What Carbon

[Moody]

Moody there is no point arguing with you.

In your case .... no.

I have explained my position several times.

No you haven't. You have made some ludicrous claims (i.e. sea levels aren't rising), and when your deceptive language is exposed you slip from the grasp and squeal off in another direction.

How about you state in one paragraph your position on climate change and what you think we should do about it. Or are you incapable of even that? (RQA)

Maybe you should find where I have said the things you impute.

Show me where you haven't. {That will keep him busy!}. OK - how about you stop treating everyone on this forum like they are 5 years old. How about you state your position?

There are none so blind.......

Oh how droll. Your wit is razor sharp tonight.

 

[Moody]

I think both sides will, till the end of time, accuse the other of being those who refuse to see.

My position re the actual debate is unimportant as I am not an expert in the field. But my belief re the style/form of argument is that the Believers are way way into ¨bad science¨. They should embrace the ¨deniers¨ and encourage healthy debate with them, not ridicule them.

RE the drron/medhead saga, which exemplifies perfectly the overall clash, you should both (IMHO) consider just why it is such an important topic that you wish to keep arguing the point, and also reflect on the apparent failure of either party to persuade the other.

My words of advice (given without their seeking as I am of Dutch heritage and comfortable thus doing so) is:

Medhead: If you cannot convince the opposition to change, you must seek alternative ways to further your beliefs and desired actions.

Drron, as my father once told me: ¨Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time, and it irritates the pig.¨

Plenty of balanced sites to be found that encourage debate. Try this one .... Global Warming and Climate Change skepticism examined

They don't tolerate argumentative drongos, but otherwise seem friendly.

 

[Moody]

In my personal experience, for about 6 months every year I find that about half the Earth is warming while the other half is cooling. And for the other six months its the other way around. The process repeats on a regular basis (of approx 12 months). In my personal experience, this cycle continues with or without a tax laws being made or repealed. While those in Melbourne may need to wait until November or December to experience warming, those of us further north (but not too far north) are already starting to feel the effects. Cooling will recommence in about 9 months time.

Ahhh...... sarcasm. Quaint. I guess we can disband the IPCC now that the game is up. [Yep - I can do it too!]

 

[JohnK]

Moody there is no point arguing with you.I have explained my position several times.
Maybe you should find where I have said the things you impute.
There are none so blind.......

I don't understand why the discussion on carbon needs to be political.

 

[medhead]

I don't understand why the discussion on carbon needs to be political.

Because it was made political in a desperate quest for power.

 

[drron]

Because it was made political in a desperate quest for power.

You mean by Al Gore.

 

[james4321]

You mean by Al Gore.

No - Medhead is absolutely correct. It was Abbott's hysterical repetitive brainwashing sloganeering that made this a political issue. It will now be very interesting to see the reaction when his "$550 saving for every household" shows up to be just another Abbott lie.

 

[amaroo]

You mean by Al Gore.

LOL, not that one.....more like the desperate quest to secure minority Gov

 

[drron]

No - Medhead is absolutely correct. It was Abbott's hysterical repetitive brainwashing sloganeering that made this a political issue. It will now be very interesting to see the reaction when his "$550 saving for every household" shows up to be just another Abbott lie.

Globally it has been a political issue well before TA became leader of the Opposition.
And really you should take note of the smilies and chill out.

 

[medhead]

LOL, not that one.....more like the desperate quest to secure minority Gov

You're right it was politicised after the failure of that desperate quest to gain minority government.

 

[medhead]

Well there's a surprise The Australia was wrong to claim warming was only half that predicted in a story last year. IIRC that is a story some in this thread like to drag out. Even the press council have given the Oz a severe gumming over their story. That says something about how devoid of reality that story happens to be.

 

[drron]

IPCC AR4-
For the next two decades, a warming of about 0.2°C per decade is projected for a range of SRES emission scenarios. (AR4 SPM)

IPCC AR5-
rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012) [is] 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade)which is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012) [of] 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade.

 

[Moody]

IPCC AR4-
For the next two decades, a warming of about 0.2°C per decade is projected for a range of SRES emission scenarios. (AR4 SPM)

IPCC AR5-
rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012) [is] 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade)which is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012) [of] 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade.

And your point is what, exactly? [Note - I have emphasised the word "exactly" in case you missed it .... like you normally do.]

 

[medhead]

IPCC AR4-
For the next two decades, a warming of about 0.2°C per decade is projected for a range of SRES emission scenarios. (AR4 SPM)

IPCC AR5-
rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012) [is] 0.05 [–0.05 to +0.15] °C per decade)which is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012) [of] 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade.

I also have to ask what is you point? The 2 selected quotes don't even relate to the same period of time. Precisely what does this prove? In the context of the Australia being shown to be wrong and admitted they were wrong.

 

[drron]

Just giving the facts.
I don't believe the Press Council is a scientific body.Do you.

 

[medhead]

Just giving the facts.
I don't believe the Press Council is a scientific body.Do you.

You mean just giving two disjointed facts that do not even relate to the same thing?

The press council dealt with the conduct of the paper after the story had been called out as wrong. No one is suggesting they are scientific body. The fact is the story you rely upon is wrong.

 

[drron]

Mine are direct quotes from IPCC reports showing the actual rate of warming is far lower than that which had been predicted.
So the IPCC reports are wrong?

 

[medhead]

Mine are direct quotes from IPCC reports showing the actual rate of warming is far lower than that which had been predicted.
So the IPCC reports are wrong?

For different time periods!!! As such they do not show that at all. How about actually telling us your exact point with those quotes.

You will also notice I have said the Australian's story was wrong as has everyone else. I'm sure you've held up that [false] story as some sort of vindication. Now it seems you're dragging out 2 unrelated quotes to try to prove the Australian was correct. Sorry but the Australia was wrong, stop trying to pretend that is a comment about the IPCC.

 

[cove]

Yesterday we got our Sydney warehouse to Yes on a solar installation so we only have Adelaide to go.
Working sunlight hours certainly helps make the paybacks at work pretty fast.

 

[drron]

For different time periods!!! As such they do not show that at all. How about actually telling us your exact point with those quotes.

You will also notice I have said the Australian's story was wrong as has everyone else. I'm sure you've held up that [false] story as some sort of vindication. Now it seems you're dragging out 2 unrelated quotes to try to prove the Australian was correct. Sorry but the Australia was wrong, stop trying to pretend that is a comment about the IPCC.

I am sorry Medhead but you obviously haven't read the Australian's article.Of course they were wrong because they said the world hadn't warmed in the last 60 years.
This has nothing to do with the current situation and is not proof that the predictions made by "deniers"previously are wrong.My IPCC quotes show that even the IPCC admits their previous predictions were wrong despite what some here believe.