Tony Abbott

[IQS.RLOW]

Coal is in increasing use you stupid fuck. Stop making statements that you have no idea about.

[IQS.RLOW]

2 seconds worth of google would have saved you from making a dickhead of yourself

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/what-gree ... s-cm363067" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The only thing that challenges coal is not your magical fairy land wind or solar farms, it that other debil of the green ignoramuses, gas that comes from fracking which is where the US is currently going.

You lefties are dumb as horse shit and like making up your own stories to fit your fucked up world views.

[IQS.RLOW]

Stupid lefties...run screaming as soon as they are shown the truth, but are guaranteed to repeat their lies again and again and again like good little nazi propagandists.

[alevine]

2 seconds worth of google would have saved you from making a dickhead of yourself

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/what-gree ... s-cm363067" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The only thing that challenges coal is not your magical fairy land wind or solar farms, it that other debil of the green ignoramuses, gas that comes from fracking which is where the US is currently going.

You lefties are dumb as horse shit and like making up your own stories to fit your fucked up world views.

So your 2 seconds confirms that coal "growth" is below trend (ie, as world energy needs increase coal's increase is not as it has been in the past) and that oil is the greatest source of energy.

Thanks for playing.

[IQS.RLOW]

lefty lying again and misrepresenting again. How droll...

the reality is that coal use is diminishing around the globe

worldwide, coal is in its strongest position in decades. In 2013, enough coal was burned to meet 30.1 percent of the world’s energy demands -- its highest share since 1970,

coal still dominates. In 2013, coal consumption increased by 3 percent, making it the fastest growing fossil fuel.

For now, coal remains behind oil in terms of its share of global energy demand, capturing 30.1 percent compared to oil’s 32.9 percent. But that could change. In a December 2012 report, the International Energy Agency predicted that by 2017, coal would become the world’s top source of energy

...and the best bit is none of your shitty fucking "renewables" are anywhere in the mix, nor will they ever be in the next 100 years.

[Super Nova]

...and the best bit is none of your shitty fucking "renewables" are anywhere in the mix, nor will they ever be in the next 100 years.

Dear Dr Evil IQ... what would be your plans to maintain energy security and deal with the environmental impact of long term climate change?

[IQS.RLOW]

The science says there is no environmental impact from long term climate change due to fossil fuel use, so there is no threat to energy security except from leftwing koolaid drinking moonbats.

We can burn as much as we like and there is no threat to climate. The science must be right, or do you want to ignore it now that it doesn't fit your hysterics?

[Super Nova]

The science says there is no environmental impact from long term climate change due to fossil fuel use

Bullshit. The science does not say that.

, so there is no threat to energy security except from leftwing koolaid drinking moonbats.

With the above being bullshit therefore this is also bullshit.

We can burn as much as we like and there is no threat to climate. The science must be right, or do you want to ignore it now that it doesn't fit your hysterics?

Your position doesn't fit the science. This must be addressed and we need to plan now.

A recent article by a real scientist.

UK chief scientist calls for urgent debate on climate change mitigation
Thursday 12 June 2014

It's time to move on from the basics of whether global warming is happening to how best to respond, says chief science adviser

....

Sir Mark Walport, the government's top science adviser, said the climate change debate had to move on from arguments over the reality of global warming to more pressing questions of what the country should do in response.

In an interview with the Guardian, Walport urged scientists and engineers to be vocal about the pros and cons of new energy sources and technologies designed to combat climate change to ensure that policy decisions came from a public debate based on solid evidence.

"Climate change is happening and humans are significant contributors, and that raises some really important policy questions," Walport said. "Scientists should be setting out the options and explaining what happens in each case. The debate has to move on to what are we going to do about climate change, and how are we going to do it."

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014 ... rk-walport

Warning Warning

Climate Change Denier Approaching

[Lucas]

Oh what a load of CRAP.

Climate change friken RETARDED SCIENTISTS ARE A DIME A DOZEN GET A FRIKEN GRIP THIS STUPID RUBBISH NEVER ENDS....

ITS FRACKING SNOWING OUTSIDE. GLOBAL WARMING MY BLOODY ASS and SATELLITE DATA SUPPORTS ME SAYING THAT....

As you were.

Cheers

[Aussie]