Climate Scientists Recieve Death Threats

[hutch]

Hutch.

Why is it that, when challenged to give a scientific reason for disagreeing with climatological science, you choose instead to engage in a tabloid Gish gallop? The Murdoch press, which you rely upon so much, is especially prone to producing rags that misrepresent, distort, or outright lie about anything remotely related to global warming.

And it'd been pointed out to you more times than I care to count that the politics of a response to climate change is different to the science that underpins our knowledge of the subject itself. Your obsession with the Greens is, besides probably being slightly unhealthy, an exercise in the logical fallacy of poisoning the well, as well as one of tu quoque.

If you want to construct a defensible argument, the first thing you need to learn is to get your logic right.

 

Now lets see, a physiologist does a study and reports his findings. He finds that 40 to 50% of people are, to use his words "green fakes" and I offer up examples of how right the good scientist is and you launch into a rant.......mmmmmm

Little touchy there on the Greens hey? File that one in memory bank for future use

[WoodDragon]

Hutch, I'd simply like to see you actually address - for once - the substance of the science that indicates that human emissions are warming the planet.

You are conmsistently unable to support any of the denialist nonsense that attemtps to contradict the professional climatologists and physicists. This means that your fundamental premise is flawed.

Anything that follows, including your wrist-flapping about the apparently horrible Greens, is therefore rendered irrelevant - the more so in light of the fact that you also employ fallacious logic in your claims.

You may file that into your memory banks as well... for all the good that it will do...

[hutch]

http://www.youtube.c...player_embedded

[WoodDragon]

Hutch.

You probably meant to link to

, or perhaps to this one, or to this one, or maybe to this one.

Or, when you're all growed up and edumacated you could try considering some scientifically credible analysis instead...

[hutch]

Hutch.

You probably meant to link to

, or perhaps to this one, or to this one, or maybe to this one.

Or, when you're all growed up and edumacated you could try considering some scientifically credible analysis instead...

 

No, its ok, I linked to what I wanted to link to.....thanks but.

What do you think of the new wealth distribution program just launched today. Fits with your socialist ideals I bet.

Pretty good take on it all here.

http://ten.com.au/vi...ovideo_m=117200

oh, I forgot....just vote yes This government has nailed this problem....nothing more to worry about. We've found a great new tax that can reduce the earth's temp...wow....lucky the greens are pulling the strings or this may never have happened.....

Edited July 10, 2011 by hutch

[hutch]

Oh dear! Where were you guys or Get Up?.....polls are trashing this carbon tax...this is your one chance...best get on the net and vote....

ANGRY Australians have vowed to vote Julia Gillard from office at the next election after today's controversial carbon tax announcement.

Scores of voters rejected the plan soon after details of the $24.5 billion package to tackle climate change were revealed, with more than 80 per cent who voted in a national online poll saying Australia shouldn't have a carbon tax.

Almost 100,000 votes were cast by more than 25,000 people across four polls in News Limited's "Carbon Tax Plebiscite" by 5pm today, with 87.1 per cent saying they planned to change their vote at the next election in light of the tax.

More than 70 per cent of voters, or 15,866 people, said they now planned to vote for the Coalition at the next election while just 8.51 per cent said they would support a Labor government.

Just 13 per cent of voters said they wouldn't change their vote at the next election.

 

http://www.heraldsun...o-1226091428949

Go Tony.......Prime Minister Tony Abbott....got a nice ring about it at the moment..Your cause has been put back decades and may never be revisited... that's my prediction. I see a wipe out of the Greens and an inhalation of Labor at the next election....Thank god...enough of this crap....Australia should stay in step with the rest of the world....

Us so called "bogans" rule at the end of the day so suck it up

Edited July 10, 2011 by hutch

[chnt]

hutch, you are a disgusting human.

[Sheather]

Second.

[FancyPants]

Oh dear! Where were you guys or Get Up?.....polls are trashing this carbon tax...this is your one chance...best get on the net and vote....

http://www.heraldsun...o-1226091428949

Go Tony.......Prime Minister Tony Abbott....got a nice ring about it at the moment..Your cause has been put back decades and may never be revisited... that's my prediction. I see a wipe out of the Greens and an inhalation of Labor at the next election....Thank god...enough of this crap....Australia should stay in step with the rest of the world....

