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 > Acting on climate change - now > Comments

Acting on climate change - now : Comments

By Kasy Chambers, published 21/2/2008

Our convenience and self-indulgence come at a cost that most of us, by choice or indifference, casually ignore.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
We in NSW have just had the coolest summer for 50 yrs.
Climate does change,that cannot be denied.The greatest influence on our climate is the Sun and Co2 gases only have a minor effect as witnessed by our geological history that spans millions of yrs.

Some scientists are now saying we are entering a cooling period and possibly a mini-ice age by 2050,as experienced in 1400 AD.

Fact;co2 is a minor global warming gas and it is improbable that it it is the sole source of heating.In the realm of improbability,believe nothing of what you hear,and only half of what you see.
Posted by Arjay, Thursday, 21 February 2008 8:40:47 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
"The greatest influence on our climate is the Sun and Co2 gases only have a minor effect as witnessed by our geological history that spans millions of yrs." (Arjay)

Eh...not quite Arjay. Emeritus Professor of Mathematical Astrophysics at Cambridge, whose research interests are Solar and Stellar Magnetic Fields, Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics and Nonlinear Dynamics had to recently defend himself against the misleading claims made by the lunar right when he said:

"Following a misleading account of my views in the Toronto National Post in February, a number of right-wing lobbyists have asserted that I claimed that an impending drop in solar activity would lead to global cooling that would cancel out the warming caused by greenhouse gases.

"On the contrary, I have always maintained that any temperature changes caused by variations in solar activity -- while interesting in themselves -- are not significant compared to the global warming that we are already experiencing, and very small compared to what will happen if we continue to burn fossil fuel at the present rate.

"On April 11 2007 the National Post published an apology and withdrew its allegations. They have nevertheless appeared again in the recent book `Scared to Death' by Booker and North."

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/now/

And more on the lunar right and an example of how desperate they have become when they deliberately defame reputable scientists and continue to manipulate the cold hard facts:

Excerpt:

"But mainstream scientists agree that the sun does have some influence on fluctuations in the Earth's temperature. As Prof Lockwood said: " I do firmly believe that there is a solar influence on pre-industrial climate and that may well have extended into the last century - up to about 1940 - but our results confirm that recent climate change is not caused by the sun. We do this with a simple and direct analysis of data and not using climate computer models - which are often a cause of scepticism."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/07/11/scisun111.xml
Posted by dickie, Thursday, 21 February 2008 9:47:55 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
All sounds eminently sensible. Don't worry about climate-change denialsm. Those who follow this political line of typically brainless right-wing thought will change their tune as they get hotter under their collars.
Posted by HenryVIII, Thursday, 21 February 2008 10:08:32 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
Sheesh, talk about someone living in the dark ages.

Arjay, if you want to comment on global warming, may I suggest you check out the difference between weather and climate.

To do otherwise demonstrates to all and sundry you don't know what you're talking about.

Tip: check out the BOM site, or better still, email them with your profound findings.

Hey Arjay, why stop there - maybe you can convince them that global warming is a load of crock, a conspiracy concocted by ALL the world's governments, big businesses (banks, insurance companies, etc) and religions of ALL faiths.

Forget the scientists, what do they know anyway?

Dickie, you are on the button!
Posted by Q&A, Thursday, 21 February 2008 10:23:47 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
Hay Q&A, does it make any difference that there has been no warming, & infact a little cooling now, in 9 years. Just how long is it weather.

How anyone can be stupid enough to believe anything coming out of such an incredibly corrupt organisation as the United nations, I fail to understand.

Perhaps if you read some of the latest research you would have a better idea
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 21 February 2008 11:56:51 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
The Rud governments target for emission cutting is 60%, with a recommendation of 90% by some leading expert.

As a nation we are what is known as ‘resource rich’ and prosper from exports and as such we over produce to meet this demand, in some cases, meat by example – by 85%, which simply means that we as a nation survive on exports for our very existence. Without them we would quite simply NOT SURVIVE!

Wheat is another example whereby if we were to consume our total output of wheat we would each have to eat thousands of loaves of bread per head, per year. Just not going to happen. I forget the exact amount of wheat exported last year but it is in the 10’s of millions of tons.

Then there are the real export dollars, the minerals.

China for example, which I believe to be our largest buyer of raw materials has a growth rate the equivalent of 1.25 BRISBANE’S PER MONTH with no end in sight. India has not really started yet but soon will be and is predicted to be a larger customer than China.

So for all of you out there who support the cutting of emissions by 60%, brace yourself because the way of life you are accustom to is about to come to a grinding halt if we adopt this strategy.

To suggest that we can cut emissions by 60%, or worse, 90%, while continuing to grow and prosper is quite simply irresponsible thinking, unless of cause we all don a pick & shovel and start digging up the minerals. But then we don’t have the population to do that do we, so we run the risk of being taken over if for nothing else but for the wealth of our commodities.

Think very very hard before you take that huge step, especially when the US, China and India have not made similar commitments.

p.s. Dear YINDIN- Where did your education come from? Whites perhaps!
Posted by rehctub, Friday, 22 February 2008 8:40:21 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. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

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