Australian Politics Forum - When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #30 - Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:50pm

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:45pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:25pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:19pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:09am:

A sizable group of climate scientists tends to regard the IPCC-based climate consensus as too optimistic.

However, mostly these scientists tend to be shunned by the media, as stated by Chomsky:

It's interesting that these (public climate) debates leave out almost entirely a third part of the debate, namely, a very substantial number of scientists, competent scientists, who think that the scientific consensus is much too optimistic. A group of scientists at MIT came out with a report about a year ago describing what they called the most comprehensive modelling of the climate that had ever been done. Their conclusion, which was unreported in public media as far as I know, was that the major scientific consensus of the international commission is just way off, it's much too optimistic ... their own conclusion was that unless we terminate use of fossil fuels almost immediately, it's finished. We'll never be able to overcome the consequences. That's not part of the debate.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-29/glikson-the-dilemma-of-a-climate-scientist...

Too optimistic? Based on what? Must be on flawed model predictions because it certainly cant be on actual outcomes.

Anyhow, the 'sizable group', is only 10 people anyhow and we've already heard their names before. Mann, Hanson etc

We can always rely on Maria to pluck her evidence out of the ether. Bonus is, we all know she will never back up her made up facts with links.

The FACTS are all around you. Temperature barely changing, polar ice not disappearing, seas scarcely changing and no identifiable climate change outside of natural variation. There is in fact NOT ONE SINGLE bit of evidence to suggest human-driven catastrophic climate change is a risk of any kind.

Debate is over, get with the times.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #31 - Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:51pm

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 11:39am:

You are.

Labor destroyed majority support for action on dangerous climate change and then walked away from a Double Dissolution since their trickery would of been exposed.

Labor crashed the debate.

If it helps you sleep at night.

But we all know the greens fcked it up

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #32 - Feb 1^st, 2016 at 6:06pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:50pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:45pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:25pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:19pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:09am:

A sizable group of climate scientists tends to regard the IPCC-based climate consensus as too optimistic.

However, mostly these scientists tend to be shunned by the media, as stated by Chomsky:

It's interesting that these (public climate) debates leave out almost entirely a third part of the debate, namely, a very substantial number of scientists, competent scientists, who think that the scientific consensus is much too optimistic. A group of scientists at MIT came out with a report about a year ago describing what they called the most comprehensive modelling of the climate that had ever been done. Their conclusion, which was unreported in public media as far as I know, was that the major scientific consensus of the international commission is just way off, it's much too optimistic ... their own conclusion was that unless we terminate use of fossil fuels almost immediately, it's finished. We'll never be able to overcome the consequences. That's not part of the debate.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-29/glikson-the-dilemma-of-a-climate-scientist...

Too optimistic? Based on what? Must be on flawed model predictions because it certainly cant be on actual outcomes.

Anyhow, the 'sizable group', is only 10 people anyhow and we've already heard their names before. Mann, Hanson etc

We can always rely on Maria to pluck her evidence out of the ether. Bonus is, we all know she will never back up her made up facts with links.

The FACTS are all around you. Temperature barely changing, polar ice not disappearing, seas scarcely changing and no identifiable climate change outside of natural variation. There is in fact NOT ONE SINGLE bit of evidence to suggest human-driven catastrophic climate change is a risk of any kind.

Debate is over, get with the times.

BEcause a UN conference decided to hold hands and sing Kumbuya? (and nothing else of course)

Back to top

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #33 - Feb 1^st, 2016 at 6:15pm

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:45pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:25pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:19pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:09am:

A sizable group of climate scientists tends to regard the IPCC-based climate consensus as too optimistic.

