AFL Overkill

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

All sides have vested interests and display bias in the field of the world's climate. It's very hard for the average person to work out what is fact and what is not fact so most people sit in the middle or don't care.

[SaintPav]

All sides have vested interests and display bias in the field of the world's climate. It's very hard for the average person to work out what is fact and what is not fact so most people sit in the middle or don't care.

Excellent attitude to have in life....if you're an ostrich...

[Dis Believer]

Sorry Pav, but one of the IPCC's own reports clearly outlined that the objective was to move funds from 1st world to 3rd world countries and no change to the climate was going to derive from any actions. The vast amount of predictions I have seen have been attached to the words "disaster", "crisis" and "extreme", and none have come to pass.

We still do not have any demonstrable proof as to the extent of man's influence on climate change, given that CO2 is naturally occurring and something like only 3% or 4% of the CO2 in the atmosphere is from human activity. In fact the computer models on which all this "science" is based, cannot actually even accurately recreate past events, let alone accurately predict future outcomes.

Ironically, the fervour with which "Climate Change" has been adopted by certain groups as their "cause de jour" mimics some of the old school religious fervour in the revivalists tents of a bygone era in the USA.....

Alarmism is exactly what the masses have witnessed for the past two decades or so, with claims of "potential sea level rises of nearly 100 metres within a century", and "drought is the new normal in Australia, Perth will be permanently out of water by 2010". The most amusing was the claim that our eastern seaboard dams would never be full again, less than 12 months before Brisbane's main catchment had to be opened multiple times to prevent it overflowing.....

[The_Dud]

As said above, if it was so easy to drive the scientific narrative with money then I think the TRILLION dollar oil industry would have that all sewn up. The public wouldn’t even know what CO2 was.

And the media only works in alarmism, don’t listen to journos, shock jocks, celebrities or politicians, listen to what the actual science and scientists at the forefront are saying.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

Point is...even if it is 100% true, the majority in the world really don't give a stuff. People aren't going to stop driving cars around, living in big houses, using electricity, catching a jet plane to a holiday spot or give up their smart phones and laptops. Especially the two biggest populations in India and China as more and more new people start getting their hands on these luxuries every day for the first time.

And sorry Mr Pavalova, there is so much misinformation, vested interest, distortion of facts, alarmism and bias on the climate subject that people have switched off from it. The fad has passed.

[SaintPav]

Ignorance is bliss, Ted..

[asiu]

very true

if we believe something
(regardless of its veracity)

that belief confers responsibility

which seems to be the one thing everyones running away from

[SaintPav]

That's a bs argument.

[The_Dud]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

[Dis Believer]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

I don't anyone denies climate, I checked and we definitely have one.....

I think very few deny it is changing.......again, or still.

Some like myself though, demand concrete scientific proof that we can determine to exactly what degree man is influencing the change. To date that is the thing that seems to evade your "97%"......

[The_Dud]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

I don't anyone denies climate, I checked and we definitely have one.....

I think very few deny it is changing.......again, or still.

Some like myself though, demand concrete scientific proof that we can determine to exactly what degree man is influencing the change. To date that is the thing that seems to evade your "97%"......

It’s hard to find proof when you don’t actually want to.

The following are scientific organizations that hold the position that Climate Change has been caused by human action. I’ll take my advice on this subject from them, and you can continue to get yours from the likes of Bolt, Roberts and Abbott.

Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Académie des Sciences, France
Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
Academy of Athens
Academy of Science of Mozambique
Academy of Science of South Africa
Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
African Academy of Sciences
Albanian Academy of Sciences
Amazon Environmental Research Institute
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Anthropological Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Fisheries Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Australian Academy of Science
Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Physics
Australian Marine Sciences Association
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Botanical Society of America
Brazilian Academy of Sciences
British Antarctic Survey
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Canadian Association of Physicists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Geophysical Union
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Society of Soil Science
Canadian Society of Zoologists
Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
Center for International Forestry Research
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Crop Science Society of America
Cuban Academy of Sciences
Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
Ecological Society of America
Ecological Society of Australia
Environmental Protection Agency
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
French Academy of Sciences
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
Georgian Academy of Sciences
German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indian National Science Academy
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
InterAcademy Council
International Alliance of Research Universities
International Arctic Science Committee
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Council for Science
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
International Research Institute for Climate and Society
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Islamic World Academy of Sciences
Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Korean Academy of Science and Technology
Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Latin American Academy of Sciences
Latvian Academy of Sciences
Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts
National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Association of State Foresters
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Council of Engineers Australia
National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
Natural England
Natural Environment Research Council, UK
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Network of African Science Academies
New York Academy of Sciences
Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
Oklahoma Climatological Survey
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Pakistan Academy of Sciences
Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Polish Academy of Sciences
Romanian Academy
Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
Royal Astronomical Society, UK
Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
Royal Irish Academy
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
Royal Society of Canada
Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
Science and Technology, Australia
Science Council of Japan
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Society for Ecological Restoration International
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of American Foresters
Society of Biology (UK)
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Sudanese National Academy of Science
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
The Wildlife Society (international)
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Woods Hole Research Center
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Forestry Congress
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences

[st.byron]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

There’s a lot of value in paradigms that are not based on Western science. Only a rusted on Western science linear cause and effect, “if you can’t see it you can’t measure it” person would fail to see that. Am curious to know if you regard Chinese medicine as ‘alternative’?

GMO farming may be providing access to food sources, but at what cost? What cost to bio-diversity and the environment? Monsanto, the world GMO leader, is about to go under in the next few years from the weight of lawsuits for their unconscionable behaviour with Roundup. Glyphosate is now being found in unborn babies. It’s everywhere.

Just because people don’t follow mainstream science as their god of choice doesn’t make them idiots. In fact, blanket labelling people who consider alternatives says more about your narrow mindedness than it does about the people you label.

[st.byron]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

I don't anyone denies climate, I checked and we definitely have one.....

I think very few deny it is changing.......again, or still.

Some like myself though, demand concrete scientific proof that we can determine to exactly what degree man is influencing the change. To date that is the thing that seems to evade your "97%"......

So what, do nothing until your ‘concrete proof’ becomes apparent?

[SaintPav]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

I don't anyone denies climate, I checked and we definitely have one.....

I think very few deny it is changing.......again, or still.

Some like myself though, demand concrete scientific proof that we can determine to exactly what degree man is influencing the change. To date that is the thing that seems to evade your "97%"......

Hope you’re right but negation does not prove anything. Can you please cite a credible, peer-reviewed study that says that anthropogenic climate change is bogus.

[asiu]

yes

as u said

ignorance is bliss

[The_Dud]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

There’s a lot of value in paradigms that are not based on Western science. Only a rusted on Western science linear cause and effect, “if you can’t see it you can’t measure it” person would fail to see that. Am curious to know if you regard Chinese medicine as ‘alternative’?

GMO farming may be providing access to food sources, but at what cost? What cost to bio-diversity and the environment? Monsanto, the world GMO leader, is about to go under in the next few years from the weight of lawsuits for their unconscionable behaviour with Roundup. Glyphosate is now being found in unborn babies. It’s everywhere.

Just because people don’t follow mainstream science as their god of choice doesn’t make them idiots. In fact, blanket labelling people who consider alternatives says more about your narrow mindedness than it does about the people you label.

I don’t think there is such a thing as ‘Western science’.

There is only one type of medicine, that is medicine (regardless of origin) that has been proven under the scientific method to work. Everything else (alternative medicine, homeopathy, etc) has either not been proven to work, or proven not to work. I don’t know why people fight this idea, the scientific method for this testing is unbiased and heavily scrutinised. Unlike religion, ‘science’ is happy to be proven wrong and change it’s stance.

Every fruit and vegetable you eat has been genetically modified at some stage over time using some method. The method we use now is the best, most accurate and safest we’ve ever had.

Monsanto already doesn’t really exist anymore, as it has been absorbed by Bayer. The court cases regarding roundup were decided by civilians with no science background, and were not based in scientific evidence. Glyphosate is a much safer option than the previous alternatives used.

If people want to throw their money away on stuff that has absolutely no benefit, then that’s their choice. But when people start dying because they don’t have the ability to make an informed choice or have been influenced by some charlatan selling snake oil, that’s when this issue gets deadly serious.

