Just because there are people displaying a high degree short sightedness and hypocrisy not to mention profiting from it, doesn't mean that the scientists are actually getting their pants from the Emperor's new wardrobe.
Tony the market isn't here - anyone with any tech of commercial value goes to China. This includes wind, solar and batteries.
China's renewable output is growing - their coal consumption has shrunk for the fourth year in a row, and it's no accident. Australia isn't even a technological backwater. It's a small fishpond.
The consequences of Keating and Hawkes decisions to focus on a service economy are now beginning to be felt:
- killing off manufacturing meant significant loss of opportunities for those technically skilled and trained in the sciences and engineering;
- the education system followed suit by steering students towards the soft subjects - business management, accounting arts and humanities and away from the hard nosed subjects like maths science and engineering;
- now the OECD comparisons reveal we're behind. Hardly a surprise IMHO. The sad thing is that once lost it's almost impossible to regain the capability, especially in an era when the universities here are training our competitors in the guise of "exporting" education.
America has done much the same and those who voted for Trump in the hope of jobs are going to be disillusioned fairly soon - there won't be jobs, and the unemployed aren't sufficiently skilled to be useful.
Just because there are people displaying a high degree short sightedness and hypocrisy not to mention profiting from it, doesn't mean that the scientists are actually getting their pants from the Emperor's new wardrobe.
I am not sure what you mean Clive.
Scientists provide data.
They presumably are not the problem.
The problem seems to be those who suggest solutions that benefit their share potfolio.
When was the last time you got a letter from your elec tricity supplier suggesting how you could reduce consumption.
And why do we need w 16 motors or 300 km per hour cars.
If folk thought deeply about the situation they would not see fosil fuel as the problem but rather our totally screwed priorities and the influence of greed.
Folk need to accept the data but reject the solutions tailored to benefit select groups.
Both sides have their axe to grind and the mob choose a side and fail to see neither side care about mankind but only about how they can profit from the crisis.
Alex
Then when you raise the next "issue" trying to deny climate change, try looking up the answer yourself before making remarks like the above.
The first article's heading "Some sites show cooling - but you can't draw global conclusions from individual sites".
That ofcourse does not apply to the warmists, every time somewhere records above temperatures, the global warming brigade go haywire - Brisbane had an above average January - BAM conclusive proof of global warming. What hypocrisy.
Second article: "A local cold day has nothing to do with the long-term trend of increasing global temperatures".
Yet, a local hot day has everything to do with increasing global temperatures, while the fact that places are experiencing below average temps for months on end, as has been the case in SE Australia in 2016/17, are conveniently ignored by the AGW mob. But, never mind, a month of hot summer weather in Brisbane is irrefutable evidence of global warming.
The first article's heading "Some sites show cooling - but you can't draw global conclusions from individual sites".
That ofcourse does not apply to the warmists, every time somewhere records above temperatures, the global warming brigade go haywire - Brisbane had an above average January - BAM conclusive proof of global warming. What hypocrisy.
Second article: "A local cold day has nothing to do with the long-term trend of increasing global temperatures".
Yet, a local hot day has everything to do with increasing global temperatures, while the fact that places are experiencing below average temps for months on end, as has been the case in SE Australia in 2016/17, are conveniently ignored by the AGW mob. But, never mind, a month of hot summer weather in Brisbane is irrefutable evidence of global warming.
I thought you might respond that way and it seems pointless to argue with you since you will dismiss anything that doesn't fit your view.
Now, just in case you can understand things and perhaps are just ignorant at this point, I'll try one more time. Media reports are just that - reports - whether it's cooler in one place or warmer in another. Look behind the reports and find the scientific data and evidence that's collected over *time* that's more than short-term sensational paper-selling stories. If you bothered to do that, you'd see the "irrefutable evidence of global warming".
Wavy, I fear you're correct, but I can't help but think that things could have been different.
For instance, since 1990 a large part of the nations wealth has been malinvested in real estate, a situation promoted by government via too-low interest rates and first home buyer grants. Could the government have used credit instead to promote research in the emerging field of solar energy to at least develop products here, if not manufacture them?
The real estate bubble has done enormous damage to our economy whereas investment in solar may have provided jobs and foreign income.
If Musk can build factories in the US couldn't we have done similar here? We don't have a big domestic market but we usually have a competitive currency to help export; it's only the artificial mining boom that caused our currency to be so high in recent years.
Clive as a guide for the future if you think I am wrong know that you have misinterpred my post.
