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 > If the science is settled, why do we need all these people working at it? > Comments

If the science is settled, why do we need all these people working at it? : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 9/2/2016

Has Climate Science become hopelessly bogged down? Has Climate Science reached a point where misbehaving programs [paradigms] are using 99% of research efforts and thus draining away – frittering away – the field’s resources?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
How would Don Aitkin know?

Get out of the way and let the CSIRO get on with its work, even if that does occasionally impinge on the right of big polluters to ruin things for now and for later.

If science is no threat to Big Capital, why the slimy attempts to shut it down? Or is the news that science brings too often containing of inconvenient truths as well as great boons.

Some of you want a return to medieval times and certainties, but I abhor your underlying self interested cynicism, dog in the manger malice and greed.

Get your heads out of your pitiful denialist butts.
Posted by paul walter, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 3:54:39 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 given coal mining is becoming increasingly unprofitable, even though power supply charges have risen 61% since 2008!? And given its principle role in man made climate change? We could do worse than opt for pragmatic and much cheaper localised power supply! Cheaper inasmuch as we will hae eliminate costly transmission losses(11%) as well as vastly more costly distribution losses (64%)

And having localized more reliable and secure supply, allow genuine competition to flourish, along with the industrial renaissance that would create?

Genuine competition will allow the least costly most efficient power delivery to flourish and prosper on merit, rather than massive subsidies!

We need to once again become a nation that makes things rather than one who makes big unprofitable holes in the ground!

If we make things, then ensure they reach their intended customers by the least costly, most efficient means possible,rapid rail and interconnected roll on roll off nuclear powered ferries, we will have achieved at least two things; but only after creating a compelling Leadership example of how to quite massively build an economy, while effectively decarbing it!

Moreover we could pocket the 26+ billion we now spend on fully imported fuel; given we can quite easily achieve total self sufficiency in oil, with very broad scale oil rich algae farming.

Something that uses just one to two percent of the water of traditional irrigation. And arguably the very means at hand to not only save the Murray, but quite massively prosper it and all who depend on it!

Climate change? who cares! Lets just go and make some real money. And set our sights on once again becoming the third wealthiest nation on earth and a creditor one into the bargain.

Eliminate the (coal fired) parasite brigade, gain Full employment, affordable housing and health care the envy of the developed world!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 7:34:39 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
Hi Paul,

I love those pea-and-thimble tricks, those definitional slides: "If science is no threat to Big Capital, why the slimy attempts to shut it down?"

Says who, 'science' ? isn't this topic about climate science, which is supposed to be settled ? About climate change ? So you drag in pollution, which I certainly think is a bigger issue, but not quite relevant to the discussion.

And who is saying that 'science' as a whole is being shut down ? Isn't the gist of these new initiatives the notion that, if the science is settled, or settled enough, then let's get on with using science to innovate and devise ways to mitigate the effects of climate change ? i.e. use different scientists with expertise in application, innovation and mitigation ?

And what has Big Capital to do with it ? What makes you think they won't jump into whatever might be a goer, including funding the CSIRO to apply what its scientists have found, in order to innovate and mitigate the effects of climate change, for the eventual benefit of Big Capital ? Why do you think that Big Capital has some sort of vested interest in 'shutting science down' ?

And in what way could science ever be seen to be a threat to Big Capital ? Big Capital makes big bucks out of any scientific break-through, isn't that so ? Vultures they may be, but vultures sitting and waiting for any new ways that science can help to boost their bottom line, isn't that so ? Science is Big Capital's friend, a publicly-funded gift that keeps on giving.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 10 February 2016 7:55:19 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
More time wasting argument.
It does not matter whether global warming is true or not !

Cannot you already see what is happening to oil & coal prices ?
We must leave oil & coal before oil & coal leave us.
The current chaos in oil prices is telling you that peak oil is past
and coal is not all that far behind.

Major oil & coal companies are in a bind. Too much capital investment
needed but it does not generate production that the economy can afford.
Surely it must ring very loud bells when companies like Shell, BT,
Exxon, Total etc etc are sacking tens of thousands and struggling to pay dividends.
Those companies profits have fallen dramatically.
Smaller companies are going bankrupt.
BHP has largely pulled out of oil & gas in the US.
In 2015 the number of US well rigs in use fell from 1600 to 571.
What does THAT tell you about the future ?

This is same problem with politicians, you & they do not have a clue
as to what is going on !
Unless cold fusion is proclaimed tomorrow then we should start building
nuclear power stations to prop up solar & wind tomorrow.
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 11 February 2016 10:55:20 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, Don. My experience of the CSIRO in recent years is that many of its staff are undertaking irrelevant research so it certainly is time for the organisation to renew its direction.
Posted by Bernie Masters, Monday, 15 February 2016 10:25:50 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
Hi Bernie,

Yeah, I had an engineer friend (true !) who was desperately looking for employment, so he took a position with a dairy company who were looking for someone to find ways to compress milk. He worked on the project diligently for six months or so, until his conscience got the better of him.

No, he wouldn't have fitted into the CSIRO by the sound of it.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 15 February 2016 10:55:41 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. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

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