Climate Change | Global Warming | BS or not?

Sean Freeman · 12th July 2009, 12:50 PM

Review of Pilmer's book Heaven and Earth by Michael Ashley, Professor of Astrophysics at the University of New South Wales...

Quote:

"Plimer has done an enormous disservice to science, and the dedicated scientists who are trying to understand climate and the influence of humans, by publishing this book. It is not "merely" atmospheric scientists that would have to be wrong for Plimer to be right. It would require a rewriting of biology, geology, physics, oceanography, astronomy and statistics. Plimer's book deserves to languish on the shelves along with similar pseudo-science such as the writings of Immanuel Velikovsky and Erich von Daniken

Ekka · 12th July 2009, 07:02 PM

That's about as funny as the Bible being the worlds most sold book eh.

Sean Freeman · 12th July 2009, 07:43 PM

I don't think he liked it

stargazer · 13th July 2009, 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean Freeman

Review of Pilmer's book Heaven and Earth by Michael Ashley, Professor of Astrophysics at the University of New South Wales...

Quote:
"Plimer has done an enormous disservice to science, and the dedicated scientists who are trying to understand climate and the influence of humans, by publishing this book. It is not "merely" atmospheric scientists that would have to be wrong for Plimer to be right. It would require a rewriting of biology, geology, physics, oceanography, astronomy and statistics. Plimer's book deserves to languish on the shelves along with similar pseudo-science such as the writings of Immanuel Velikovsky and Erich von Daniken

If any of this were true, there would be no question about global warming. Astronomy??????????? Give me a break!!!!!!!!! Or is he referring to Mars going through colder and warmer times? Does he argue that such variations are caused by all the heavy industry on Mars?

Immanuel Velikovsky did make predictions based on his theories, and his predictions were found to be correct when space probes reached other planets. The "consensus" among scientists were proven wrong. Nothing like facts to upset the popular accepted beliefs!

Reality is not a democracy, truth is not up for a vote, consensus does not change reality. Consensus has often been proven wrong.

Sean Freeman · 13th July 2009, 01:29 AM

Ekka · 20th September 2009, 09:34 PM

More interesting evidence ....

Source: Shrinking Glaciers Reveal Hidden Forests And A Warmer Climate

Quote:

Shrinking Glaciers Reveal Hidden Forests And A Warmer Climate

Uniquely old tree remains have recently been uncovered by the thawing of the rapidly shrinking Kårsa Glacier west of Abisko in Lapland, in northernmost Sweden. The finds show that in the last 7,000 years it has probably never been so warm as during the last century.

“If the area hadn’t been covered by a glacier all these thousands of years, these tree remnants would never have made it. The finds yield information indicating that the 20th century was probably the warmest century in 7,000 years. The fact that the climate is so unique during the last century means that we must question whether this could be 100 percent the result of natural mechanisms,” says Leif Kullman, professor of physical geography, who is directing the project.

Pines and birches grew on the site of the glacier during parts of or perhaps the entire period between 11,800 and 7,000 years ago. This is shown by carbon 14 dating of the remains of trees that have now been uncovered. During that period, the glacier did not continuously exist, and the climate was warmer than at any time afterward.

All in all, there are four finds, parts of birch and pine trunks, that have been uncovered under the shrinking glacier in the Lapland mountains. In most cases they are well preserved, but they are degrading rapidly as they come in contact with air and water. As early as 2003, tree remnants of a similar age were found in Sylarna, in Jämtland province. They have completely crumbled into dust at this point. The warmer climate during the last century, which is the reason the tree remnants have now seen the light of day, may therefore be unique in the perspective of many millennia.

The oldest tree, a pine, lived and died on the site of the Kårsa glacier around 12,000 years ago. The area is 400-450 meters above today’s timberline. This discovery places the thawing of ice at the end of the latest ice age in an entirely new perspective.

“Previous research indicated that Lapland was covered with ice at this time. These finds show that the ice melted and life returned much earlier than we previously thought,” says Leif Kullman.

The researchers are now continuing their examination of glaciers in northern Lapland and Västerbotten (West Bothnia). This ongoing research is part of a larger project that comprises glaciers throughout the entire range of mountains in Sweden. The project is funded by the Swedish Research Council and is directed by Professor Leif Kullman, Umeå University.

Done it · 20th September 2009, 09:56 PM

That's interesting, I read this a few weeks ago.

Plants put limit on ice ages

Plants put limit on ice ages
next article 03.07.2009
When glaciers advanced over much of the Earth's surface during the last ice age, what kept the planet from freezing over entirely?

This has been a puzzle to climate scientists because leading models have indicated that over the past 24 million years geological conditions should have caused carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere to plummet, possibly leading to runaway "icehouse" conditions. Now researchers writing in the July 2, 2009, Nature report on the missing piece of the puzzle – plants.

...more about:
> carbon dioxide > carbon dioxide levels > Carnegie > CO2 > CO2 concentration > Ecology > fossil fuel emission > Global Ecology > Plants"Atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been remarkably stable over the last 20 or 25 million years despite other changes in the environment," says co-author Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology. "We can look to land plants as the primary buffering agent that's held CO2 in such a narrow range during this time."

The research team, led by Mark Pagani of Yale University, found that the critical role of plants in the chemical breakdown and weathering of rocks and soil gave them a strong influence on carbon dioxide levels. It was a link that earlier studies had missed.

Over geologic time, large volumes of carbon dioxide have been released into the atmosphere by volcanoes. This would cause CO2 to build up in the atmosphere were it not for countervailing geologic processes of sedimentation, which bury carbon-containing minerals in the crust, sequestering it from the atmosphere. The overall rate of sedimentation is controlled by the upthrust of mountains and the erosion and chemical breakdown of their rocks. The rise of the Andes, Himalayas, Tibetan Plateau, and mountain ranges in western North America over the past 25 million years would have been expected to have cause faster weathering and erosion, and therefore a faster burial of carbon drawn from the atmosphere. But the stability of carbon dioxide levels indicate that this didn't happen. Why not?

