I cannot understand why you all seem to rely so heavily on these sort of comments. Yes, this decade has been the warmest. All the graphs that I have posted all indicate it.
The point is, there has been no warming for the last 16 years, despite the rate of CO2 emissions increasing throughout this period.
Do you have a link to the 30 year comment?
The purpose of the carbon tax was to supposedly drive up prices where non "green" production was occurring. This was (and still is - although 9months is still too early to determine the true impact of the tax) intended to drive up the prices of power, fuel, transport (and therefore incidentals) which would in turn drive up prices across the board.
The government identified this and brought out assistance packages - payments to people of certain incomes (the clean energy bonus - which is such a bogus name - how will paying someone money in their household use "cleaner energy" - it will just help them fill their car with more fuel).
The payments to the people is taking money out of the coffers which may otherwise have gone to other areas - eg. health, education etc.
And that's probably only just the start of the economic impact of the carbon tax.
What I'd really like is to see is the environmental impact of the carbon tax.
Last edited by Mod-pegasus; 06-04-2013 at 14:54.
If the graph was extended back before 1970, it would also show about 30 years of cooling. And if it was extended back to the 1700, it would show that we have been warming at about the same rate since then - well before our CO2 emissions increased.
No one is saying we haven't warmed. We have. Since 1700.
We haven't warmed in recent years.
I know that you have posted before that 'scientists need several decades'. You all seem to be ignoring the fact that it was these same scientists who said (just 5 years ago) that 15 years was the magic number. What scientific or statistical analysis can you provide to show what time period is actually required? I provided NOAA's statement and analysis for the 15 year figure.
It seems that these scientists can just change the goal posts without any real reason. Or is there are reason that 15 years is no longer enough time? I haven't found any of NOAA's adjusted figures.
Father, I just can't understand your 'tallest' analogy. Your height, which by its very nature is pretty much fixed from about your late teens, is not a suitable comparison to temperature. If you really feel the need to use an analogy (because clearly we can't understand your argument otherwise), perhaps graphing your weight would be more useful. This is a measurement that changes on a daily, monthly and yearly basis and is influenced by outside factors (exercise, diet, illness) and therefore is a more relevant comparison with temperature than your height fixed (by genetics a long time ago).
In terms of climate change I offer the four possible scenarios about what could happen in the future:
1. Climate Change does not happen. We have taken no action. Outcome - the world continues on as it currently is.
2. Climate Change does not happen. We have taken action anyway. Outcome - we have spent some money on a number of initiatives. Those initiatives have hopefully produced new technology such as renewables. The world looks different from today, but we all carry on.
3. Climate Change is real. We have taken action. Outcome - we spent money on initiatives. These initiatives prepared us not to rely on fossil fuels, provided strategies to protect vulnerable communities and allow us to carry on with a fairly similar lifestyle to what we are use to.
4. Climate Change is real. We have taken no action. Outcome - I think we describe this as the oh #%$* moment. Our lifestyle is dramatically impacted, vulnerable communities are inundated, species become extinct, the world as we know it no longer exists.
Even if the risk of scenario 4 occurring is only very very small, I think it is one we need to be ready for.
In terms of risk, there is a very, very, very low risk, for example, that a pregnant woman could contract listeria from eating soft cheese. I am not prepared to take on this very tiny risk just for the joy of eating soft cheese, therefore I will avoid it during my pregnancy.
Even if the risk of scenario 4 is equally low, it is not a risk I think the world should be prepared to take, just for the joy of burning a few more fossil fuels.
We could debate the facts until the cows come home, but we may end up with the proverbial fiddling while Rome burns. I'd rather not still be discussing your height while we could be helping low lying Pacific communities prepare for their island to be inundated.
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!
Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!