USA OUTLAWS EU Carbon Tax...

[peterc005]

Personally, I think the UFO conspiracy theory nutters are more interesting than the climate change conspiracy theory nutters. I'm a sc-fi (Star Trek) fan and appreciate their imagination, pity they take it seriously.

[empire4]

peterc005, [QUOTE]Climate change sceptics nutters/QUOTE] In using the word skeptic you are assuming that the majority believes its real. That is absolutely BS.

Climate change exists, it has to. That is why there are no "skeptics" as you say at the CSIRO. What people don't believe, me included is that HUMANS are a major contributing factor. There is evidence to suggest the world average temperature has not warmed in 16 years.

Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it | Mail Online

But I'm sure they are just "skeptics" or conspiracy theorists. Julia Gillard's carbon dioxide tax, which was supposed to change Australian buying habits. “There will be price impacts,” Prime Minister Julia Gillard promised in 2011. “The whole point of pricing carbon is to say that goods that have got a lot of carbon pollution in them get relatively more expensive.” The government now says impact of the carbon tax is sufficiently compensated so as to have little/no impact on consumer behaviour. The “whole point”, as the Prime Minister put it, has been missed.

keep dreaming mate, maybe you'll be able to see Elvis in concert again.

[sprocket check]

The Carbon Tax in Australia turned out to be a big non-event

or so you think...

hoodwinked again!

If it was such a non event.... why am I $1900 poorer?

Oh, sorry it was not because of the carbon tax, it was all the peripherals they snuck in around it while we were looking in the other direction:

Wait for your cold store prices to go through the roof-

I had to get my air con re-gassed after moving it from the old place and being in storage for 3 years. The gas, as in vast majority of units is R22. Not under the carbon tax, according to the fridgie... BUT now subject to a carbon LEVY introduced under the tax, hidden in the fine print.

So, here we have an 800% !!! increase on the price of this gas.

Means a refill is now going to be more expensive than a new unit.

This fridgie also does the local supermarkets, who are screaming blue murder. It won't be long before your fruit, veg, meat etc gets a hike. And it might not be a small one.

The worst thing of all... this levy will probably end up in the pocket of those that come with these kind of hair brain schemes to justify their own existence. Like Pinocchio. The nose just keeps on growing.


sc

[baswell]

This fridgie also does the local supermarkets, who are screaming blue murder. It won't be long before your fruit, veg, meat etc gets a hike. And it might not be a small one.

One word: doors.

[sprocket check]

doors?

How are they going to stop leaky pipes???

[baswell]

Saves more in power bills every year than they could possibly spend on refrigerant.

[Flying Binghi]

Proof of climate hysteria perhaps...

via peterc005;

The science behind climate change is solid and backed by more than twenty years of peer-review.

The reason there are no climate change skeptics at the CSIRO is because climate change is good science and the CSIRO are good scientists...

via peterc005;

If people are going to make assertions they should substantiate them with a reputable source.

Climate change sceptics nutters melt like an ice cream on a hot day when asked to cite proven facts rather than just psychotic conspiracy theories.

peterc005. I have asked you before to produce the scientific 'proof' for AGW that you claim exists, and i'm still waiting, waiting...

via #299 http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-aviation-questions/484906-gillards-carbon-tax-effect-aviation-fuel-15.html






.

[Flying Binghi]

via baswell #88;

As the moderators on Wikipedia would say: "citation required".

Heh, your a gift baswell.. The moderators at wikipedia only allow citations that suit their own agenda..


Some info about wikipedia website administrator Connolley...

"...Connolley rewrote Wikipedia's articles on global warming, on the greenhouse effect, on the instrumental temperature record, on the urban heat island, on climate models, on global cooling. On Feb. 14, he began to erase the Little Ice Age; on Aug. 11, the Medieval Warm Period. In October, he turned his attention to the hockey stick graph. He rewrote articles on the politics of global warming and.........cont.

The American Spectator : Wikipedia Meets Its Own Climategate




http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/3761...ropaganda.html







.

[Flying Binghi]

.


Hmmm... the climate hysterics seem to have done a runner.

Amazing what happens when yer ask them AGW spruikers fer proof of claims. First they abuse yer and call yer names... then they try and muddle through with some nonsensical easly debunked claims... then they run away..


Meanwhile, over in Doha a Duh Oh moment...

How is Doha going? (Where was that, again?)
The Indians have gone home, The Chinese are being told off. Nobody else is very interested, except developing nations looking for a handout. The Australians already agreed to everything whatever it is. (Great negotiation ploy by our Labor Government that.) The EU wants to do what it’s already doing.
Mike Haseler at the Scottish Climate and Energy Forum says it’s all over, bar the shouting. Kyoto ends on December 31, and there is no treaty to replace it, and there can be no ratified treaty by Jan 1...

continues...
Doha: dead — Kyoto: kaput, but NGO’s win anyway « JoNova: Science, carbon, climate and tax





.

[peterc005]

The science underpinning climate change and global warming has almost 30 years of research and peer-review behind it. All of the Australian universities and the CSIRO accepted that carbon emissions are causing global warming and climate change.

