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 change denial > Comments

Climate change denial : Comments

By Clive Hamilton, published 3/5/2007

Most Australians are no longer in a state of denial: they are facing up to the truth about global warming.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  9. Page 11
  10. 12
  11. 13
  12. 14
  13. ...
  14. 18
  15. 19
  16. 20
  17. All
Perseus posits:
"For the record, 98% of IT experts were absolutely convinced of the certainty of Y2K. Sceptics were defamed as luddites. But the silence on the 1st January 2000 was deafening."

And why shouldn't it have been? I remember "inoculating" my computer before the dread chiming of the clock at midnight. Don't you?

As they say, and ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Posted by Sir Vivor, Monday, 7 May 2007 4:59:17 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
ChrisC,
Although I had considered the radiation strength due to proximity to the sun, I don't know if it's then valid to say that because Mars has half the solar flux of earth, Mars CO2 GHG impact should be doubled for comparison. Either by:

Halving Mars CO2 concentration from 25 to 12.5 times earths for the 5deg rise due to greenhouse to give us 0.4deg rise per earth concentration.

Or doubling the GHG induced temp from 5 to 10deg for Mars and dividing by 25(times earth concentration) still giving us 0.4 deg rise per earth concentration.

Venus has a solar flux roughly double that of the earth. So is it fair to halve its CO2 concentration to 85000 of earths for say 500deg, to give a 0.006deg rise per earth concentration.

Obviously I haven't taken into account the logarithmic effect of CO2 as a GHG, nor factored in albedo etc. Just some thoughts.
Posted by rojo, Monday, 7 May 2007 11:12:14 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
ChrisC,
You selectively quote me. My disclosure that I had a PhD was not an appeal to authority, (I have done some rhetoric too) but the mention that there was considerable mathematical modelling and simulation involved in that degree might be seen as giving me some basis to comment on the art and the science of mathematical modelling. In relation to the degree I also said "and I recognise that will draw a lot of flak". Clearly I was right.
Posted by Reynard, Tuesday, 8 May 2007 9:59:42 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
Once again the Y2Kers claim they actually fixed the problem. But there were no reports of ANY Y2K failures. So are we seriously to believe that they got to every single PC on the planet and fixed it? give us a break. One would normally assess the success of a program in terms of percentage prevention etc, but 100% prevention makes it clear that it was a "AAA" rated hoax.

ChrisC, I was actually refering to the sensitivity analysis in my post. It may be convenient for you to imply that I was suggesting all GCMs are run that way but reasonable men and women will see through your ploy.

Funny how all the the plodders revert to defamation when the logic of their arguments runs thin. But keep going fellas, every disparaging comment about someone's age is a nail in your political coffin.
Posted by Perseus, Tuesday, 8 May 2007 11:35:50 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
Excellent article Clive. I agree with the comment: "It is now clear that most Australians are no longer in a state of denial, that they are facing up to the truth about global warming and what it means for life in this country and around the world."

The proof will be in the outcome of the 2007 Federal Election. However, it is unrealistic to expect a 60% reduction through policies of weak incentives to make the right choices. Only strong leadership by the next government, using tough regulatory measures, can achieve a 60% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Australians are prepared to make adjustments, especially when they are made by all of us. Both industry and individuals need to know the new ground rules for achieving a sustainable future built around renewables.

This would see energy inefficency and polluting technology heavily taxed initially with target dates set for scheduled cessation or prohibition of the worst offenders. Conversely, zero polluting technologies would receive massive incentives to establish and become mainstream. Australia can play an environmental leadership role in our region.

As a society, we have successfully managed major transitions in the past: Decimalisation, tarrif reductions, vaccinations to name a few.

The majority of Australians have the stamina for tough changes to the way we do things. By becoming a world leader and demonstarting how to make a 180 degree change we can once again hold our heads up.

Post election, expect politicians who have the fortitude to take stern leadership positions
Posted by Quick response, Tuesday, 8 May 2007 12:05:33 PM
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
Perseus and his denialist buddies' intellectual though inane blatherings have me perplexed.

Are they denying that volcanic activity affects climate change where volcanic emissions are just 1% of human-induced emissions?

Are they claiming that anthropogenic pollution is good for the environment and human health?

Are they insisting that man-made pollution does not affect the climate?

Are they recommending that we continue to pollute the entire planet, desecrating everything necessary to sustain life on earth?

Mmmmmm.....bright lads these sceptics - aren't they!?

What ever the're on......could I have some too, please?
Posted by dickie, Tuesday, 8 May 2007 2:25:20 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  9. Page 11
  10. 12
  11. 13
  12. 14
  13. ...
  14. 18
  15. 19
  16. 20
  17. All

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