals or walrus. You will also note that in that text, it will tell you that polar bears can swim 60 miles non-stop at a speed of 6 mph, more than twice as fast as a human. Drowning is not a factor in a healthy polar bear.

POLAR BEARS STARVING DUE TO MELTING ICE PACK

Polar bears primary diet is seal pups. Seals try and protect their pups by hiding them in snow caves below the ice surface. Bears smell the pups in the caves and try and catch them by breaking the ice surface to reach the cave and the pup. Bears are only successful in about 1 out of 6 attempts. If the ice pack melted, then the seals would be forced to having their pups on land. This would result in a veritable buffet of seal pups for the bears, thus causing the bear population to actually increase due to the extra food available. It is a little known fact that animals increase or decrease their rate of reproduction according to the available food in their habitat.

GLOBAL WARMING DUE TO FREON EATING A HOLE IN THE OZONE

Remember that scare tactic back in the 1970′s? Scientists have quietly backed away from that claim. This is because we outlawed Freon in 1989 and it has made no difference in the ozone. The difference it has made is to increase the cost of an alternative coolant over 500%. Despite the fact that their theory was disproved, scientists have not made such an admission and pushed for re-legalization of Freon which is much cheaper for cooling.

Confronted with this contradiction to their theory, scientists are now claiming that it is CO2 which is causing a "Green House Effect". There was never an actual hole in the ozone. There was only a seasonal shift in the thickness of the ozone layer at the poles. The thinning is a natural occurrence due to the fact that it at the poles where the earth spins on its axis. This would naturally cause what is defined as a vortex. You see a thinning of the air in the center of a tornado which is another naturally occurring vortex. The thinning changes during the seasons because of Boyles Law and Charles Law of Gasses.

Scientists never bothered to explain their theory in view of the evidence that: Gasses have no magical magnetic properties that would cause them to race thousands of miles to the poles and then magically re-concentrate themselves into this toxic soup to eat a hole in the ozone. They also did not bother to explain how Freon could then rise up into the Troposphere where the thinning occurs since Freon is a heavier than air gas weighing 134% more than air. Scientists also did not bother to explain why there was no atmospheric thinning over the land masses in the warmer climates likeFloridaandCaliforniaandMexicowhere the Freon was actually released.

GLOBAL COOLING

NASA quietly and without fanfare corrected their temperature records because a blogger reminded them that the warmest year on record was actually back in 1934 during the Great Dust Bowls. This is long before the expansion of the Industrial Revolution and its corresponding increases of CO2.

We have had atmospheric cooling for the last 8 years with record lows being set around the world. For example,San Francisconever got above 71 degrees in June this year for the first time ever since we have been keeping temperature records. This flies in the face of global warming theory and is an utter contradiction. Scientists and Mr. Gore have quietly changed their rhetoric to talk about "climate change" instead of global warming in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Now that Congress is poised to inflict carbon taxes and Cap and Trade legislation, it would behoove us to look at both sides of the issue which are conspicuously absent in the mainstream media. Carbon taxes are sure to be a business killer. We are in a deep recession with thousands of businesses going belly up. There are tens of thousands more businesses, just barely hanging on. President Obama said during his campaign he "he would tax businesses out of business if they did not meet his carbon requirements". Businesses need to start lobbying Congress for their own survival.

What then as a society should be our role? Should we blindly accept increased costs and taxes based upon a flawed and disproved theory? My answer is no, what is yours? What will you do about it to give voice to your concerns?

Editor's note: John Wilder graduated from College with three degrees, two of which in the sciences. He went on to graduate school for clinical psychology. Additionally, he worked in the scientific field for several years.

[Slybacon]

You guys aren't worth trying to educate. We dealt with all that in another thread.

 

Thats the sort of attitude mate...... It sounds like war, divide and rule!

It's clear you've totally missed the other thread that was started months ago.

Bring it to the surface when you find it and we'll chat then.

At least Woody has some education behind his debate, you sound like a Whinny soccer mum on chardy after watching A Current Affair.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Slybacon

[Halcyon Daze]

Lol. I only wrote that because you keep writing things like this in my threads all the time...

"Most of the topics have been covered in the Global Cooling thread which got moved to Chill Space. So don't see why this thread shouldn't be merged so we are not chasing our tail. "

Look familiar? It should because you wrote it!