However, mostly these scientists tend to be shunned by the media, as stated by Chomsky:

It's interesting that these (public climate) debates leave out almost entirely a third part of the debate, namely, a very substantial number of scientists, competent scientists, who think that the scientific consensus is much too optimistic. A group of scientists at MIT came out with a report about a year ago describing what they called the most comprehensive modelling of the climate that had ever been done. Their conclusion, which was unreported in public media as far as I know, was that the major scientific consensus of the international commission is just way off, it's much too optimistic ... their own conclusion was that unless we terminate use of fossil fuels almost immediately, it's finished. We'll never be able to overcome the consequences. That's not part of the debate.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-29/glikson-the-dilemma-of-a-climate-scientist...

Too optimistic? Based on what? Must be on flawed model predictions because it certainly cant be on actual outcomes.

Anyhow, the 'sizable group', is only 10 people anyhow and we've already heard their names before. Mann, Hanson etc

We can always rely on Maria to pluck her evidence out of the ether. Bonus is, we all know she will never back up her made up facts with links.

The FACTS are all around you. Temperature barely changing, polar ice not disappearing, seas scarcely changing and no identifiable climate change outside of natural variation. There is in fact NOT ONE SINGLE bit of evidence to suggest human-driven catastrophic climate change is a risk of any kind.

^{Every single word of Marias statement is wrong}

Back to top

*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.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #34 - Feb 1^st, 2016 at 7:23pm

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 6:06pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:50pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:45pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:25pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:19pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:09am:

A sizable group of climate scientists tends to regard the IPCC-based climate consensus as too optimistic.

However, mostly these scientists tend to be shunned by the media, as stated by Chomsky:

It's interesting that these (public climate) debates leave out almost entirely a third part of the debate, namely, a very substantial number of scientists, competent scientists, who think that the scientific consensus is much too optimistic. A group of scientists at MIT came out with a report about a year ago describing what they called the most comprehensive modelling of the climate that had ever been done. Their conclusion, which was unreported in public media as far as I know, was that the major scientific consensus of the international commission is just way off, it's much too optimistic ... their own conclusion was that unless we terminate use of fossil fuels almost immediately, it's finished. We'll never be able to overcome the consequences. That's not part of the debate.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-29/glikson-the-dilemma-of-a-climate-scientist...

Too optimistic? Based on what? Must be on flawed model predictions because it certainly cant be on actual outcomes.

Anyhow, the 'sizable group', is only 10 people anyhow and we've already heard their names before. Mann, Hanson etc

We can always rely on Maria to pluck her evidence out of the ether. Bonus is, we all know she will never back up her made up facts with links.

The FACTS are all around you. Temperature barely changing, polar ice not disappearing, seas scarcely changing and no identifiable climate change outside of natural variation. There is in fact NOT ONE SINGLE bit of evidence to suggest human-driven catastrophic climate change is a risk of any kind.

Debate is over, get with the times.

BEcause a UN conference decided to hold hands and sing Kumbuya? (and nothing else of course)

because the world is acting. There is consensus. Climate Change is real. Deal with it. And move on with your life. You fought on the dumb side of the debate, and you lost miserably.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #35 - Feb 1^st, 2016 at 8:24pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:51pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 11:39am:

You are.

Labor destroyed majority support for action on dangerous climate change and then walked away from a Double Dissolution since their trickery would of been exposed.

Labor crashed the debate.

If it helps you sleep at night.

But we all know the greens fcked it up

Trying to be Maria's conjoined twin ... pretending your opinions are facts ?

Who in partnership with the coalition attacked the Renewable Energy Sector via attacking RET ... then included burning old growth forest as a renewable energy. Nasty old labor !

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #36 - Feb 1^st, 2016 at 10:13pm

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 8:24pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:51pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 11:39am:

You are.

Labor destroyed majority support for action on dangerous climate change and then walked away from a Double Dissolution since their trickery would of been exposed.

Labor crashed the debate.

If it helps you sleep at night.

But we all know the greens fcked it up

Trying to be Maria's conjoined twin ... pretending your opinions are facts ?

