The Great Global Warming Swindle

[jonbuoy]

Hell you can see the effects of burning fossil fuels looking over the yellow smog on Aucklands skyline on a sunny morning.

[Jantar]

One point however - these arguments miss a rather crucial matter - impact on the biosphere. Even if releasing billions of tonnes of carbon annually, plus lead, zinc, copper etc doesn't affect the climate, it sure as hell affects the micro biota under your feet. And in the sea. If you want any chance of your grandchildren living on this planet, you'll reflect upon the entire food-chain - and how we are systematically poisoning it.

Two (of many) indicators - bee deaths, and ocean acidification.

And in this part I am in full agreement. I too would like to see a drastic decrease in pollution, and Winston has hit the reason bang on. I just wish more people who are anti pollution would say so and give this as a reason instead of making the "global warming" claim

[Quasievil]

I am now actually convinced you lot cant read.

the whole Carbon tax that is about to hit your pockets is based on the so called science that man made Co2 emissions are causing global warming (did you read that)

well it isnt, and there is no global warming as its getting cooler.and man made emissions count for only 1.7% of Co2 in the atmosphere.

I can write it any more simply than that, none of you have dispelled that simple bolded and underlined headline, so yup keep your head in the sand and expect a $3000 plus bill in your letter box next year, enjoy it knowing that your tax will make absolutely ZERO difference to the climate.

so where is the argument that should enable to big crooks to get your money ABSOLUTELY without question from practically any of you ?

bloody sheep

[Winston001]

I am now actually convinced you lot cant read.

the whole Carbon tax that is about to hit your pockets is based on the so called science that man made Co2 emissions are causing global warming (did you read that)

well it isnt, and there is no global warming as its getting cooler.and man made emissions count for only 1.7% of Co2 in the atmosphere.

I can write it any more simply than that, none of you have dispelled that simple bolded and underlined headline, so yup keep your head in the sand and expect a $3000 plus bill in your letter box next year, enjoy it knowing that your tax will make absolutely ZERO difference to the climate.

I know you are sincere and feel frustrated - but sadly you are mistaken. Carbon trading is simply a method for conservation and environmental protection. It is a gross and inaccurate measure but it is also easy to work with. If you and I are persuaded by cost to reduce our carbon footprint, then the result is we reduce polluting the environment.

Personally I don't think our ETS scheme is any good, and that its all too late anyway. Plus selling a carbon credit which a polluter can buy so they can burn more stuff just doesn't seem very logical.

So I reckon head for high ground, near the coast to get rainfall, and buy land with rich soil. Hunker down and your grandkids will thank you.

[Quasievil]

I know you are sincere and feel frustrated - but sadly you are mistaken. Carbon trading is simply a method for conservation and environmental protection. It is a gross and inaccurate measure but it is also easy to work with. If you and I are persuaded by cost to reduce our carbon footprint, then the result is we reduce polluting the environment.

Personally I don't think our ETS scheme is any good, and that its all too late anyway. Plus selling a carbon credit which a polluter can buy so they can burn more stuff just doesn't seem very logical.

So I reckon head for high ground, near the coast to get rainfall, and buy land with rich soil. Hunker down and your grandkids will thank you.

Like I said above

[Badjelly]

your last comment surely doesnt imply that Im simple.

It surely wasn't intended to. You said somewhere that I was making things complicated. I was replying that things are complicated.

[Badjelly]

man made emissions count for only 1.7% of Co2 in the atmosphere.

The rise in CO2 in the atmosphere over the last century or two is wholly caused by human activities: burning of fossil fuels plus maybe a bit of deforestation. The reasons we know this were given by me in a reply to Jantar a few posts back.

I don't know where you got your 1.7% from, and you won't tell me, but its either wrong or irrelevant (probably the latter, I suspect).

[Hitcher]

Carbon trading is a wealth tax. It has been promulgated by a "green" agenda to stop people in developed economies having fun and enjoying life. Like all taxes it can and will be subverted, requiring an enormous and costly compliance infrastructure.

And there is no need for it. If carbon fuels are indeed a scarce commodity, then good old market forces will drive the processes required to conserve and ensure their wise use.

[jonbuoy]

Sorry Quasi you lost me, one book and a petition?? Its not like governments can get global warming to change its mind with a petition. Organisations like NOAA don´t bandy figures about if they aren´t sure. The NOAA website is well worth a visit if you are interested in the subject. They collect data from weather buoys, ships, sattelites deep sea bathys and have a staggering amount of raw data to work with.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatec...de/bigpicture/

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GlobalWarming2.php

Cut and paste from NOAA:

Are greenhouse gases increasing?

Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases). There is no scientific debate on this point. Pre-industrial levels of carbon dioxide (prior to the start of the Industrial Revolution) were about 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv), and current levels are greater than 380 ppmv and increasing at a rate of 1.9 ppm yr-1 since 2000. The global concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today far exceeds the natural range over the last 650,000 years of 180 to 300 ppmv. According to the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), by the end of the 21st century, we could expect to see carbon dioxide concentrations of anywhere from 490 to 1260 ppm (75-350% above the pre-industrial concentration).

[Badjelly]

The major greenhouse gas is water vapour.

If the rise in water vapour occurs because the temperature is rising, then it doesn't necessarily cause more clouds to form. It's a rise in absolute humidity but not in relative humidity. Cloud feedbacks might exist, in fact they probably do exist, but they could go either way.

Back up a tad, gentlemen, if you please.

If you back up and re-read the exchange you'll see that I'm not denying water vapour is the major greenhouse gas, I'm not denying that it affects clouds and I'm not denying that clouds are very important radiatively.

All I'm saying is that if a rise in average temperature of the atmosphere causes a rise in water vapour concentration (AKA absolute humidity), such that the relative humidity stays the same then the cloud cover will not necessarily increase. 'Cos it's the relative humidity not the absolute humidity that determines how close the air is to saturation.

[Badjelly]

So erm again, what evidence is there that more C02 forces the temperature up further ?

A fair question. I've been too busy responding to various "facts" that you've put up to deal with stuff like that. I'll see what I can do.

Here we go:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...-6-easy-steps/

[Quasievil]

Here we go:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...-6-easy-steps/

mmmm a nice mathematical calculation that unfortunetly doesnt correlate to well with actual fact of history

historically then how do you account for 4500 ppm of Co2 and a 12 c temperature (as it is today 12c roughly and current Co2 is 385ppm)

And yet right now the Co2 is going up yet the temperature is going down.................sorry but next

[Jantar]

The rise in CO2 in the atmosphere over the last century or two is wholly caused by human activities: burning of fossil fuels plus maybe a bit of deforestation. The reasons we know this were given by me in a reply to Jantar a few posts back......

I am still researching the link you gave for that claim. many of the papers refered to are not available on line, and the some of the ones that are have already been withdrawn or surpassed. So far I have not been able to locate any of the data that this claim mis based on, and with data no claim can ever be verified. This is the same reason that Mann's hockey stick is now recognised as false and is no longer used by the IPCC.

[Quasievil]

Also how do the Global warming scare mongers propose to deal with the economic affects that this scam will be imposing on the public as well as the industry of New Zealand and indeed the world, without science being even settled on the reason behind the scam.

Is it an attitude of "ar fuck em the evil empires of this world deserve to go down" which would be catastrophic for humanity as indeed would the affect of global warming to the level advocated by the loonies, but in this comment however only one of these things is certain one isnt even real (and you know what I mean there)

I have come to realise after a week in that this is a religious issue, the loonies have made this into a religion, the science and facts dont stack up absolutely on any level, yet they are happy to release this crap upon the masses as if it was the second coming of jesus (which would in effect be more likely) coupled with some scientists craving the research dollar and some purchased high power players like the plonker Al gore and throw in a movie and some government officials singing "Im a environmentalist" and we find ourselves here now passing stupid things like the ETS and the Copenhagen agreement

people do you actually have a brain outside your own scientific craving for attention and research monies, this shit is real and your shit aint proven and to date you cant prove it.

sorry just some thoughts all good in debate !

[Grahameeboy]

I am now actually convinced you lot cant read.

the whole Carbon tax that is about to hit your pockets is based on the so called science that man made Co2 emissions are causing global warming (did you read that)

well it isnt, and there is no global warming as its getting cooler.and man made emissions count for only 1.7% of Co2 in the atmosphere.

I can write it any more simply than that, none of you have dispelled that simple bolded and underlined headline, so yup keep your head in the sand and expect a $3000 plus bill in your letter box next year, enjoy it knowing that your tax will make absolutely ZERO difference to the climate.

so where is the argument that should enable to big crooks to get your money ABSOLUTELY without question from practically any of you ?

bloody sheep

Yeah and the idea that melting ice caps will rapidly raise the sea level is dubious because a) 2/3rds is under water b) melting ice = a lot less in water....takes about 4 billy cans of ice just to make a cuppa...(that's not a Darwin Theory either)