Us so called "bogans" rule at the end of the day so suck it up

 

You'd prefer your vote to go to someone who just stands around pooh-poohing anyone on the other side of the parliamentary room says without offering ANY alternative scenario (as I thought the opposition was supposed to, in order to make the country a better place and not just fight to be voted king shit of turd mountain like a schoolyard bully)? He'd be more useful planted on top of Capital Hill with his ears used as wind turbines to power Turd Mountain below. I LOVE it when the Libs get all high and mighty about Labour changing their minds after being voted in, when Howard did the same with Work Choices and the GST. Abbott is more bogan than Gillard? HAH.

/end rant here before it gets too much farther off topic.

[hutch]

You'd prefer your vote to go to someone who just stands around pooh-poohing anyone on the other side of the parliamentary room says without offering ANY alternative scenario (as I thought the opposition was supposed to, in order to make the country a better place and not just fight to be voted king shit of turd mountain like a schoolyard bully)? He'd be more useful planted on top of Capital Hill with his ears used as wind turbines to power Turd Mountain below. I LOVE it when the Libs get all high and mighty about Labour changing their minds after being voted in, when Howard did the same with Work Choices and the GST. Abbott is more bogan than Gillard? HAH.

/end rant here before it gets too much farther off topic.

 

You better go....you don't know the difference between Labor and labour ......Abbott is a bogun with big flapping fucking ears....yeah...just like me and the boguns will soon rule the lodge again and you guys just hate it.......hahahahahahaha....That fact alone gives me a woody......I may be a disgusting person chnt but I am disgusting with a majority. You are more than likely a pimply faced little snot who worships the Greens...Don't worry, most of us, and I say MOST of us grow out of that childish stage in our lives when we realize this is a real world needing real leaders...The ones who don't seem to live here. It is only on this site where I am in a minority.....a minority of children who worship the Greens god love em....I will have great pleasure watching the Greens fail........you better jump on your "getup" site and get at it. I sense a slaughter about to happen....and by the way Fancypants.....at least Howard had the balls to take the GST to an election and let the people decide. You may not remember that as you were most likely then still on the breast....

[hutch]

So this tax is one big fail........what a cock up....It does nothing but transfer wealth....How could even the die hard believers in doomsday climate change think this will do anything to make one ounce of difference. It is clearly a socialist policy not a climate one. This is what you get when you put your head in the sand and say "just vote yes"...

quote]THE Greens must have been so astonished by the brilliance of the carbon tax that they just ignored page 18 of the Treasury's overview.

The modelling, which the government relies on to back up just about every fiscal decision it makes, reveals an interesting twist to the carbon tax tale.

People may have been allowed to believe this carbon tax was all about reducing Australia's annual carbon emissions. Not necessarily. It was about reducing our annual "growth" in emissions.

According to Treasury, our total annual emissions will go up. That's right, Australia will pump out more carbon annually in 2020 than now, even with a carbon price and ETS.

According to Treasury, our annual emissions are 578 million tonnes a year. By 2020, with a carbon tax and an ETS, our annual emissions will be 621 million tonnes. The difference is that without the tax, those emissions would have risen to 679 million tonnes. And this was always the case. So, while the government can claim it will reduce emissions by a net 50 million tonnes because of the carbon tax, our total annual emissions will still be higher in 2020 than they are now.

Even with a carbon tax, Australia will not be able to find enough domestic reductions to meet its target of reducing annual emissions by 5 per cent on 2000 levels and instead will have to buy carbon farming credits, new renewables and go to Europe to buy 100 million tonnes of abatement schemes to reach our target.

Coalition environment spokesman Greg Hunt estimates this will cost taxpayers about $3.7 billion in today's terms, which is money which will not be pumped back into the Australian economy.

 

http://blogs.news.co...enson/index.php

[hutch]

There you are Woody.....from the great man Andrew Bolt....the very man who can't get one alarmist to debate him....not one! you would think it a great opportunity for someone to show him up on national television but none have the balls....cause none can answer his questions.......how much will this tax reduce the worlds temperature by?

Nothing...zip...nada.....nought...wealth redistribution by stealth......

JULIA Gillard's carbon dioxide tax is the most brazen fraud to be perpetrated by an Australian government.

Warming believers should be outraged that the tax is so useless.

Sceptics should be outraged it's so pointless.

It offends the intelligence of everyone and threatens the jobs of thousands. For nothing.

The Prime Minister yesterday claimed "the science is in" and man's gases were heating the planet dangerously.

But not even Gillard dares to claim the tax she's finally unveiled will stop any of that warming, or change the climate in any way.

Never has she said by what amount her tax would change the temperature - because it won't. It can't.

Even the Greens' deputy leader, Christine Milne, admits this $23-a-tonne price on carbon dioxide emissions "will not be high enough to drive the transition to renewable (energy)".

No wonder. From sheer gutlessness, the Government has exempted many of the worst "polluters". There's no tax on petrol, no tax on farmers and their gassy animals, and huge handouts to keep some of our coal mines, smelters and power stations going.

And, of course, the tax is just half what global warming adviser Professor Ross Garnaut said was needed, and less than a third of what the Greens wanted.

So what's the point of it?

If you really think man's emissions are heating the world catastrophically, you should be outraged - unless you're hoping the sneaky Government is just softening us up for the full whammy, after the election.

But even then our sacrifice would achieve nothing, because there is no way anything Australia does can change the climate.

Yesterday Professor Richard Lindzen, arguably the world's finest climate scientist and dubbed "credible" even by professional alarmist Tim Flannery, scoffed at Gillard's tax.

"There's no disagreement in the scientific community that this will have no impact on climate," said Lindzen, professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a former lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

"It would be nothing for practical purposes and it would be nothing if the whole world did the same."

Of course, the rest of the world is not doing the same. Not a single other nation has a national carbon dioxide tax, so either we're smarter than every other country ... or Gillard is dumber than every other leader. You choose.

Oh, and Prof Lindzen also added that since 1995 there had been no global warming that could be distinguished from natural variability. The theory man's gases are heating the world dangerously is falling to bits.

The idea a whole economy is being deliberately slowed down for an utterly useless gesture seems so unimaginable, a folly perhaps, explains why few analysts even dare to ask if this tax will do a single thing for the planet.

So here we are, discussing instead whether a tax that costs $4 billion more over the next four years than it will collect will really leave the average household 20 cents a week better off, as the Government says. Twenty cents.

Just to enter such debate makes you complicit in the madness of pretending to do something about something you pretend is a threat. It's like arguing whether unicorns are white or more a creamy colour.

Let's sketch out some of that mad pretence.

Here's a government trying to stop us from using coal to produce cheap electricity for ourselves, while shipping more of it to China so it can have the cheap power instead.

Here's a government promising to keep compensating people for its tax, even though it will after three years let emitters buy carbon credits overseas for half their gases, costing the government the billions it needs to keep up the compo. And once again, this out-of-control Government is promising to spend billions not to build vital infrastructure but to rip it up.

Last month it agreed to pay Telstra $11 billion, effectively to dig up its rival copper network, so the Government could build its own $36 billion national broadband network without fear of competition.

Yesterday Gillard promised to spend undeclared billions more to decommission some 2000 megawatt coal-fired power station to stop its "dirty" emissions. That station will almost certainly be Hazelwood, in Victoria.

Consider the madness. Hazelwood supplies up to a quarter of the baseload power of growing Victoria, which needs more power stations, not less. And that cheap, reliable power will be replaced with ... what?

Ah. And here comes the explanation for the Greens' decision to support this useless tax, even though it has more loopholes and exemptions than were in the emissions trading scheme Prime Minister Kevin Rudd offered them last year - and which they rejected.

Greens leader Bob Brown boasts he has extracted $10 billion from the Government for renewable energy projects, including more than $3 billion for a new green bureaucracy to splurge on developing expensive forms of alternative energy, especially wind and solar.

This is the power the Greens and Gillard imagine will replace a Hazelwood and all the coal-fired stations no investor now dares to build for our future.

What an invitation to waste - and blackouts.

Think of the fate of similar green schemes this Government has tried so far: the roof insulation fiasco, the solar rebate blowout, the green loans disaster and more.

Or think of the $90 billion the Rudd Government gave in 2009 to Geodynamics, a green power company developing a geo-thermal plant in South Australia.

This was green technology Chief Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery once claimed was "relatively straightforward".

But it wasn't, of course. The trouble-plagued Geodynamics project is now years behind schedule and its shares, a bundle of which have been held by Flannery himself, have halved in price.

That's the kind of "clean energy future" Gillard yesterday promised under a plan that won't work to stop a warming that might have stopped anyway, and probably isn't a problem even if it starts again.

Do not let your reason be insulted. Don't be panicked into thinking we must do even something useless to save ourselves.

