NSW Liberals call for national debates on climate change science

The NSW Liberals have formally called on the Turnbull government to conduct public debates about climate change - including whether the science is settled - in a stark reminder of the deep divisions within the party over the issue.

A motion passed at the party's state council calls on the government to "arrange and hold public debates/discussions" between scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and "independent climate scientists".

The motion says the events should cover "the global warming/climate change debate"; "the claims by the IPCC"; and the statement "is all the science settled".

It proposes the first debate be held in Sydney, the second in Melbourne and "the others to take place one in each state".

Fairfax Media understands the motion passed with support of more than 70 per cent of delegates at the state council meeting held on the Central Coast last weekend.

A second motion called on the Turnbull government to hold an inquiry into Australia's engagement with the United Nations on climate change and report back to the party by mid-year.

But an amendment by NSW MLC Catherine Cusack, supported by left faction powerbroker Michael Photios, ensured the motion was sent off to the party's platform committee for consideration at a later stage.

The motions - which were debated after Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull had left the room following his speech - reveal the level of climate change scepticism among the Liberal base in NSW.

Sources say Mr Turnbull - known to strongly support action on climate change - was heckled by sections of the party during his speech and a large section of delegates refused to rise when he was given a standing ovation.

The successful motion will be conveyed to federal environment minister Greg Hunt. Mr Hunt's office did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokeswoman for the NSW Liberal Party said: "We encourage robust debate of policy motions at state council".

Mr Turnbull has been accused of compromising his principles on climate policy since taking the prime ministership from Tony Abbott, who had previously described debate around the science of climate change as "absolute crap".

Conservative government MPs warned Turnbull not to stray to the left on climate change when he took the leadership.

Despite supporting the measure as opposition leader, Mr Turnbull does not now support an emissions trading scheme to cut Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.

The federal government says it still intends to abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which funds renewable energy infrastructure.

Mr Turnbull has also been criticised for failing to intervene to stop cuts to the CSIRO's climate monitoring and modelling units.




http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-liberals-call-for-national-debates-on-climate-change-science-20160307-gnd3zn.html

So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed?

Well, the Libs are dismantling the CSIRO Air and Ocean division so no nasty facts about AGW will be aired. That should fix that—for a Lib.

The Greens twice stuffed up action against AGW so they must agree with the Libs.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:27pm:

So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed?

When's the Libs debate on Gravity?

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:31pm:

The Greens twice stuffed up action against AGW so they must agree with the Libs.

Labor's ETS locked in no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033.
Greens were correct in voting this down

If Labor hadn't been so tricky, Abbott would of never been PM.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1449746328

What's there to debate?

The climate changes, has done since the year dot, and without the help of us ape descendants.

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:39pm:

Labor's ETS locked in no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033.

Obama's agreement with China is that China will look at reducing emissions after 2030. Given Australia's emissions it would seem not a huge jump.

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:44pm:

What's there to debate? The climate changes, has done since the year dot, and without the help of us ape descendants.

Victim mentality aside. Humans are changing the planet and to deny the power we have and are using to change the climate, makes you appear naive.

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? When's the Libs debate on Gravity?

Gravity is a universally accepted, scientifically proven fact that can be reproduced by anyone at will. Climate change is not.

lee wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:44pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:39pm: Labor's ETS locked in no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033. Obama's agreement with China is that China will look at reducing emissions after 2030. Given Australia's emissions it would seem not a huge jump.

Australia's emissions as a percentage of global emissions equates to a fart in a hurricane - literally. That's how miniscule our contribution is to global emissions.

Given the huge political donations the Libs recieve from fossil fuel companies, I wouldnt expect their views to change.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? When's the Libs debate on Gravity? Gravity is a universally accepted, scientifically proven fact that can be reproduced by anyone at will. Climate change is not.

Gravitys only a theory.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? When's the Libs debate on Gravity? Gravity is a universally accepted, scientifically proven fact that can be reproduced by anyone at will. Climate change is not.

This past 4th of July, a European team of astronomers led by Hongsheng Zhao of the SUPA Centre of Gravity at the University of St Andrews presented a radical new theory at the RAS National Astronomy Meeting in St Andrews. Their theory suggested that the Milky Way and Anromeda galaxies collided some 10 billion years ago and that our understanding of gravity is fundamentally wrong. Remarkably, this would neatly explain the observed structure of the two galaxies and their satellites.

In 2009, Zhao led An international team of astronomers that found an unexpected link between 'dark matter' and the visible stars and gas in galaxies that could revolutionize our current understanding of gravity. Zhao suggested that an unknown force is acting on dark matter.

The team believes that the interactions between dark and ordinary matter could be more important and more complex than previously thought, and even speculate that dark matter might not exist and that the anomalous motions of stars in galaxies are due to a modification of gravity on extragalactic scales.

