Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffkop
The trouble is Mike that in the eyes of the average person .. AKA me, I see quite credible information from what appears to me equally as credible sources, that refute the pro claims. I dont know if this falls into your "pseudo science and creationist like selective evidence picking" category or not. Im an open book on this subject by the way. So what Chris is saying is exactly the problem here ... why is it so difficult to produce tangible demonstratable and repeatable proof. I know you think we have already seen proof, but I havent and would really like to one way or the other.
The fact that this delemour exists makes it all a grey area to me.
I am quite willing to side with the facts ... just show them to me.
If we have to go down the avenue of prudence then so be it ... my objection to that is not that in itself, only the timing of it.
I have to clearly object to the assertion that the government has a mandate ... Not even in some abstract way, nor mixing up letters and taking a few away is there any chance that the statement "there will be no carbon tax under my government" was not made in one sentence and in english ... and as an average person, I dont know how else to understand that but of course thats only my take on it.
Fortunately, that is not the main focus in this, there are much more difficult decisions and problems to address and I l hope that if Carbon is the problem we find solutions and move on. Either way though Im in favour of being pro active in the search for renewable energy sources as I think are most.
The thorium idea being discussed seems to be something that definately has merit.
|
I hear what you are saying Jeff but at this stage waaaay down the track of this needless debate, I am affraid the evidence is unequivocal, goverments have been given the facts and findings, it is all there, the Australian goverment must listen to the IPCC and they have. They have come up with the best system (by far) of the two major parties to takle the issue and it will almost certainly become active legislation, for at least several years, lets hope anyway.
I know that wasn't what you wanted but I am a little tired of this now (no offense at all) I wish you and others who doubt the science best of luck in trying to decide - it isn't hard really.
Cheers
Mike