Who in partnership with the coalition attacked the Renewable Energy Sector via attacking RET ... then included burning old growth forest as a renewable energy. Nasty old labor !

none of that matters. Everything fell apart once the Greens decided they didn't like an ETS that they then re-introduced as an exactly the same policy, only with a much higher cost. Greens are vandals. Terrorists. Destroyed the entire debate on climate change.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

____ Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 33410 Australia Gender:	Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism? Reply #37 - Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 6:54am Things fell apart when Labor tried to fool the voters with their dirty CPRS ... then chickened out of a DD over it. This is when Labor sold out Australians.
Back to top	IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 61230 Here Gender:	Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism? Reply #38 - Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 9:48am When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism? When there are no votes in it.
Back to top	IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 61230
Here
Gender: male

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #39 - Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 9:53am

____ wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 6:54am:

Things fell apart when Labor tried to fool the voters with their dirty CPRS ... then chickened out of a DD over it.

This is when Labor sold out Australians.

The Greens stuffed up, get over it. The greens pooed in their own nest.

You can not expect a government to go to a DD over every policy, there is a reasonable chance that a competent GG would reject a call for a DD over this issue. The GG has to believe that it will make government unworkable, I doubt that would be the case.

Back to top

IP Logged

____ Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 33410 Australia Gender:	Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism? Reply #40 - Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 10:00am Labor had the trigger. Labor had the majority support for real action on dangerous climate change. What labor was missing was the policy to win the election ... and the courage.
Back to top	IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism?
Reply #41 - Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 10:46am

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 7:23pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 6:06pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:50pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:45pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:25pm:

mariacostel wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:19pm:

____ wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 5:09am:

A sizable group of climate scientists tends to regard the IPCC-based climate consensus as too optimistic.

However, mostly these scientists tend to be shunned by the media, as stated by Chomsky:

It's interesting that these (public climate) debates leave out almost entirely a third part of the debate, namely, a very substantial number of scientists, competent scientists, who think that the scientific consensus is much too optimistic. A group of scientists at MIT came out with a report about a year ago describing what they called the most comprehensive modelling of the climate that had ever been done. Their conclusion, which was unreported in public media as far as I know, was that the major scientific consensus of the international commission is just way off, it's much too optimistic ... their own conclusion was that unless we terminate use of fossil fuels almost immediately, it's finished. We'll never be able to overcome the consequences. That's not part of the debate.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-29/glikson-the-dilemma-of-a-climate-scientist...

Too optimistic? Based on what? Must be on flawed model predictions because it certainly cant be on actual outcomes.

Anyhow, the 'sizable group', is only 10 people anyhow and we've already heard their names before. Mann, Hanson etc

We can always rely on Maria to pluck her evidence out of the ether. Bonus is, we all know she will never back up her made up facts with links.

The FACTS are all around you. Temperature barely changing, polar ice not disappearing, seas scarcely changing and no identifiable climate change outside of natural variation. There is in fact NOT ONE SINGLE bit of evidence to suggest human-driven catastrophic climate change is a risk of any kind.

Debate is over, get with the times.

BEcause a UN conference decided to hold hands and sing Kumbuya? (and nothing else of course)

because the world is acting. There is consensus. Climate Change is real. Deal with it. And move on with your life. You fought on the dumb side of the debate, and you lost miserably.

The world ISNT acting at all.
Their isnt consensus at all and never has been.
Climate Change (castastrophic human-driven kind) is a con with ZERO evidence to support it.

Back to top

IP Logged

____ Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 33410 Australia Gender:	Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism? Reply #42 - Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 11:02am Yes Maria ... human activity is just an internet conspiracy. Next Maria will claim a human caused nuclear winter wouldn't effect the climate.
Back to top	IP Logged

mariacostel Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 7344 Sydney Gender:	Re: When Will Libs Stop Supporting Climate Terrorism? Reply #43 - Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 3:13pm ____ wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2016 at 11:02am: Yes Maria ... human activity is just an internet conspiracy. Next Maria will claim a human caused nuclear winter wouldn't effect the climate. You really do come up with pointless dross.
Back to top	IP Logged