"The dark matter seems to 'know' how the visible matter is distributed. They seem to conspire with each other such that the gravity of the visible matter at the characteristic radius of the dark halo is always the same," said Dr. Benoit Famaey (Universities of Bonn and Strasbourg). "This is extremely surprising since one would rather expect the balance between visible and dark matter to strongly depend on the individual history of each galaxy.

"The pattern that the data reveal is extremely odd. It's like finding a zoo of animals of all ages and sizes miraculously having identical, say, weight in their backbones or something. It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark matter with an invisible hand, leaving the same fingerprints on all galaxies, irrespective of their ages, shapes and sizes."

Such a force might solve an even bigger mystery, known as 'dark energy', which is ruling the accelerated expansion of the Universe. A more radical solution is a revision of the laws of gravity first developed by Isaac Newton in 1687 and refined by Albert Einstein's theory of General Relativity in 1916. Einstein never fully decided whether his equation should add an omnipresent constant source, now called dark energy.

etc etc etc

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/11/our-understanding-of-gravity-is-fundamentally-wrong-two-conflicting-theories-of-the-universe.html



The theory of Gravity isn't settled yet.
Libs witchhunt on climate science is ideological, not factual.
If they were serious about the science, then they would be debating Gravity too.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:56pm:

lee wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:44pm: ____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:39pm: Labor's ETS locked in no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033. Obama's agreement with China is that China will look at reducing emissions after 2030. Given Australia's emissions it would seem not a huge jump. Australia's emissions as a percentage of global emissions equates to a fart in a hurricane - literally. That's how miniscule our contribution is to global emissions.

So's our financial debt, as a percentage of global debt.
Do you suggest we ignore our financial debt too?

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:50pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:44pm: What's there to debate? The climate changes, has done since the year dot, and without the help of us ape descendants. Victim mentality aside. Humans are changing the planet and to deny the power we have and are using to change the climate, makes you appear naive.

That human change is why you live in comfort, and can tap out and send your thoughts & views all around the world instantly.  Without the fossil fuels you'd be swinging in the trees and prey for big furry animals with big teeth.......more likely extinct

My problem with environmentalism is that it has been totally hijacked by parties such as the Greens as a political tool to promote their hidden main agenda.....which is socialism.

If 'climate change' induced by co2 is such a doomsday issue then the Greens should be supporting the establishment of nuclear power generation.  :-?

The Greens are just phonies, have not been an environmental Party for years and years.

All the Greens want to do is play to their wealthy inner city base. they have been rightwing for a long time and Di Natale has dragged them to the far right.

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:11pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:50pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:44pm: What's there to debate? The climate changes, has done since the year dot, and without the help of us ape descendants. Victim mentality aside. Humans are changing the planet and to deny the power we have and are using to change the climate, makes you appear naive. That human change is why you live in comfort, and can tap out and send your thoughts & views all around the world instantly.  Without the fossil fuels you'd be swinging in the trees and prey for big furry animals with big teeth.......more likely extinct My problem with environmentalism is that it has been totally hijacked by parties such as the Greens as a political tool to promote their hidden main agenda.....which is socialism. If 'climate change' induced by co2 is such a doomsday issue then the Greens should be supporting the establishment of nuclear power generation.  :-?

Why tact your vent onto my post, when it's not even in the same ball park.
Humans are powerful, and you pretending otherwise so to deny AGW is weak.

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:37pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 9:11pm: ____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:50pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:44pm: What's there to debate? The climate changes, has done since the year dot, and without the help of us ape descendants. Victim mentality aside. Humans are changing the planet and to deny the power we have and are using to change the climate, makes you appear naive. That human change is why you live in comfort, and can tap out and send your thoughts & views all around the world instantly.  Without the fossil fuels you'd be swinging in the trees and prey for big furry animals with big teeth.......more likely extinct My problem with environmentalism is that it has been totally hijacked by parties such as the Greens as a political tool to promote their hidden main agenda.....which is socialism. If 'climate change' induced by co2 is such a doomsday issue then the Greens should be supporting the establishment of nuclear power generation.  :-? Why tact your vent onto my post, when it's not even in the same ball park. Humans are powerful, and you pretending otherwise so to deny AGW is weak.

The human exchange is called socialism: money is socialism!

