Thread: Katoomba Monthly Temp average set to be SMASHED!!! AGAIN!!!

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

It is absurd that the increasingly small amount of CC deniers can still exert a disproportionate amount of influence over the debate.

I'll assume you mean that the number of deniers is reducing Thank gawd fer that, but I do wish that rate of decrease would increase.

Still haven't watched Q&A but I saw a snippet of Jim Molan in the news. How on earth did such a moron get to be a General? Certainly I understand how he could get to be a Senator, but a Major General? I've never heard of such head in the sand mentality from a member of the pragmatic Army.

As a former Major General of the Army he proudly said (re CC denial) "I'm not relying on evidence."

WHAT? He also came out with the usual lie of "I'm happy to be convinced one way or another". What a load of bollocks.

I'd still like to see the actually temperatures and weather patterns before the recordings started??????

Sorry folks, but when the "Media" and "Educators" put out figures that suit their purposes of making money or pushing specific agenda to justify there own ends;

I'm can't say I trust them!

Originally Posted by crowie

I'd still like to see the actually temperatures and weather patterns before the recordings started??????

OK, so fundamentally, you are saying that because dinosaurs couldn't record the temperatures, that we now don't know enough?

Originally Posted by crowie

I'd still like to see the actually temperatures and weather patterns before the recordings started??????

So what you are asking for is something that you know very well cannot be produced in the format that you require. Apart from this having been previously addressed and debunked, it's a standard reply for people who refuse to be convinced no matter how compelling the data is. They ask that the data be produced in a format that they know can never be done - i.e. from thermometers and other such instruments before such things existed. That's why they ask for that data - it's impossible to produce, so it gives them a convenient cop out.

So instead of saying "I want to see this or that" (because it still won't change your mind) why don't you show some facts - facts - that prove that we are not contributing to the planet getting hotter? That doesn't mean merely showing some other contributing factors (because there are some) - it means proving that we are not one of them.

Ice core samples are just as accurate - as is the CO2 content of the air pockets trapped in them.

The science is settled Peter - it is incontrovertible. It cannot be cogently argued with

Originally Posted by crowie

Sorry folks...

No point in apologising to us - most of us will be dead before the weather becomes intolerable, with half the planet uninhabitable, and the rest of it frighteningly expensive. It's our grandchildren that will certainly be owed an apology in due course. We are leaving them a shocking, disgraceful legacy.

Originally Posted by crowie

...when the "Media" and "Educators" put out figures that suit their purposes of making money or pushing specific agenda to justify there own ends; I'm can't say I trust them!

How can you possibly say that when you put such store in the words of Alan Jones - who is pushing a specific agenda to justify his own end - having an audience!!! Which makes money for him, dammit!!!


Can you say what it is that you are afraid of?

Can you say what it is that would convince you to change your mind? (something possible, that is....)

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

The science is settled Peter - it is incontrovertible. It cannot be cogently argued with

That's what they said when the science of the day all pointed to the Earth being flat and people were persecuted for arguing that it was round at the time.

Ever since this rock has had a climate that climate has been changing. As it changes life evolves. The day of the dinosaur is gone and for the time being it's our turn. Nothing we can do can change that inevitably the planet will not naturally support human life after some as yet undetermined time. At best we can delay the inevitable.

Originally Posted by doug3030

Ever since this rock has had a climate that climate has been changing.

That's the same tired old argument that doesn't acknowledge our contribution to the rapid acceleration of change.

Originally Posted by doug3030

The day of the dinosaur is gone.....

I disagree.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

That's the same tired old argument that doesn't acknowledge our contribution to the rapid acceleration of change.

Have you had the electricity disconnected at your place yet, Brett, or are you still contributing to the problem?

I'm in the same situation as you are Doug - no choice about whether or not I can have Solar power. If I had a choice I would be on Solar, and with an electric vehicle

It has to be said that that is not much of an argument - too many individuals don't have such control over their lives. That is completely separate to acknowledging that we cannot continue - as a society (not one individual) - to do what we are doing to the atmosphere.

Can you say why you don't accept that we are rapidly escalating CC?

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Can you say why you don't accept that we are rapidly escalating CC?

Can you say where I said that I don't?

Well, your posts sure seem to indicate that you don't accept our contribution. But rather than estimating, do you accept it?

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

How can you possibly say that when you put such store in the words of Alan Jones - who is pushing a specific agenda to justify his own end - having an audience!!! Which makes money for him, dammit!!!

you accuse Peter of putting store in the words of Alan Jones, and yet you seem to take great store in everything the ABC states. Just look at the number of times you quote them. Who says they aren’t
pushing a specific agenda to justify their own end?

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Well, your posts sure seem to indicate that you don't accept our contribution. But rather than estimating, do you accept it?

Im keen to find out just what in my posts gave you that idea. Can you find an example of something I have posted, and quote it IN CONTEXT to make your case. Don't just take part of a post and quote it out of context like you did with Senator Molan.

Originally Posted by Lappa

you accuse Peter of putting store in the words of Alan Jones, and yet you seem to take great store in everything the ABC states. Just look at the number of times you quote them. Who says they aren’t pushing a specific agenda to justify their own end?

It is not an accusation - it is an observed fact. When an email is sent to a significant number of people saying that "Alan Jones is singing my song" (re CO2 non-impact) then I think it's pretty safe to say that store is put in Jones' words.

To address the second part of your post: it is not necessarily the ABC making those statements - they are reporting scientists opinions, papers etc. There may have been some ABC staff opinions in that mix, but by and large it is reported from other sources. Furthermore, I have quoted a number of other sources such as The Guardian, NASA, et al. I don't take news and info from one source only. Quite a number of those links have links to other sources, so I'm trying to take information from as a broad a base as I can.

I have to ask why the ABC would push a not-necessarily-true climate agenda, and to justify their own end. They are publicly funded but independent of Govt. What purpose could it possibly serve for them? Furthermore, I suspect that they would take a lot less heat from the current Govt (so since 2013) if they adopted News Ltd's position, so they are not taking an easy road.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

I have to ask why the ABC would push a not-necessarily-true climate agenda, and to justify their own end. They are publicly funded but independent of Govt. What purpose could it possibly serve for them? Furthermore, I suspect that they would take a lot less heat from the current Govt (so since 2013) if they adopted News Ltd's position, so they are not taking an easy road.

Are you the only one in Australia that cannot see that the ABC has a green agenda? I stopped watching Q and A years ago because the audience and panel are stacked green almost every episode. It started out as a good unbiased forum for debate but it quickly degenerated to the ABC's usual bias.