The FACT is that global temperatures are at level significantly different to what they were in the past and the rate of temperature change post-industrialization has been significantly different from what would have occurred in natural course. I'm not in any way advocating that we jump to conclusions, but the study of global warming is far from that.

^^^^^

what a stupid statement,... unless we have a control "planet earth" to compare to there is no way to kow what climate change would do without industrialisation.
Also, it is only really since industrialisation that we have been monitoring the climate anyway.

Until the "scientists" can accurately predict the weather, the movement of the tectonic plates, and stop the universe from expanding, there is no way I will believe they have ALL the facts on climate change.

The carbon we're all so worried about releasing into the atmosphere came out of the atmosphere in the first place and once released will create more fertile areas for the growth of vegetation, thus food - mother nature is just balancing what mankind is doing by clearing rainforests !!

Good to see there are some people around here who can think for themselves and not blindly accept what the so called experts are telling us.

Experts or not the are still only human and human nature being what it is, all of us feather our own nests first.

My needs are few so I have been able to feather my nest to my required level of comfort quite easily.

Ninety or more percent of scientists are taxpayer funded so these silver tails just come up with the results their political masters want regardless of truth or fact.

The pollies give them the answers they want and then they work the "Science" backwards, rather than starting with the facts and working the science forward for the betterment of mankind and not their lousy selves.

busterwa said...

original....

Australia's wealth and sovereign rights may soon be signed away, so why hasn't the public at least been informed?

0.7% of GDP ... I didn't see anyone whinging when 4.6% of GDP was thrown out in handouts? The interest we'll pay on the resultant debt will probably be close to 0.3% of GDP per year anyway.

That's your money, folks. Billions to be sent to Third World governments and authoritarian regimes to allegedly deal with a warming that actually halted in 2001.

So if its colder than average tomorrow... well then global warming is disproved? Global warming never said it couldn't get colder. False inference.

Never have the Third World's demands for the First World's cash been so brazen.

You realise the fines would apply to them as well. You also realise that 'greener' infrastructure is expensive? Third world countries aren't going to do what we want them to based on goodwill, a stable climate is a luxury they cannot afford themselves.

All this gives a remote and unelected world body a huge and unprecedented say in how we run our own economy and our foreign affairs. For instance, any Australian government that decided to keep gassy coal-fired power stations running to avoid blackouts or to save Australian jobs potentially faces huge fines from foreigners.

Saving jobs in the long term would justify having millions of people painting rocks different colours being supported by those actually contributing to society.

But no. UN bodies are already notoriously hard for any one nation to supervise or restrain.

How is that even a negative? You just criticized Cuba and Libya because they are dictatorships.

And with this new global warming body, the vote of the paying West will be overruled even more decisively by the spending rest.

Hey wait... where's the parallel... oh Australia?

Now ask: why hasn't this been the subject of furious debate? Where's the Government? Where's the Opposition?

Because something needs to be done... both parties see that.

Not our politicians, for sure.
So if you oppose this surrender of our billions and our freedom, better start saying so now, before it's all too late.

Our freedom? To do what? Pollute at 0 cost? To cause harm to others without any kind of compensation or consideration of future generation's well being?

On a broader level this 'freedom' to choose creates a situation in which choices made individually do not represent an efficient collective decision, unless you assume altruism then restricting this 'freedom' is the only way to go.

I couldn't possibly conceive what an ideal world would be, it is a concept far too profound for me to be able to say what is right and wrong with respect to everything. But that doesn't mean I'm running blind either...

I do know the only way we'll ever get closer is by correcting the imperfections that we know exist today... step by step I guess.

Am I a eugenicist if I think people with debilitating heredity genetic disorders shouldn't reproduce? How is this relevant?

By the way I'm not saying that this new scheme is going to work - it really depends on how many concessions are given to polluters and to what extent contracts are enforceable, but at least it looks like the developed nations are taking the lead - as they should.

Mobydisc said...

Rudd, he can't wait to introduce a new tax that will have negilable to no effect on the global climate, while slugging struggling families, individuals and businesses with a tax on life.

Geez... we have it so tough here in Australia... who'd have known.

Who's fault is it that some families live beyond their already inflated (re: socialism) means?

any thoughts on when the NWO are going to achieve there goal of a one world government.

this centralization of power is so obvious especially through the control/poisoning of the food + water. research codex to see how in the not too distant future they want to take absolute control of this.

they already have major control of food + water already. under Codex all the seeds will be Genetically modified.

jfk said it beautifully[10 days before they knocked him off] when he said... for we are opposed around the world by a ruthless + monolithic conspiracy that relies primarlarily on covet means for expanding its sphere of infuence.he went on to say it is a system that has conscripted military, economic,diplomatic and wait for it political operations.

there you have it from the horses mouth, it is a system that has conscripted political operations.

petermac33 said...
jfk said it beautifully[10 days before they knocked him off] when he said... for we are opposed around the world by a ruthless + monolithic conspiracy that relies primarlarily on covet means for expanding its sphere of infuence.he went on to say it is a system that has conscripted military, economic,diplomatic and wait for it political operations.

