Here's an idea... how about I go and dig up all the info and lay it all before you in plain English? What would the outcome be? You would just argue it for the sake of it.
If you are not prepared to consider other views or that the overwhelming scientific consensus might actually be right then who am I to change your mind.
It's like a religion to you. You've made your mind up that humans are predominantly responsible for changes in the climate, and you stick doggedly to your view despite the lack of evidence.
Your mind is closed and you are completely unprepared to consider other views.
On the other hand, I have an open mind. I don't claim that humans have no impact on the climate, nor do I claim they are predominantly responsible for changes in the climate. My position is that I don't know, and that nobody else knows the extent to which human activity influences changes in the climate. I actually find it quite conceited when people claim to know how much humans are responsible for changes in something as complex as the global climate.
I'm happy to look at any evidence you may offer, but so far you have offered zero evidence showing the extent to which humans are responsible.
It's like a religion to you. You've made your mind up that humans are predominantly responsible for changes in the climate, and you stick doggedly to your view despite the lack of evidence.
Your mind is closed and you are completely unprepared to consider other views.
1. I believe there is evidence of the greenhouse effect 2. I cannot meaningfully quantify the effect human contribution has to this effect, nor its likely impact 3. I am aware that meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions is virtually impossible 4. I believe conservation of resources for future generations at least until viable alternatives are available is a good thing 5. I believe reducing pollution is a good thing
6. Given all this, even though I don't accept that we are at alarmist levels, or alarm serves any good purpose, reducing consumption of greenhouse producing and other polluting resources is a good thing. But with that approach, I'm just as likely to choose a water saving washing machine as I am to choose an energy efficient fridge. It's not about staving off climate change. It's about conserving natural resources.
Property speculation is a type of gambling... But everyone knows that in gambling, the house always wins in the end.
Seriously I don't care one iota why we reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, as long as we do reduce them significantly.
If you don't believe in man made global warning then why would I care as long as I see the right objectives being met. Absolutely none of us here actually knows regardless of how much we think that we know about the science, so my money is with Pascal - it's the safest bet that we will ever see.
Catweasel say it would be the better if mice in all a educated in fundamental of scientific the think. Basing its life on faith and fear not the answer.
But that would make many of its beliefs about a world redundant, so for the many, better to keep a mouse in the mental slavery.
It's not a belief or fear, and I do have some basic scientific knowledge, but it's strictly a numbers proposition of putting the odds in my favour.
Do you not play cards?
Any expressed market opinion is my own and is not to be taken as financial advice
Sydney must have had a bit of a fog problem back in the 50s to the 70s to I guess!
No. The words of someone who lives in Beijing and can tell the difference between smog and fog and can also look at the US Embassy pollution monitor that is on the web.
The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off. --Gloria Steinem AREPS™
In February this year, Penny Wong, the then climate change minister said: ‘Globally, 14 of the 15 warmest years on record occurred between 1995 and 2009' and she argued that the Bureau of Meteorology had concluded that ‘2009 was the second hottest year in Australia on record and ended our hottest decade. In Australia, each decade since the 1940s has been warmer than the last.'
It is claims such as these that provide the justification for Australia putting a ‘price on carbon' to reduce our emissions of carbon dioxide. However, as Professor Bob Carter explains, what Penny Wong said might be true, but in the debate about climate change the minister's claims are meaningless. As Carter says ‘Minister Wong's statement, and others like it, are scientifically trivial and appear to be deliberately intended to mislead. In reality it is no more significant that 14 of the last 15 years are the warmest since instrumental records began than it is that the hottest days of each year cluster around and shortly after midsummer's day.'
That's because we only have about 150 years of accurate, instrument-measured, temperature records. In the context of the history of the earth's climate what's occurred in the last few decades is not unusual. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries temperatures increased following the ‘Little Ice Age', successive phases of which lasted from roughly 1350 to 1860. The Little Ice Age followed the ‘Mediaeval Warm Period' of 800 to 1000 AD. Reconstructed temperatures for the Mediaeval Warm Period are based upon proxy data such as tree ring analysis and various geochemical measurements, which imply that at many localities temperatures then were as warm or warmer than those of today. Similarly, during the ‘Holocene climatic optimum' of several thousand years ago, temperatures were a degree or so warmer than they are now; during the last interglacial period 125,000 years ago temperatures were approximately two degrees warmer than now; and six million years ago, temperatures were about two to three degrees warmer than now.
None of this was mentioned by Penny Wong. Nor did she mention that it is likely that global temperatures peaked in 1998 and started declining in 2002. The new minister for climate change, Greg Combet, hasn't taken the trouble to talk about any of this either.
As we find out from Climate: The Counter Consensus there's lots of other things we haven't been told by those politicians who believe that humans are causing potentially catastrophic global warming and that therefore drastic action must be taken.
While the politicians are constantly telling the public ‘the science is settled' and there's a ‘consensus', they have never dared inform the public of the basic facts of climate change. Thankfully it's an omission rectified by Professor Carter.
Carbon dioxide, water vapour, methane, nitrous oxides, and ozone are called ‘greenhouse' gases because they absorb heat and warm the atmosphere. Without greenhouse gases the temperature of the earth's atmosphere would be about minus 19°C. The proportionate impact of each of the greenhouse gases on atmospheric warming is approximately as follows: 78 per cent from water vapour, 20 per cent from carbon dioxide, and 2 per cent from the other gases. Of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, up to 5 per cent is the result of burning fossil fuels. What this translates into is that 0.45 per cent of the greenhouse warming in a particular year is the result of human activity. Or expressed in another way, 99.55 per cent of the greenhouse effect has nothing to do with carbon dioxide emissions caused by humans. It's widely acknowledged that partly as a result of human activity atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, but as Carter points out the impact of this increase is disputed. For one thing our understanding of important processes like the exchange of carbon dioxide between the atmosphere and the oceans remains limited. But the context is clear, for:
even if human emissions were to be reduced to zero, the difference would be lost among other uncertainties in the global carbon budget. What is presently missing from the public debate, then - and it is not provided by computer model outputs, either - is an appreciation of both the small scale (in context) of human emissions, and the range of uncertainty in the carbon budget.
Uncertainty, and the limits of our knowledge of climate change is a constant theme of Carter's book. What we do know is that the climate is constantly changing, and that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been unable to demonstrate that anything that has so far happened to the earth's temperature is not part of normal climatic variation.
Carter's position on climate change can be summarised as follows:
There is unanimous agreement that human activities can affect climate at local scale; summed across the globe, these local affects may have a measurable effect on global climate; for the period of the instrumental record (say the last 100 years), however, climate change has proceeded at rates that lie within previous natural rates and magnitudes, and any anthropogenic effect cannot be distinguished from the noise and natural variation in the system.
No. The words of someone who lives in Beijing and can tell the difference between smog and fog and can also look at the US Embassy pollution monitor that is on the web.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy
or this 
could lead to climate change?
