Hi Poirot,

I'm not so sure about the speed of climate change: sea-levels have risen - what ? 5 cm in a hundred years ? Since the end of the ice Age, 12,000 years ago, sea-levels have risen around fifty metres. That's an average of 45 cm or so, every hundred years. Probably most of that rise was in the first couple of thousand years so, i.e. 1.5 metres every hundred years, and about, say, 5 cm every hundred years after that ? But five cm is hardly Noah's Flood.

Incidentally, a recent TV clip of a Bangla Deshi island being flooded failed to mention tectonic subsidence in the Brahmaputra Delta as the Bengal Plate tilts up in the west and down in the east. Naughty !

Suse,

I agree with you that:

"Humans have well developed brains and they continue to evolve and think of new inventions and innovations as time goes on, so new technologies like IVF and other scientific /medical discoveries will continue as always."

And so it will be with the development of technologies to combat and reverse climate change. Medical research has made amazing advances in the last generation. And after all, world food production has doubled in the last forty years, when Paul Ehrlich et al. foretold mass deaths by starvation by now. The proportion of the world's population, even as it grows, who are starving each night is constantly shrinking.

So, like you, I am not a human abilities denier.

Cheers,

Joe

This conversation is hilarous. In the Middle East people are losing thier heads daily and you are worried about some fantasy. The only thing climate scientist need to be concerned about is that the funding keeps coming so they can sprout their nonsense.

Oh yes Runner, and you know better than all those hilarious scientists don't you?
You must feel humble in your own presence...

I honestly don't think government should be spending millions of dollars, likely to billions, in research re climate change.

I don't think anything will come from it. It will simply see large loads of something, (like money) poured into something that's simply not fixable, due to huge amounts of human interference with nature and growth in terms of areas like consumerism and overpopulation. Most Australians, won't want to change current lifestyles either.

So in that context nature has been taken over and can now only provide a few options to human beings. The best option I'd argue, if people want some change, on environment or health is to leave this to the private sector.

For example, I take five medications per week, for five medical conditions I don't want, but if I don't take these I will end up physically ill. I highly appreciate specialists and doctors I see in regards to the conditions I have, and this should be the focus, not government misleading the public, that climate change can be reduced by a set year or certain medical conditions are fixable.

That's being realistic - not negative.

Loudmouth: The proportion of the world's population, even as it grows, who are starving each night is constantly shrinking.

True, but the problem is they are in third World Countries that breed like flies. So the Cycle isn't self sustaining. The First World feed them, they breed greater numbers, then they starve again. They then fight amongst themselves & blame their predicament on the First World. The First World is forced by the Vocal Minority of Greenies & PC People into feeling guilty so we feed 'em again. Vicious Cycle.

I have no doubt we will find a way to deal with carbon, as an alternative to reducing it to unachievable levels. After all, words are cheap.

If you asked the majority of people to choose between a job and a decent lifestyle, of an unrealistic reduction in carbon, I recon most would choose the job. I cant see how we can have both.