Some friggin'crack smokers mate just fu*********'n lose it ay broseph!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Yeh, few rich doods over this way sunshine so don't worry about who knows what hay front bottom************  :o

(lol, talk about lost in translation.. hows the fascist phrase parsing  ::))

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:27pm:

So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed?

lol a fascist crying foul: lol, let's all catch the foul ball and never pitch em out ay whaddya say whaddya say whaddya friggin'sayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy dam you** face??

oi  :D :D :D :D :D :D

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? When's the Libs debate on Gravity?

lol, they admitted it was written in the bible that they would be tested or some crap  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:46pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? When's the Libs debate on Gravity? lol, they admitted it was written in the bible that they would be tested or some crap  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

..ya know- cos god is on their side and stuff  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:39pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:31pm: The Greens twice stuffed up action against AGW so they must agree with the Libs. Labor's ETS locked in no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033. Greens were correct in voting this down If Labor hadn't been so tricky, Abbott would of never been PM. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1449746328

I think the mainstream parties simply have to acknowledge certain truths about corruptability of power!

A system always wins and systems need refurbishing!

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:04pm:

Libs witchhunt on climate science is ideological, not factual. If they were serious about the science, then they would be debating Gravity too.

Gravity does what to our climate?


____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:37pm:

Humans are powerful

You on whacky baccy?

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:44pm:

What's there to debate? The climate changes, has done since the year dot, and without the help of us ape descendants.

-> rates of change: swaggy missed the calculus and it's associated application called the indutrial revolution it would seem!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? When's the Libs debate on Gravity? Gravity is a universally accepted, scientifically proven fact that can be reproduced by anyone at will. Climate change is not.

You don't know bunkukm about method!  :D :D

What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:56pm:

lee wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:44pm: ____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:39pm: Labor's ETS locked in no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033. Obama's agreement with China is that China will look at reducing emissions after 2030. Given Australia's emissions it would seem not a huge jump. Australia's emissions as a percentage of global emissions equates to a fart in a hurricane - literally. That's how miniscule our contribution is to global emissions.

That's why we can't go thinking we are better than the rest of the planet given how much land we have and that many think it their birthright to invade on the first excuse!

Suck Suck Suck  8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)

Its time wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:54pm:

What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ?

And with that scam, on what could the trillions of dollars have been better spent? Cheap electricity, support for third world countries?

____ wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:07pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:56pm: lee wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:44pm: ____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:39pm: Labor's ETS locked in no reduction in coal pollution until after 2033. Obama's agreement with China is that China will look at reducing emissions after 2030. Given Australia's emissions it would seem not a huge jump. Australia's emissions as a percentage of global emissions equates to a fart in a hurricane - literally. That's how miniscule our contribution is to global emissions. So's our financial debt, as a percentage of global debt. Do you suggest we ignore our financial debt too?

Yes, of course armchair does

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ABtlI2Wk3Ws/hqdefault.jpg

lee wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:56pm:

Its time wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 9:54pm: What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ? And with that scam, on what could the trillions of dollars have been better spent? Cheap electricity, support for third world countries?

you tell us buddy :what else does the foreign investor cartel require from our childrens asses?

Swagman wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:11pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:50pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:44pm: What's there to debate? The climate changes, has done since the year dot, and without the help of us ape descendants. Victim mentality aside. Humans are changing the planet and to deny the power we have and are using to change the climate, makes you appear naive. That human change is why you live in comfort, and can tap out and send your thoughts & views all around the world instantly.  Without the fossil fuels you'd be swinging in the trees and prey for big furry animals with big teeth.......more likely extinct My problem with environmentalism is that it has been totally hijacked by parties such as the Greens as a political tool to promote their hidden main agenda.....which is socialism. If 'climate change' induced by co2 is such a doomsday issue then the Greens should be supporting the establishment of nuclear power generation.  :-?

Nuclear Power is about plutonium genenration: black is not white ya know, unless you love children THAT WAY!

Socialism the Greens’ hidden agenda  ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D


Quote:

In Federal Parliament this term the Greens have three achievements to their credit: Screwing over thousands of pensioners Helping corporations hide their money to evade tax Destroying the Federal futures of minor parties The fact that the dodgy Senate deal with the Coalition is blowing up in the Greens faces already is a sure sign that acts of political bastardry do have repercussions. Sometimes those repercussions can even prove fatal.

http://wixxyleaks.com/hysteria-the-greens-preference-plan-backfires/

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:54pm:

____ wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? When's the Libs debate on Gravity? Gravity is a universally accepted, scientifically proven fact that can be reproduced by anyone at will.

No, it isn't. Newton's theory of gravitation has been refuted by modern science because it ignores relativity. It isn't integrated with quantum mechanics. There's no evidence yet that the graviton actually exists.

Newton didn’t have a theory of gravity. He formulated his laws of motion from studying the orbits of planets.

Einstein had a theory of gravity.

Its time wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 9:54pm:

What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ?

What if it is a scam and we bankrupt countries in the process?

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 7:02am:

Newton didn’t have a theory of gravity. He formulated his laws of motion from studying the orbits of planets. Einstein had a theory of gravity.

