Australian Politics Forum

Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl Member Run Boards >> Environment >> How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1329714472 Message started by matty on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:07pm

Title: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by matty on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:07pm

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/with_a_record_like_this_why_is_he_climate_commissioner/

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by skippy. on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:09pm

matty wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:07pm:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/with_a_record_like_this_why_is_he_climate_commissioner/

How do Bolt followers defend that prick?

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:10pm

"How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? "

How does ANYONE believe Murdoch media hack - and tabloid blogger - Andrew Bolt ?i

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by matty on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:15pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

"How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? "

How does ANYONE believe Murdoch media hack - and tabloid blogger - Andrew Bolt ?

Come on buzz, "Even the rain that falls won't fill our dams". Please explain??

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:17pm

Step 1: Find the original Flannery quote IN FULL.

Step 2: Realise that 2012 is not the distant future as Flannery says (but escapes most deniers reading ability)

Step 3: Give yourself an uppercut for believing a muppet like Bolt will tell you the truth.

Step 4: Give yourself an another uppercut for good measure.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:25pm

To be honest, I never understood why climate change was a left vs right fight, and in particular why the right were so quick to go against it... until I read this:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/vergano/story/2012-02-19/politics-climate-change-science/53137248/1

..."The science doesn't matter because the science isn't the real issue," Brulle adds. "It's about politics and money." All we have with climate change, he suggests, is politicians taking sides in an economic debate over whether we should spend money to address climate change, or not (with one side very strongly opposed), and hiding behind a smokescreen of debate about settled science to avoid making those issues clear.
"Take away the political divide between parties over the environment and all the debate about the science disappears," Brulle says. Every time you read a story claiming global warming science isn't real, he concludes, you are watching a sideshow, a magician's act designed to distract you while our political and industrial leaders put off any decisions about climate. ....

Bolt is our resident magician.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:29pm

You might have a point if it weren't for the Inconvenient Truith that every single significant prediction made by the climate extremists has failed to eventuate. A complete and total predictive failure is as good a repudiation of the theory as any other. Those who disbeleive in the central tenets of Climate Change Extremism dont have to do anything but watch the theories implode. and they do that nicely. even NASAwhose temperateur data has always been the odd one out in predicting temperature rises has admitted that globale temperatures are falling.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

"How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? "

How does ANYONE believe Murdoch media hack - and tabloid blogger - Andrew Bolt ?

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

in other words, 100% WRONG.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by skippy. on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:35pm

longliar wrote-
Quote:

even NASAwhose temperateur data has always been the odd one out in predicting temperature rises has admitted that globale temperatures are falling.

EVIDENCE LIAR PANTS????????????

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

You accuse Flannery of lying, and then you come out with the biggest lie of all that global temps are dropping.

Even after you've been run out of almost every enviro thread on here when shown up as a liar.

Will you never learn, or are you just a sucker for punishment.?

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Deathridesahorse on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:03pm

Get longweekend to talk about RATES-OF-CHANGE and you will see tears come through the computer screen!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;)

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:09pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

2011 was the 'ninth warmest year since 1998' (quote from NASA). even despite the silly spin on that statment it still means that it was the fifth COOLEST.

I doubt interpretation is something you do very well unless it is MISinterpretation.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:09pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

and you want to call ME a liar...

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by darkhall67 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:15pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Deathridesahorse on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:17pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

RATES OF CHANGE,... RATES OF CHANGE,... RATES OF CHANGE!!!!!!!!!!!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

ya see: LONGY WILL NEVER TALK ABOUT RATES OF CHANGE!!

NOR WILL ANY DENIER!!!

They anaylse stock market graphs yet all of a sudden the rich can't interpret graphs when it comes to climate change!!

:o :o :o WOW, like simply WOW!!!! ::) :D :D :D :D :-X

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Karnal on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:21pm

matty wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:15pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

"How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? "

How does ANYONE believe Murdoch media hack - and tabloid blogger - Andrew Bolt ?

Come on buzz, "Even the rain that falls won't fill our dams". Please explain??