We've already had a warning of what happens when we let the warming alarmists scare us into spending billions.

In 2005, Flannery claimed Sydney could run out of water within two years because of man-made warming. In 2007, he said cities such as Brisbane would never again have dam-filling rains, because global warming had caused "a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas" and made the soil too hot, "so even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and river systems".

Check the Murray-Darling system this year: in flood. Check Brisbane's dam levels: abundant. And also check the desalination plants Labor governments built in a panic in Queensland and Victoria: not needed.

Trust nothing you are now told by the same people.

Do not trust Gillard's claim yesterday that "the Great Barrier Reef is at risk".

Fact: Townsville's Australian Institute of Marine Science now reports "we found no evidence of consistent, system-wide decline in coral cover since 1995".

Do not trust Gillard's claim yesterday that even British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, a Conservative, said we had to fight man-made warming.

True, she said that in 1988, but by 2003 Thatcher had changed her mind.

In her book, Statecraft, in a chapter headed "Hot Air and Global Warming", she flayed the "doomsters", poked holes in their theories and warned against "costly and economically damaging" schemes to cut carbon dioxide emissions, usually pushed by people who favoured "worldwide, supra-national socialism".

Thatcher could have been talking about Gillard herself, now selling a pointless, ruinous tax to the cheers of ideologues too stupid to even ask: why?

 

http://blogs.news.co...tralian_people/

[Slybacon]

I found this today. Thought it was interesting. Public opinion on the matter is unsettled. I'm still so confused. I appreciate WDs knowledge on the science, but I still feel like I'm undecided.

Another Thread

[FancyPants]

Hutch, is it even possible for you to have a reasonable debate or even argument without resorting to getting personal?

[woof woof woof]

for all the negative guys here

 

[hutch]

Hutch, is it even possible for you to have a reasonable debate or even argument without resorting to getting personal?

 

And what was this shit then?

You'd prefer your vote to go to someone who just stands around pooh-poohing anyone on the other side of the parliamentary room says without offering ANY alternative scenario (as I thought the opposition was supposed to, in order to make the country a better place and not just fight to be voted king shit of turd mountain like a schoolyard bully)? He'd be more useful planted on top of Capital Hill with his ears used as wind turbines to power Turd Mountain below. I LOVE it when the Libs get all high and mighty about Labour changing their minds after being voted in, when Howard did the same with Work Choices and the GST. Abbott is more bogan than Gillard? HAH.

/end rant here before it gets too much farther off topic.

You call that reasonable debate? Or how about " hutch, you are a disgusting human" I will give as good as I get and if you don't like it you know what to do. I shouldn't have to tell you. Go back and have a look at whom has contributed to this debate and who have just slagged off and attempted to humiliate me and shut me down. The more that happens the more shit I will post...simple...The biggest part of the problem here is a fair few of you just don't like what I put up because it offends your ideology...It does not conform to beliefs.. don't really give a flying fuck about that any more. This place long ago lost its shine for me.....

[FancyPants]

I got personal against Abbott, yes, absolutely. To you, no I didn't. If someone else did, that's their issue, I didn't do that to you. You know NOTHING about who I am. I however questioned why you would vote for someone who hasn't put forth any alternative policies when shutting down the efforts of those who are at least having a go. FWIW I think Labor needs to pull their heads in about a lot of things and think things through a bit better, but FFS at least they're doing SOMETHING. You hypocritically scorn my spelling of Labor as labour (which you're right) yet consistently spell "bogan" wrong. WTF does that even have to do with anything?

Edit: It seems to me this place "lost its shine" for you because unless your arse is pulled into line by Torsten or a mod, you can't accept that we're all different with different perspectives. There's MANY people here who I've debated/argued with on one particular topic or another, yet am still able to agree and be civil with them about other things without dredging up other disagreeances from other irrelevant threads/topics.

Edited July 11, 2011 by FancyPants

[hutch]

for all the negative guys here

 

 

But first you would need to believe in his extremes....the biggest problem you guys face now is that a huge chunk of Australians don't believe the government nor those that they have appointed to convince us that they are right. Too many times they have shown themselves to be alarmist and worse still, WRONG....Wether you agree with me or not is a mute point. The argument is collapsing and people are worried that we are about to destroy our economy for nothing. We are continually bombarded with conflicting stories...It wasn't that long ago polls were reversed. Governments around the world set out to put the fear of god in us. All those claims of doom and gloom were just not coming to fruition and given that most of us have been gifted with some level of common sense we have started to see through this con.

