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 > Climate Commission needs to re-think forest carbon > Comments

Climate Commission needs to re-think forest carbon : Comments

By Mark Poynter, published 27/6/2011

Taking its lead from an activist agenda undermines the Climate Commission’s effectiveness and credibility.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Sadly the loopy left is now in control of Australian politics.
They are seemingly incompetent in many areas but unfortuneately they may well succeed in destroying the native forest timber industry; in so doing producing lttle or no carbon abatement locally but with devasting effects on third world forests which will be exploited in an uncontrolled (illegal) manner in order to supply our own needs.

These perverse outcomes make the Climate Change Commission's stance seem, at best ill-considered, at worst immoral NIMBYism.

An excellent analysis Mark!
Posted by Ben Cruachan, Monday, 27 June 2011 9:19:54 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
A co2 man made global warming tax just to fill the coffers where green labor can dole out giveaways at the next election, yes Nimbyism, at its uncompetitive and repetitively lazy best, Where green labor local and state governments still contain this climate policy within their funding portfolios, What a bunch of miscreants.
Posted by Dallas, Monday, 27 June 2011 9:23:18 PM
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
Good article, Mark -- although it's a bit too easy finding inconsistencies and logical fallacies in the government's current position on environmental issues. Finding some environmental policies that actually achieve their stated goal -- now, THAT would be a challenge!
Posted by Jon J, Tuesday, 28 June 2011 7:15:11 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
Global warming is a load of crap.

Until someone can reconcile 2011: the coldest winter in the northern hemisphere in 100 years and the coldest in the UK since the Met Office records began and how this can be caused by the alarmist global warming the 'settled science' claims are completely undermined.

It's no wonder the media and the alarmists are saying nothing about this 'extreme event'.

All those pushing the warming creed should be asked to explain the current coldest temperatures in 100 years.

Why is this cold event going unnoticed and ignored.

Who's the denier now?
Posted by imajulianutter, Tuesday, 28 June 2011 7:55:02 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
"Global warming is a load of crap."

A demonstration that in 'the world of stupid' the inhabitants can't comprehend the distinction between signal and noise.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/#temp
Posted by bonmot, Tuesday, 28 June 2011 8:33:40 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
Dear Mark,

I don’t think there is much choice other then to rely on NGO’s for advice. The house of carbon has been constructed on non empirical scientific advocacy. The more it is challenged scientifically the more it has to respond with spin.

It is probably the spin more than anything else that is causing the severe decline in support for the alarm phenomena worldwide and the even more severe decline in support for action. Our government is responsible for more damage to the cause than anything else in the last three years.

It seems that once the electorate becomes sensitized to spin, the reaction appears to become inversely proportional and enters a self destructive phase. The more spin, the more sensitivity, the greater the disbelief, the more spin is needed, the less the credibility.

There is a further problem that relates to historical spin. Once sensitivity to current spin increases, questions of credibility of previous spin are raised. Thus the fundamental premise of alarmism is now being questioned.

If this alarmist phenomenon is to be validated, it will be validated by less science and more spin, which is precisely where it is headed.

In the meantime, we will have to tolerate an increase in the number of increasingly outrageous claims, urgency, ideology and total disregard of contrary public opinion.

The case for action on AGW is now based upon “the right thing to do”, “It’s what the people of Australia voted for”, “the advice we have” and the emerging contradictions being ignored or “brassed out”.

R.I.P.
Posted by spindoc, Tuesday, 28 June 2011 10:14:58 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. All

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