Matty, I think we should give Mr Bolt the Climate Comissioner's job when we get back into government.

Thoughts?

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:24pm

darkhall67 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:15pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:09pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

and yet in 40 years temperatures have risen a massive ONE degree while history records temperature rises and falls of 4 times that amount in the last 1000 yearas all of it prior to the industrial revolution. and then of course there re the historical ice ages - all of which occured with massive DROPS In temperature.

but yep, you keep telling us how its getting warmer despite the evidence that the cyclical rise and fall of temperature is now on the downslope.

all I want is for you lot to actually get a few of your significant predictions come to pass unequivocably. but so far, NONE. in fact the level of failure is so high that no credble scientist shoudl support a theory for which every model is wrong and every outcome fails.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:33pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

"How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? "

How does ANYONE believe Murdoch media hack - and tabloid blogger - Andrew Bolt ?

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

in other words, 100% WRONG.

That ... is RUBBISH !

Average global tempratures have INCREASED every decade - on the previous one - for the last seventy ( ... or so) years

You read TOO much "cash for comment" from the Heartland Institute

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:34pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:24pm:

all I want is for you lot to actually get a few of your significant predictions come to pass unequivocably. but so far, NONE. in fact the level of failure is so high that no credble scientist shoudl support a theory for which every model is wrong and every outcome fails.

Huh? Almost all peer-reviewed scientific predictions have come true so far, just these for example:
1) Increase in global temperatures.
2) Reduction of polar ice cap
3) Carbonisation of the sea water.
4) Widespread Glacial retreat.

Tick, tick, tick.

You're prediction that temperature wont rise.... FAIL.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:37pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:24pm:

darkhall67 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:15pm:

and yet in 40 years temperatures have risen a massive ONE degree while history records temperature rises .....

but yep, you keep telling us how its getting warmer despite the evidence that the cyclical rise and fall of temperature is now on the downslope.

Do you even understand that graph ?
;D

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Deathridesahorse on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:37pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:24pm:

Yet again longy is dodging the RATES OF CHANGE concept!!

I WONDER WHY??? :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-*

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:43pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

"How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? "

How does ANYONE believe Murdoch media hack - and tabloid blogger - Andrew Bolt ?

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

in other words, 100% WRONG.

and you read too much sci-fi. in the 1960s the fear was global COOLING which of course occured because temperatures were RISING, right? gimme a break. you are brighter than that.

temperatures have never gone anywhere near outside the usual cycle of rise and fall. by 2025 there wont be a climate change hysteric anywhere to be seen because temperatures wil be a degree lower than now. and the change to cooler has already started.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:44pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:37pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:24pm:

Yet again longy is dodging the RATES OF CHANGE concept!!

I WONDER WHY??? :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-*

if you want to debate differential calculus you might try showing some common sense first. no one (and that is literally so) is going to debate with a crack-addicted fool like you.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:48pm

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:52pm

Here is an educated video for the people who have trouble with how science is supposed to work

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw

The idiots at IPCC are wrong, simply, it is just wrong. This guy knows.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:53pm

What a sad individual mr progessives/longy is....

When he comes up against temperature data graph, he shows us a cartoon.

deathridesahorse has it all over him, meaning he must be stupider than a "crack-addicted fool". Takes one to know one I guess.

All these, and yet doesnt get a cent from the oil barrons at Heartland.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by matty on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:57pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

Flannery IS a proven liar, and I am still waiting to see how any of you defnd his comments about the dams.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:58pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:53pm:

Well jolly dill, the cartoon reflects the OP.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:59pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:43pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:33pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

"How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this? "

How does ANYONE believe Murdoch media hack - and tabloid blogger - Andrew Bolt ?

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

in other words, 100% WRONG.

Past Decade Warmest on Record According to Scientists in 48 Countries

Earth has been growing warmer for more than fifty years

July 28, 2010

The 2009 State of the Climate report released today draws on data for 10 key climate indicators that all point to the same finding: the scientific evidence that our world is warming is unmistakable. More than 300 scientists from 160 research groups in 48 countries contributed to the report, which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.