This is where the plants come in. "The rates of weathering reactions are largely controlled by plants. Their roots secrete acids that dissolve minerals, they hold soils, and they increase the amount of carbon dissolved in groundwater," says Caldeira. "But when levels of carbon dioxide get too low, the plants basically suffocate and the weathering slows down. That means less sediment is eroded from the uplands and less carbon can be buried. It's a negative feedback on the system that has kept carbon dioxide levels from dropping too low."

Extremely low carbon dioxide levels would have reduced the atmosphere's ability to retain heat, putting the planet into a deep freeze. "So you could say that by limiting the drawdown of CO2 by chemical weathering and sedimentation, plants saved the planet from freezing over," says Caldeira.

Could plants save us from rising carbon dioxide from human emissions and harmful greenhouse warming? No, says Caldeira. "We are releasing CO2 to the atmosphere about 100 times faster than all the volcanoes in the world put together. While these weathering processes will eventually remove the CO2 we are adding to the atmosphere, they act too slowly to help us avoid dangerous climate change. It will take hundreds of thousands of years for these rock weathering processes to remove our fossil fuel emissions from the atmosphere."

The Carnegie Institution (www.CIW.edu) has been a pioneering force in basic scientific research since 1902. It is a private, nonprofit organization with six research departments throughout the U.S. Carnegie scientists are leaders in plant biology, developmental biology, astronomy, materials science, global ecology, and Earth and planetary science. The Department of Global Ecology, located in Stanford, California, was established in 2002 to help build the scientific foundations for a sustainable future. Its scientists conduct basic research on a wide range of large-scale environmental issues, including climate change, ocean acidification, biological invasions, and changes in biodiversity.

Ken Caldeira | Source: EurekAlert!
Further information: Carnegie Institution for Science

Ekka · 7th December 2009, 08:56 AM

So the conference begins, Christmas trees banned and a recent email scam will make it interesting.

For those who dont know of the email scam some hackers got into Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Britain and took thousands of emails and documents.

And now serious issues arise regarding the data and even the fact that there is a recent cooling!

Hot and bothered | The Australian

YouTube - Scientists under fire in climate change 'cover-up' scandal

You know, funny the extremes that have to be deployed to get all the facts out .... maybe the hacker is a hero rather than a villan. When a govt spies on others and discovers "issues" that's called "intelligence". When a hacker finds "issues" hidden by "leaders" then I dont see that as crime either.

We've had the industrial boom, technology boom, resources boom etc .... it really appears that global warming is prepping to be the next economic boom, just the regulations are missing to make mountains of cash move around the globe.

You have poorer countries in some cases fighting to cut their forests down rather than preserve them, issues include the compensation for retention is lesser than the value of wood products and alternative crops/mining. Is it fair that industrialized nations which pollute more use under developed nations to offset their emmisions?

No doubt Copenhagen will be an argument, I personally dont see much coming out of it as there's too many fingers in the pie and now with questionable data and eye brows raised the community isn't going to swallow the outcome easily.

Just my 0.02

dov · 7th December 2009, 04:52 PM

One point that people often fail to see in this debate is that it's a Carbon CYCLE. That's right. All of the carbon that is being released into the atmosphere from burning carbon based fuels WAS ONCE TAKEN FROM THE ATMOSPHERE by plants, that formed the coal and oil that we dug up and released into the atmosphere again. Oh no! We're releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere! Well, that's where it came from. Big problem? I don't think so.

You know the logs that got washed away when Mt St Helens erupted? Well a lot of them sank to the bottom of the water there and are now in the process of eventually making more coal...

...and the big wheel keeps on turning.

Well, except for the loony green fringe. It seems common knowledge that younger trees absorb far more CO2 from the atmosphere, so a healthy renewal of forest trees with responsible harvesting of older wood would seem to be wise, but the greentard lobby says we can't and our governments listen to them. In Victoria we now have the problem that some of our oldest forests, like Sherbrooke Forest in the Yarra Ranges, are actually dying because they've been protected from logging and fires for so long, that new trees can't even get a start in life. We could be getting much higher quality timber on the market, building our homes with hardwood instead of this radiata rubbish and helping the environment at the same time! Try getting that through the gangha'd out headspace of the average Greenpeace member. One other thought, do they stop to think of the damage that they're causing with all that weed smoke?

On the other issue of global warming. Well, yes I think that the weather has been changing. Things do seem to be gradually getting warmer, but is this part of a natural cycle? I'd like to repost something that I wrote for another forum here:

"I mistrust anything in the fields of Science where theory is so strongly held onto that conflicting data and skeptics both are just gunned down. I have no real doubt that the climate is changing to some degree. How big the cycle, if there is one, could be and how far things will swing, well these are the important questions that the general climate change lobby and scientist clique are not answering sufficiently because intelligent debate has been willfully stifled. The millennium project in Europe (trying to map climate change over the last thousand years across Europe) is one project worth watching."

The website for that project is http://millenniumproject.net/

dov · 7th December 2009, 05:13 PM

For those who can't be bothered reading the whole lot, a synopsis of my last post...

Relax. Plant a tree in the backyard. Think about one in the front. Have a nice day.

Done it · 7th December 2009, 09:47 PM

I've said before I'm sick of it, but have a go at this.

Ukraine's `hot air' bedevils global climate deal: Associated Press Business News - MSN Money

Countries or companies that cannot meet commitments to reduce emissions can buy these "allowances" from those that have cut emissions more than required and have a surplus to sell. Point Carbon, a Norwegian-based consulting firm, estimates 9 billion allowances are available, mostly in Russia.

