Ets

[hendo]

from the limits of year 11 chemistry the extra space that water takes up when it freezes stays above the waterline thus having a null effect on the sea levels for ice in the sea.

where the rise in sea levels comes from are glaciers when they melt.

[KENut]

Yes, thats why I thought it was funny. He didnt think it through much

What climate scientists do is not idiotic, although there are lots of people out there capitilising on climate change (or Enhanced Global Warming).
Yes, carbon pollution is not the whole story, but it definately does have an impact. Sun's radiation passes through Earth's gaseous outer spheres, is absorbed, and re-radiated as infra-red (heat). With more CO2 the radiation is less likely to pass through the atmosphere into space; it will more likely bounce back to earths surface. IE warming the planet, as not as much radiation is escaping.

[driftke70]

dude, think what your saying through, co2 isnt a one way mirror, what it keeps in is directly proportional to how much it prevents from entering in the first place.

the amount of co2 in the atmosphere doesnt change the temperature, the temperature changes the amount of co2 that can be supported. Look up Dr David Evans and read his stuff, has like 2 phds and 6 degrees and worked for the gov (labour aus) climate change for over 10 years and says its a crock of shit.

Proof that its bullshit is in china, the highest producer of co2 in the world by far, and they have experienced a cooling effect. From the pollution not letting sunlight through. There is a difference too between co2 and pollution.

As mentioned, "climatolagists" exist purely on government funding, if they dont agree they wont have a job.

We have been measuring the earths temperature for under 200 years. There is at least 2 degrees in deviation to the accuracy of the equipment in that time. The earth has been around for more than 4.5 billion years. We arnt even a sneeze in the earths existance, yet we think that with a computer model we can predict temperatures. Its absolute baloney.

All the data is VERY selective, only certain points are picked and chosen, certain time frames and temperature references, like they will talk about 5 years in south america, during the peak of el nino patterns when the warmer waters are comming around and have done for as long as man has known. Theyll talk about ice caps melting which they have done every summer. Al gore will talk about polar bears swimming up to 1k offshore because of ice melting. Which they have ALWAYS done.

Im all for making things more sustainable, but not when its at such a cost. There is a right way and a wrong way to do things, making australians pay more than 35% more for energy including electricity, gas and petrol (this has already been implemented and is occuring in 2011) is not the answer. Making people use fluro bulbs (which are worse for the environment because they contain mercury and are bad to dispose of) is not the solution. Australia makes less than 1% of the worlds co2 emmissions (knowing that co2 isnt a problem) is not enough to justify what is happening. Australias ecconomy depends significantly on coal production, which will be heavily reduced after the ets.

Rudd has basically not discussed ANY of the details regarding the ets too anyone but other labour members. He wont either, last time he spoke anything of it was in april. He is renoun for dodging interviews, he has is PR person only tell one news resource such as abc or channel 7 or what ever litterally 30 mins before a conference so they only just make it, dont have decent questions and he makes a joke about noone being there and leaves.

People dont seem to grasp the concept of the scale of what we are dealing with.

[KENut]

Sun light is ultraviolet radiation; this energy is absorbed, and re-radiated as infrared. Ultraviolet and infrared are different wavelengths, and therefore travel through materials, soilds, fluids and gases differently. UV can pass through gases easier than infrared.

Matt: But its not really the scientists giving away the money its the government? The government selects the information that suits them, then 'act' on that to win votes. It is not an exact science, but there is fact within some of it.

[Konakid]

My Yr 11 and 12 Geography teacher fed me the same story and we had to learn it even though he spent numerous lessons telling us about how bullshit it all is, how the figures used represent such a small time frame in the scheme of the earths existence that you cannot possibly say we have contributed to the earths ever so slight rise in temperature in certain countries. Not to mention the locations of temperatures recorded (our modern concrete jungles are an awfully good heat sink) and also the accuracy of the equipment like beally said.

He was the person who changed my view on the whole situation and when i actually got off my arse and researched more into the 'global warming hoax' its plain to see that these so called 'scientists' have very very limited credibility when it comes to the matter.

The public often say "Havent you seen the figures, global warming is happening, the scientists say so"

But what about all the other qualified scientists who disagree with the whole notion?

ASK these people, like i do, if they have ever even researched into the other side of the argument? What about their own side even? 99% of people havent because they just believe what the media feeds them, its sad but true, people can't even do some thinking for them selves these days.

As usual its a case of the media/government scare tactics/power over the people kind of thing, not the first time such a thing has happened.

Can't be bothered getting that much into it tho its a pity more people arent interested in somethings which will only be too late to change once it actually effects them.