Based on comprehensive data from multiple sources, the report defines 10 measurable planet-wide features used to gauge global temperature changes. The relative movement of each of these indicators proves consistent with a warming world. Seven indicators are rising: air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, air temperature over oceans, sea level, ocean heat, humidity and tropospheric temperature in the “active-weather” layer of the atmosphere closest to the Earth’s surface. Three indicators are declining: Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern hemisphere.

“For the first time, and in a single compelling comparison, the analysis brings together multiple observational records from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the ocean,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator.

“The records come from many institutions worldwide. They use data collected from diverse sources, including satellites, weather balloons, weather stations, ships, buoys and field surveys. These independently produced lines of evidence all point to the same conclusion: our planet is warming”

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100728_stateoftheclimate.html

FYI

The "global cooling" theory was short-lived - and the product of a VERY small demographic

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:02pm

matty wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:57pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

Flannery IS a proven liar, and I am still waiting to see how any of you defnd his comments about the dams.

Read my 1st post in this thread you muppet.

Its not "defending" him. Its gaining the truth through accurate quoting.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:03pm

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:58pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:53pm:

Well jolly dill, the cartoon reflects the OP.

Its shows the depth of your argument, that you run away from the first sign of scientific data.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:07pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:03pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:58pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:53pm:

Well jolly dill, the cartoon reflects the OP.

Its shows the depth of your argument, that you run away from the first sign of scientific data.

Wow, you must be learning that pseudo science pretty well. FACT: I came here and posted = came here, not ran away der

You should watch that video and learn something.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Deathridesahorse on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:10pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:44pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:37pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:24pm:

Yet again longy is dodging the RATES OF CHANGE concept!!

I WONDER WHY??? :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-*

if you want to debate differential calculus you might try showing some common sense first. no one (and that is literally so) is going to debate with a crack-addicted fool like you.

I don't have to show nada buddy!

I just have to say rates of change to make you cry at will: I WAS BORN TO MAKE YOU FREE-MARKET LIARS CRY ENDLESS TEARS, SIMPLE!!

CHEER UP AND SIMPLY REALISE YOU CAN'T HIDE FROM ME IS ALL!!

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:18pm

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:07pm:

Wow, you must be learning that pseudo science pretty well. FACT: I came here and posted = came here, not ran away der

You should watch that video and learn something.

Posting a cartoon when confronted with Scientific data is, most definitely running away.

Running away from science is your forte. In fact, I'd say science is totally irrelevant to you. Correct ?

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:24pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:18pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:07pm:

Wow, you must be learning that pseudo science pretty well. FACT: I came here and posted = came here, not ran away der

You should watch that video and learn something.

Posting a cartoon when confronted with Scientific data is, most definitely running away.

Running away from science is your forte. In fact, I'd say science is totally irrelevant to you. Correct ?

Oh, what science. Can you point out the post as I have not read them all yet with you wasting mine and everyone elses time.

BTW you surely watched the video after implying I should not be running away from science.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by nairbe on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:25pm

matty wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:57pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

Flannery IS a proven liar, and I am still waiting to see how any of you defnd his comments about the dams.

What lies? Proof please ., what a tosser as the poms would say. The very basic fact and differentiation that the conservative climate doubters never quite get is that weather and climate are two different things altogether. So just because we have had a mild summer that was wet does not mean that the core temperature of the oceans and land masses has not crept up. Actually the rise in water temperature would explain the increase rain fall.
Truth is the deniers and conservatives don't give a sh1t if the ecology of the world collapses and we destroy 90% of the world species. They believe they are so smart that man will survive and they are probably right. The question is do you really want to live in such a waste land. I certainly don't.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:27pm

nairbe wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:25pm:

matty wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:57pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

and in the meantime global temperatures are dropping and our dams and rivers are filled again.

Flannery IS a proven liar, and I am still waiting to see how any of you defnd his comments about the dams.