Earlier this year, each one-ton allowance sold for $10 when Ukraine signed a $300 million deal with Japan. The Kiev government has almost 1 billion more tons to put on the market, said Irina Stavchuk of the National Ecological Center of Ukraine.

Ekka · 9th December 2009, 10:11 AM

LOL, the hypocrisy and irony of it all.

So maybe there'll be a huge credit for BHP pulling out of Newcastle?

Selling credits for something that doesn't exist, interesting.

Told you it was the new boom.

The real facts are ....

1/ Will there be an increase of global vegetation?
2/ Will there be a decrease of CO2 emmissions?

Selling credits from a shut down factory is bullshit.

I wonder what the CO2 footprint is for running the farce? And what about all those bums on chairs at Copenhagen, most flew there.

I saw a large sign on the side of a Europcar hire pantec truck, it wrote "we plant 17 trees for each vehicle added to our fleet".

Big deal, that wouldn't even cover the emissions for 1 tyre let alone the total CO2 footprint of that vehicle from design through to destruction, and the very process of growing, transporting and planting that tree likely has a negative CO2 footprint in the beginning too.

Whole thing is a

Ekka · 12th December 2009, 10:21 AM

And already the tossing and tugging of not only body parts but economics has upset Australia's minsiter Wong.

Draft climate deal not enough - Wong | News.com.au

So India and China will get a lenient requirement as they have yet to "develop". But they wont have to verify their data anyway.

Imagine that, the people who put poison in milk and clothes etc will give honest emmision numbers.

If you believe that then you are

Quote:

The draft deal sets out relatively tough conditions for rich countries like Australia.

They would have to cut emissions by at least 25 per cent by 2020, and by at least 75 per cent by 2050.

But developing countries including China, which is the world's largest emitter, would only have to cut emissions if they were directly paid to do so.

Their emissions could still go up, but by 15 to 20 per cent less than business-as-usual over the next decade.

Developing countries would not have to let international observers verify their emissions data.

Developed countries would have to let the observers in.

The deal doesn't make it clear if developing countries would have to take on binding promises on emissions.

And this is why I cant see a result, or if there is one it will be highly contested.

Ekka · 14th December 2009, 09:29 PM

Things looking gloomy now, and expect factions to arise as countries unite with like minded and form pacts, united they'll disagree with a lot more.

I reckon they should hire Tiger Woods, he can play many fields at the same time .... for a while atleast.

jmcg.insight.gardens · 14th December 2009, 11:37 PM

I doubt that they will accomplish anything worthwhile at Copenhagen this year, what with the mass walk out of the poorer countries and everyone blaming everyone else.

Seems like the same bullshit as always.

Warming it is.

Whatever the ultimate cause of 'climate change'

Well I,m not going to get depressed,oh no,

I'm going to live my life the way I always do

Ekka · 15th December 2009, 07:01 AM

Fresh in, seems there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.

Quote:

Citizens Electoral Council of Australia

Media Release 14th of December 2009

Craig Isherwood‚ National Secretary

PO Box 376‚ COBURG‚ VIC 3058
Phone: 03 9354 0544 Fax: 03 9354 0166
Email: cec@cecaust.com.au
Website: Citizens?Electoral?Council?of?Australia

British admit: Copenhagen intends genocide, World Government

The official British two-pronged policy for the Copenhagen Conference is now out‚ in explicit language. It consists of: 1) massive population genocide‚ on a scale that would make Adolf Hitler blush‚ and 2) the establishment of a world government with policing powers to cap carbon emissions‚ to tax every advanced sector nation to the extent of two per cent of GDP per year‚ and to impose a global levy on all global financial transactions‚ among other draconian provisions.

Regarding the genocide‚ the Fabian Society’s London School of Economics‚ the anchor of the Fabian Gordon Brown government (the chief organiser of the Copenhagen Conference)‚ has produced a study for Copenhagen‚ released
by the British government-backed Optimum Population Trust (OPT)‚ calling for the reduction of world population by between three to five billion people between now and 2050. This flagrant call for mass extermination is based on the argument that the single greatest cause of (non-existent) global warming is overpopulation‚ and that the most “cost-effective” cure for global warming is radical population reduction. This is not just the “opinion” of one way-out nutty group: The Copenhagen conference is itself being sponsored by the U.N.‚ and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) tapped the OPT’s director‚ Roger Martin‚ to present the UNFPA’s own “State of World Population 2009” report on 16th November‚ in the lead-up to Copenhagen.

Former Thatcher government adviser Lord Christopher Monckton blew the whistle on the proposed World Government on the Alex Jones radio show on 9th December. Monckton‚ who is in Copenhagen attending the UN climate summit‚ said that
when he attempted to obtain a copy of the 180-page current draft of the negotiating text agreement‚ he was initially rebuffed before he threatened an international diplomatic incident unless the document was forthcoming. “I insisted‚ and it took about 10 minutes and they consulted each other with three or four of them arguing over it—none of them would produce the document … I said I know this treaty exists because this is what the conference is all about‚” said Monckton.

Monckton went on to elaborate precisely how the 180-page treaty draft would establish a world government‚ replete with around 700 separate bureaucracies‚ and powers of taxation‚ inspection and enforcement over individual nation-states. Developed nations‚ for instance‚ will be taxed to pay the World Bank to fund developing nations‚ but such funds will only be forthcoming for those developing nations if they meet stringent criteria. The treaty also outlines‚ said Monckton‚ “penalties or fines for non-compliance”‚ in developed countries‚ and the creation of an international police force to “enforce its will by imposing unlimited financial penalties on any countries whose performance under this treaty they don’t like”‚ adding that that it amounted to a total global government takeover on an “unimaginable scale”.

Briefed on Monckton’s findings‚ American statesman and physical economist Lyndon LaRouche charged‚ “What this 180-page document represents is a policy worse than Hitler‚ which is the policy behind the Copenhagen summit. And the people who are proposing this‚ therefore‚ are subject to trial for genocide. Anybody who proposes this‚ becomes subject to a subsequent trial for genocide‚ by a future Nuremberg proceeding. Beware! Do not propose this; you may be subject to a future Nuremberg proceeding!”