No educated, informed, sane person has doubts about the science of climate change - which leaves us, on the other hand, with the climate change skeptics.

More needs to be done to reduce carbon emissions, and while the Carbon Tax was a good step forward, it is not enough by itself.

[Flying Binghi]

.


Dang !... still a hard core one left..

via peterc005;

The science underpinning climate change and global warming has almost 30 years of research and peer-review behind it. All of the Australian universities and the CSIRO accepted that carbon emissions are causing global warming and climate change.

"The science underpinning climate change and global warming has almost 30 years of research and peer-review behind it ..."

Well peterc005, ah do wonder if you know much about the subject. The science behind the worlds naturaly changing climate goes back hundreds of years. The science behind the claims that CO2 is a greenhouse gas goes back a hundred odd years.'

...although peterc005, i might be wronging yer there. you could be refering to the computer models that gave us such brilliant 'science' as the hocky stick graph. That'd be about 30 years of 'peer review'..





.

[Frank Arouet]

The science underpinning climate change and global warming has almost 30 years of research and peer-review behind it. All of the Australian universities and the CSIRO accepted that carbon emissions are causing global warming and climate change

Man made of coursse?

Hey Binghi! don't feed the troll.

Of more importance is the fact that 1.5 million new voters are "enrolled" by Gillard and the facts are that most are not Abbott friendly. Sad but he could loose the election by the masses not being informed.

[rutan around]

No Frank he will lose the election because the masses are finally becoming informed. RA

[Flying Binghi]

via rutan around;

No Frank he will lose the election because the masses are finally becoming informed. RA

rutan around, the masses are becoming informed about what ?





.

[Flying Binghi]

via Frank Arouet;

Hey Binghi! don't feed the troll.

Oh, leave poor ol peterc005 alone..

I rekon peterc005 is genuine enuf. peterc005 shows very simular characteristics to many of the anthropogenic global warming true believers i've run into on some of the hard core climate forums - its just the way they are..





.

[baswell]

The science behind the claims that CO2 is a greenhouse gas goes back a hundred odd years.

You really ought to look up these "ice cores" I have hinted to on several occasions.

rutan around, the masses are becoming informed about what ?

The Carbon Tax has nothing to do with that. It's mostly that the "Reaganomics" he preaches, his proposed "fair taxes" and the austerity measurers his buddy Newman is trying out in Queensland turn good economies into those like the United States. Whereas Keynesian economics keep everyone in prosperity - as evidenced by how well Australia came through the GFC with some of the worlds lowest tax rates, debt and deficit!

Now Labor are no saints, but Abbott's goal is to make Gina Reinhart even richer than she already is at the expense of the rest of us.

(Also: his hilarious "cut tax rates, increase spending" economics and people are realising his propensity for making mountains out of mole hills when it comes to the personal lives of his opponents have no substance to them, nor affect their own lives.)

[Towering Q]

Frank, just because peterc005 has a differing view to yours, (and I realise his delivery style can be a little 'blunt' at times), it doesn't necessarily follow that he is a 'troll'.

Binghi, the problem with reading Jo the Microbiologist's blog, is that it only reinforces your current beliefs. Have you tried widening out from Jo, wattsupwiththat and the ICSC?

[peterc005]

@Towering Q - some people see conspiracy theories everywhere and no amount of rational thought or facts can make them budge.

Luckily these types are rarely make to positions of influence and only get a voice in anonymous forums like this.

I usually can't be bothered getting involved in pointless arguments on forums, but sometimes join in to ask people substantiate their wild claims. Conspiracy theory nutters of various flavours melt away in the light of facts and scientific thought.

[FGD135]

Conspiracy theory nutters of various flavours melt away in the light of facts and scientific thought.

peterc005,

Here are some facts and "scientific thought" for you:

1. None of the claims made by the models have come to pass. The temperature has not risen as the models have predicted; the sea levels have not behaved as the models have predicted; the ocean temperatures have not conformed to the model predictions, and the atmospheric heat distribution has not changed as per the predictions.

2. There has been no global warming for 16 years now. The models never predicted this (absence of heating), of course, so this inconvenient truth just further questions the validity of the modelling and the assumptions made by the modellers. Something very different is happening to the "global temperature" but the warmist scientists have no idea what. What does that tell you about them and their assumptions?

You should be interested to know that, a few weeks ago, a large group of high profile scientists wrote an open letter to Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary-General.

They basically said that the science does NOT support the claims he has been making about climate change and that he should therefore, tone down his statements.

You can read the letter, and the names and qualifications of the scientists here:

Open letter to UN Secretary-General: Current scientific knowledge does not substantiate Ban Ki-Moon assertions on weather and climate, say 125-plus scientists | FP Comment | Financial Post

There were over 120 prominent scientists that signed their names to that letter. Every one of them has "climate" related specialties, e.g, Climatology, Meteorology, Atmospheric Physics, Modelling & Simulation, etc.

[Frank Arouet]

Groan. Fight you bastards.

Merry Christmas if I'm still not flooded or sunburned to death.

Well, the thought was there. From one "nutter to another".