What Carbon

[medhead]

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.

The Australian article had the maths wrong.

Glad you can admit that your IPCC quotes do not address that point at all. Perhaps if you provided some sort of comment we would've know they were irrelevant to the point about the Australian's story.

Of course the quotes do relate to different time periods. So the second one isn't a comment about the first one. Unless your saying the IPCC also compare apples with oranges.

 

[drron]

Well the first quote says the rate of warming will be 0.2C per decade.
The second quote does cover the first 7 years of that prediction and gives a figure that means the 0.2C per decade is really not going to be right for that first decade.
And note the confidence intervals are greater than the suggested rise.In Medicine we would call that a negative study.That is cant be taken as proof there is warming statistically.

 

[SeatBackForward]

And in some not surprising news:

Qantas, Virgin in sights of ACCC

The competition regulator is making enquiries to determine whether Qantas Airways and Virgin Australia Holdings have made misleading statements in relation to their ability to recover the carbon tax.

In its carbon monitoring report for the June quarter, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said the airlines had told the regulator they did not expect airfares to fall once the carbon tax was removed because they were unable to pass though the costs to customers.

...

"Virgin Australia has been unable to recover the cost of the carbon tax due to the aggressive competitive environment," she said. "The carbon tax costs have been absorbed and have not been added to ticket prices.”

A Qantas spokesman said the airline had explained its position to the ACCC, particularly the fact it was unable to recover the carbon tax due to “unique pressures” in the highly competitive aviation sector.

Qantas, Virgin in sights of ACCC

So there are commercial organisations taking advantage of consumers general lack of understanding of how the "carbon tax" is supposed to work to make *surprise* commercial gain?

 

[JohnK]

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

By whom?

In Australia if you are a Labor supporter you are for the Carbon tax and all the evil that goes with it.

If you are not a Labor supporter or couldn't care less about politics then you are against the carbon tax and all the stupid theories that go with it.

I don't want to give up anything and I don't want to pay anything extra for it either. If you think there are better alternatives then fund them yourself and then try to sell them to me.

 

[james4321]

By whom?

In Australia if you are a Labor supporter you are for the Carbon tax and all the evil that goes with it.

If you are not a Labor supporter or couldn't care less about politics then you are against the carbon tax and all the stupid theories that go with it.

I don't want to give up anything and I don't want to pay anything extra for it either. If you think there are better alternatives then fund them yourself and then try to sell them to me.

Its not about the carbon tax - its about doing something to address climate change. Are you are saying you are not interested in addressing the climate change problem because it will cost you? What do you think your descendants will think about that position?

 

[SeatBackForward]

By whom?

In Australia if you are a Labor supporter you are for the Carbon tax and all the evil that goes with it.

If you are not a Labor supporter or couldn't care less about politics then you are against the carbon tax and all the stupid theories that go with it.

I don't want to give up anything and I don't want to pay anything extra for it either. If you think there are better alternatives then fund them yourself and then try to sell them to me.

errm ok. Out of interest, how has the carbon tax effected you?

 

[serfty]

Just received my latest power bill.

My electricity usage base rate dropped by 2.44¢/KWH on June 1st - it was an 11% decrease.

 

[medhead]

By whom?

In Australia if you are a Labor supporter you are for the Carbon tax and all the evil that goes with it.

If you are not a Labor supporter or couldn't care less about politics then you are against the carbon tax and all the stupid theories that go with it.

I don't want to give up anything and I don't want to pay anything extra for it either. If you think there are better alternatives then fund them yourself and then try to sell them to me.

You are a clever chap, I'm sure you can think of whom.

The rest of what you wrote is a) political and b) suggests a lack of understanding of the issues.

 

[JohnK]

Its not about the carbon tax - its about doing something to address climate change. Are you are saying you are not interested in addressing the climate change problem because it will cost you? What do you think your descendants will think about that position?

I don't believe in the theories behind climate change. We weren't there 10,000 years ago and we have only kept detail records for the past 100 years or so. For all we know whats happening is natural and carbon emissions have no effect on climate change whatsoever.

All of this is no different to you telling me not to drive a car as there is a risk I could die.

Climate change fanatics are trying to sell me speculation and I am not buying. When they have some concrete proof behind their theories I may listen.

Oh and I don't need to disprove anything. It is up to climate change fanatics to prove beyond doubt.

 

[james4321]

I don't believe in the theories behind climate change. We weren't there 10,000 years ago and we have only kept detail records for the past 100 years or so. For all we know whats happening is natural and carbon emissions have no effect on climate change whatsoever.

All of this is no different to you telling me not to drive a car as there is a risk I could die.

Climate change fanatics are trying to sell me speculation and I am not buying. When they have some concrete proof behind their theories I may listen.

Oh and I don't need to disprove anything. It is up to climate change fanatics to prove beyond doubt.

AAH the old "lets wait till it happens then we'll do something about it" plan. Yep ..that'll work great.

 

[anat0l]

I don't believe in the theories behind climate change. We weren't there 10,000 years ago and we have only kept detail records for the past 100 years or so. For all we know whats happening is natural and carbon emissions have no effect on climate change whatsoever.

All of this is no different to you telling me not to drive a car as there is a risk I could die.

Climate change fanatics are trying to sell me speculation and I am not buying. When they have some concrete proof behind their theories I may listen.

Oh and I don't need to disprove anything. It is up to climate change fanatics to prove beyond doubt.