Except his laws of motion were in fact based on the observation of gravity.

Renewables are already cheaper than coal.

Try again Longy.

mariacostel wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:11am:

Its time wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 9:54pm: What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ? What if it is a scam and we bankrupt countries in the process?

You need to get over it. The debate is long over.

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:13am:

Renewables are already cheaper than coal. Try again Longy.

Incorrect.

Try again Monkey.

mariacostel wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:11am:

Its time wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 9:54pm: What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ? What if it is a scam and we bankrupt countries in the process?

The periodic table is a scam?

mariacostel wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:12am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 7:02am: Newton didn’t have a theory of gravity. He formulated his laws of motion from studying the orbits of planets. Einstein had a theory of gravity. Except his laws of motion were in fact based on the observation of gravity.

As I said, was all to do with observation of planetary orbits, Kepler et al.

____ wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:54am:

mariacostel wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 9:11am: Its time wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 9:54pm: What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ? What if it is a scam and we bankrupt countries in the process? The periodic table is a scam?

Love it  ;D

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cc3j1FKVAAIRuQr.jpg

and

http://ecowatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/recordfeb750.jpg

and

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/03/01/february_2016_s_shocking_global_warming_temperature_record.html

Don’t think it is a scam! Climate change is here and now!

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 10:58am:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/03/01/february_2016_s_shocking_glob...

Oh dear. Slate?


Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:13am:

Renewables are already cheaper than coal.

How many renewables have gone broke worldwide?  Solyndra is one.

lee wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:04am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 10:58am: http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/03/01/february_2016_s_shocking_glob... Oh dear. Slate? Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 9:13am: Renewables are already cheaper than coal. How many renewables have gone broke worldwide?  Solyndra is one.

Thats a crappy metric to use. Plenty of fossil fuel companies have gone broke too. You know what a better metric to use when comparing the costs of various different energy sources is? The actual cost of the energy from various difference sources.

According to Bloomberg, renewables reached parity with fossil fuels 3 years ago.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-06/solar-wind-reach-a-big-renewables-turning-point-bnef
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/renewables-now-cheaper-than-coal-and-gas-in-australia-62268

And last year wind power unsubsidised became cheaper than subsidised coal power in europe.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-06/solar-wind-reach-a-big-renewables-turning-point-bnef

So yes, renewables are cheaper.

lee wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:04am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 9:13am: Renewables are already cheaper than coal. How many renewables have gone broke worldwide?  Solyndra is one.

How many coal mines are running at a loss?

Lee always tries to quibble with the science. Best just to ignore.

donincognito wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:15am:

. You know what a better metric to use when comparing the costs of various different energy sources is? The actual cost of the energy from various difference sources. According to Bloomberg, renewables reached parity with fossil fuels 3 years ago. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-06/solar-wind-reach-a-big-renewables-turning-point-bnef

Blloomberg ?  6 Oct 2016?

'Constantly increasing solar and wind installations -- Germany now has about 45 percent of Europe's total wind generation -- were the main reason for that.

That growth was fueled by massive subsidies. Last year, German households paid 23 billion euros ($24.3 billion), about 572 euros per family, in feed-in tariffs, or surcharges on energy bills that guarantee "clean power" producers can cover their costs.'

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-11-30/wind-and-solar-are-gaining-ground-in-germany

I guess it depends on who writes the story.

Its a new religion and this ...


https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5041/5245681213_1a47bbaf55.jpg






Has been replaced by this  ;D ...


http://www.plainswindeis.anl.gov/images/photos/wind_450KW_turbine_IA_V_13764.jpg

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8^th, 2016 at 8:27pm:

So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed?

Science isn’t the final word. It is flexible and changeable as new evidence becomes available, and as new technology is brought into Question at hand.

and only a halfwit would think otherwise...

especially when governments are using scientists grants to get them to say what they want to trying to extract taxes our of its people with a massive "Scare" campaign...

mind you.. only a nincompoop couldn't see whats really happening..

[quote author=innocentbystander. link=1457432712/49#49 date=1457486831]Its a new religion and this ...


https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5041/5245681213_1a47bbaf55.jpg






Has been replaced by this  ;D ...


Only a retard would label an evidence based believe a religion .

Its time wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:35am:

Only a retard would label an evidence based believe a religion .

Shut up and pray to the great windmill god ... ya loser  ;D

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:34am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? Science isn’t the final word. It is flexible and changeable as new evidence becomes available, and as new technology is brought into Question at hand. and only a halfwit would think otherwise... especially when governments are using scientists grants to get them to say what they want to trying to extract taxes our of its people with a massive "Scare" campaign... mind you.. only a nincompoop couldn't see whats really happening..

Look at it from a business perspective. In particular, take a look at risk management.

Climate change is a risk that needs to be managed.