LaRouche further called on China and India‚ who are coming under excruciating pressure to capitulate‚ to stick to their positions going into Copenhagen and to walk out if faced with mandatory emissions restrictions: “Stick to what they agreed to; stick to it! Don’t worry about the differences; stick to it! Screw this thing up! Destroy it now‚ and get rid of it!

“The issue here is that some governments are in a sense ducking the issue‚ pretending to accept conditions which they intend to defy in fact. But the point is‚ then they will become targets for destruction on that basis. It’s better to defy than to try to evade. Defiance promotes unity; compromise promotes destruction.”

jmcg.insight.gardens · 15th December 2009, 09:49 PM

Thanks Eric,

Quote:

Fresh in, seems there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.

I had a gut feeling.

Yes, I muck around and jest at times, it's to alleviate the sense of despair.

I'll have to go away to read the PDF and digest it.

Keep us posted

Julie

Ekka · 15th December 2009, 10:09 PM

Dont forget it's politics too.

Like they all BS and lay down the slant they perceive and try to get the voters to believe it.

I was just born too critical and cynical eh.

stirmantrees · 16th December 2009, 01:16 PM

massive government control

no thanks.

jmcg.insight.gardens · 16th December 2009, 10:37 PM

yes, I know it's all about political control, the lies don't wash with me.

I was raised to be cynical, my father was from Belfast. He was an extremely intelligent (genius IQ) and astute man who taught me about the ways of the World Bank etc at a young age.

It won,t be long and there will be so many ways of paying the government for 'alleviating' climate change and we'll be the ones paying it.

It,s already started, an increase of up to 62% in electricity rates, with the minimum rise being Integral at 44%. I have reason to believe there's another one after that.

All this to pay for infrastructure for I believe future population growth.

The bullshit and heiferdust will continue, ultimately they can't con all of us, but we'll be roped in anyway.

Quote:

massive government control
no thanks.

thats funny,

we are already under massive government control

this is the bit that really got to me with the little bit of reading done last night

Quote:

Alternative to paragraph 10:
[In the face of the grave challenge of harmonizing sustainable development with mitigation of climate
change, all the Parties are in need of a paradigm shift towards low carbon development. However, there
still is no model for low carbon paradigm shift. As mitigation is a result of paradigm shift towards low
carbon development, a concrete roadmap for low carbon development, especially for developing country
Parties, is urgently needed.]

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,15/Sept/2009

How long have they known about this? This has already been discussed in this thread, and covered eloquently.

So where have they had their heads. I know what my father would have said. They have had their heads up their ......!!!

Julie

dov · 17th December 2009, 10:09 AM

You know how young, growing trees absorb far more carbon that older, mature trees? Well at last we seem to have some sort of agreement coming out of Copenhagen and as per usual it's loony-green badly thought out trash.

Copenhagen Forest Deal

It just doesn't make sense. Log older growth forests, replant with young trees. Win+win=win. Good wood for industry to use, renewed, younger forests mopping up the carbon in the atmosphere and more jobs in the logging industries. With the extra wood and pulp we could go back to things like paper shopping bags (and other products) instead of this plastic muck. Biodegradable and safe. Makes bloody good sense, which is why it probably won't get any votes from the drugged out hippies who seem to have everyone's ears these days. Bloody lunacy.

I think in a lot of ways we had a more sustainable forestry policy in the 50's than we do now.

Ekka · 17th December 2009, 10:46 AM

Lordy, told you so!

Paying 3rd world countries to not progress and keep their forests whilst the polluter continues on it's merry way, increasing profits and share prices woohoo.

Quote:

Australia has signed up to a deal to protect forests in neighbouring countries - one of the first agreements reached at the ailing Copenhagen summit.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced Australia would provide $A120 million over three years for the $US3.5 billion ($A3.9 billion) fund.

The money will be used from next year to protect forests in countries like Indonesia and Papua New Guinean from being logged, to save greenhouse gas emissions.

Now hows this ....

Quote:

Some African nations have proposed a solution to the row over long-term financing for poor countries, suggesting $US50 billion ($A55 billion) a year by 2015 and $US100 billion ($A110.5 billion) by 2020.

Mr Rudd said the proposal, made by Ethiopia, was constructive but he wouldn't necessarily sign up to all the elements of it.

Just moving the money around the globe based on what?

I would almost say that this global warming stuff is the panacea of financial woes for 3rd world countries. No more having to donate money. And of course the govts of these 3rd world nations are trustworthy and wont waste money on arms or coups.

Biggest load of BS I have seen, what about giving those 3rd world countries the industry so they pollute their share and the vacant factory in say Detroit become a park of trees with homeless unemployed living in them.

stirmantrees · 17th December 2009, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dov

You know how young, growing trees absorb far more carbon that older, mature trees? Well at last we seem to have some sort of agreement coming out of Copenhagen and as per usual it's loony-green badly thought out trash.

It just doesn't make sense. Log older growth forests, replant with young trees. Win+win=win. Good wood for industry to use, renewed, younger forests mopping up the carbon in the atmosphere and more jobs in the logging industries. With the extra wood and pulp we could go back to things like paper shopping bags (and other products) instead of this plastic muck. Biodegradable and safe. Makes bloody good sense, which is why it probably won't get any votes from the drugged out hippies who seem to have everyone's ears these days. Bloody lunacy.