Prove those lies., what a tosser as the poms would say. The very basic fact and differentiation that the conservative climate doubters never quite get is that weather and climate are two different things altogether. So just because we have had a mild summer that was wet does not mean that the core temperature of the oceans and land masses has not crept up. Actually the rise in water temperature would explain the increase rain fall.
Truth is the deniers and conservatives don't give a sh1t if the ecology of the world collapses and we destroy 90% of the world species. They believe they are so smart that man will survive and they are probably right. The question is do you really want to live in such a waste land. I certainly don't.

That is not what flannery implied would happen. Isn't that what this thread is about. You know, the loony toon flimflan and his predictions.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:39pm

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:24pm:

Oh, what science. Can you point out the post as I have not read them all yet with you wasting mine and everyone elses time.

The temperature graph. You know if very well because it follows you like a shadow when you post your lies on enviro forums.

Its like your worst nightmare. ;D

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by nairbe on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:45pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:39pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:24pm:

Oh, what science. Can you point out the post as I have not read them all yet with you wasting mine and everyone elses time.

The temperature graph. You know if very well because it follows you like a shadow when you post your lies on enviro forums.

Its like your worst nightmare. ;D

Makes no difference, evidence is no object , you just ignore it and throw another insult. The deniers are so clever.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:48pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:39pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 5:24pm:

Oh, what science. Can you point out the post as I have not read them all yet with you wasting mine and everyone elses time.

The temperature graph. You know if very well because it follows you like a shadow when you post your lies on enviro forums.

Its like your worst nightmare. ;D

I can only see one graph and it doesn't go back to the medieval warming period. Why?

I assume it would look something like this

Except without the failed hockey stick overlay.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by dsmithy70 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 6:22pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:29pm:

So who wins the 2080 Melbourne cup?
Most predictions are for the end to next century not the next decade.
They say we have until mid 2020's to curb our emissions to avoid the long term predictions

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 6:47pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:34pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 4:24pm:

Quote:

1) Increase in global temperatures.

Outside of expected norms... No so FAIL

Quote:

2) Reduction of polar ice cap

antartica ice mass is actually expanding slightly (although reducing on one side and expanding on the other) while the artic ice cap has been predicted to melt for the last 10 years and has repeatedly refused to do so despite a huge active volcano under it. FAIL

Quote:

4) Widespread Glacial retreat.

A recent report on himalayan glaciers reported ZERO retreat. the only retreat that has been seen in the alst 30 years is the usual cyclical growth and retreat. FAIL

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 6:50pm

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 6:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 3:29pm:

So who wins the 2080 Melbourne cup?
Most predictions are for the end to next century not the next decade.
They say we have until mid 2020's to curb our emissions to avoid the long term predictions

funny about that... after a decade of total and absolute failure on predictions for 10-20 years hence, science now wants us to believe their predictions for 50-80 years in the future. do I really have to explain why almost no-one trusts these predictions which have ranged from 100m sea level rises now down to 1meter OR temperature rises from as much as 10 degrees now down to 2 degrees.

what possible reason do we have to believe people who have gotten so much, so wrong, wil be right 50 years hence when they cant get the most basic of predictions anywhere near close?

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 10:09pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 6:47pm:

... the artic ice cap has been predicted to melt for the last 10 years and has repeatedly refused to do so despite a huge active volcano under it. FAIL

NASA: Climate change shrinks Arctic sea ice to near-record level
October 4, 2011

Arctic sea ice from March 7 to Sept. 9, 2011, as measured by the Aqua satellite.
The yellow line depicts the 30-year average extent of the ice; the red line is the Northwest Passage shipping lane. (NASA)

The sea ice capping the Arctic Ocean is melting away much faster and in more critical areas than initially predicted, and could dissolve entirely into tepid water earlier than 2100, a group of scientists said today.

The sea ice, which typically reaches its lowest extent each September, was the second smallest in known history this past month, according to researchers from NASA and the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado in Boulder. You can see how far the white ice has receded in the above map. (Larger, and here's a great movie of the cap from March 7 to Sept. 9.) The yellow line represents the 30-year average September extent, and the red line is the Northwest Passage, a shipping route that is becoming increasingly viable thanks to ice loss.

