Has Climate Change "reporting" reached "End Game'?

[Cruiser Elite]

Oh the plot thickens just like the air in MEL - James Murdoch breaks ranks over 'climate change denial'

 

[Pushka]

Climate change exists. Period. However not accepting all of ‘The Science ‘ that claims to have the answer in a single solution, does not make one a climate change denier.

 

[RooFlyer]

My starting position in the discussion tomorrow will be that the climate has changed and it continues to change," Ms Andrews said.

Great - that's what I reckon too, except I would have put it ...'The climate has always changed (since sometime after the solidification of the continents), is changing now and will continue to change ... The amount to which mankind is contributing to it, is debatable, because we have very, very little knowledge about the rates of change and causes of the previous periods of intense climate change, such as the initiation and ending of ice ages.'

Also polling from the (admittedly 'progressive' think tank), the Australia Institute shows that only 23% of the polled Australians now disagree that the Government should take action to mitigate climate change.

The majority will be pleased to learn then, that the Government has already done much to reduce CO2 emissions to 'mitigate (man's effect on) climate change'. This is what we hear often from the climate alarmists - that the Australian government is 'doing nothing' or similarly 'should start to do something' . Demonstrably and obviously not true, yet I guess they think if they say it often enough, people will believe.

 

[RooFlyer]

Oh the plot thickens just like the air in MEL - James Murdoch breaks ranks over 'climate change denial'

One media outlet poking finger and name-calling another media outlet. Ho hum. Yawn.

And hypocritical of the SMH who refuse to acknowledge that another side to the debate even exists - they of the 'the science is settled' mentality. Hey! Remember that! it got quite a lot of air-time a few years back before oops! they discovered that the oceans have quite a bit of effect on the condition of the atmosphere. And that good 'ol water vapour has quite an effect too.

Name calling - stock in trade of the followers of the faith. I hope this thread keeps getting kicked along - ********

[Removed divisive content which is offensive to many AFF members]

 

[tgh]

The growing first world clamour to "do something" is likely to achieve its goal.. whatever the cost.
What "doing something" cannot do is present any current and relevant science that will warrant any climate change at all.

For many first world residents it will be sufficient to be a lot poorer and to feel a little better because they have tried.
The other 90??% of the world will continue in headlong pursuit of cars and planes and air conditioners.. to be like us.

 

[admin]

I hope this thread keeps getting kicked along

I actually hope this thread does not continue to get "kicked along". AFF is primarily about travel, not climate science. Climate science is a divisive topic (just look at the problems it has caused in the Liberal Party!) and I doubt very much if any of us can really add anything of value - other than just repeating their own opinion in a futile attempt to convert others to their view. Or even worse - to be provocative!

We are keeping this thread open for now, but we are monitoring it very closely. Any posts which are in breach of our TOS will be removed/edited and the poster disciplined.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

<snip>............... Climate science is ................ other than just repeating their own opinion in a futile attempt to convert others to their view. Or even worse - to be provocative!

<snip>

Oh, the irony

 

[JohnK]

Irrespective of whether human "amplified" climate change is real not, I believe there a specific group of individuals who have a problem with capitalism per se, and these are the more militant ones. Climate change is a convenient vehicle for them, that resonates more broadly than most of the arguments they may have, so they use it.

Interesting comment.

I was asking some very opinionated young ones at work if they were at the protest on the weekend that caused disruptions to people trying to go about their business and this was one response.

"Did that affect you? Oh. Really? Oh you poor thing."

Its this type of condescending attitude that irks me. They have an agenda, they are the only ones that are right and nothing can get in the way.

 

[juddles]

I actually hope this thread does not continue to get "kicked along". AFF is primarily about travel, not climate science. Climate science is a divisive topic (just look at the problems it has caused in the Liberal Party!) and I doubt very much if any of us can really add anything of value - other than just repeating their own opinion in a futile attempt to convert others to their view. Or even worse - to be provocative!

We are keeping this thread open for now, but we are monitoring it very closely. Any posts which are in breach of our TOS will be removed/edited and the poster disciplined.

I see the difficulty that this topic poses. because it is in the modern (but I believe short-lived) era that it is such a spectacle.

It is very true that obviously AFF is about travel, not religion (or whatever you want to call the whole Climate thingy). When I used to be a member of whirlpool (a forum for nerds and tech stuff - computers and so forth) they had a very specific rule called "I v P" - this is "Israel versus Palestine". Essentially they identified it as a topic very similar to the Climate Change thing - everyone had firm sides, nothing was gained by allowing debate, and it brought many members to blows.

This sort of rule, where ANY post that even REMOTELY refers to the Climate Change debate would thus get immediately removed by mods. It would rapidly promote an AFF that is not sidetracked by non-aviation issues.

But, there is another side to this, where many on AFF also enjoy participating as a central sort of socialising/debating that has grown far more important in their lives than just a site to discuss cheap tickets...

Maybe a compromise can be reached - have a single isolated thread that is available for these religious wars. Just one. And no others, applying to every other sub-forum and thread the afore mentioned "I v P" concept.

 

[Deleted member]

Quote in NINE media from Science Minister Karen Andrews today shows continued uncertainty from the Government - expect her to be put back in her place anytime soon:

Ms Andrews warned unnecessary debate could distract from the urgent need to develop new bushfire adaptation and mitigation techniques. Her intervention is another step in the Coalition's recent shift in rhetoric over climate change, after a decade of divisions over the issue dominating the party room.