I think in a lot of ways we had a more sustainable forestry policy in the 50's than we do now.

i feel like cutting a tree down right now. ......and replant a couple trees ofcourse...

why dont all these dumbasses spend all this money they devote to figuring out how to kill innocent people to actually planting trees. like buying the tree, planning, watering, and sticking it in the ground. lord knows how many forest alone could be reforested with the money they spend

on the whole population control issue. kids in my opinion are the best investment i can make to this planet. my children are taught to be stewards and to contribute to this world and society. To help because someone needs help. not for monetary gains and such. the day someone comes in my house to control my population, be it my grandmother or my children, its going to be a serious can of whoopass, ghuns a blazing. I speak for alot of yankees on this one. if i wanted all that i might as well move to china. the united nations is one of the most corrupt organizations on the planet.
in china ofcourse i will not be able to be on tree world anymore without illegally searching the international web.

Bob Tooley · 19th December 2009, 08:37 AM

I don't believe the 'arrogance-of-man' is ever going to let him recognize the very minor role he plays in the creation, or in the destruction of the ecological changes that occur in ' world evolution', and geological events and time.
These global changes aren't anything new, except to "us" and now it's being considered an 'inconveniece' to our way of life...therefor "destructive"...
I'm not sure that all of nature feels the same way...but then, 'who the hell cares what's best for nature'...let alone necessary global evolution.
I'm glad man wasn't around when the dinosaurs roamed the earth... or we'd be doing extra tree work today to reduce the dinosaur feeding damage...

stirmantrees · 19th December 2009, 08:58 AM

i suppose we would need to propose dinosour population management (dpm).
Or possible sanctions for illegal topping of trees through foraging.
what about dinosour breathing.. we might as well kill em. it will save us from global warming..

Bob Tooley · 19th December 2009, 09:17 AM

We are more like fleas on a dog's back... we may bother him slightly, but we're not controlling the whole dog simply because we're there...
One thing to look at is the money this 'photo-op' is getting for doing all this research, and notice that the bottom line is strictly financially oriented... nothing else.
The governments are going to try to 'buy' thier way out of the problem, but it's your dollars going from one pocket into the next and we're 'still' going to have the problem... if that's the way people see 'evolution'...

Ekka · 19th December 2009, 11:20 AM

Well this is interestig, whilst no emission targets have been set etc there is some agreement to keep temperatur rises below 2C.

I must be dumb though because the steps to attaining that have all been booted, but we agree on the goal just nothing else.

So how is the world going to achieve the goal?

Ah, who cares, my election term is over soon anyway.

Climate deal 'unprecedented breakthrough': Obama

The agreement foresees US contributions of $US3.6 billion ($A4.06 billion) in climate funds for the 2010-2012 period, while Japan would contribute $US11 billion ($A12.41 billion) and the European Union $US10.6 billion ($A11.95 billion).

Quote:

It also includes a commitment to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius - well short of the demands of island nations.

But a decision on targets for reducing carbon emissions by 2020 was put off until next month, a European diplomat said.

And unlike earlier drafts, the new accord did not specify any year for emissions to peak.

dov · 19th December 2009, 11:32 AM

Ah. They decided on the political announcement that China spoke about. Well, probably best in the long run!

stjawa · 19th December 2009, 11:07 PM

Just came in after a very long day and for a bit of entertainment logged in on the official "Copenhagen Climate Change Conference" site.How much media and political spin bullcrap can you take.After 12 days,millions of dollars they have come to a "meaningful agreement".Plus plenty of those other well used spin,"strong foundation" ,"working together in the future".The most popular one at this conference seams to be "transparency".

TRANSPARENCY MY ARSE!!!

What I really like about this thread is we can talk about BOTH sides of a subject with intelligent,and thought full input.I have copped a lot of crap and downright disbelief from friends and family to question the climate change theories.It seems the media/government spin and brainwashing is working.

A good example of the brainwashing came to light recently when I was having a discussion with a few mates about our local surf break.The general consensus among them, was the wave had changed shape over the last 20years and it must be due to global warming.I pointed out to them that the reef the wave broke on was not static,it constantly changed from erosion due to wave action etc as it probably had over thousands of years therefore constantly changing the shape of the wave.No I was wrong it was global warming.

Even at work we are constantly being asked is it due to global warming.

The mulch looks slightly different to the last load you delivered last month is it due to global warming?I am not making this up some one did ask me this.Another story my consulting arborist told me was when he went to look at a macrocarpa cypress.After explaining in detail to the client why the tree needed to be removed due to 70% of the roots being removed after an extreme excavation around it, the client said is it dead because of global warming.

What about those dinosaurs?How much methane would they have pumped out.That meteor theory of extinction could be all wrong it might of been GLOBAL WARMING.

Bob Tooley · 20th December 2009, 01:23 AM

One of my hobbies is in fossils and geology, and there are a few things which become apparent from those studies.
The earth is 4.5 billion years old and it has gone through numerous changes since it's conception... and reality dictates... it will go through numerous additional changes in the future. Fossil studies have proven a species goes extinct due to senility, the inability to adjust to changes, or cope with the effects of those changes.
What part of.... ''''the world isn't going to stop changing'''' do these 'senile' people not understand ?

"Normal" is a term used to distinguish or define a new unknown condition when compared to a former known status'.... Problem is... 'future' changes don't conform to or align with 'past' known factors......... There are no models to follow when predicting what will happen when all you have to compare it to is what has happened before.....

