gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 29^th, 2011 at 2:10pm:

Go dodgy LPMA's!!!! yeh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The_Barnacle wrote on Nov 30^th, 2011 at 3:55pm:


Don't you just love how global warming proponents love to panic over short term data and try to blame man for nature.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 30^th, 2011 at 5:26pm:

Moving Averages!!!

According to a new report from the Climate Institute called A Climate of Suffering, severe weather events will cause more depression, post-traumatic stress and other forms of mental illness.  Professor Hickie also says that 1 in 10 primary children had post-traumatic stress after cyclone Larry.  Haven't we been getting cyclones here in Oz since Adam was a boy?   I think this is an irresponsible scare tactic.

toots wrote on Dec 1^st, 2011 at 7:41am:


A irresponsible scare tactic is exactly what it is.
I distinctly remember just over two years ago, an 'expert' called ABC radio and claimed that a thousand years ago, cyclones in northern Australia were small and infrequent, so clearly the category 4's & 5's were have been seeing in the Asiatic region is clear proof of climate change.
What he did not explain is how he obtained information like this from the 10th century, long before white man came to the region and 700 years before this countries discovery.
It was pure unadultered irresponsible alarmist crap designed to scare the gullable and the young.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Dec 1^st, 2011 at 8:19am:


And right on cue the old conspiracy theories are brought out.
And of course the old chestnut "the media are reporting alarming predictions which I don't believe - therefore the whole science of global warming must be wrong"

Let me give you an example. Last year I saw a headline in a tabloid which read

"(The star) Betelgeuse may go super nova next year"

I was astonished that such a prediction could be made so I read the article. What the scientist actually said was that Betelgeuse could go supernova at any time, maybe in a thousand years or maybe next year.

But of course using the logic of the climate skeptics, if Betelgeuse doesn't go supernova next year then this proves that the whole science of Astronomy is a fraud.

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 1^st, 2011 at 10:14am:


You missed a step or two in your theory.
You missed the part where the government decide to implement another tax to mitigate the obvious probable effects on Betelgeuse going supernova.
And where school teachers frighten little children that the earth could be vaporised next year and sends them home crying.
As for conspiracy theories, the only people actually peddling conspiracy theories are the alarmists themselves.
Because quite frankly, the rest of us are simply waiting for the arctic ice to disappear, the seas to rise, the islands to sink and the cat 5 cyclones to be coming by the dozen to blow us away along with all of Flannery's predictions that have come and gone over the years.

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 1^st, 2011 at 10:46am:


Yes but most people don't or won't ingnore the exaggerations, which is why there is such panic over 'huge' sea-level rises (which haven't happened) and increases in the power and frequency of cyclones (which is also a non-starter)....

So, it's good you agree that teaching small children that the world will end in their life times (possibly before they grow up) is alarmist and inaccurate...