Australian Politics Forum - Not "climate change"

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #150 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:55am

Grendel wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:47am:

I don't suppose muso it has crossed your mind that REAL CLIMATE is a propaganda site for this new wave of climate hysteria?

BTW I am quite ok with fixing all kinds of pollution... including that of CO2 emissions.

Maybe NOAA is the same, and every single National Academy and every single government too.

Maybe basic atmospheric physics is wrong.

Maybe nothing exists, and maybe everybody in this world is mad, except thee and me, and I'm having my doubts about thou. Wink

Grendel - Do you believe they actually landed men on the moon?
Be honest now.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

tallowood

Gold Member

Offline

Израиль Навсегда

Posts: 8648
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #151 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:55am

muso wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:47am:

tallowood wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:37am:

So how do you propose to reduce human population?

A good question. Any suggestions?

One way would be to just ignore everything we know and carry on burning coal as if it's not important. That would do it. It's a bit drastic and inhumane though - don't you think?

Is war more or less drastic and inhumane?

All other methods fall short in the face of exponential ppl numbers grow depicted in "meat" graph.

Back to top

עַם יִשְרָאֵל חַי

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #152 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:03am

tallowood wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:55am:

muso wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:47am:

tallowood wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:37am:

So how do you propose to reduce human population?

A good question. Any suggestions?

One way would be to just ignore everything we know and carry on burning coal as if it's not important. That would do it. It's a bit drastic and inhumane though - don't you think?

Is war more or less drastic and inhumane?

All other methods fall short in the face of exponential ppl numbers grow depicted in "meat" graph.

Are you suggesting that we nuke densely populated parts of the world?

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

tallowood

Gold Member

Offline

Израиль Навсегда

Posts: 8648
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #153 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:12am

muso wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:03am:

tallowood wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:55am:

muso wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:47am:

tallowood wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:37am:

So how do you propose to reduce human population?

A good question. Any suggestions?

One way would be to just ignore everything we know and carry on burning coal as if it's not important. That would do it. It's a bit drastic and inhumane though - don't you think?

Is war more or less drastic and inhumane?

All other methods fall short in the face of exponential ppl numbers grow depicted in "meat" graph.

Are you suggesting that we nuke densely populated parts of the world?

No. I suggest to let Nature take its natural course.

Back to top

עַם יִשְרָאֵל חַי

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #154 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:21am

tallowood wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:12am:

No. I suggest to let Nature take its natural course.

I agree, but burning 7,100,000,000 tonnes of coal, oil and gas every year is not letting nature take its natural course.

By the way I agree that World population is a major issue - just not as imminent an issue as the numerous effects caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 levels.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

tallowood

Gold Member

Offline

Израиль Навсегда

Posts: 8648
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #155 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:42am

muso wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:21am:

tallowood wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 10:12am:

No. I suggest to let Nature take its natural course.

I agree, but burning 7,100,000,000 tonnes of coal, oil and gas every year is not letting nature take its natural course.

By the way I agree that World population is a major issue - just not as imminent an issue as the numerous effects caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 levels.

Nature will take care of burning coal by drastically and remorselessly reducing the polluter's numbers.

There is approximately 4 years and 23 days left to the Time Reset(13.0.0.0.0). It is 12.19.15.15.16 now.

Back to top

עַם יִשְרָאֵל חַי

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #156 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 1:36pm

Grendel - Is this the site you cut and pasted your comments from?

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

Or should I ask if you agree with the article there? It's probably easier to talk through that bit by bit if you agree with it.

It is actually quite skillfully constructed. Many of the links are quite valid, but there are also a huge number of half truths, and the overall conclusion is off the wall.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Not "climate change" Reply #157 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 4:49pm No I don't rely on one source of information muso. I don't recall being on that site. You're sounding a bit feral in your responses to Tallowood BTW... not a tad, alarmist are you? OH and BTW, the culling of the population is the old "deep green" solution for everything.
Back to top	IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Not "climate change" Reply #158 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 4:55pm Oh almost forgot... MOTM? Yes.
Back to top	IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: Not "climate change" Reply #159 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 5:00pm Lets look at some of your half-truths... That the words "very likely" mean definite.
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #160 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 5:20pm

The IPCC Summary for Policymakers is not exactly a document I dote on. The probability corresponding to 'very likely' was downgraded to that, largely as a result of political lobbying.

I base my conclusions on scientific evidence only.

Do you agree with the information provided on that site I linked to? It's quite typical of some of the things you are saying.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 29^th, 2008 at 5:39pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #161 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 5:24pm

Grendel wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 4:49pm:

No I don't rely on one source of information muso.
I don't recall being on that site.

You're sounding a bit feral in your responses to Tallowood BTW... not a tad, alarmist are you?

OH and BTW, the culling of the population is the old

"deep green"

solution for everything. Grin

Tallowood was the one suggesting that we do nothing and just allow a sizeable proportion of the population to die off.

I was asking him if he was advocating nuclear war. I'm pretty sure that some of the things he says are tongue in cheek.

- but I'm beginning to think you actually might believe what you're saying.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #162 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 5:26pm

Grendel wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 9:47am:

Wanna graph?

"...the Earth was evidently coming out of a relatively cold period in the 1800s so that warming in the past century may be part of this natural recovery."

Dr. John R. Christy
(leading climate and atmospheric science expert- U. of Alabama in Huntsville) (5)

What's the relevance of a regional graph of US temperatures in the context of "the Earth"?

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #163 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 5:32pm

Grendel wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 4:55pm:

Oh almost forgot... MOTM? Yes.

So it's just the AGW contrarian conspiracy theory you adhere to.

That's basically the one that says that every National Academy, and tens of thousands of research scientists are obediently falsifying data just to make Al Gore rich. Or something equally ridiculous and paranoid.

Do I have that right?

Let me know when you want to rejoin us in the real world.

Oh and Grendel - Do you think that it's all due to Cosmic Rays?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 29^th, 2008 at 6:18pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Not "climate change"
Reply #164 - Nov 29^th, 2008 at 8:06pm

muso wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 5:32pm:

Grendel wrote on Nov 29^th, 2008 at 4:55pm:

Oh almost forgot... MOTM? Yes.

So it's just the AGW contrarian conspiracy theory you adhere to.

That's basically the one that says that every National Academy, and tens of thousands of research scientists are obediently falsifying data just to make Al Gore rich. Or something equally ridiculous and paranoid.

Do I have that right?

Let me know when you want to rejoin us in the real world.

Oh and Grendel - Do you think that it's all due to Cosmic Rays?

Did someone say cosmic rays?? Goodie! Time for the tin foil hats:

http://eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php

Back to top

IP Logged