Exadios Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Oh yeah, just what struggling American manufacturing needs, another burden.The progression is well underway towards cleaner, more responsible manufacturing worldwide, we are what we are now and the changes should be generational* rather than forced (other than the ones that obviously need forcing of course). *Teach our Children to do better than us. Either we build a workable economy or it will collapse. The path you advocate will lead to that collapse. It is hard to see how a collapse of the economy can benefit the struggling US manufacturer. The truth is that we need to re-engineer our lives and that we are on the brink of a new age of prosperity. It makes me wish that I was a young engineer again - so many opportunities. All this is good news for struggling US manufacturers - and Australian ones if we are smart enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Either we build a workable economy or it will collapse. The path you advocate will lead to that collapse. I have no idea what you are talking about. Which makes 2 of us.. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exadios Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 I have no idea what you are talking about.Which makes 2 of us.. So, exactly how many people have you got in there? Sounds a bit too crowded. Actually, I was not expecting you to understand. You have met my expectations. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Well at least we are entertaining Teckair 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 We are having a warm winter at the moment and you know what the climate change wankers reckon about that. It is warm because we are getting wind off the ocean and not the usual westerlies, is this caused by green house gases? probably not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 The question is what would their Sulfer Dioxide emissions be? The answer is a lot lower than they otherwise would have been. This is why you never hear about Acid Rain anymore. This reduction is a result of the SO_2 cap and trade market. A CO_2 cap and trade market would work in exactly the same way. That is very nice but the thread drift is about climate change and the carbon tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 We have a current alarming temperature increase cycle of about a hundred years cycle, so you can disregard the yearly temperature swings, but if you calculate a moving average for the last 150 years you should see an upward trend. At the same time we are cycling into another ice age in about 15,000 years time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 We have a current alarming temperature increase cycle of about a hundred years cycle, so you can disregard the yearly temperature swings, but if you calculate a moving average for the last 150 years you should see an upward trend.At the same time we are cycling into another ice age in about 15,000 years time. So do you think the carbon tax is a good idea? or is it just another way for the ALP to try to extract money from the so called 'big end of town'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 We were doing very nicely with an education process until the Intergovernmental Panel was infiltrated by extremists who put out false figures, and we were on the right track with for example the Victorian Government's Department of Primary Industries advising fruit growers how to change varieties as the soil progressively dried out in parts of Victoria. We were also on the right track by legislating for lower emissions which hit CO2 production with needle precision, and led to billions of dollars being spent on research in for example motor vehicles, where the people who used them paid for the research over time. But to hit a slab of industry with a blunt tax and then rather cutely suggest they knew who would be affected and give them money was just plain dumb, especially when Australia has so little impact on the big picture. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PA. Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 That is very nice but the thread drift is about climate change and the carbon tax. We have to talk about something while we wait for MH370 to surface. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgmwa Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 We have to talk about something while we wait for MH370 to surface. :) Looks like this may become the longest thread yet! rgmwa 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 But to hit a slab of industry with a blunt tax and then rather cutely suggest they knew who would be affected and give them money was just plain dumb, especially when Australia has so little impact on the big picture. I felt the ALP themselves only did that because the greens forced them to so they could form a government and yet there are people out there who think it was a great idea. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 It was blatantly political; macroeconomics is a very complex subject, but for example government legislation has worked in the emissions area on vehicles (industry generally is badly lagging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exadios Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 That is very nice but the thread drift is about climate change and the carbon tax. The SO_2 cap and trade system is evidence that markets do work in this instance. On the other hand the collapse of the Soviet Union is evidence that 5 year plans do not work, comrade. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rankamateur Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 We are having a warm winter at the moment and you know what the climate change wankers reckon about that. It is warm because we are getting wind off the ocean and not the usual westerlies, is this caused by green house gases? probably not. Those same wankers changed their tune over the last couple years, from "global warming" to "climate change" because they were having trouble justifying the blizzards they were having. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 My neighbour is the scientist who coined the name "Greenhouse Effect" in the 1970's and he was one of the early members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change so the name was around prior to around 2000. Global warming may have been the later name to make it simpler. He was well out of the extremist era, and is a good sounding board when the screaming debates start from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 We are having a warm winter at the moment . That's correct and according to 400,000 years of ice drilling history, we are supposed to be getting hotter. Apparently all those Toyota's we were driving around in 15,000 years ago set it off as it did 130,000 years and 240,000 years and 350,000 years ago ... Look up Vostok deep ice drilling program, there's a couple of others as well, one is at 680,000 years I think. Simply put they drill for cores and measure the atmospheric gases trapped in the ice from that time, notice the cycles ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
octave Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 bexrbetter, firstly can I ask the source of the graph you posted and also do you contend that NASA's graph is incorrect and if so what would be the explanation for that, are they deliberately misleading us or are they shoddy scientists? (as must be nearly all of the worlds scientific organisations) http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 bexrbetter, firstly can I ask the source of the graph you posted and also do you contend that NASA's graph is incorrect and if so what would be the explanation for that, are they deliberately misleading us or are they shoddy scientists? (as must be nearly all of the worlds scientific organisations) Yes, I have stopped beating my wife, I mean no, I haven't stopped beating my wife ... wait, what? I gave you the source. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Llewellyn Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 We are having a warm winter at the moment and you know what the climate change wankers reckon about that. It is warm because we are getting wind off the ocean and not the usual westerlies, is this caused by green house gases? probably not. ...could it be warm because MH370 had a few tons of plutonium in its cargo, and it's reacting and warming the ocean? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guernsey Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 I'm having baked beans for dinner tonight but I planted a tree to offset the emissions. I guess that I am in real trouble.....does anyone have a spare few acres of land they could give me so I can plant thousands of trees.... I just love my baked beans.. Alan the old fart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza 38 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 That's correct and according to 400,000 years of ice drilling history, we are supposed to be getting hotter. Apparently all those Toyota's we were driving around in 15,000 years ago set it off as it did 130,000 years and 240,000 years and 350,000 years ago ...Look up Vostok deep ice drilling program, there's a couple of others as well, one is at 680,000 years I think. Simply put they drill for cores and measure the atmospheric gases trapped in the ice from that time, notice the cycles ... Hang on, that can't be right , my churchy mates told me that the earth is only 6000 years old 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rankamateur Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 yet there are people out there who think it was a great idea. That would be why the Greens had members in the parliament who needed to be kept happy, so they would make up the numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Hang on, that can't be right , my churchy mates told me that the earth is only 6000 years old Look up Bill Nye Vs Ken Ham ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 bexrbetter, firstly can I ask the source of the graph you posted and also do you contend that NASA's graph is incorrect and if so what would be the explanation for that, are they deliberately misleading us or are they shoddy scientists? (as must be nearly all of the worlds scientific organisations) http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence This link is The CSIRO summary as at 2012, and if I'm not mistaken one of the graphs closely correlates the NASA Data you posted. CSIRO do their own analysis and also cross check information from the world's scientists. The key issue for coastal communities is water temperature, and there's a graph on that n the series. There's also a lot of explanatory information http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Climate/Understanding/State-of-the-Climate-2012.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now