"My starting position in the discussion tomorrow will be that the climate has changed and it continues to change," Ms Andrews said. "We need to focus on the steps to adapt and mitigate the impact of those changes."

Also polling from the (admittedly 'progressive' think tank), the Australia Institute shows that only 23% of the polled Australians now disagree that the Government should take action to mitigate climate change.

I think that she has made the point that climate change is real, BUT not necessarily taken the view that it’s all our fault.
As any so called denier will tell, climate has always been changing, and will,continue to do so , frankly I agree that we should be mending the place (our planet) and make sure we re better able to deal with the problems a changing climate will inevitably produce.

 

[Deleted member]

JohnK, you are right to say climate change is natural and always with us. The area under most scrutiny is the extent to which change is exacerbated by human activity, such as burning coal and flying around the globe. This is where the contest of ideas is taking place, and at this stage i don't think we have got to half-time yet.

and don’t forget the massive deforestation over the last 500 years or so. Eg Scotland, Iceland etc.

 

[Pushka]

When I used to be a member of whirlpool (a forum for nerds and tech stuff - computers and so forth)

I am still on this forum! Now I’m a nerd too!

On cruise critic, one mention of the USA gun control and you are given a warning. Gun control is at the thought of many, likely non US people, so when the topic of whether to travel to a country, say recently, Australia and smoke, and say, France and the yellow jackets. “Is it safe” they ask from the good ole USA. To which must of us would say it’s safer than the USA with lunatics and guns, but that would likely get you banned!

 

[mel-world]

Where this Thread can remain valid is to discuss when the Climate Change debate starts to influence our travel decisions, especially relating to non-essential flights for Mileage or Status runs. I do not intend to limit any business or leisure travel in the foreseeable future but would seriously consider any need to do a status run just to achieve a FF goal.

 

[RooFlyer]

With respect, the thread subject is about 'reporting' of climate change. And while we veered of topic (guilty, your honour), and respecting and observing Admin's cautions above, I think discussion of those topics are fair enough in this 'off topic' thread.

 

[eastwest101]

Oh the plot thickens just like the air in MEL - James Murdoch breaks ranks over 'climate change denial'

You know what - you won't be able to find the full statement of whatever James Murdoch is purported to have said anywhere, every single article is an interpretation from the original Daily Beast article that does not have the full unedited copy of the statement.

 

[Pushka]

Where this Thread can remain valid is to discuss when the Climate Change debate starts to influence our travel decisions, especially relating to non-essential flights for Mileage or Status runs. I do not intend to limit any business or leisure travel in the foreseeable future but would seriously consider any need to do a status run just to achieve a FF goal.

Some of the most serious advocates of man created climate change in my family are also the ones who do the most flying.

 

[stoney]

Your piece is well argued, but flawed I think in the quote. For many of us, it’s not that the climate isn’t changing ( which should rob those who throw the vicious insult of ‘deniers’ ) but that it’s always changing, at various rates and to various extremes. The paucity of data for past extreme occurrences ( other than they existed, such as recent ice ages) to me makes it hard to sustain the argument that is currently all man’s fault and we have to nigh-on destroy our economy to ‘fix’ it.

Most of the quoted ’science’ is on a tiny fraction of the earth’s history, measured to hundredths of degrees. yet for events in the very recent past, they can’t agree on the timing of multi-degree variations, except that somehow they occurred.

The fact that we were first attempted to be bullied into believing that the ‘science is settled’ ( when it was demonstrably not, and rarely ever is) also led me to believe that many of the more strident in the global warming camp are merely charlatans.

Roo Flyer, I am totally in agreement with your understanding of climate change. There are qualified people who have written books which deal with the history of earths climate change by not only their own logic but extrapolating vast amounts of evidence (supported by bibliography as proof) to show that our planet is a dynamic tiny object in the scheme of things whose climate is largely influenced by the vagaries of our thermo nuclear reactor called the sun. One such person is Professor Ian Plimer.
The other point that is worth a mention here is the fact that there are just too many people on this tiny blue dot for our own good. The increase in population has been exponential, consider the explosion from the start of mankind as we now know it ( from start 200,000 years ago) to 1800 turned the first billion i.e. 199,780 years and in the last 220 years it has grown to 7.5 billion. That takes a lot of feeding and resources to sustain let alone provide for the increase.

 

[dajop]

It is very true that obviously AFF is about travel, not religion

Big call that. At times matters (i.e on topic frequent flyer matters) discussed on here do seem be a bit like a religion or at the very least a cult Plenty of discussion of holy grails, elevation to status as higher beings, incurring the wrath of the deity, the elixir of the gods (Krug for some?) , the expedited path to heaven etc etc ...

 

[Hvr]

The other point that is worth a mention here is the fact that there are just too many people on this tiny blue dot for our own good.

I think people on both sides of this debate are in furious agreement here.

Maybe if the right-wing religious people would let birth control and sex education become widespread and common place then there could be a reduction in the number of people on this fragile planet?

Educating women and letting them fully participate in society will also mean fewer children with the benefit of them also being better educated and more productive members of society.

 

[Pushka]

I think people on both sides of this debate are in furious agreement here.

Maybe if the right-wing religious people would let birth control and sex education become widespread and common place then there could be a reduction in the number of people on this fragile planet?

Educating women and letting them fully participate in society will also mean fewer children with the benefit of them also being better educated and more productive members of society.

I’m pretty sure that religious people are not only right wing. In fact in recent memory there is a fair splattering on both sides.