The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Carbon chatter everywhere and not a drop of commonsense > Comments

Carbon chatter everywhere and not a drop of commonsense : Comments

By Everald Compton, published 18/5/2011

The supercharged emotional nonsense that is currently swamping Australia's carbon debate.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Everald. You say: "The vast majority of emails were from readers who want a solution to be found. Some were keen on Howard’s plan and others put up interesting alternatives. All were in no doubt that there are problems with the environment and they want to do something positive to create a better world."

As you point out, most of us are concerned about "problems with the environment" and want to do something positive about it. The real issue is that there seems to be scanty evidence that CO2 is actually causing problems with the environment.

Eminent climate scientist Roger Pielke Sr argues that man is indeed having an impact, but it is largely land-use factors (deforestation, urbanisation, interference with natural hydrological cycles, industrialised agriculture and the like) that are affecting local and regional climate in many places around the world.

The case against CO2 has not been proven. All we see are unproven assumptions about positive feedbacks in models.

What if Dr Pielke is correct? What if natural factors are the cause of observed changes?

The fact is we don't really know, and it would be foolhardy to seriously disrupt our economy and wellbeing until we do know.
Posted by Herbert Stencil, Wednesday, 18 May 2011 6:42:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
" to get Australia started on solving an issue that will not go away."

You mean "... an issue that doesn't exist."

There, fixed that for you.
Posted by Jon J, Wednesday, 18 May 2011 7:26:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree that the ignorant extremists on both sides should shut up, that is both minimifidianists and panic merchants, though in my experience there are far more of the former than the latter. As a matter of fact I haven't heard of any advocates of climate change "who believe that the world will be flooded tomorrow by rapidly rising seas". There are relative hysterics out there but they often seem motivated in their folly by frustration with those who blithely deny the evidence presented by the experts.
For the record, I think both Howard's and this government's attempts at action are so tokenesque, and even irrational, that I don't support an ETS myself--and I'm not a denialist.
I think Compton should wipe his gob and stop thinking his position is "reasonable". It's not, it's utterly mundane compromise--the art of politics.
Posted by Squeers, Wednesday, 18 May 2011 8:23:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"We will find that there are 32 nations, plus ten U.S. states, that already have implemented emissions trading. New Zealand is one of them. Seven nations have a carbon tax, including the U.K. ..................:"
This is a reason Australia should introduce a carbon tax as well? Hardly. From all accounts no country that has has introduced the "tax" has reduced their emissions by any measurable amount. And the truth is Australia's proposed tax will have zero effect on our emissions.

There are so many areas where energy use could be cut. Our governments have the power to legislate them quite easily. A good start would be outlawing open refrigerators and freezers in our supermarkets. And what about enforced natural light levels in buildings? The list could go on and on.

We don't need this tax just some clever thinking.
Posted by Sparkyq, Wednesday, 18 May 2011 8:26:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well Everald, from the comments so far, it looks like the negativity continues from both sides. Personally, I found your article one of the most balanced op-ed pieces I have read for a very long time – including my own!
Posted by Martin N, Wednesday, 18 May 2011 9:42:13 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
martin n, interesting comment .. please tell us what the positives are about this subject?

No one is happy about anything to do with AGW or Climate Change issues as far as I can see, but you find reason to comment that "negativity continues", yet offer nothing different, except to comment in a negative way about other posters.

Fascinating ..
Posted by Amicus, Wednesday, 18 May 2011 9:53:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy