Comments on: Nelson still talking guano on climate

By: JohnJames# 2

JohnJames# 2 — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Bob, thanks for the references. But its not the sceptics linking weather patterns to alleged Climate Change causality, its the “true believers” like yourself. As I said, the Agriculture Minister, Tony Burke, quoted the meterology patterns predicted by the CSIRO for 2020 as proof positive that drought would become the norm. And that’s nonsense. So you need to start reading a little more broadly than the Green literature they’re feeding you.

By: ben

ben — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

please….. this is just another attempt at fear mongering and populous policy on behalf of the opposition. as they have no great difference in standing on the policy to swing votes their way, they are looking to incite fear in the common australian who is already pissed at the great rizes in petrol and grocery prices. and what does fear do? it makes people less rational and less willing to hear the FACTS on issues. we hear it every time nelson or turnbull gets on the box, “it will hurt australian families”. HOW? and then what do u plan to do about it?

By: JamesK

JamesK — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I hope that your beloved aunt is in-law rather than consanguineous John James because the IPCC would then predict that you are genetically predisposed to a bad case of gout in the coming decades….

By: Bob B

Bob B — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

JohnJames, you are one of too many people who think that ‘climate change’ is the same as ‘meterology’. They’re two different things - you might as well argue “I don’t believe high cholesterol causes heart failure because doctors don’t know everything about mental illness.” You really ought to read up on the subject and educate yourself. A good place to start is http://www.eo.ucar.edu/basics/index.html or http://www.begbroke.ox.ac.uk/climate/interface.html

When you’re finished there, you really should check out http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/start-here/ This site comprehensively debunks all the arguments of the “climate skeptics”.

By: JamesK

JamesK — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Venise> How do you know Bob B is Bob Browne? If you know that Bob B is in fact Bob Browne then you know more than I. I was commenting on the postings of Bob B which if you care to read them are nonsensical. Not in any ‘political’ sense; they just make no sense literally. And please I am not contemptible! Are you? Desist from your personal attacks and enter the debate.

By: Venise Alstergren#2

Venise Alstergren#2 — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

JamesK: Politics is like war, there are some rules which apply. eg Don’t slaughter your opponents generals. Try to retain the moral high-ground etc etc. You have just broken every standard in the book; with your un-funny, crude and tasteless remark about Sen Bob Brown. It ill befits the man who saved the Franklin Dam. If you want to criticize him; be my guest, if you want to mourn John Howard, be my guest; if you want to say that Kevin Rudd is a God-bothering little prick, go for it, swear your head off, fantastic; rant or rave, I’ll be right there with you; but to indulge in gutter jokes and behind the boat -shed giggling you betray a man of conscious. And you reveal yourself as contemptible.

By: JamesK

JamesK — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

No need for Bob B to be told to ‘blow it out ‘yer arse’.

He already has.

By: Bob B

Bob B — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

JohnJames says, “Someone who isn’t a scientist is wrong about climate change, therefore scientists are wrong about climate change.” Good going, John, you’ve won me.

By: JamesK

JamesK — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Unfortunately there are a lot more than one of your type Bob B, but that does not mean that you are ‘right’. John James is trained in science. Are you?

31,072 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,021 with PhDs:

“We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in
Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on
greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and
damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other
greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the
Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific
evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the
natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”
http://www.petitionproject.org/index.htmle

May I recommend some further reading if you are open-minded rather than prejudiced:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/node/7523/print#SlideFrame_1
http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-Spencer-on-global-warming.htm#GW10
http://climatesci.org/2008/06/17/guest-weblog-by-dr-kiminori-itoh-of-yokohama-national-university/
http://climatesci.org/main-conclusions/
http://energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=880
http://www.cei.org/pdf/5539.pdf
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/climate-library
http://magna-magnaverse.blogspot.com/2008/07/great-global-warming-hoax.html
http://glowarmers.blogspot.com/2007/05/bjorn-lomberg-and-kyoto-protocals.html
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=D4B5FD23-802A-23AD-4565-3DCE4095C360
http://dreadpundit.blogspot.com/2008/07/flat-screen-tvs-to-destroy-planet.html
http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121486841811817591.html
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/06/03/uah-global-temperature-dives-in-may/
http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/19842304.html

Or perhaps like Connor Moran you prefer grandstanding?
http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php