Australian Politics Forum - The fallacy of the Greens

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 59817 Gender:	Re: The fallacy of the Greens Reply #255 - Aug 18^th, 2022 at 5:14pm Jordan Peterson and Tim Blair hit out at ‘utterly delusional’ Albanese government ( and the MeToo Morrison gov, they should have added) Chico Marx was right, there is no Sanity Clause when it comes to net zero and other Gretaesque sloganeering.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

Bobby.

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 121321
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #256 - Aug 18^th, 2022 at 5:34pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 4:06pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 2:56pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 2:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 1:57pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 1:07am:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 16^th, 2022 at 4:29pm:

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/113/586/830/original/0e0fbf...

1. China is already the world's largest producer and consumer of renewable electricity, and proceeding apace with it's emissions reduction time-table

2. China has ceased funding more overseas coal projects.

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/106/957/161/original/260a79...

That's because China is bigger than all those economies put together. And the fact remains, China is the largest producer and consumer of renewables....and increasing as per the 5 year plans to carbon neutrality. Increasing coal will peak in 2030.

Don't make excuses for the Chinese destroying our planet.

Er ... American CO2 emissions per capita are five times those of China's. And yet you want the Chinese to disappear, so you can keep burning fossils.

We are all destroying the planet, some individuals are contributing to that destruction more than others, and most of those particular individuals are in the First world.

The Chinese are destroying the planet far more than any other country.

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 15589
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #257 - Aug 18^th, 2022 at 10:33pm

Bobby. wrote on Aug 18^th, 2022 at 5:34pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 4:06pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 2:56pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 2:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 1:57pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 17^th, 2022 at 1:07am:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 16^th, 2022 at 4:29pm:

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/113/586/830/original/0e0fbf...

1. China is already the world's largest producer and consumer of renewable electricity, and proceeding apace with it's emissions reduction time-table

2. China has ceased funding more overseas coal projects.

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/106/957/161/original/260a79...

That's because China is bigger than all those economies put together. And the fact remains, China is the largest producer and consumer of renewables....and increasing as per the 5 year plans to carbon neutrality. Increasing coal will peak in 2030.

Don't make excuses for the Chinese destroying our planet.

Er ... American CO2 emissions per capita are five times those of China's. And yet you want the Chinese to disappear, so you can keep burning fossils.

We are all destroying the planet, some individuals are contributing to that destruction more than others, and most of those particular individuals are in the First world.

The Chinese are destroying the planet far more than any other country.

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/106/957/161/original/260a79...

That's not debate, that's blind, uniformed repetition.

The 3rd world/developing world has 6 times the population of the first world which is responsible for most of the man-made CO2 in the atmosphere, over the last 200 years.

The developing world has a right to develop; if you want them to use renewables, you better pay them to do it.

....although there is a way in which the whole world can go 'green for free' ASAP...though neoliberal market ideologues are too blind to see it:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/225#238

#237

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 121321
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #258 - Aug 18^th, 2022 at 10:52pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 18^th, 2022 at 10:33pm:

That's not debate, that's blind, uniformed repetition.

The 3rd world/developing world has 6 times the population of the first world which is responsible for most of the man-made CO2 in the atmosphere, over the last 200 years.

The developing world has a right to develop; if you want them to use renewables, you better pay them to do it.

....although there is a way in which the whole world can go 'green for free' ASAP...though neoliberal market ideologues are too blind to see it:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/225#238

#237

Only Thorium power stations can save our planet.
Cheap, safe, unlimited power.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1519823686/150#150

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 15589
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #259 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 12:06am

Bobby. wrote on Aug 18^th, 2022 at 10:52pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 18^th, 2022 at 10:33pm:

That's not debate, that's blind, uniformed repetition.

The 3rd world/developing world has 6 times the population of the first world which is responsible for most of the man-made CO2 in the atmosphere, over the last 200 years.

The developing world has a right to develop; if you want them to use renewables, you better pay them to do it.

....although there is a way in which the whole world can go 'green for free' ASAP...though neoliberal market ideologues are too blind to see it:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/225#238

#237

Only Thorium power stations can save our planet.
Cheap, safe, unlimited power.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1519823686/150#150

Maybe, but how is the 3rd world - neverlone the rich world - going to pay for it ASAP?

Back to top

IP Logged

Bobby.

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 121321
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #260 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 8:28am

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 12:06am:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 18^th, 2022 at 10:52pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 18^th, 2022 at 10:33pm:

That's not debate, that's blind, uniformed repetition.

The 3rd world/developing world has 6 times the population of the first world which is responsible for most of the man-made CO2 in the atmosphere, over the last 200 years.