Any company that is not making a fair assessment of the risk of climate change and not taking appropriate action to hedge against that risk such as taking out insurance is exposing itself to future losses.

For example, what is the risk of severe weather events? How many times in a decade can we expect a severe cyclone to wipe out a particular farmer's banana crop? With climate change, this risk is increased. Even if the science suggests it will happen only once more per decade, that is a quantifiable risk.

Now you can accept the science or not. But if you want an idea of what others think of it, take a look at risk management, insurance, hedging. These are people who earn a living mitigating risk. And you can be sure that they have included climate change in their risk portfolios.

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:34am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? Science isn’t the final word. It is flexible and changeable as new evidence becomes available, and as new technology is brought into Question at hand. and only a halfwit would think otherwise... especially when governments are using scientists grants to get them to say what they want to trying to extract taxes our of its people with a massive "Scare" campaign... mind you.. only a nincompoop couldn't see whats really happening..

::) ::)

mariacostel wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:11am:

Its time wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 9:54pm: What if it is a scam , and we make the world a better place, for nothing ? What if it is a scam and we bankrupt countries in the process?

maria doesn't know what banrkrupt means  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/climate%20church.jpg

Bam wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:45am:

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 11:34am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? Science isn’t the final word. It is flexible and changeable as new evidence becomes available, and as new technology is brought into Question at hand. and only a halfwit would think otherwise... especially when governments are using scientists grants to get them to say what they want to trying to extract taxes our of its people with a massive "Scare" campaign... mind you.. only a nincompoop couldn't see whats really happening.. Look at it from a business perspective. In particular, take a look at risk management. Climate change is a risk that needs to be managed. Any company that is not making a fair assessment of the risk of climate change and not taking appropriate action to hedge against that risk such as taking out insurance is exposing itself to future losses. For example, what is the risk of severe weather events? How many times in a decade can we expect a severe cyclone to wipe out a particular farmer's banana crop? With climate change, this risk is increased. Even if the science suggests it will happen only once more per decade, that is a quantifiable risk. Now you can accept the science or not. But if you want an idea of what others think of it, take a look at risk management, insurance, hedging. These are people who earn a living mitigating risk. And you can be sure that they have included climate change in their risk portfolios.

lets put it this way...

and you'll know this already about me if you've been listening..

I don’t give a **** if we agree or disagree about climate change...

but what I do believe in is that each individual has a responsibility to leave the earth CLEAN for the next generations...

individuals should have already installed water tanks and solar systems for electricity and water heating.. they should recycle and compost.. they should grow some of their own vegetables etc..

fossil fuels aren't going to last forever but greedy companies and governments are all wanting a quick buck now...

we should not load up future generations with National Debt either.. that's just more irresponsibilitys...

government policy could change a lot of this... like every new home built should have a solar system and water tank fitted... there are enough companies around now to keep them competitive all trying to undercut each other.. NO SUBSIDIES... subsidies only drives pricing up with the consumer being ripped off...

why haven't they done this already??

Greedy Electricity companies and governments addicted to fuel tax...

the halfwit Victorian government spent 25 Billion on a desal plant...

how many water tanks could have been installed into Victorian homes for $2000 .. ?? I put my 5000lt tank in for $1800...

12,500000 Water Tanks...

there's only 6 Million People in Victoria for christs sakes..

the government could also put out a tender for installing Solar Systems on behalf of New Home Buyers to get them the best price...

as an installer knowing that you had thousands of systems to install you could get Bulk Discounts of suppliers... and thousands of jobs would be created at little expense... just policy changes..

but it seems governments want to spruke "Climate Change" (let me tax you) but then keep living the dirty life that we always have done.. its BS  >:(

the "Climate Change" catch cry, is just a Red Herring... we have taken our eye off whats important..

and that's keeping the Earth Clean for future generations..

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:01pm:

Bam wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 11:45am: President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 11:34am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 8th, 2016 at 8:27pm: So you think we should all be forced to accept this point of view and that any talk regarding it is pointless and should be quashed? Science isn’t the final word. It is flexible and changeable as new evidence becomes available, and as new technology is brought into Question at hand. and only a halfwit would think otherwise... especially when governments are using scientists grants to get them to say what they want to trying to extract taxes our of its people with a massive "Scare" campaign... mind you.. only a nincompoop couldn't see whats really happening.. Look at it from a business perspective. In particular, take a look at risk management. Climate change is a risk that needs to be managed. Any company that is not making a fair assessment of the risk of climate change and not taking appropriate action to hedge against that risk such as taking out insurance is exposing itself to future losses. For example, what is the risk of severe weather events? How many times in a decade can we expect a severe cyclone to wipe out a particular farmer's banana crop? With climate change, this risk is increased. Even if the science suggests it will happen only once more per decade, that is a quantifiable risk. Now you can accept the science or not. But if you want an idea of what others think of it, take a look at risk management, insurance, hedging. These are people who earn a living mitigating risk. And you can be sure that they have included climate change in their risk portfolios. lets put it this way... and you'll know this already about me if you've been listening.. I don’t give a **** if we agree or disagree about climate change... but what I do believe in is that each individual has a responsibility to leave the earth CLEAN for the next generations... individuals should have already installed water tanks and solar systems for electricity and water heating.. they should recycle and compost.. they should grow some of their own vegetables etc.. fossil fuels aren't going to last forever but greedy companies and governments are all wanting a quick buck now... we should not load up future generations with National Debt either.. that's just more irresponsibilitys... government policy could change a lot of this... like every new home built should have a solar system and water tank fitted... there are enough companies around now to keep them competitive all trying to undercut each other.. NO SUBSIDIES... subsidies only drives pricing up with the consumer being ripped off... why haven't they done this already?? Greedy Electricity companies and governments addicted to fuel tax... the halfwit Victorian government spent 25 Billion on a desal plant... how many water tanks could have been installed into Victorian homes for $2000 .. ?? I put my 5000lt tank in for $1800... 12,500000 Water Tanks... there's only 6 Million People in Victoria for christs sakes.. the government could also put out a tender for installing Solar Systems on behalf of New Home Buyers to get them the best price... as an installer knowing that you had thousands of systems to install you could get Bulk Discounts of suppliers... and thousands of jobs would be created at little expense... just policy changes.. but it seems governments want to spruke "Climate Change" (let me tax you) but then keep living the dirty life that we always have done.. its BS  >:( the "Climate Change" catch cry, is just a Red Herring... we have taken our eye off whats important.. and that's keeping the Earth Clean for future generations..

Half decent post, well done

The left just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK.

Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it.

Jennifer wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:10pm:

The left just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK. Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it.

um, jevons paradox said what?

Jennifer wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:10pm:

The left just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK. Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4631.0?OpenDocument

Thats the stats for the employment activity in the renewable energy sector. They are slightly out of date, and dont really take into account how much the LNP buggered the sector right up.

Funnily enough, there will be updated figures released on the 15/3, which im sure you will be waiting with baited breath for.

donincognito wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 12:30pm:

the renewable energy sector

.........the defacto Public Service.....

Jobs aren't generated....they are fabricated

Jennifer wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 11:10pm:

The right just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK. Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it.

Fixed it for you.

Bam wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 1:40pm:

Jennifer wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 11:10pm: The right just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK. Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it. Fixed it for you.

you are not allowed to change anothers post

REPORTED.

Swagman wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 1:23pm:

donincognito wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 12:30pm: the renewable energy sector .........the defacto Public Service..... Jobs aren't generated....they are fabricated

Wait, how is a private company supplying energy to the grid the public service? I mean, they are doing a public service, sure, but thats a bit of a stretch.

Do you have any proof that these jobs arent actually jobs?

Swagman wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 1:23pm:

donincognito wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 12:30pm: the renewable energy sector .........the defacto Public Service..... Jobs aren't generated....they are fabricated

swaggy knows bugger all about everything ever invented  :D :D :D :D :D :D

nice one swaggy: daddykins would be so proud  :-*

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 1:46pm:

Bam wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:40pm: Jennifer wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 11:10pm: The right just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK. Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it. Fixed it for you. you are not allowed to change anothers post REPORTED.

get the rule book out: umpire umpire umpire  :D

donincognito wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 3:01pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:23pm: donincognito wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 12:30pm: the renewable energy sector .........the defacto Public Service..... Jobs aren't generated....they are fabricated Wait, how is a private company supplying energy to the grid the public service? I mean, they are doing a public service, sure, but thats a bit of a stretch. Do you have any proof that these jobs arent actually jobs?

swaggy wants a claytons argument about ,um???,... not really sure actually  :D :D :D :D :D

Government Intervention into the marketplace I suppose  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

These f'n libs are so undercooked and never had a plan: just a series of stunts like Garrett put on the hansard years ago!

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9^th, 2016 at 9:01pm:

lets put it this way... and you'll know this already about me if you've been listening.. I don’t give a **** if we agree or disagree about climate change... but what I do believe in is that each individual has a responsibility to leave the earth CLEAN for the next generations... individuals should have already installed water tanks and solar systems for electricity and water heating.. they should recycle and compost.. they should grow some of their own vegetables etc.. fossil fuels aren't going to last forever but greedy companies and governments are all wanting a quick buck now... we should not load up future generations with National Debt either.. that's just more irresponsibilitys... government policy could change a lot of this... like every new home built should have a solar system and water tank fitted... there are enough companies around now to keep them competitive all trying to undercut each other.. NO SUBSIDIES... subsidies only drives pricing up with the consumer being ripped off... why haven't they done this already?? Greedy Electricity companies and governments addicted to fuel tax... the halfwit Victorian government spent 25 Billion on a desal plant... how many water tanks could have been installed into Victorian homes for $2000 .. ?? I put my 5000lt tank in for $1800... 12,500000 Water Tanks... there's only 6 Million People in Victoria for christs sakes.. the government could also put out a tender for installing Solar Systems on behalf of New Home Buyers to get them the best price... as an installer knowing that you had thousands of systems to install you could get Bulk Discounts of suppliers... and thousands of jobs would be created at little expense... just policy changes.. but it seems governments want to spruke "Climate Change" (let me tax you) but then keep living the dirty life that we always have done.. its BS  >:( the "Climate Change" catch cry, is just a Red Herring... we have taken our eye off whats important.. and that's keeping the Earth Clean for future generations..

Yeah good rant but at the end of the day you are still advocating for feel good sh!t that makes absolutely f#$k all difference to anything apart from your own ego, doing all of the above sh!t or not doing all of the above sh!t is not going to change a thing outside of your own mind.

innocentbystander. wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 3:51pm:

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 9:01pm: lets put it this way... and you'll know this already about me if you've been listening.. I don’t give a **** if we agree or disagree about climate change... but what I do believe in is that each individual has a responsibility to leave the earth CLEAN for the next generations... individuals should have already installed water tanks and solar systems for electricity and water heating.. they should recycle and compost.. they should grow some of their own vegetables etc.. fossil fuels aren't going to last forever but greedy companies and governments are all wanting a quick buck now... we should not load up future generations with National Debt either.. that's just more irresponsibilitys... government policy could change a lot of this... like every new home built should have a solar system and water tank fitted... there are enough companies around now to keep them competitive all trying to undercut each other.. NO SUBSIDIES... subsidies only drives pricing up with the consumer being ripped off... why haven't they done this already?? Greedy Electricity companies and governments addicted to fuel tax... the halfwit Victorian government spent 25 Billion on a desal plant... how many water tanks could have been installed into Victorian homes for $2000 .. ?? I put my 5000lt tank in for $1800... 12,500000 Water Tanks... there's only 6 Million People in Victoria for christs sakes.. the government could also put out a tender for installing Solar Systems on behalf of New Home Buyers to get them the best price... as an installer knowing that you had thousands of systems to install you could get Bulk Discounts of suppliers... and thousands of jobs would be created at little expense... just policy changes.. but it seems governments want to spruke "Climate Change" (let me tax you) but then keep living the dirty life that we always have done.. its BS  >:( the "Climate Change" catch cry, is just a Red Herring... we have taken our eye off whats important.. and that's keeping the Earth Clean for future generations.. Yeah good rant but at the end of the day you are still advocating for feel good sh!t that makes absolutely f#$k all difference to anything apart from your own ego, doing all of the above sh!t or not doing all of the above sh!t is not going to change a thing outside of your own mind.

One of Cods posts made more sense than your reply , you have just lowered the bar , may sky fairies have mercy on your soul .

innocentbystander. wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 3:51pm:

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 9:01pm: lets put it this way... and you'll know this already about me if you've been listening.. I don’t give a **** if we agree or disagree about climate change... but what I do believe in is that each individual has a responsibility to leave the earth CLEAN for the next generations... individuals should have already installed water tanks and solar systems for electricity and water heating.. they should recycle and compost.. they should grow some of their own vegetables etc.. fossil fuels aren't going to last forever but greedy companies and governments are all wanting a quick buck now... we should not load up future generations with National Debt either.. that's just more irresponsibilitys... government policy could change a lot of this... like every new home built should have a solar system and water tank fitted... there are enough companies around now to keep them competitive all trying to undercut each other.. NO SUBSIDIES... subsidies only drives pricing up with the consumer being ripped off... why haven't they done this already?? Greedy Electricity companies and governments addicted to fuel tax... the halfwit Victorian government spent 25 Billion on a desal plant... how many water tanks could have been installed into Victorian homes for $2000 .. ?? I put my 5000lt tank in for $1800... 12,500000 Water Tanks... there's only 6 Million People in Victoria for christs sakes.. the government could also put out a tender for installing Solar Systems on behalf of New Home Buyers to get them the best price... as an installer knowing that you had thousands of systems to install you could get Bulk Discounts of suppliers... and thousands of jobs would be created at little expense... just policy changes.. but it seems governments want to spruke "Climate Change" (let me tax you) but then keep living the dirty life that we always have done.. its BS  >:( the "Climate Change" catch cry, is just a Red Herring... we have taken our eye off whats important.. and that's keeping the Earth Clean for future generations.. Yeah good rant but at the end of the day you are still advocating for feel good sh!t that makes absolutely f#$k all difference to anything apart from your own ego, doing all of the above sh!t or not doing all of the above sh!t is not going to change a thing outside of your own mind.

innocent is pretending he doesn't have an ego  :D :D :D :D

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 1:46pm:

Bam wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:40pm: Jennifer wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 11:10pm: The right just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK. Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it. Fixed it for you. you are allowed to change anothers post

Fixed it for you.


longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 1:46pm:

REPORTED.