Strangely much of what we read about this stuff comes via journalists and they tend to sensationalise. That proba ly does not reflect the real positon.
And so folk may think there is a bias for example as we see here... Why dont they report the cold days well consider the journalist.. because no one wants to know..
I study this stuff and I think the data so far suggests warming.
I doubt we can do a thing irrespective of the reasons for warming.
There is no will but there are many who push their save the planet idea orcapitalise on the problem.
We wont become carbon free in my view so probably best to plan cities underground.
Look at all the toy cars that wont change.
Greedy consumption.. that wont change.
While there is coal and oil left and folk make money from its supply to the world it will remain a carbon dominated world.
The electric motor beats the petrol motor hands down for the average person but who wants a car that does not make that masculine growl.
Could we have a carbon tax and all proceeds go to subsidising solar panels... we could but its just another revenue stream.
I think many sceptics see the scam and attack the premise but they would be better to accept the data and concentrate on exposing how folk simply seek to profit from the situation.
Alex
Clive as a guide for the future if you think I am wrong know that you have misinterpred my post.
Jolly good...
As to your last post, I'm perhaps less optimistic than you.
I think modern western society is fatally flawed and will collapse even without the pressure of climate change.
(It's a mathematical certainty)
The first article's heading "Some sites show cooling - but you can't draw global conclusions from individual sites".
That ofcourse does not apply to the warmists, every time somewhere records above temperatures, the global warming brigade go haywire - Brisbane had an above average January - BAM conclusive proof of global warming. What hypocrisy.
Second article: "A local cold day has nothing to do with the long-term trend of increasing global temperatures".
Yet, a local hot day has everything to do with increasing global temperatures, while the fact that places are experiencing below average temps for months on end, as has been the case in SE Australia in 2016/17, are conveniently ignored by the AGW mob. But, never mind, a month of hot summer weather in Brisbane is irrefutable evidence of global warming.
Perth has had a cooler than average summer. How does that fit with your AGW agenda?
Whilst I agree that no single weather event could be direct proof of climate change, and yes some people do try to use these heat waves or floods to wave their banner( which I think is pretty sad but understandable)... I guess I had the below picture in mind when I vented my frustration towards climate change skeptics.
Whilst I agree that no single weather event could be direct proof of climate change, and yes some people do try to use these heat waves or floods to wave their banner( which I think is pretty sad but understandable)... I guess I had the below picture in mind when I vented my frustration towards climate change skeptics.
Cheers Julian
This is generally done to try and provide the 'wake up call'.
The hassle with getting action on climate change is that the effects take so long to come into effect. We live in a 'now' society where 50 years away may as well be 1,000,000 years away.
If you can't get people's attention during a record heatwave, then you probably never will.
If you can't get people's attention during a record heatwave, then you probably never will.
I think people are over climate change because this is another example of opportunistic politicians politicizing the issue. Western Governments now seem to be in gridlocked by this type of leadership. ...Ironic now the world looks to China to lead the climate change charge.
Tim Flannery - the gentleman who predicted it will never rain again, campaigned against construction of dams in favour of vastly more expensive desal plants, which are now rusting under water, and predicted that our coastal cities will be under water within our lifespan, then buys an expensive waterfront home...
A cockroach has more intelligence than that far-left socialist climate extremist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave
Why would you buy a water front if you sincerely believed what you were telling everyone.
Dunno, if the cockroach checked the local topography and found that the useable part of the property was above the sea level rise predicted for its lifetime or that of its 10,000 children? I would have thought it's the vertical, not the horizontal distance from the sea that matters here?
Dunno, if the cockroach checked the local topography and found that the useable part of the property was above the sea level rise predicted for its lifetime or that of its 10,000 children? I would have thought it's the vertical, not the horizontal distance from the sea that matters here?
I think his property was pointed out to me and if it was his then on his view it should go under.
The trouble is I dont know if the property pointed out to me was his... I am a suspisious person so I leave room for the fact it may not have been his property.
Alex
I think his property was pointed out to me and if it was his then on his view it should go under.
The trouble is I dont know if the property pointed out to me was his... I am a suspisious person so I leave room for the fact it may not have been his property.
Alex
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave
I do not call the man a cockroach by the way.
Alex
Sorry Alex, didn't mean to suggest you did.
Maybe the guy thought that with the supply of climate change sceptics so plentiful, there won't be a lack of prospective buyers when it's time to get out.