The developing world has a right to develop; if you want them to use renewables, you better pay them to do it.

....although there is a way in which the whole world can go 'green for free' ASAP...though neoliberal market ideologues are too blind to see it:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/225#238

#237

Only Thorium power stations can save our planet.
Cheap, safe, unlimited power.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1519823686/150#150

Maybe, but how is the 3rd world - neverlone the rich world - going to pay for it ASAP?

The scientists and engineers need to make the first working,
large power station first before we can talk about who will pay.
I am disappointed that it's taking so long.
There was already a working molten salt reactor in the late 1960s.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 8^th, 2018 at 6:36pm:

A Thorium reactor was working for 4 years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment

The Molten-Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) was an experimental molten salt reactor at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) researching this technology through the 1960s; constructed by 1964,
it went critical in 1965 and was operated until 1969.[1]

The MSRE was a 7.4 MWth test reactor simulating the neutronic "kernel" of a type of inherently safer epithermal thorium breeder reactor called the liquid fluoride thorium reactor. It primarily used two fuels: first uranium-235 and later uranium-233. The latter 233UF4 was the result of breeding from thorium in other reactors. Since this was an engineering test, the large, expensive breeding blanket of thorium salt was omitted in favor of neutron measurements.

In the MSRE, the heat from the reactor core was shed via a cooling system using air blown over radiators. It is thought similar reactors could power high-efficiency heat engines such as closed-cycle gas turbines.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59817
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #261 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 8:57am

First we had the Great Barrington Declaration, challenging the 'settled' scientific consensus about lockdowns. Now comes the World Climate Declaration, challenging the computer models predicting environmental catastrophe.

1,200 Scientists and Professionals Declare: “There is No Climate Emergency”

BY CHRIS MORRISON 18 AUGUST 2022

The political fiction that humans cause most or all climate change and the claim that the science behind this notion is ‘settled’, has been dealt a savage blow by the publication of a ‘World Climate Declaration (WCD)’ signed by over 1,100 scientists and professionals. There is no climate emergency, say the authors, who are drawn from across the world and led by the Norwegian physics Nobel Prize laureate Professor Ivar Giaever. Climate science is said to have degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science.

The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd.

Particular ire in the WCD is reserved for climate models. To believe in the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. Climate models are now central to today’s climate discussion and the scientists see this as a problem. “We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models,” says the WCD. “In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/08/18/1200-scientists-and-professionals-declare-th...

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 15589
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #262 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 12:23pm

Frank wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 8:57am:

First we had the Great Barrington Declaration, challenging the 'settled' scientific consensus about lockdowns.

(from wiki)

"It claimed harmful COVID-19 lockdowns could be avoided via the fringe notion of "focused protection", by which those most at risk could purportedly be kept safe while society otherwise continued functioning normally.

The document presumed without evidence that the disease burden of mass infection could be tolerated, that any infection would confer long term sterilizing immunity, and it made no mention of physical distancing, masks, contact tracing,[6] or long COVID, which has left patients with debilitating symptoms months after the initial infection.

In other words, lock up the elderly and let covid rip through the community....despite the fact covid claimed the lives of many non-elderly.

Quote:

Now comes the World Climate Declaration, challenging the computer models predicting environmental catastrophe.

1,200 Scientists and Professionals Declare: “There is No Climate Emergency”

BY CHRIS MORRISON 18 AUGUST 2022

The political fiction that humans cause most or all climate change and the claim that the science behind this notion is ‘settled’, has been dealt a savage blow by the publication of a ‘World Climate Declaration (WCD)’ signed by over 1,100 scientists and professionals. There is no climate emergency, say the authors, who are drawn from across the world and led by the Norwegian physics Nobel Prize laureate Professor Ivar Giaever. Climate science is said to have degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science.

The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd.

Particular ire in the WCD is reserved for climate models. To believe in the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. Climate models are now central to today’s climate discussion and the scientists see this as a problem. “We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models,” says the WCD. “In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”

https://dailysceptic.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/119552396_bcd4d052-4f5a-4c1e...

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/08/18/1200-scientists-and-professionals-declare-th...

Even accepting that, fossils will run out, and they are becoming increasingly expensive as the easy-to-extract reserves are all used, not to mention private profit- gougers seeking riches on the back of consumers of essential power.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21394
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #263 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 1:05pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 12:23pm:

In other words, lock up the elderly and let covid rip through the community....despite the fact covid claimed the lives of many non-elderly.

But according to some COVID saved us from greater CO2 as seen from space.

Unfortunately the latest spectrometers have an accuracy of about 0.3%. The claimed reduction was less than 1ppm.

