+ Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 62 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 613
  1. #111
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,565
    Thanks
    2,851
    Thanked
    1,254
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post

    What harm is there? - Economic harm.
    I'll start with the economic side of this debate, since my most recent degree is in economics & public policy... What economic harm is the carbon tax doing?

    I haven't finished reading the rest of the debate yet, so will come back later with a comment about your "data".

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    As far as this comment, I'm fairly certain their "sources" are the scientists that contribute to Skeptical Science: http://www.skepticalscience.com/team.php
    I was referring to which dataset was used to create the graph. I'm sure they didn't get the numbers from their thermometers in their backyards.

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by beebs View Post
    The 30 year quote came from the Victorian Governments website on climate change.

    "the 20 warmest years have all occurred since 1981, and the 10 warmest have all occurred in the past 12 years." - NOAA/

    I'd be interested to hear your rebuttal to the above.
    My 10 tallest years have all occurred in the last 10 years! How many times do I have to say it???
    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?

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    I was referring to which dataset was used to create the graph. I'm sure they didn't get the numbers from their thermometers in their backyards.
    Here you go: 'We have also updated both the global surface temperature and Arctic sea ice Escalators. The surface temperature Escalator had previously used Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) data; however, BEST is a land-only temperature dataset. Therefore, the new temperature Escalator uses an average of GISS, NCDC, and HadCRUT4 monthly global surface tempererature anomalies from January 1970 through August 2012.'

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/clim...r-updates.html

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    My 10 tallest years have all occurred in the last 10 years! How many times do I have to say it???
    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?
    As I've shown, the escalator shows there has been an increase. Although I don't know where Beebs gets her info. We've posted before that scientists need several decades to predict a trend and not just 16 years.

  6. #116
    Mod-pegasus's Avatar
    Mod-pegasus is offline ADMINISTRATOR
    and all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks with the one word...UNLESS
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    14,644
    Thanks
    1,733
    Thanked
    1,735
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Funchu View Post
    I'll start with the economic side of this debate, since my most recent degree is in economics & public policy... What economic harm is the carbon tax doing?

    I haven't finished reading the rest of the debate yet, so will come back later with a comment about your "data".
    Without getting into the climate change side of this (because regardless of my thoughts on climate change, I do not believe the carbon tax is a move in any direction to impact on climate change in any way), if the carbon tax had no impact on the economy, then it wouldn't have been introduced.

    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.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Mod-pegasus For This Useful Post:

    Father  (06-04-2013)

  8. #117
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    As far as this comment, I'm fairly certain their "sources" are the scientists that contribute to Skeptical Science: http://www.skepticalscience.com/team.php
    Ha. They are an impressive team aren't they?
    Richard Linzden, John Cristy, and Roy Spencer better watch out! There is a zoo volunteer and a kayaker debating them.

  9. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    As I've shown, the escalator shows there has been an increase. Although I don't know where Beebs gets her info. We've posted before that scientists need several decades to predict a trend and not just 16 years.
    The escalator shows a decrease over recent years. It does show a long term increase though of about 0.15C per decade since 1970. I don't disagree with that at all. I'm not blind.
    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.

  10. #119
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,565
    Thanks
    2,851
    Thanked
    1,254
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    Without getting into the climate change side of this (because regardless of my thoughts on climate change, I do not believe the carbon tax is a move in any direction to impact on climate change in any way), if the carbon tax had no impact on the economy, then it wouldn't have been introduced.

    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.
    Father said "economic harm", not "economic impact". Of course the carbon tax has an "economic impact" - that's the point of a tax. I want to know what the "harm" is in taxing high pollutors & offering incentives, such as incentives for manufacturers to install energy efficiency measures & incentives for renewable energy innovation.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Funchu For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (07-04-2013),wrena  (06-04-2013)

  12. #120
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,187
    Thanks
    482
    Thanked
    1,049
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger
    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.

  13. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DJ Nette For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (07-04-2013),Funchu  (06-04-2013),Kirst33  (06-04-2013),Rutabaga  (23-04-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Vanuatu - Great or not so great?
    By Clarabelle in forum Destination Suggestions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 29-10-2012, 10:56
  2. Green poop
    By Alphabetsoup in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 24-05-2012, 20:02

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Shapland Swim Schools
Shapland's at participating schools offer free baby orientation classes once a month - no cost no catches. Your baby will be introduced to our "natural effects" orientation program develop by Shapland's over 3 generations, its gentle and enjoyable.
sales & new stuffsee all
Wendys Music School Melbourne
Wondering about Music Lessons? FREE 30 minute ASSESSMENT. Find out if your child is ready! Piano from age 3 years & Guitar, Singing, Drums, Violin from age 5. Lessons available for all ages. 35+ years experience. Structured program.
Use referral 'bubhub' when booking
featured supporter
ProSwim
ProSwim runs learn to swim classes for babies, children and adults. Our indoor centre in Plympton Park has lessons all year round, including school holidays. We also offer outdoor programs during the summer months (Oct-Mar) at Rostrevor college.
gotcha
X

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!