Well I do believe in anthropogenic climate change, but don't worry, the penalty for your not "believing" shall not be death by stoning. That's what real fanatics do..... (PS. thanks for the association - I'm thoroughly insulted....) :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

 

[SeatBackForward]

I don't believe in the theories behind climate change. We weren't there 10,000 years ago and we have only kept detail records for the past 100 years or so. For all we know whats happening is natural and carbon emissions have no effect on climate change whatsoever.

There is plenty of evidence of what the environment was like over thousands and millions of years ago - ice cores, sedimentary layers, fossilised flora and fauna all indicative of the type of climatic conditions present at the time. what modern times provides is day-by-day records, and I think we can all unanimously agree that as interesting as weather is, it isn't climate.

All of this is no different to you telling me not to drive a car as there is a risk I could die.

Climate change fanatics are trying to sell me speculation and I am not buying. When they have some concrete proof behind their theories I may listen.

Oh and I don't need to disprove anything. It is up to climate change fanatics to prove beyond doubt.

Look up at the smog above any typical city, you have no problem with whats being released into the air, then being breathed into all of our lungs?

 

[JohnK]

errm ok. Out of interest, how has the carbon tax effected you?

Affected me? Increased airfares, increased grocery bills, increase train/bus fares, increase power bills etc to name a few.

I can't afford to pay more taxes. And you're OK with that? I am not. I sacrifice enough already. I should be out there driving my car to/from work but I put up with the eternally selfish daily.

 

[SeatBackForward]

Affected me? Increased airfares, increased grocery bills, increase train/bus fares, increase power bills etc to name a few.

I can't afford to pay more taxes. But you're OK with that. I am not.

By how much?

 

[SeatBackForward]

For decades since the industrial revolution, we as a society have consumed natural resources at unprecedented levels, with reckless abandon on the impacts to our environment through the air we breathe, the water we drink and the plants and animals we consume.

I for one am glad that that this form of "externality" ( as old school economics hopelessly failed at quantifying) is finally being addressed. To be effective a method had to target a common denominator, something that we all readily related to: money. And by seeing the reactions this produces, it appears to be hitting that target.

The whole mechanism was designed to slowly change behaviours, to encourage the development of less pollutive technologies, that market forces would eventually promote. But apparently the scaremongering of this being another tax that will all hit us hard, and have no positive benefits, has worked.

 

[SeatBackForward]

Affected me? Increased airfares, increased grocery bills, increase train/bus fares, increase power bills etc to name a few.

I can't afford to pay more taxes. And you're OK with that? I am not. I sacrifice enough already. I should be out there driving my car to/from work but I put up with the eternally selfish daily.

Just on the above listed items, from the wikipedia link I posted earlier in this thread:

The scheme primarily applied to electricity generators and industrial sectors. It did not apply to road transport and agriculture. Domestic aviation did not face the carbon tax per se, but was subject to an additional fuel excise levy of approximately 6 cents per litre

 

[JohnK]

AAH the old "lets wait till it happens then we'll do something about it" plan. Yep ..that'll work great.

You are convinced something needs to be done. I am not.

I don't need to prove or disprove anything. You are the one that needs to prove beyond any doubt your concerns on climate change.

Unfortunately history is your greatest asset but it is entirely against you.

 

[james4321]

You are convinced something needs to be done. I am not.

I don't need to prove or disprove anything. You are the one that needs to prove beyond any doubt your concerns ...

I once had a boss who subscribed to that theory ... The business went broke !

 

[james4321]

I can't afford to pay more taxes. And you're OK with that? I am not. .

So you dont support Abbott's direct action handouts either then I assume.

 

[medhead]

I don't believe in the theories behind climate change. We weren't there 10,000 years ago and we have only kept detail records for the past 100 years or so. For all we know whats happening is natural and carbon emissions have no effect on climate change whatsoever.

All of this is no different to you telling me not to drive a car as there is a risk I could die.

Climate change fanatics are trying to sell me speculation and I am not buying. When they have some concrete proof behind their theories I may listen.

Oh and I don't need to disprove anything. It is up to climate change fanatics to prove beyond doubt.

Yet another example where simply holding an opinion is not enough to make it true. Records of the climate are frozen in ice all over the planet, locked in rocks and even locked in old tress. You'll also find that weather records have been kept on and off since 900 BC. The bablonyians and greeks were pretty clever in that regard. A bloke in England kept weather records in the 1300s. The British Empire was built on seafaring ability. The Royal Navy weather records go back into the 17th century, recorded even in the earliest ship's logs. The first weather records in Australia date back to 1788. The US Army started collecting weather observations 1870.

So you opinion that detailed weather records have only been kept for 100 years is wrong. But great that you have an opinion.

There have been a few links in this thread to research that shows the rate of temperature change is happening much, much faster than has occurred naturally in the past. There is even a paper that found that pollution induced warming is forcing the natural systems. Even drron agrees that the temperatures are increasing faster than natural variations would suggest. The only issue he has is the amount of discrepancy between prediction and observed. But he does agree there is an observed increase.

Basically - not natural and concrete proof. Again you valuable opinion is incorrect. But I fully support your right to an opinion.

Now the car thing? can we say that is like you telling me to not have whole body scans at an Australian airport because there is a risk (in your opinion*)?

It is true that you don't need to disprove anything. Great that you have an opinion. But the evidence contradicts your opinion.


* Already discussed elsewhere lack of risk to support the opinion about whole body airport scanners