[Dis Believer]

I love the reaction when people don't fall into line with your cult... Yeah, the sheer role call of names impresses me, especially the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Australian Medical Association and the IPCC. I especially loved the IPCC, a political body whose very existence and more importantly,funding, depends upon the existence of man made climate change. Naturally because I don't agree with your position, I must get my info from Bolt or Abbott, because god forbid anyone think for themselves.
Firstly, let me say, science doesn't work on me disproving your hypothesis, in fact it is the diametric opposite - if you have a hypothesis, it remains that, until you conclusively prove your hypothesis to be fact. To date, that has not happened. Yes the climate is changing, as it has through the existence of this planet, but the degree (if any) to which man is influencing the climate still remains a point of conjecture, it has not been proven!! Therefore the ball remains in your court to prove your hypothesis. And consensus or popular vote has no place in science. At one point in history the consensus was that the earth was flat - did consensus make that true!!
Simply being a popular opinion, or one that is fashionable, does not make it fact. If and when a scientist or research facility has a "eureka" moment and has produced a means of proving man's involvement in climate change then I will happily change my position.

Besides sending us back to the stone age, I would be interested to know the effect on the global climate if we stopped all use of fossil fuels in Australia as of midnight tonight? If as of 12:01am tomorrow we could only use renewable energy sources, what would the sum total effect be on the global climate?

[BarryGrogan]

.... if you have a hypothesis, it remains that, until you conclusively prove your hypothesis to be fact. ...

But the scientific method isn't about proving a hypothesis to be fact.

It's about proving what the facts are.

[SaintPav]

Thanks TB. As CO2 in the atmosphere produces a global dimming effect, removing it would mean the earth’s temperature may actually heat up. This is why we are screwed.

Consensus and popular opinion isn't exactly the same as scientific peer review.

[Special]

I’m gradually warming to the idea that man made climate change may be real.

Still not 100% convinced it’s not a natural warming cycle that has occurred on and off for millions of years. I guess our micro climate data only goes back 150 odd years and the earth has been around for millions but anyway....

A lot of Dudley’s List are reliant on government funding so have natural bias in what they say - a lot like AFL media and that biggest apologist Whateley

But I do agree pollution is bad for the air and we should do what we can to limit that.

[st.byron]

It is worrying we are in the age of ‘alternative facts’.

Society has never had this much access to information and what do we end up with? Anti-vax, flat earth, climate denying, anti-gmo, alternative medicine loving idiots.

Not good!

There’s a lot of value in paradigms that are not based on Western science. Only a rusted on Western science linear cause and effect, “if you can’t see it you can’t measure it” person would fail to see that. Am curious to know if you regard Chinese medicine as ‘alternative’?

GMO farming may be providing access to food sources, but at what cost? What cost to bio-diversity and the environment? Monsanto, the world GMO leader, is about to go under in the next few years from the weight of lawsuits for their unconscionable behaviour with Roundup. Glyphosate is now being found in unborn babies. It’s everywhere.

Just because people don’t follow mainstream science as their god of choice doesn’t make them idiots. In fact, blanket labelling people who consider alternatives says more about your narrow mindedness than it does about the people you label.

I don’t think there is such a thing as ‘Western science’.

There is only one type of medicine, that is medicine (regardless of origin) that has been proven under the scientific method to work. Everything else (alternative medicine, homeopathy, etc) has either not been proven to work, or proven not to work. I don’t know why people fight this idea, the scientific method for this testing is unbiased and heavily scrutinised. Unlike religion, ‘science’ is happy to be proven wrong and change it’s stance.

Every fruit and vegetable you eat has been genetically modified at some stage over time using some method. The method we use now is the best, most accurate and safest we’ve ever had.

Monsanto already doesn’t really exist anymore, as it has been absorbed by Bayer. The court cases regarding roundup were decided by civilians with no science background, and were not based in scientific evidence. Glyphosate is a much safer option than the previous alternatives used.

If people want to throw their money away on stuff that has absolutely no benefit, then that’s their choice. But when people start dying because they don’t have the ability to make an informed choice or have been influenced by some charlatan selling snake oil, that’s when this issue gets deadly serious.