12th July 2009, 07:02 PM	#62
Ekka Admin - Dip Arb & Hort & Seldom Wrong Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 9,785	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? That's about as funny as the Bible being the worlds most sold book eh. __________________ TAS Training & Assessment Services\| Arb and Hort Training available here Free Online Tree Value Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online TPZ and SRZ AS4970-2009 Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online Tree Surface Area and Tree Volume Calculator by TreeWorld Free Tree and Green Industry Deep Link Directory ... Yes, I also SEO (Optimize) and build websites that fly high in Google Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist, Tree and Arborist Reports \| Project Arborist

12th July 2009, 07:43 PM	#63
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 2,155	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? I don't think he liked it __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran http://wanderingarborist.blogspot.com/ http://veterantreegroup.blogspot.com/ http://www.youtube.com/user/VeteranTreeGroup

13th July 2009, 01:29 AM	#65
Sean Freeman PDF King & Arborist Extrodinaire Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Townsville Nth Queensland & Gold Coast Sth Queensland Posts: 2,155	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? __________________ Sean Trees are poems that earth writes upon the sky, We fell them down and turn them into paper, That we may record our emptiness. - Kahlil Gibran http://wanderingarborist.blogspot.com/ http://veterantreegroup.blogspot.com/ http://www.youtube.com/user/VeteranTreeGroup

20th September 2009, 09:56 PM	#67
Done it Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Parramatta. nsw. Australia. Posts: 631	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? That's interesting, I read this a few weeks ago. Plants put limit on ice ages Plants put limit on ice ages next article 03.07.2009 When glaciers advanced over much of the Earth's surface during the last ice age, what kept the planet from freezing over entirely? This has been a puzzle to climate scientists because leading models have indicated that over the past 24 million years geological conditions should have caused carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere to plummet, possibly leading to runaway "icehouse" conditions. Now researchers writing in the July 2, 2009, Nature report on the missing piece of the puzzle – plants. ...more about: > carbon dioxide > carbon dioxide levels > Carnegie > CO2 > CO2 concentration > Ecology > fossil fuel emission > Global Ecology > Plants"Atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been remarkably stable over the last 20 or 25 million years despite other changes in the environment," says co-author Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology. "We can look to land plants as the primary buffering agent that's held CO2 in such a narrow range during this time." The research team, led by Mark Pagani of Yale University, found that the critical role of plants in the chemical breakdown and weathering of rocks and soil gave them a strong influence on carbon dioxide levels. It was a link that earlier studies had missed. Over geologic time, large volumes of carbon dioxide have been released into the atmosphere by volcanoes. This would cause CO2 to build up in the atmosphere were it not for countervailing geologic processes of sedimentation, which bury carbon-containing minerals in the crust, sequestering it from the atmosphere. The overall rate of sedimentation is controlled by the upthrust of mountains and the erosion and chemical breakdown of their rocks. The rise of the Andes, Himalayas, Tibetan Plateau, and mountain ranges in western North America over the past 25 million years would have been expected to have cause faster weathering and erosion, and therefore a faster burial of carbon drawn from the atmosphere. But the stability of carbon dioxide levels indicate that this didn't happen. Why not? This is where the plants come in. "The rates of weathering reactions are largely controlled by plants. Their roots secrete acids that dissolve minerals, they hold soils, and they increase the amount of carbon dissolved in groundwater," says Caldeira. "But when levels of carbon dioxide get too low, the plants basically suffocate and the weathering slows down. That means less sediment is eroded from the uplands and less carbon can be buried. It's a negative feedback on the system that has kept carbon dioxide levels from dropping too low." Extremely low carbon dioxide levels would have reduced the atmosphere's ability to retain heat, putting the planet into a deep freeze. "So you could say that by limiting the drawdown of CO2 by chemical weathering and sedimentation, plants saved the planet from freezing over," says Caldeira. Could plants save us from rising carbon dioxide from human emissions and harmful greenhouse warming? No, says Caldeira. "We are releasing CO2 to the atmosphere about 100 times faster than all the volcanoes in the world put together. While these weathering processes will eventually remove the CO2 we are adding to the atmosphere, they act too slowly to help us avoid dangerous climate change. It will take hundreds of thousands of years for these rock weathering processes to remove our fossil fuel emissions from the atmosphere." The Carnegie Institution (www.CIW.edu) has been a pioneering force in basic scientific research since 1902. It is a private, nonprofit organization with six research departments throughout the U.S. Carnegie scientists are leaders in plant biology, developmental biology, astronomy, materials science, global ecology, and Earth and planetary science. The Department of Global Ecology, located in Stanford, California, was established in 2002 to help build the scientific foundations for a sustainable future. Its scientists conduct basic research on a wide range of large-scale environmental issues, including climate change, ocean acidification, biological invasions, and changes in biodiversity. Ken Caldeira \| Source: EurekAlert! Further information: Carnegie Institution for Science

7th December 2009, 08:56 AM	#68
Ekka Admin - Dip Arb & Hort & Seldom Wrong Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 9,785	Dec 7 to Dec 18 Copenhagen So the conference begins, Christmas trees banned and a recent email scam will make it interesting. For those who dont know of the email scam some hackers got into Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Britain and took thousands of emails and documents. And now serious issues arise regarding the data and even the fact that there is a recent cooling! Hot and bothered \| The Australian YouTube - Scientists under fire in climate change 'cover-up' scandal You know, funny the extremes that have to be deployed to get all the facts out .... maybe the hacker is a hero rather than a villan. When a govt spies on others and discovers "issues" that's called "intelligence". When a hacker finds "issues" hidden by "leaders" then I dont see that as crime either. We've had the industrial boom, technology boom, resources boom etc .... it really appears that global warming is prepping to be the next economic boom, just the regulations are missing to make mountains of cash move around the globe. You have poorer countries in some cases fighting to cut their forests down rather than preserve them, issues include the compensation for retention is lesser than the value of wood products and alternative crops/mining. Is it fair that industrialized nations which pollute more use under developed nations to offset their emmisions? No doubt Copenhagen will be an argument, I personally dont see much coming out of it as there's too many fingers in the pie and now with questionable data and eye brows raised the community isn't going to swallow the outcome easily. Just my 0.02 __________________ TAS Training & Assessment Services\| Arb and Hort Training available here Free Online Tree Value Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online TPZ and SRZ AS4970-2009 Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online Tree Surface Area and Tree Volume Calculator by TreeWorld Free Tree and Green Industry Deep Link Directory ... Yes, I also SEO (Optimize) and build websites that fly high in Google Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist, Tree and Arborist Reports \| Project Arborist

7th December 2009, 04:52 PM	#69
dov Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 141	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? One point that people often fail to see in this debate is that it's a Carbon CYCLE. That's right. All of the carbon that is being released into the atmosphere from burning carbon based fuels WAS ONCE TAKEN FROM THE ATMOSPHERE by plants, that formed the coal and oil that we dug up and released into the atmosphere again. Oh no! We're releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere! Well, that's where it came from. Big problem? I don't think so. You know the logs that got washed away when Mt St Helens erupted? Well a lot of them sank to the bottom of the water there and are now in the process of eventually making more coal... ...and the big wheel keeps on turning. Well, except for the loony green fringe. It seems common knowledge that younger trees absorb far more CO2 from the atmosphere, so a healthy renewal of forest trees with responsible harvesting of older wood would seem to be wise, but the greentard lobby says we can't and our governments listen to them. In Victoria we now have the problem that some of our oldest forests, like Sherbrooke Forest in the Yarra Ranges, are actually dying because they've been protected from logging and fires for so long, that new trees can't even get a start in life. We could be getting much higher quality timber on the market, building our homes with hardwood instead of this radiata rubbish and helping the environment at the same time! Try getting that through the gangha'd out headspace of the average Greenpeace member. One other thought, do they stop to think of the damage that they're causing with all that weed smoke? On the other issue of global warming. Well, yes I think that the weather has been changing. Things do seem to be gradually getting warmer, but is this part of a natural cycle? I'd like to repost something that I wrote for another forum here: "I mistrust anything in the fields of Science where theory is so strongly held onto that conflicting data and skeptics both are just gunned down. I have no real doubt that the climate is changing to some degree. How big the cycle, if there is one, could be and how far things will swing, well these are the important questions that the general climate change lobby and scientist clique are not answering sufficiently because intelligent debate has been willfully stifled. The millennium project in Europe (trying to map climate change over the last thousand years across Europe) is one project worth watching." The website for that project is http://millenniumproject.net/

7th December 2009, 05:13 PM	#70
dov Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 141	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? For those who can't be bothered reading the whole lot, a synopsis of my last post... Relax. Plant a tree in the backyard. Think about one in the front. Have a nice day.

7th December 2009, 09:47 PM	#71
Done it Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Parramatta. nsw. Australia. Posts: 631	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? I've said before I'm sick of it, but have a go at this. Ukraine's `hot air' bedevils global climate deal: Associated Press Business News - MSN Money Countries or companies that cannot meet commitments to reduce emissions can buy these "allowances" from those that have cut emissions more than required and have a surplus to sell. Point Carbon, a Norwegian-based consulting firm, estimates 9 billion allowances are available, mostly in Russia. Earlier this year, each one-ton allowance sold for $10 when Ukraine signed a $300 million deal with Japan. The Kiev government has almost 1 billion more tons to put on the market, said Irina Stavchuk of the National Ecological Center of Ukraine.

9th December 2009, 10:11 AM	#72
Ekka Admin - Dip Arb & Hort & Seldom Wrong Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 9,785	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? LOL, the hypocrisy and irony of it all. So maybe there'll be a huge credit for BHP pulling out of Newcastle? Selling credits for something that doesn't exist, interesting. Told you it was the new boom. The real facts are .... 1/ Will there be an increase of global vegetation? 2/ Will there be a decrease of CO2 emmissions? Selling credits from a shut down factory is bullshit. I wonder what the CO2 footprint is for running the farce? And what about all those bums on chairs at Copenhagen, most flew there. I saw a large sign on the side of a Europcar hire pantec truck, it wrote "we plant 17 trees for each vehicle added to our fleet". Big deal, that wouldn't even cover the emissions for 1 tyre let alone the total CO2 footprint of that vehicle from design through to destruction, and the very process of growing, transporting and planting that tree likely has a negative CO2 footprint in the beginning too. Whole thing is a __________________ TAS Training & Assessment Services\| Arb and Hort Training available here Free Online Tree Value Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online TPZ and SRZ AS4970-2009 Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online Tree Surface Area and Tree Volume Calculator by TreeWorld Free Tree and Green Industry Deep Link Directory ... Yes, I also SEO (Optimize) and build websites that fly high in Google Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist, Tree and Arborist Reports \| Project Arborist

14th December 2009, 09:29 PM	#74
Ekka Admin - Dip Arb & Hort & Seldom Wrong Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 9,785	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? Things looking gloomy now, and expect factions to arise as countries unite with like minded and form pacts, united they'll disagree with a lot more. I reckon they should hire Tiger Woods, he can play many fields at the same time .... for a while atleast. __________________ TAS Training & Assessment Services\| Arb and Hort Training available here Free Online Tree Value Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online TPZ and SRZ AS4970-2009 Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online Tree Surface Area and Tree Volume Calculator by TreeWorld Free Tree and Green Industry Deep Link Directory ... Yes, I also SEO (Optimize) and build websites that fly high in Google Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist, Tree and Arborist Reports \| Project Arborist

14th December 2009, 11:37 PM	#75
jmcg.insight.gardens Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Mannering Park, Australia Posts: 158	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? I doubt that they will accomplish anything worthwhile at Copenhagen this year, what with the mass walk out of the poorer countries and everyone blaming everyone else. Seems like the same bullshit as always. Warming it is. Whatever the ultimate cause of 'climate change' Well I,m not going to get depressed,oh no, I'm going to live my life the way I always do

15th December 2009, 10:09 PM	#78
Ekka Admin - Dip Arb & Hort & Seldom Wrong Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 9,785	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? Dont forget it's politics too. Like they all BS and lay down the slant they perceive and try to get the voters to believe it. I was just born too critical and cynical eh. __________________ TAS Training & Assessment Services\| Arb and Hort Training available here Free Online Tree Value Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online TPZ and SRZ AS4970-2009 Calculator by TreeWorld Free Online Tree Surface Area and Tree Volume Calculator by TreeWorld Free Tree and Green Industry Deep Link Directory ... Yes, I also SEO (Optimize) and build websites that fly high in Google Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding Brisbane Brisbane - Gold Coast Consulting Arborist, Tree and Arborist Reports \| Project Arborist

16th December 2009, 01:16 PM	#79
stirmantrees Mature tree Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: oviedo, fl Posts: 475	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? massive government control no thanks.

