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 is more than an abstract idea > Comments

Climate change is more than an abstract idea : Comments

By Tanveer Ahmed, published 21/1/2009

Those who doubt the need to attack climate change with any urgency would do well to speak to the developing world's poor.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All
Some quotes from my favourite Spiritual Philosopher

"The now-time staus quo is a pattern of lawlessness without any moral integrity and accountability. To persist in that pattern will, eventually and inevitably, destroy or self-destruct humankind and the Earth-world. This status quo could be made to persist for even many more years, but in that fatal meantime, what would actually be occurring would be the final and catastrophic breakdown of global system-patterns altogether, both human and non-human.

This status quo pattern is stealing the virtue of all of humankind, by everywhere preventing human beings from being actively responsible for themselves as a collective totality and for the Earth-domain itself as a natural pattern-totality.

The current pseudo-system is no longer tolerable, and it never was viable. Nevertheless, those who are currently in power have not yet become entirely inclined to deal, at root, with the signs of global systemic breakdown. Many continue to pretend, for example, that, even while the Earth is dailly becoming more and more overwhelmingly polluted, there is some necessary, and hence action-preventing controversy to be engaged relative to whether global warming is a reality or not, or otherwise, humanly caused or not. Nevertheless, the evidence is now irrefutable. The Earth IS being polluted, always more and more, by HUMAN causes.

The human causes of Earth-pollution, which results in global pollution, global warming, and extreme weather, are a global projection of the politically and CORPORATELY propagandized and controlled pattern of individual self-indulgence in an un-regulated and boundless consumerism that otherwise, by such means as toxic food and drink, pollutes the body of every seeker of the "good life", and which everywhere results in disease, unbearable stress-patterns, and every other mode of otherwise avoidable suffering and agony and CASUAL death.

Indeed, altogether, the present-time, and future-threatening global and collective situation is both dark and insane. Quite literally a global madhouse of mutual threats, and whole nations in clans of "tribalized" power, competing with one another like rival street gangs, always "protecting" nothing more than their will to egoic self-indulgence and egoic self glorification

This system is what "conservatives" champion.
Posted by Ho Hum, Thursday, 22 January 2009 11:27:57 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
Here are just some quotes displeasing those in the middle-class baby-boomers' Gaia cult:

1) Guy Le Blanc-Smith, retired CSIRO Principal Research Scientist:

"I have yet to see credible proof of carbon dioxide driving climate change, let alone man-made CO2 driving it. The atmospheric hot spot is missing and the ice core data refute this. When will we collectively awake from this deceptive delusion? I contend that those professional scientists and advisors that are knowingly complicit in climate science fraud and all that is derived from it will continue to be exposed by the science itself".

2) William Kininmonth, head of the Australian BoM National Climate Centre 1986-1998 and Australian delegate to the World Meteorological Organization's Commission for Climatology 1982-1998:

"AGW is a fiction and a very dangerous fiction".

3) Bob Carter, paleoclimate scientist James Cook University and ex-chairman of the ARC's Earth Science Panel:

"Many distinguished scientists refuse to participate in the IPCC process, and others have resigned from it, because in the end the advice that the panel provides to governments is political and not scientific".

The ruling oligarchs - as expressed by their front men ex-World Bank Stern and Garnaut - want to keep an even faker monetarist bubble going via their ETS scam. Such an economic tyranny would be even more oppressive than their derivatives bubble itself, which underlies this current global systemic disintegration, but ETS is meant to tie into the current looters' system via the bail-out pork.

Of course, the same oligarchs also want depopulation, whatever spin they put over their lies; as "CO2 emitters", humans are pollutants according to the sick, nasty cult of hypocrites (they themselves are too special and enlightened to perish in the great "cleansing").

Summer has been 2.5 months late in Victoria; we used the heater several times just before Xmas! Meanwhile, the northern hemisphere's snow and ice data show record stretches of cold too. Then the cultists reply that this is because the polar caps are melting (and polar bears drowning, etc.)!
Posted by mil-observer, Thursday, 22 January 2009 11:54:47 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 mil-observer:
re: "atmospheric hot spot is missing and the ice core data refute this" sorry to say that this is totally incorrect.
The tropical hot spot has been measured and confirmed by the IPCC viz there is a heating signature in the trophosphere. This argument has been used and abused by Carter, Evans, Nicol, Kininmonth et al from the ACSC, none of whom have been proven correct by any scientific measure. Just like ice-core data showing CO2 lags temperature. This is correct in the normal Milankovitch cycle, however it always happens in periods of deglaciation (simple research required), the last of which was 12,000 years ago. QED
Posted by sillyfilly, Thursday, 22 January 2009 12:51:31 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
mil-observer,

If AGW is all a plot by the global corporate elite to seize more power, with the aid of corrupt scientists, then you need to explain why the Bush administration made such desperate efforts to shut up Jim Hansen and other scientists at NASA and other US government agencies. See Mark Bowen's book "Censoring Science". There also seems to be a lack of understanding about how science works. Scientists are acclaimed, promoted, and awarded research grants and tenure for coming up with novel ideas, not for jumping on a bandwagon. If you look at the articles in New Scientist, say, you can easily see that very divergent alternatives to popular theories, such as string theory in physics, get published in respected journals and widely discussed. There are undoubtedly all sorts of scientists out there who would dearly love to conclusively discredit AGW.

I don't post on AGW as a rule, because it is not my field, and it would take probably 2 years to get up to speed, even though I was trained as a scientist. Even the front runners in climatology say that there is no absolute proof either way, because the various feedback mechanisms are extremely complicated. As Lawrence Krauss, the Nobel prize winning physicist, has said, however, the physics makes sense. So far as policy is concerned, it is all a matter of risk management. I wonder if some of you would be equally sceptical if an oncologist told you a lump needed to be biopsied (after all it might not be cancer) or a civil engineer told you that a building was structurally unsound. Assuming that that the problem is real, 80% of the excess greenhouse gases now in the atmosphere came from developed countries, so Bangladesh has a valid complaint.

I agree with some of the rest of you that even if AGW is real, it is a symptom of the main underlying sustainability issue, overpopulation, with mismanagement and conspicuous consumption playing strong supporting roles.
Posted by Divergence, Thursday, 22 January 2009 2:47:00 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
Ho Hum, does your favourite spiritual philosopher perchance reside in a looney bin?
Posted by fungochumley, Thursday, 22 January 2009 3:25:48 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
What absolute piffle! I agree with that sillyfilly, but not that questioners of AGW are uneducated.

The primary issue is not measuring temperature or CO2, it's the total lack of any link between them beyond fanciful modeling.

If you have a proven link, that increases in CO2 has a proven direct correlation to temperature, please let us all know - because that's the holy grail of the AGW religion isn't it, and why you all seem to be so angry other people are questioning your beliefs. (So how much CO2 = what temperature?)

The rest of the AGW piffle depends on models with suspicious outcomes which always seem to reflect what the modelers set out to discover. They are interesting tools, but not proof, you would need millions of variables to model climate, so modelers "estimate" the hard stuff, like clouds. There is also AGW's carefully chosen "graphology", it's not science, it's marketing.

I note other AGW believers argue that there is no hotspot near the equator because it manifests in a different way - you folks need to get your delusions in a row, maybe get a hockey stick to help you all marshall your beliefs. Just shouting it isn't so won't change the doubts or stop the questioning, nor should it, (nor will name calling).
Posted by rpg, Thursday, 22 January 2009 7:31:56 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. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All

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