"Currently, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere averages about 405 molecules out of every 1 million molecules of air, a ratio that scientists call “405 parts per million.” OCO-3 will measure this tiny percentage to an accuracy of about 0.3 to
0.5 percent."

https://ocov3.jpl.nasa.gov/documents/1/oco-3-fact-sheet-4-pages.pdf

"We show that the impact of short-term regional changes in fossil fuel emissions on CO2 concentrations was observable from space. Starting in February and continuing through May, column CO2 over many of the world’s largest emitting regions was 0.14 to 0.62 parts per million less than expected in a pandemic-free scenario, consistent with reductions of 3 to 13% in annual global emissions."

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abf9415

0.3% of 415 ppm = 1.245ppm. Isn't it amazing how scientists can find things finer than the instrumental accuracy? Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 15589
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #264 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 4:37pm

lee wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 1:05pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 12:23pm:

In other words, lock up the elderly and let covid rip through the community....despite the fact covid claimed the lives of many non-elderly.

But according to some COVID saved us from greater CO2 as seen from space.

Logical, one would think; lockdowns stop people driving their cars.

Quote:

Unfortunately the latest spectrometers have an accuracy of about 0.3%. The claimed reduction was less than 1ppm.

If you say so.

Quote:

"Currently, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere averages about 405 molecules out of every 1 million molecules of air, a ratio that scientists call “405 parts per million.” OCO-3 will measure this tiny percentage to an accuracy of about 0.3 to
0.5 percent."

https://ocov3.jpl.nasa.gov/documents/1/oco-3-fact-sheet-4-pages.pdf

"We show that the impact of short-term regional changes in fossil fuel emissions on CO2 concentrations was observable from space. Starting in February and continuing through May, column CO2 over many of the world’s largest emitting regions was 0.14 to 0.62 parts per million less than expected in a pandemic-free scenario, consistent with reductions of 3 to 13% in annual global emissions."

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abf9415

0.3% of 415 ppm = 1.245ppm. Isn't it amazing how scientists can find things finer than the instrumental accuracy? Roll Eyes

Yes. But a pandemic scenario is very localized, with essential industry continuing as required.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21394 Gender:	Re: The fallacy of the Greens Reply #265 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 4:46pm thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 4:37pm: es. But a pandemic scenario is very localized, with essential industry continuing as required. Yes...But... The claimed differences were smaller than the instrument data. In other words Bullshcist. Just sciencey sounding to get the suckers, like you, in.
Back to top	IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59817
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #266 - Aug 19^th, 2022 at 5:39pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 12:23pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 8:57am:

1,200 Scientists and Professionals Declare: “There is No Climate Emergency”

BY CHRIS MORRISON 18 AUGUST 2022

The political fiction that humans cause most or all climate change and the claim that the science behind this notion is ‘settled’, has been dealt a savage blow by the publication of a ‘World Climate Declaration (WCD)’ signed by over 1,100 scientists and professionals. There is no climate emergency, say the authors, who are drawn from across the world and led by the Norwegian physics Nobel Prize laureate Professor Ivar Giaever. Climate science is said to have degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science.

The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd.

Particular ire in the WCD is reserved for climate models. To believe in the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. Climate models are now central to today’s climate discussion and the scientists see this as a problem. “We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models,” says the WCD. “In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”

https://dailysceptic.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/119552396_bcd4d052-4f5a-4c1e...

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/08/18/1200-scientists-and-professionals-declare-th...

Even accepting that, fossils will run out, and they are becoming increasingly expensive as the easy-to-extract reserves are all used, not to mention private profit- gougers seeking riches on the back of consumers of essential power.

It is one thing to do something because of a baseless and artificially induced climate panic and to do it in a considered, calm, measured way.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 15589
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #267 - Aug 20^th, 2022 at 2:15pm

lee wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 4:46pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 4:37pm:

es. But a pandemic scenario is very localized, with essential industry continuing as required.

Yes...But... Grin

The claimed differences were smaller than the instrument data. In other words Bullshcist. Just sciencey sounding to get the suckers, like you, in. Grin

Er ....you jumped in with the " differences were smaller than the instrument data" spiel.

I ignored them...beyond noting lockdowns probably reduce the number of cars on the road.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21394
Gender: male

Re: The fallacy of the Greens
Reply #268 - Aug 20^th, 2022 at 2:19pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 20^th, 2022 at 2:15pm:

Er ....you jumped in with the " differences were smaller than the instrument data" spiel.

I ignored them

No you didn't.

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 19^th, 2022 at 4:37pm:

Quote:
Unfortunately the latest spectrometers have an accuracy of about 0.3%. The claimed reduction was less than 1ppm.

If you say so.

You can't even lie straight. Grin

Back to top