Looks like you can give but you can't take, even when it wasn't serious. I knew you wouldn't like a taste of your own shit medicine.

You guy's aren't skeptics, you are outright deniers. Face it, no evidence will ever change your minds.

That's not very scientific now is it...

[Slybacon]

Call me what you want, denier or skeptic, you don't have a true insight into the political manipulation of the science. Labels of my "type" won't further your argument. I'm Supa Serial.

I have way more respect for WD's input on the subject, and appreciate his scientific input. Yours is just green hippy crap.

Keep looking, Manbearpig is out there.........

[Halcyon Daze]

Yeah, thanks for the insult mate, and thanks for trolling all my threads.

[Halcyon Daze]

I'm Supa Serial.

 

More like 'A serial troll with an identity crisis'.

Look, you made your point so many times now. Either add to the debate or stop trolling my threads.

[hutch]

This is what our CSIRO expert, Dr Penny Whetton had to say in 2008

Scientists say Australian skiers should prepare for shorter ski seasons because of global warming.

A report published in the New Scientist magazine has found the average number of days of snow in the Swiss Alps is lower than ever before.

CSIRO climate change expert Dr Penny Whetton says Australia's mountain snow cover could be reduced by up to 54 per cent by 2020.

"The probability of any precipitation falling as snow rather than rain is going to decrease, and any snow lying on the ground is going to melt more quickly," she said.

"So the outcome of that is, there's going to be shorter snow seasons, not as much depth of snow on the ground, with that situation deteriorating further as we go through the century."

 

http://www.abc.net.a...ction=australia

But then in the real world we get this,

A WINTER wonderland awaits snow bunnies this Queen's Birthday long weekend.

Every major resort is opening lifts for the start of the ski season and this is set to be the biggest opening weekend in more than a decade.

Chilly conditions and pleasant weather reports are expected to make snow conditions perfect.

Mount Buller opened its Bourke St lift for three hours yesterday, attracting a few hundred enthusiasts.

Tomorrow, that number could be more than 5000 as the season officially starts and four lifts open.

Falls Creek resort spokesman Ian Talbot said they had received an "avalanche" of inquiries in the past week.

"By the number of calls, I would not be surprised if we got a couple of thousand people over the weekend," he said. Mt Baw Baw Alpine Resort chief executive Leona Turra said it would be the biggest opening weekend in nearly two decades.

 

http://www.heraldsun...2-1226073277705

So is this now a part of Global warming? Is the CSIRO wrong? How am I too take the science seriously when I can find endless examples of scientists being alarmist and then proven wrong...

Now we are going to slaughter camels to save our planet....In gas guzzling 4X4 vehicles no doubt...

WITH the planet threatening to turn into a ball of fire, it's a relief to find the Gillard Government may have a solution: Kill the camels.

Yes, shoot the buggers. From a car, from a helicopter. Exterminate.

As you know, we have herds of camels roaming the outback, but only now have they been revealed as a menace to the planet.

In a proposal the Department of Climate Change has released for consultation, the Northwest Carbon company notes these cud-chewers burp clouds of methane.

"Methane is a potent greenhouse gas," it warns.

These camel burps are baking the planet. And so, under this proposal, we must shoot the camels to save ourselves.

It's plans like this that make me wonder who the planet is actually being saved for. Certainly not for the camel.

http://blogs.news.co...ate_the_camels/

That'l drop the planets temp by a few degrees.....

[Halcyon Daze]

Ok, well these are valid points but as far as I undertsand, we can expect more extreme weather events.

So some years will be unusually cold, some unusually hot, some extra dry some extra wet. Overall, the gradual warming of the planet is causing this climatic chaos and hence the term 'Global Warming'. But the term Global Warming has been superseded by the less confusing term, "Climate Change". And this is what we're seeing all around us every year.

Not only are we seeing it happen already but we're able to measure feedback effects like drier conditions in some places resulting in more bush-fires that release more carbon. They've been predicting this for 50 years and now it's happening. The fact that we can now measure feedback effects suggests we've already waited too long to get out of it easily. Every day we waste is another few months of extinctions and human and economic losses.