Spoken like a true Western science worshipper and you even deny there’s such a thing as western science......ok....only the dominant thinking paradigm in our culture for the past century. Classic that you’re so ingrained in it, that you don’t believe there are any valid alternatives. Very narrow. Don’t have time right now to address all of the things in your post however....... I take it you regard Chinese medicine as unproven and ‘alternative’? When I studied Chinese Medicine my teacher related a story from his teacher of Chinese medicine, who had been practising for 50 years. He asked his teacher, “What do you think of Western medicine”? The teacher answered, “It’s too early to tell”. Western science takes a linear causative approach, which logically leads to breaking down systems into their component parts in an effort to understand them. Other ‘scientific’ paradigms like Chinese medicine for example, look at the whole system and the inter-relatedness of all the parts as the basis of their science. It’s been going for 3000 years and is incredibly refined and complex.

[st.byron]

I’m gradually warming to the idea that man made climate change may be real.

Still not 100% convinced it’s not a natural warming cycle that has occurred on and off for millions of years. I guess our micro climate data only goes back 150 odd years and the earth has been around for millions but anyway....

A lot of Dudley’s List are reliant on government funding so have natural bias in what they say - a lot like AFL media and that biggest apologist Whateley

But I do agree pollution is bad for the air and we should do what we can to limit that.

Have you seen the latest science on the glacier and polar ice melts? What about the reduction in the insect population? Or the fact that the number of animals on the planet has reduced by 25% in something like the last thirty years (would have to look that up to verify it, but it’s something like that).
There is no more time to waste. We are in the midst of a climate emergency.

[takeaway]

I love the reaction when people don't fall into line with your cult... Yeah, the sheer role call of names impresses me, especially the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Australian Medical Association and the IPCC. I especially loved the IPCC, a political body whose very existence and more importantly,funding, depends upon the existence of man made climate change. Naturally because I don't agree with your position, I must get my info from Bolt or Abbott, because god forbid anyone think for themselves.
Firstly, let me say, science doesn't work on me disproving your hypothesis, in fact it is the diametric opposite - if you have a hypothesis, it remains that, until you conclusively prove your hypothesis to be fact. To date, that has not happened. Yes the climate is changing, as it has through the existence of this planet, but the degree (if any) to which man is influencing the climate still remains a point of conjecture, it has not been proven!! Therefore the ball remains in your court to prove your hypothesis. And consensus or popular vote has no place in science. At one point in history the consensus was that the earth was flat - did consensus make that true!!
Simply being a popular opinion, or one that is fashionable, does not make it fact. If and when a scientist or research facility has a "eureka" moment and has produced a means of proving man's involvement in climate change then I will happily change my position.

Besides sending us back to the stone age, I would be interested to know the effect on the global climate if we stopped all use of fossil fuels in Australia as of midnight tonight? If as of 12:01am tomorrow we could only use renewable energy sources, what would the sum total effect be on the global climate?

Cult? Pretty large cult - on average a majority of the world's population. If you are waiting for 100% concrete evidence that man is causing or at least significantly contributing to climate change you won't get it. Does smoking cause cancer? Yes, it does, but we do not have 100% rock solid evidence that it does. We are at the same stage with the science on man made climate change - it is pretty certain. Anyway, the climate is changing, significantly, and coupled with rampant consumerism and plundering of the earth's limited resources, we are severely limiting our future. I think Stephen Hawking's prediction of 100 years left before we need another planet seems a bit over the top, but who am I to know? Brian Cox the same.

Stopping all fossil fuels overnight? Thinking about that, I think I would go for it. Would be absolute chaos, but might be the disastrous shock the world needs, to get into gear. Millions dying, manic development of renewable energies from the pitiful 3% achieved so far, humans rising above themselves under urgent threat of extinction, yes good idea TB. Let's go.

[Dis Believer]

.... if you have a hypothesis, it remains that, until you conclusively prove your hypothesis to be fact. ...

But the scientific method isn't about proving a hypothesis to be fact.

It's about proving what the facts are.

It's about proving what the facts are. Agreed - In order to support or disprove a hypothesis.

When we don't know what the facts are, we form a hypothesis of what the facts are, then design an experiment to prove or disprove that hypothesis - yes?

[BarryGrogan]

.... if you have a hypothesis, it remains that, until you conclusively prove your hypothesis to be fact. ...

But the scientific method isn't about proving a hypothesis to be fact.

It's about proving what the facts are.

It's about proving what the facts are. Agreed - In order to support or disprove a hypothesis.

When we don't know what the facts are, we form a hypothesis of what the facts are, then design an experiment to prove or disprove that hypothesis - yes?

Yes.