The teeny-tiny ice cap in 2007 still holds the record for lowest-ever extent, but that's no great comfort, because there were mitigating factors causing that incredible melt. Says the space agency:

The near-record ice-melt [of Sept. 2011] followed higher-than-average summer temperatures, but without the unusual weather conditions that contributed to the extreme melt of 2007. "Atmospheric and oceanic conditions were not as conducive to ice loss this year, but the melt still neared 2007 levels," said NSIDC scientist Walt Meier. "This probably reflects loss of multiyear ice in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas as well as other factors that are making the ice more vulnerable."

Scientists have been tracking the incredible shrinking ice cap with sensitive satellite instruments since the late '70s. The September cap has shrunk an average of 12 percent each decade, a fact that "scientists attribute largely to warming temperatures caused by climate change," according to NASA

Cont ...

http://www.wjla.com/blogs/weather/2011/10/nasa-climate-change-shrinks-arctic-sea-ice-to-near-record-level-13064.html

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by philperth2010 on Feb 20^th, 2012 at 11:09pm

Tony Abbott intends to spend billions of dollars on climate change with no compensation and no chance of success......His direct action policy is a total waste of time.....Even Andrew Bolt has called Abbott's direct Action policy a waste of time!!!

A look at direct action.....read here......
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by philperth2010 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:33am

If the Liberal Party had won the 2007 election we would already have an ETS.....How do the faithful justify their back flip???

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 7:32am

Quote:

The sea ice capping the Arctic Ocean is melting away much faster and in more critical areas than initially predicted, and could dissolve entirely into tepid water earlier than 2100, a group of scientists said today.

so now its 2100, is it? it was originally expected do disappear in 2008 then 2009 and then 2010 and you get the picture. now they've given up and made an unprovable prediction outside the lifespan of our grandchildren. and conveniently they STILL dont take into consideration the worlds largest active volcano directly beneath the arctic. think that might have something to do with local melting?

Meanwhil back in antarctica, ice volumes are remaining static. how Inconvenient.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:05am

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:33am:

If the Liberal Party had won the 2007 election we would already have an ETS.....How do the faithful justify their back flip???

Easy. An ETS was a Howard "non-core" policy. They only talked it up before the election because Rudd was making them look old and indecisive.

They can justify the backflip, because a backflip was secret internal policy.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:10am

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:05am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:33am:

If the Liberal Party had won the 2007 election we would already have an ETS.....How do the faithful justify their back flip???

Oh the good old what ifs that never were. Too bad hey. The country nearly got suckered by the church of climatology. Then we get the actual suckers (not what the Australian people wanted nor were promised) give us a carbon tax.

Not even the dumby American are as dumb as labor. and the greens.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:11am

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:05am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:33am:

If the Liberal Party had won the 2007 election we would already have an ETS.....How do the faithful justify their back flip???

do you really think that as an ALP supporter you ahve any place talking about election promise breaches? Gillard-the-Liar has broken any and all that she fins inconvenient.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:30am

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:11am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:05am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:33am:

If the Liberal Party had won the 2007 election we would already have an ETS.....How do the faithful justify their back flip???

do you really think that as an ALP supporter you ahve any place talking about election promise breaches? Gillard-the-Liar has broken any and all that she fins inconvenient.

mate, I'm not ALP supporter.

And I strongly believe that both sides lie through their teeth. John Howard was called "Honest John" as sarcastic nickname. He had core and non-core promises. this is all public record.
Rudd backfliped on the ETS. Gillard backflipped on the carbon tax, and pokies. OFarrell backflip on solar, and shooting in NP. Abbott is known as the "weathervane" because he flip flops on so many issues.

They are all liars. But ask yourself, are lies always a bad thing. I certainly dont want politicians to be locked into a position they had 10 years ago. There needs to be some latitude for re-assessing a position based on changed circumstances, as everyone encounters in day to day life.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:32am

progressiveslol wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:10am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:05am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:33am:

If the Liberal Party had won the 2007 election we would already have an ETS.....How do the faithful justify their back flip???

