-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Global Warming
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
People get tied up in the political debate, because most people have some capacity to form an opinion on it. Fundamentally it comes down to does rising CO2 in the atmosphere = crisis? For all the nonsense conjecture and rhetoric we hear in our polity, this is what the science community has failed to demonstrate. Given the huge impact their findings will have on the lifestyles of everyone, they have to do a better job at this. Having leftist actors tell us to get into line is not going to work, especially in a country like Australia that is naturally sceptical of authority.
A bit more from Blair regarding the death threats.
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/false_alarmists/
http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/false_alarmists/
it appears the productivity commission favours pricing carbon as an effective way of reducing emissions:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/key-productivity-commission-report-backs-putting-a-price-on-carbon/story-e6frg6xf-1226072381938
definitely a boost for the pro-carbon tax argument.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/key-productivity-commission-report-backs-putting-a-price-on-carbon/story-e6frg6xf-1226072381938
definitely a boost for the pro-carbon tax argument.
A bit like saying a couple of stitches is better than a band-aid for a severed leg.Brodders17 said:
Interesting to note that although the report states that emissions trading schemes were the most price-effective means of reducing emissions, none of the countries investigated had a carbon tax. As I see it, a carbon tax is an ETS with all the messy rorting and ticket clipping bits removed, so I'd expect it to be even more effective.
The report does note that energy and fuel taxes were effective at reducing emissions, but weren't considered as carbon taxes as they were introduced as general revenue raising taxes. This is interesting to me, as I reckon taxing the fuels would be more effective at driving efficiencies than taxing emissions.
The report does note that energy and fuel taxes were effective at reducing emissions, but weren't considered as carbon taxes as they were introduced as general revenue raising taxes. This is interesting to me, as I reckon taxing the fuels would be more effective at driving efficiencies than taxing emissions.
It has argued that the only reason Turnbull was all for a price on C02, was he was looking after his mates at Goldman Sachs.mld said:
Prima facie, it looks to me like it will be a typical bureaucratic shambles that will leave itself wide open to corporate rorting.
Freezer said:
Thats not what I meant, but I do happen think that if you reject the prevailing science, if the cap fits...
What I actually meant was the nature of the medium dictates that replies and posts have to short and easy to skim. Its just the way it is. I know from experience to attempt otherwise is pointless. People ignore key sections of your post and or skim it for key points that they want to shoot down regardless. Often they mis-read the central point. I've done it, like I said, its an anonymous internet footy forum, not a policy think tank.
Giardiasis said:
a) they haven't failed to demonstrate it. B) your 'given' is not actually a given. There won't be a huge impact. The denialists are the alarmists in this debate.
mld said:
Geez why so hang dog? Come Mld, robust discussion is enjoyable. I think of PRE as an online pub, and I approach it as such. There is no malice in any of my posts (except the race thread at times, but thats another story).
Merveille said:
This gets the 'distraction of the week award'. Pollution, increased CO2, its all the same. Light a fire in your loungeroom and block up the chimney, call the result smoke, pollution, carbon, call it whatever you want, the result is the same.
Re: Global Warming Thread for Deniers, Flat-Earthers and Bogans
Not sure what you mean, but if its what I think you mean, that you got a reaction from me, correct, 3 points to you. But who is correct Merv? That is the question. If a relative was dying of cancer and I had to choose a cure from an internet blog or medicine refined over years of peer reviewed science, I know what I'm going for.
Merveille said:
Not sure what you mean, but if its what I think you mean, that you got a reaction from me, correct, 3 points to you. But who is correct Merv? That is the question. If a relative was dying of cancer and I had to choose a cure from an internet blog or medicine refined over years of peer reviewed science, I know what I'm going for.
evo said:
Every single major area of government policy in every single government in the world leaves itself open to corporate rorting. You are not wrong. I don't like it, who does, but its a side issue that applies to defence spending, any government sell off, any major contract at all. The economic rationalists would argue, and I'm a bit of one, that even though the Goldman Sachs and Deliottes of the world are doing well in the age of outsourcing, it still ends up cheaper than the old way.
FWIW I beleive Turnbill is sincere, but who knows?
As an aside I agree having Kate Blanchett as a spokesperson was a mistake but how do you know she is leftist and if she is why is it relevant ?Giardiasis said:
This debate has so many times shifted to one of if you are left leaning you are for some form of carbon pricing mechanism and you accept the science of man's role in that and if you are right leaning you don't. It shouldn't have , and in most cases doesn't , anything to do with Political leanings . The creation of a political divide is exactly what Tony Abbott wants in this discussion and the Government is not helping change that .