[FancyPants]

^^^ Hutch, would you agree that the majority of the Australian population (myself included) wouldn't necessarily know shit from shinola 100% what is right and what is wrong? Popular opinion often flies in the face of fact, either because media spins it whichever way it wishes, or because of rampant selfishness? Whatever the reasons... many people don't believe in conspiracy theories, yet there's a few who believe utterly that they're true; does that mean all conspiracy theories are false?

for all the negative guys here

 

 

Yes, that is exactly why I'm supporting some kind of action rather than none at all.

[Slybacon]

All those claims of doom and gloom were just not coming to fruition and given that most of us have been gifted with some level of common sense we have started to see through this con.

 

Im not sure which is the con tho mate. Climate change or the Solutions? It seems to me that stuff IS happening. If the data on Carbon emmissions effect on Temp rises is correct no amount of tax can save us. Perhaps we just need to continue to be adaptive. Look at the land reclaiming in Holland. Humans WILL survive.

[hutch]

Im not sure which is the con tho mate. Climate change or the Solutions? It seems to me that stuff IS happening. If the data on Carbon emmissions effect on Temp rises is correct no amount of tax can save us. Perhaps we just need to continue to be adaptive. Look at the land reclaiming in Holland. Humans WILL survive.

 

I think both are cons to some degree but it doesn't matter what I alone think. It is what the majority thinks that will count and the majority have moved on. They have done a shocking job of convincing the majority. I read and participate in a shit load of news forums and I have noticed the mood swing. Gradual at first but now its a tidal wave and people are angry and rightly so. All the lies and exaggerations have now blinded people to what may be true. It's like they keep getting caught out crying woof....The shut down of debate has had a huge impact on public opinion. Get Ups attempted blackmail did no end of harm as was barring Monkton from some venues. People are wondering what have they got to hide...why wont they debate? Why do they insult anyone who dares question them...People are doing it a bit tougher than the well off's think as well. I just got my home insurance bill from RACQ. They want to sting me another $14.00 per week and they are not willing to negotiate...I am obviously shopping around but If I can do no better than what they are offering then I have just pissed any carbon compo from Gillard up the wall...This is gunna hurt a lot of us no matter what the government would like us to believe and the worse thing is its all for nothing. All that coal will still be burnt, just by others.....But the human species is very adaptive so I have no doubt we will survive into the future no matter what happens.

[hutch]

If your interested in what the Internet polls have to say have a look here..

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/carbon-tax-pm-announces-23-per-tonne-carbon-price/story-e6frf7jo-1226091428949

I know they are not an accurate reflection but they have gone crazy....Tony Abbott will be PM unless something drastic happens...A huge glacier better break off and slip into the ocean or something because people have switched off....

[Slybacon]

I think both are cons to some degree but it doesn't matter what I alone think. It is what the majority thinks that will count and the majority have moved on. They have done a shocking job of convincing the majority. I read and participate in a shit load of news forums and I have noticed the mood swing. Gradual at first but now its a tidal wave and people are angry and rightly so. All the lies and exaggerations have now blinded people to what may be true. It's like they keep getting caught out crying woof....The shut down of debate has had a huge impact on public opinion. Get Ups attempted blackmail did no end of harm as was barring Monkton from some venues. People are wondering what have they got to hide...why wont they debate? Why do they insult anyone who dares question them...People are doing it a bit tougher than the well off's think as well. I just got my home insurance bill from RACQ. They want to sting me another $14.00 per week and they are not willing to negotiate...I am obviously shopping around but If I can do no better than what they are offering then I have just pissed any carbon compo from Gillard up the wall...This is gunna hurt a lot of us no matter what the government would like us to believe and the worse thing is its all for nothing. All that coal will still be burnt, just by others.....But the human species is very adaptive so I have no doubt we will survive into the future no matter what happens.

 

I think this is the best responce you have personally added to this debate. I agree with most of what you have said here.

[Blood Trance Fusion]

If your interested in what the Internet polls have to say have a look here..

 

Q: Do you want more or less tax?

A: 100% - Less

0% - More

Surprised, hutch?

[hutch]

Surprised, hutch?

 

I'm talking about the sentiment.....there is anger out there and you can see it in the polls whether you want to admit it or not....

Like the question they use in most of the polls..

"Do you believe in climate change" I mean derrrrr!!!!

It goes both ways.