Oo, I'm scared.   8-)
</sarcasm>

Bam wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 6:59pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:46pm: Bam wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:40pm: Jennifer wrote on Mar 9th, 2016 at 11:10pm: The right just love rent seekers. It's because they don't pay any tax to prop them up but the rent seekers perpetuate their ideology, so that makes it AOK. Woe betide an industry that actually produces real jobs, income and adds to GDP instead of deducting from it. Fixed it for you. you are allowed to change anothers post Fixed it for you. longweekend58 wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:46pm: REPORTED. Oo, I'm scared.   8-) </sarcasm>

longy has the girth of who's who in this hood: ..and don't you forget it bud  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

donincognito wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 3:01pm:

Swagman wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:23pm: donincognito wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 12:30pm: the renewable energy sector .........the defacto Public Service..... Jobs aren't generated....they are fabricated Wait, how is a private company supplying energy to the grid the public service? I mean, they are doing a public service, sure, but thats a bit of a stretch. Do you have any proof that these jobs arent actually jobs?

Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... :D

Swagman wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 8:20pm:

donincognito wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 3:01pm: Swagman wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 1:23pm: donincognito wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 12:30pm: the renewable energy sector .........the defacto Public Service..... Jobs aren't generated....they are fabricated Wait, how is a private company supplying energy to the grid the public service? I mean, they are doing a public service, sure, but thats a bit of a stretch. Do you have any proof that these jobs arent actually jobs? Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... :D

^{;D ;D fm this guy votes for who?????????????????????????????????????????????????}

DRAH is a good example of what an overdose of leftist indoctrination does to a person....

Swagman wrote on Mar 10^th, 2016 at 8:29pm:

DRAH is a good example of what an overdose of leftist indoctrination does to a person....

wow, what an inspiration to your kids you must be  killing all internet connection to the future hopefully forever: wait, maybe you'll employ fibre in good time as long as your kids wait long enough ay buddy  ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:09am:

Swagman wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 8:29pm: DRAH is a good example of what an overdose of leftist indoctrination does to a person.... wow, what an inspiration to your kids you must be  killing all internet connection to the future hopefully forever: wait, maybe you'll employ fibre in good time as long as your kids wait long enough ay buddy  ;D

Do you wait for your parents to go to bed before you get on the Internet or does your piss poor dad let you use his union logon while he is begging for his job?

Jennifer wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:13am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:09am: Swagman wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 8:29pm: DRAH is a good example of what an overdose of leftist indoctrination does to a person.... wow, what an inspiration to your kids you must be  killing all internet connection to the future hopefully forever: wait, maybe you'll employ fibre in good time as long as your kids wait long enough ay buddy  ;D Do you wait for your parents to go to bed before you get on the Internet or does your piss poor dad let you use his union logon while he is begging for his job?

...did you even know people died for this country when you voted for copper internet?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:15am:

Jennifer wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:13am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:09am: Swagman wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 8:29pm: DRAH is a good example of what an overdose of leftist indoctrination does to a person.... wow, what an inspiration to your kids you must be  killing all internet connection to the future hopefully forever: wait, maybe you'll employ fibre in good time as long as your kids wait long enough ay buddy  ;D Do you wait for your parents to go to bed before you get on the Internet or does your piss poor dad let you use his union logon while he is begging for his job? ...did you even know people died for this country when you voted for copper internet?

I would shove copper Internet into your jugular and connect it to 240Vac.

Jennifer wrote on Mar 11^th, 2016 at 12:17am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:15am: Jennifer wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:13am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 11th, 2016 at 12:09am: Swagman wrote on Mar 10th, 2016 at 8:29pm: DRAH is a good example of what an overdose of leftist indoctrination does to a person.... wow, what an inspiration to your kids you must be  killing all internet connection to the future hopefully forever: wait, maybe you'll employ fibre in good time as long as your kids wait long enough ay buddy  ;D Do you wait for your parents to go to bed before you get on the Internet or does your piss poor dad let you use his union logon while he is begging for his job? ...did you even know people died for this country when you voted for copper internet? I would shove copper Internet into your jugular and connect it to 240Vac.

Really, that would sound great  ::)