Have you ever listened to the whole speech and not just excerpts? It makes fun and interesting reading.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Speeches/JFK/003POF03NewspaperPublishers04271961.htm

It's actually an address by JFK to the Press Association, he's asking them to stop telling the Soviets what's going on in the USA.
My favourite line ;

"On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did.
It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one's golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man."

petermac33 said...

any thoughts on when the NWO are going to achieve there goal of a one world government.

this centralization of power is so obvious especially through the control/poisoning of the food + water. research codex to see how in the not too distant future they want to take absolute control of this.

they already have major control of food + water already. under Codex all the seeds will be Genetically modified.

jfk said it beautifully[10 days before they knocked him off] when he said... for we are opposed around the world by a ruthless + monolithic conspiracy that relies primarlarily on covet means for expanding its sphere of infuence.he went on to say it is a system that has conscripted military, economic,diplomatic and wait for it political operations.

there you have it from the horses mouth, it is a system that has conscripted political operations.

So I don't get it... Are you trolling? Or do you believe what you write?

^^^I don't remember reading in the News That Copenhagen would turn Australia into a Dictatorship, I'm sure I'll be just as free next January as I am now. I may have to pay slightly higher taxes, or more for electricity, but maybe that will teach me to use the resources i have sparingly.

Beersy said...

^^^I don't remember reading in the News That Copenhagen would turn Australia into a Dictatorship, I'm sure I'll be just as free next January as I am now. I may have to pay slightly higher taxes, or more for electricity, but maybe that will teach me to use the resources i have sparingly.

That's a funny thing about secret agendas. They tend not to get published in news papers. However if you go through the posts in this thread you will find a link to an article in the Sun Herald that spells out what Copenhagen is about.

It is only just now that the full implications of signing up to the "Copenhagen Agreement" are coming into the light of day. This is why there is a huge split in the coalition.

Turnbull was/is a merchant banker and I believe was an employee of "The World Bank" (I could be wrong on that), and that is why his opposition to the agreement has only been "token" over the wording of it not the principle of it.

Mobydisc said...What is KRudd, Wong and co proposing? taxes to raise revenue or incentives and penalties to force people to change their behaviour?

...and on the other side...

Change my behaviour to what? Should I stop driving my car? How would I get to work, earn my pay, feed the family? Not use my aircon? Not watch telly or use the computer? Leave the lights off at night? I may as well go live in the third world countries.

To change my behaviour, I need viable alternatives. Where are they?

^^^
This is a guy who believes "the earth is stationary + the sun revolves around the planets"
www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=57463



petermac33
About Me:
44 never taken or wanted,likes all sport,japanese girls esp.likes researching new world order on u/tube.ambitions to stay healthy & fit.

maxm said...

cisco said...I used the example of the hot rod cars to illustrate the hypocracy and how the government bends to the will of large business interests over the "WILL OF THE PEOPLE".

Sorry, cisco, you lost me there. Why would Ford and GM want to push V8 cars? Surely they'd be happy to sell us any kind of car we want, as long as we buy their cars wouldn't they? If the V8s are popular then they'd be happy to make 'em and sell 'em. If little buzz boxes with fuel miserly diesels are popular, they'd be just as happy to sell us those. Have a look at Europe... or ask your local Ford dealer the price of the diesel Fiesta (as I did a week ago) and compare it to the price of the petrol version. That's an expensive little engine!

The speed limit is 100kmh. Why does the government allow cars on the road capable of three times that speed.

Yes, the car companies don't care what they sell us as long as they sell us something at a profit and hang the environment. They are prostitutes.

Ask the Ford and GM dealers in Gladstone, Rockhampton and Mackay where their volume sales are and how well they are doing out of them.

They are struggling to keep up the supply of V8 wank mobiles to the highly paid (and argueably overpaid) coal miners in the Surat and Bowen Basins whose egotistical macho man mentalities require the doubtful satisfaction of these petrol powered phallic extensions because they are socially inept when it comes to intellectual intercourse with feminine persons.

The marketing by the auto companies is pure "ego appeal".

Hey macho man, check out this cool or hot V8. It is so fast your mates will probably fellate you.

Hey enviro man, check out this cool or hot diesel. It goes fast too and at the local expresso bar you will be able to jerk off the girls about how much of a Sensitive New Age Guy you are.

If the government and the auto manufacturers were serious about environmental issues they would stop pumping so many new cars in at the top end.

Consider this. What is the so called "Carbon Footprint" from producing a new automobile today no matter how environmentally friendly it is when in use???

The comparison is the reconditioning of existing chariots and repowering them with newer technology.

Ralph Sarich developed the orbital engine decades ago which was half the weight, twice the horsepower and twice the fuel economy and was relevant to the time.

What happened to it?? It was quashed and archived in the interest of saving the auto makers from retooling and maintaining fuel sales.

Back to the subject of this thread. Rudd's evil plan.

Hooray for Tony Abbott for toppling the teetering turn coat Turnbull and jousting off the jeering Joe Hockey and K.O ing Kevin and his Klan.

No "Copenhagen Con Job" for us. Yahooo!!!!

maxm said...

Mobydisc said...What is KRudd, Wong and co proposing? taxes to raise revenue or incentives and penalties to force people to change their behaviour?

...and on the other side...

Change my behaviour to what? Should I stop driving my car? How would I get to work, earn my pay, feed the family? Not use my aircon? Not watch telly or use the computer? Leave the lights off at night? I may as well go live in the third world countries.

To change my behaviour, I need viable alternatives. Where are they?

It's not so prohibitive, it simply encourages efficiency. Your alternative would be to use less of what you mentioned where you can... if you can, which doesn't necessarily require an alternative.

Though in some cases you are right such as the suggestion of a congestion tax in the Sydney CBD a few months ago... like we're all going to start using the public transport system instead