John Howard's final years hit households

[freediver]

Yes, it is indeed a big conspiracy, though you adopt that sneering tone and the word 'conspiracy' to make me sound like a whacko.

I can't make you sound like a whacko. Only you can do that. I did not sneer as I typed the word conspiracy, but you can only interpret it in that manner, because even you recognise your conspiracy theory as absurd.

The rate of change you're so worried about coincides with increased / decreased sunspot activity.

That underlying trend increase in temperature does not coincide with sunspot activity. It can only be explained by anthropogenic greenhouse emissions.

As for the 'rate of change', may I point out we have been paying close attention to the 'rate of change' only recently? As in, the last couple decades?

There are ways to find out the temperature changes from past years. For example, we have temperature measurements going back more than a few decades. With the benefit of newfangled inventions (like a calculator) we are able to deduce the rate of change from past temperature measurements, even though the measurements were done on completely different days. You can also get at even earlier data from ice cores etc.

Do you suppose perhaps that it's worth examining closer, given the drastic measures you insist must be implemented now?

Sure, that what the scientists are doing and continue to do. Obviously they are looking at it far closer than your conspiracy laden claptrap. Also, we should start with the easiest changes and leave the drastic changes to later.

I'd say this, um, miraculous cooling of temperatures over the past decade has, at least, bought us a little time to think it through.

It is no more miraculous than a froty morning. Only an idiot would panic one year when it's especially hot then forget about it the next year when it is especially cold.

[mantra.]

The global warming doomsday hysteria is the world's greatest scam, simply done to put a great big ball and chain to weigh down the economies of the west, for the advantage of those concocting the scam. It's why those puppetting this movement won't accept going nuclear - that's a solution that'd work and improve the economics of it all.

You make a very good argument BrokenDrum and I actually found myself agreeing with much of what you wrote - apart from the above.

I agree that "something" is being done to put a ball and chain on the economies of the west to weigh them down - but this began under the "new world order" who are great proponents of nuclear power and the theory that "all nations should be equal" ie. detract from one nation to lift another one up. Nuclear Power isn't acceptable - it's too toxic and expensive - and those who oppose it have alternatives, which unfortunately they aren't embracing earnestly enough to support their lobbying.

Instead of climate change - it should have been named "pollution control" or "clean up our planet" - a headline even the most simple of us could understand.

[skippy]

The global warming doomsday hysteria is the world's greatest scam, simply done to put a great big ball and chain to weigh down the economies of the west, for the advantage of those concocting the scam. It's why those puppetting this movement won't accept going nuclear - that's a solution that'd work and improve the economics of it all.

You make a very good argument BrokenDrum and I actually found myself agreeing with much of what you wrote - apart from the above.

I agree that "something" is being done to put a ball and chain on the economies of the west to weigh them down - but this began under the "new world order" who are great proponents of nuclear power and the theory that "all nations should be equal" ie. detract from one nation to lift another one up. Nuclear Power isn't acceptable - it's too toxic and expensive - and those who oppose it have alternatives, which unfortunately they aren't embracing earnestly enough to support their lobbying.

Instead of climate change - it should have been named "pollution control" or "clean up our planet" - a headline even the most simple of us could understand.

Exactly, If it were said we had major polution problems and we need "Pollution control" a lot of the sceptics might understand a little better.
I always wonder why these sceptics are so sure that "excesive polution " is not happening, maybe they have been living with it for so long they think it normal ,my question to them would be can you not taste or smell pollution? or at least see it? dont you know people are dying of pollution related illness? so if its that bad for us surelly it cant be good for the earths atmosphere.

[freediver]

Those are two largely separable problems. CO2 is odorless and colourless, and if it weren't for AGW would be pretty much benign. Particulates and other more noxious gasses, to which you seem to be referring as pollution, are a genuine problem and tend to cause the more localised pollution around the megacities. However, you can 'clean up' a process to remove that pollution relatively cheaply. This is not true for CO2.

[skippy]

Those are two largely separable problems. CO2 is odorless and colourless, and if it weren't for AGW would be pretty much benign. Particulates and other more noxious gasses, to which you seem to be referring as pollution, are a genuine problem and tend to cause the more localised pollution around the megacities. However, you can 'clean up' a process to remove that pollution relatively cheaply. This is not true for CO2.

I know what you mean fd, but pollution is pollution, and I think if you lived near a coal power station you may have a different opinion on whether you can smell the smoke or not.

[Deathridesahorse]

The global warming doomsday hysteria is the world's greatest scam, simply done to put a great big ball and chain to weigh down the economies of the west, for the advantage of those concocting the scam. It's why those puppetting this movement won't accept going nuclear - that's a solution that'd work and improve the economics of it all.

You make a very good argument BrokenDrum and I actually found myself agreeing with much of what you wrote - apart from the above.

I agree that "something" is being done to put a ball and chain on the economies of the west to weigh them down - but this began under the "new world order" who are great proponents of nuclear power and the theory that "all nations should be equal" ie. detract from one nation to lift another one up. Nuclear Power isn't acceptable - it's too toxic and expensive - and those who oppose it have alternatives, which unfortunately they aren't embracing earnestly enough to support their lobbying.

Instead of climate change - it should have been named "pollution control" or "clean up our planet" - a headline even the most simple of us could understand.

Renaming it "pollution control" doesn't reflect the time imperative element of the potential situation.

The science may be far from consensus but that doesn't mean it isn't happening....