To think that there's some sweeping conspiracy that encompasses all scientists and all countries, and they're ganging up on the poor old oil companies is ridiculous. It's quite simply laughable.

Scientists are encouraged to speak out if they disagree with another scientist, but they have to be open to the fact that they may also be proven wrong by the next scientific findings.

Scientists love debate, it helps them narrow down the fact from the fiction.

As for the camels. I think the only way we're going to help things now is to take a multi-faced approach. Do whatever we can, how ever we can, when, where whoever we can because all the little things add up. Especially when you're on borrowed time.

Honestly hutch, these are well worn arguments, you must be aware of them.

[Slybacon]

Ok, well these are valid points but as far as I undertsand, we can expect more extreme weather events.

So some years will be unusually cold, some unusually hot, some extra dry some extra wet. Overall, the gradual warming of the planet is causing this climatic chaos and hence the term 'Global Warming'. But the term Global Warming has been superseded by the less confusing term, "Climate Change". And this is what we're seeing all around us every year.

Not only are we seeing it happen already but we're able to measure feedback effects like drier conditions in some places resulting in more bush-fires that release more carbon. They've been predicting this for 50 years and now it's happening. The fact that we can now measure feedback effects suggests we've already waited too long to get out of it easily. Every day we waste is another few months of extinctions and human and economic losses.

 

There is a lot of evidence to suggest this is true. Natural or man made being at the whim of the ever changing environment is scary for sure. I agree there are a lot of things that can be done to ensure we all live sustainably and take care of the environment that provides for us.

I think a much better motivation for bringing about these changes is providing people a way to give power to them selves. When I say power I mean the power over their own lives to influence the choices they make not power in the form of electricity, although this is part of it.

To think that there's some sweeping conspiracy that encompasses all scientists and all countries, and they're ganging up on the poor old oil companies is ridiculous. It's quite simply laughable.

Scientists are encouraged to speak out if they disagree with another scientist, but they have to be open to the fact that they may also be proven wrong by the next scientific findings.

Scientists love debate, it helps them narrow down the fact from the fiction.

 

In every emotional trigger there are huge power gains to be made for those in the position to exploit them. In fact there is enormous pressure on the men of position to take such action or potentially lose everything. We need to awaken to the fact we have very little to gain from our division on emotional subjects such as the climate despite the enormous amounts of knowledge and enthusiasm input. The power our emotions generate driving these threads is the fuel for tyrannical opportunities to manifest amongst the anger,blame and confusion. We should be looking at other ways of improving our situation. If we give this power to ourselves and not surrender to the whims of such convenience the unpredictable forces of the worlds tyrants will be powerless against us.

I feel that too many people picture a "conspiracy" as some synchronized effort of a select few, controlling the pecking order of the hoard to ultimately take over the planet. All in the name of some modern flavor society has dreamed up to fuel both sides of such debates. Dark and powerful men that dwell in exorbitant hedonistic realms commanding secret forces to do their bidding, warping the minds of modern science to influence the consequences of the herds actions. Like the super villains in comic books or the myths of the family bloodlines that frequent these circles. The word conspiracy is just a label, and one that has been twisted to bring about images. It is no more useful then other terms that appear through the pages of many debates on the topic of this thread. Words that can be twisted in the complexities of context to further the ego of the participants and gain favor for their adopted agenda. In the hope that the time they have invested in manifesting these personal truths was not wasted.

I think in truth a real conspiracy is born from ideals that motivate capitalism, greed and tradition. An idea that has lurked in the shadows of the minds of history's most powerful men. The heirachy of our modern world is geared to steer these idea's to gain the majority opinion of the masses. Every facet of modern convenience is used to drive this engine to further the agenda of Power and Order. The power of these idea's are resonated through the echelons of the worlds pecking order and its archaic existence has been known by many names through the rise and fall of countless civilisations. This is the phenomena science fails to explain, and what drives power of fear through the doctrines of the worlds modern religion.

Halycon I do respect your enthusiasm and I apologise for coming off as some what of an ignorant arsehole. I hope that as a society we can come to some sort of consensus about the climate and the way we use technology to enrich our lives, although I feel that a better way to address the problem would be restoring more power to the people and take away the centralised governing body that is the catalyst for a select few make the desicions that effect us all. Our Fate is in Our Hands.