17th December 2009, 10:09 AM	#81
dov Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 141	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? You know how young, growing trees absorb far more carbon that older, mature trees? Well at last we seem to have some sort of agreement coming out of Copenhagen and as per usual it's loony-green badly thought out trash. Copenhagen Forest Deal It just doesn't make sense. Log older growth forests, replant with young trees. Win+win=win. Good wood for industry to use, renewed, younger forests mopping up the carbon in the atmosphere and more jobs in the logging industries. With the extra wood and pulp we could go back to things like paper shopping bags (and other products) instead of this plastic muck. Biodegradable and safe. Makes bloody good sense, which is why it probably won't get any votes from the drugged out hippies who seem to have everyone's ears these days. Bloody lunacy. I think in a lot of ways we had a more sustainable forestry policy in the 50's than we do now.

19th December 2009, 08:37 AM	#84
Bob Tooley Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: May 2009 Location: Scarborough, Maine USA Posts: 128	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? I don't believe the 'arrogance-of-man' is ever going to let him recognize the very minor role he plays in the creation, or in the destruction of the ecological changes that occur in ' world evolution', and geological events and time. These global changes aren't anything new, except to "us" and now it's being considered an 'inconveniece' to our way of life...therefor "destructive"... I'm not sure that all of nature feels the same way...but then, 'who the hell cares what's best for nature'...let alone necessary global evolution. I'm glad man wasn't around when the dinosaurs roamed the earth... or we'd be doing extra tree work today to reduce the dinosaur feeding damage...

19th December 2009, 08:58 AM	#85
stirmantrees Mature tree Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: oviedo, fl Posts: 475	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? i suppose we would need to propose dinosour population management (dpm). Or possible sanctions for illegal topping of trees through foraging. what about dinosour breathing.. we might as well kill em. it will save us from global warming..

19th December 2009, 09:17 AM	#86
Bob Tooley Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: May 2009 Location: Scarborough, Maine USA Posts: 128	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? We are more like fleas on a dog's back... we may bother him slightly, but we're not controlling the whole dog simply because we're there... One thing to look at is the money this 'photo-op' is getting for doing all this research, and notice that the bottom line is strictly financially oriented... nothing else. The governments are going to try to 'buy' thier way out of the problem, but it's your dollars going from one pocket into the next and we're 'still' going to have the problem... if that's the way people see 'evolution'...

19th December 2009, 11:32 AM	#88
dov Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 141	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? Ah. They decided on the political announcement that China spoke about. Well, probably best in the long run!

19th December 2009, 11:07 PM	#89
stjawa Sappling Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Vic, Australia Posts: 31	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? Just came in after a very long day and for a bit of entertainment logged in on the official "Copenhagen Climate Change Conference" site.How much media and political spin bullcrap can you take.After 12 days,millions of dollars they have come to a "meaningful agreement".Plus plenty of those other well used spin,"strong foundation" ,"working together in the future".The most popular one at this conference seams to be "transparency". TRANSPARENCY MY ARSE!!! What I really like about this thread is we can talk about BOTH sides of a subject with intelligent,and thought full input.I have copped a lot of crap and downright disbelief from friends and family to question the climate change theories.It seems the media/government spin and brainwashing is working. A good example of the brainwashing came to light recently when I was having a discussion with a few mates about our local surf break.The general consensus among them, was the wave had changed shape over the last 20years and it must be due to global warming.I pointed out to them that the reef the wave broke on was not static,it constantly changed from erosion due to wave action etc as it probably had over thousands of years therefore constantly changing the shape of the wave.No I was wrong it was global warming. Even at work we are constantly being asked is it due to global warming. The mulch looks slightly different to the last load you delivered last month is it due to global warming?I am not making this up some one did ask me this.Another story my consulting arborist told me was when he went to look at a macrocarpa cypress.After explaining in detail to the client why the tree needed to be removed due to 70% of the roots being removed after an extreme excavation around it, the client said is it dead because of global warming. What about those dinosaurs?How much methane would they have pumped out.That meteor theory of extinction could be all wrong it might of been GLOBAL WARMING.

20th December 2009, 01:23 AM	#90
Bob Tooley Semi-mature vigorous tree Join Date: May 2009 Location: Scarborough, Maine USA Posts: 128	Re: Climate Change \| Global Warming \| BS or not? One of my hobbies is in fossils and geology, and there are a few things which become apparent from those studies. The earth is 4.5 billion years old and it has gone through numerous changes since it's conception... and reality dictates... it will go through numerous additional changes in the future. Fossil studies have proven a species goes extinct due to senility, the inability to adjust to changes, or cope with the effects of those changes. What part of.... ''''the world isn't going to stop changing'''' do these 'senile' people not understand ? "Normal" is a term used to distinguish or define a new unknown condition when compared to a former known status'.... Problem is... 'future' changes don't conform to or align with 'past' known factors......... There are no models to follow when predicting what will happen when all you have to compare it to is what has happened before..... Last edited by Bob Tooley; 20th December 2009 at 01:33 AM. Reason: additional

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Timing belt change	clementine	Non Tree Related chat	20	12th January 2009 12:41 PM
Colder climate diesel tree variant	Grits	Ask an Arborist here	6	20th November 2008 03:58 PM
Altering climate affecting your pruning?	blair duncanson	General Tree Chat	22	18th April 2008 05:08 AM
Global Warming	OsAGe85	Non Tree Related chat	11	12th August 2007 12:44 PM