Oh the good old what ifs that never were.

So you think Howard would have brought in an ETS if he'd won (and held his seat) in 2007 ?

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:38am

Quote:

John Howard was called "Honest John" as sarcastic nickname

at least get your facts right. his nickname Honest John was given to him in reference to his actual honesty. you dont have to like it or even agree with it but you DONT get to reinterpret historical fact. that nickname actually preceded him becoming PM as well.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:41am

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:30am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:11am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 8:05am:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:33am:

If the Liberal Party had won the 2007 election we would already have an ETS.....How do the faithful justify their back flip???

do you really think that as an ALP supporter you ahve any place talking about election promise breaches? Gillard-the-Liar has broken any and all that she fins inconvenient.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT and refreshingly so! Howards reassessmen of his position on the GST occured years apart. it was a CHANGE of heart. Gillards change over the carbon tax occured in under a week. and it wasnt a change of heart or opinion. it was nothing more than a cynical grab for power - the worst possible reason to renege on a promise.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:54am

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:38am:

Quote:

John Howard was called "Honest John" as sarcastic nickname

at least get your facts right. his nickname Honest John was given to him in reference to his actual honesty.

Absolute BS. You are trying to re-write history there.

...the name "Honest John" was bestowed on him ironically by none other than Paul Keating, in the late 70's after Howard as treasurer promised his "fist full of dollars" tax cuts and did not deliver after the election.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:00am

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:41am:

In your blinkered view. A "change of heart" is not what I would call changed circumstances or new data. Thats flip-flopping.

On the other hand, Gillard told a lie about the carbon tax. No question. It was also contradictory to her party's own policy of pricing carbon. You could tell it was a lie as soon as she said it, before the election. Stupid, school girl error. No question. And she probably could have kept it the truth if labor won power outright.

But in a coallition with the greens, carbon tax/pricing was a must have. Thats a major changing or circumstances over that week, and a fair call too.

Harping on about the carbon tax lie is just playing party politics. As lies go, it turned out for the best.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by progressiveslol on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:09am

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:41am:

As lies go, it turned out to be the biggest and will be the end of labor.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by darkhall67 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:23am

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:38am:

Quote:

John Howard was called "Honest John" as sarcastic nickname

That's a load of balsa.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:36am

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:54am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:38am:

Quote:

John Howard was called "Honest John" as sarcastic nickname

at least get your facts right. his nickname Honest John was given to him in reference to his actual honesty.

which IRONICALLY was then adopted by media and the people in general as an ACCURATE estimation of the man. He continues to be considered by the bulk of the population as essentially honest. The term Honest John was a term used by most for exactly what it says.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by longweekend58 on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:38am

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:00am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:41am:

i thought there just for a minute you were going to turn into a rational non-partisan poster. alas, I was mistaken. a 'change of mind' in 4 days is ok but a change of policy over 4 years is not. you say you want pollies to be free to change their minds etc but apparently only when it suits you.

disappointed...

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 12:21pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 11:36am:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:54am:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:38am:

Quote:

John Howard was called "Honest John" as sarcastic nickname

at least get your facts right. his nickname Honest John was given to him in reference to his actual honesty.

ha, ha, ha that is so funny.

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Deathridesahorse on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 9:32pm

There is no Howard legacy,... end of story!!

THE LIBS HATE THE FACT THAT THERE LONGEST SERVING PRIME-MINISTER WAS HATED BY ALL AS A DO NOTHING PRIME-MINISTER WHO SAT THERE AND WATCHED THE DOLLARS ROLL IN AND SPENT UP BIG ON ADVERTSING!!

:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

This is why all silver-spooners hate themselves!!

Title: Re: How do gw believers like Flannery, defend this?
Post by Deathridesahorse on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 9:36pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2012 at 10:38am:

Quote:

John Howard was called "Honest John" as sarcastic nickname

WTF?
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

FMdrunkyshite!! ::) :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* ;D ;) ;) ;) ;D