Cobber says, "Neverwas I didn't bother to say anything because we have been over this ground many times.

Let's listen to the experts, I have little knowledge of climate science my training is in Physics and Computer science. I therefore have not got the enough knowledge to do anything other then take the consensus view of climate scientist.

I wouldn't ask a climate scientist about my gastro, and I wouldn't ask Tim about climate science.

Indeed I would seriously question what the motivation of someone who is talking well outside their area of expertise".

In that case Cobber, you should have the same math I have.

Try applying that math, rather than emotional clap trap, & you will then know that dangerous/run away AGW can not be caused by CO2 no matter how much of it there is.

Theses a dare fore you, Are you up for it?

Rhrosty wrote:

"The chinese are throwing mega bucks at thorium by building a reactor a week"

Well I've gotta call BS on that one. Maybe I'm badly informed so I asked Mr Google and he also doesn't know anything of any working thorium reactors in China. But there is plenty of information about China hoping to have one by 2025 if they can overcome the many problems they have with it.

So Rhrosty I've got to do something many on this site hate...I'm asking you for evidence to support your claims. Show us information that confirms that China has thorium reactors currently working. I wait with bated breathe.

Rhrosty 'thinks' that anyone who doesn't go along with his fantasies are "self serving moribund coal devotees, advocates and shareholders". On the other hand, maybe they just have an attachment to reality.


ant,

You're rather amusing. Here you are having been found out just making stuff up about what the author said and instead of owning up you just carry on as though such fabrication is both normal and acceptable. We live in very different ethical worlds.

There is of course a direct connection between Robert Manne, the Monthly Magazine and Quadrant Magazine too.
Robert was of course a long-time contributor to Quadrant, and on that basis he became Quadrant's editor. Some time afterwards he was sacked because he attempted to steer Quadrant into a more left/liberal/progressive direction.
The last edition that he edited contained a superb essay by Hugh Stretton which connected the dots between the English Enclosure laws, and the at the time growing trend promoted by the neo-"conservatives" to privatize everything.
It also featured another superb essay by Ronald Conway which questioned all of the usual Christian presumptions about the nature of Reality, and of its fabricated origins too. Ronald Conway was the author of The Great Australia Stupor and The Rage For Utopia.
It is interesting to compare Ronald Conway's analysis of Australian "culture" to that of the facile nonsense promoted by Nick Cater.

This essay from The Monthly Magazine puts Robert Manne's sacking into perspective. It is written by the son of the man who founded Quadrant.
Martin was also on the management board of Quadrant at the time. He was also a good friend of Robert Manne. He resigned from Quadrant because of his sympathy for Robert.

http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2006/december/1165812126/martin-krygier/usual-suspects

Quadrant has of course become much worse in its promotion of right wing group-think worse since then

mhaze
You don't have answers do you, so make an ad homemen attack.

Showing how Tim was wrong about his comment about CO2 using reference to an 11 year research program was not meant to happen.

Quote from ARM research project showing how CO2 reacts with radiated infrared long waves:

"The results agree with theoretical predictions of the greenhouse effect due to human activity. The research also provides further confirmation that the calculations used in today's climate models are on track when it comes to representing the impact of CO2."
The project collected data from two locations in the natural environment.

Tim makes statements without addressing recent science.

The Oceans are warming which has an impact on climate, previously comment was made about historic data and contemporary data being compared.

The other reference previously provided, used satellites to ascertain temperature in Oceans.

Quote:

"To date, research on the effects of climate change has underestimated the contribution of seawater expansion to sea level rise due to warming of the oceans. A team of researchers at the University of Bonn has now investigated, using satellite data, that this effect was almost twice as large over the past twelve years than previously assumed."

The two studies conform to the view of a greenhouse effect.

No comment about Lake Poopo; mhaze, you might be able to come up with a better answer than glaciers regressing. The question, then becomes if you are not able to give an alternative answer, where is the warmth coming from causing such regression? The sun is in a dimming stage at present.

The Tasmanian situation:

Unprecedented fires

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/opinion/all-at-risk-of-being-lost-forever/news-story/4e52c12a3b950e820140dca25895f7b3

Then flooding

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/rain-causes-flood-havoc/news-story/8d1923a1520ac04b363d230bb8643bfc

Which gets back to the question, what strategies need to be in place to protect ourselves from climate change whether man made or otherwise?

mhaze, Yes and sorry, It was years ago when I read a scholarly and credible article, written by an American professor, whose expertise seemed to be physics.

Since then I have read, a believable claim that the chinese were building one a week.

The original and thought provoking article was headed, Thorium, cheaper than coal.

It seems my chinese friends may have misinformed me and are along with the Indians heavily investing in thorium research?

And if reports of progress are to be believed, the Indians will have a working 300MW generator in service by 2016. That's this year folks!

While we here in Oz will be scratching our heads and wondering how the "developing world" stole a march on an "advanced us"?

Arguably because of ponderously obtuse activists that just didn't want to see, Australian coal replaced by something vastly cleaner and cheaper; and or, the Indians are better than us at everything?

Or maybe keeping open enquiring minds as opposed to just bagging everything and everyone or new ideas or original thinking?

Townsville nickel e.f. might be yet salvaged by vastly cheaper energy, and obtain some sort of premium due to a carbon reduction in the processing phase?

And it would seem we have enough of the stuff to power the world for 700 years; or ourselves for considerably longer, if we use the brains we were born with; and just keep it here for our own industrial needs?

It seems some of the research is directed at miniaturization and a $1,000.00 unit that will power a ten house street for a lifetime. THat's what? a $100.00 a house?

Plus the ongoing cost of triannual expert inspections?

As I understand it these thorium units will need very little maintenance with a proposed triennial inspection thought to be sufficient?

My most sincere and humble apologies if I have entirely unintentionally mislead anyone!

A 300MW working example probably worth it?
Rhrosty.

Bravo Rhrosty. Its so unusual in this group to see someone own up to an error. They either try to brazen it out like ant (see above) and Mr O, or they simply disappear for a week or so.

We all make errors and get misled occasionally. The thing is to see it and learn from it. Why even I have been known to be wrong, hard as it is to believe. The last time was in 2008 and was probably the cause for the economic collapse in that year - although I could be wrong about that. :)

So kudos.

I suspect your error on the one a week thing was about coal. It is claimed in some circles that China is building 1 new coal station per week.

I also think you need to look more closely at the Indian claims. They seem to have been promising a prototype thorium reactor next year for the last decade. The last I saw was that in reality they are hoping, and its no more than hope, to be able to get one by 2024 which is roughly when China is aiming. But it seems that many technical issues remain unresolved and there remains a more than negligible chance that thorium may never be commercialised. I have seen quotes from Chinese scientists expressing their dismay that the official timeframe for this was moved from 2040 to 2024 because they have so many issues not yet worked out that they doubt they can meet that target. We'll see. But its never good to suffer from premature elation.

One of the reasons I'm blase about AGW is that I have confidence that technology will kick in in the next decade or two that will replace fossil fuels in both price and efficacy. Maybe it'll be thorium or fission. Maybe they'll get battery storage for solar/wind/tide worked out. Or maybe there's some geek working in his garage right now who will make a break-through no one else has considered. But thorium looks like a reasonable candidate.