Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 ... 23
Send Topic Print
What's the Real truth? (Read 29119 times)
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #195 - Jul 25th, 2011 at 6:53pm
 
First things first....define 'REAL Truth'.....
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #196 - Jul 25th, 2011 at 7:17pm
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Jul 25th, 2011 at 6:53pm:
First things first....define 'REAL Truth'.....


If you wish to raise points, for &/or against certain scenario's, then please do so, I'd rather not "play games"!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
salad in
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5941
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #197 - Jul 25th, 2011 at 7:42pm
 
perceptions_now wrote on Jun 1st, 2011 at 10:23pm:
 

That said, the truth is that the Global Climate is changing, that change is materially affected by human input, as the majority of world scientists agree...

 


Science is not done by a show of hands.
Back to top
 

The ALP, the progressive party, the party of ideas, the workers' friend, is the only Australian political party to roast four young Australians in roof cavities. SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #198 - Jul 25th, 2011 at 8:44pm
 
salad in wrote on Jul 25th, 2011 at 7:42pm:
perceptions_now wrote on Jun 1st, 2011 at 10:23pm:
 

That said, the truth is that the Global Climate is changing, that change is materially affected by human input, as the majority of world scientists agree...

 


Science is not done by a show of hands.


No, science is not a democracy, it does not require a show of hands or a majority, to be either correct or incorrect, but it is usually the majority that hold sway in science, until &/or if, they are shown to be incorrect.

However, in this instance, I agree that the majority's science will be proven correct, in the long run and the question for humanity is -
Do we take whatever mitigating actions are available to us & try to get better outcomes OR do we hope the majority are wrong, which may cost humanity the Earth?  
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #199 - Jul 25th, 2011 at 9:02pm
 
Population issues temper WA economy - Deloitte Access Economics Report


WA'S economic growth will be under intense pressure as a slowing population growth, increased retirement numbers and huge business investment look set to clash, a new report warns.

The quarterly Deloitte Access Economics report, released today, reaffirmed WA as one of the engines – along with Queensland – of the national economy, with almost a quarter of a trillion dollars of investment projects in the state’s pipeline, mainly led by resource operations.

However, the report warns of a volatile period for the state’s economy, as projections for “stellar” economic growth are tempered by a much slower growing population, where migrant numbers have dropped notably since 2009 and baby boomer retirement is about to accelerate sharply.

Deloitte forecasts WA’s total population to grow 2.2 per cent in the 2011 financial year, and for that to dip to 1.9 per cent in 2015-16.

Economic growth is tipped to grow 3.4 per cent in 2010-11 before surging to 6 per cent the following year, and then making its way down to 3.7 per cent in 2015-16.

“So the squeeze on Western Australia’s economy is about to be considerable,” the report says.

Link -
http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/business-old/population-issues-temper-wa-eco...
===============================
Slowing population growth and increased retirement numbers will certainly impact on WA and OZ nationally, but the truth is there will also be the effects of another Global slowdown to contend with, as well!  
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #200 - Jul 25th, 2011 at 10:54pm
 
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #201 - Jul 25th, 2011 at 11:19pm
 
Powerful new physics paper shows how climate modellers treated Earth like a star ignoring night and day temperature differences. Fudged equations exposed.


The Model Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect
http://climaterealists.com/?id=8119
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #202 - Jul 27th, 2011 at 2:23pm
 
Australian dollar hits post-float record high


The Australian dollar has surged to a new record high, after stronger than expected inflation figures raised expectations of a rate hike by the central bank.

The consumer price index (CPI) rose 0.9 per cent in the June quarter, for an annual inflation rate of 3.6 per cent, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) reported on Wednesday.

The Australian dollar was trading at 109.60 just prior to the data release at 1130 AEST, but quickly rose to a post-float high of 110.62 cents, on speculation the central bank may need to raise the cash rate to keep a lid on inflationary pressures.



The domestic currency reached its previous high, since the currency was floated in December 1983, on May 3 this year of 110.11 US.

Underlying measures of inflation calculated by the ABS grew on average by 0.9 per cent in the quarter for an annual rate of 2.7 per cent.

"The signal for the RBA is crystal clear and if they are in any way competent, they will hike rates at the next meeting (in August)," said Adam Carr, senior economist at ICAP.

"The consequences of them delaying for another six months could be dire in 2012.

"They really need to get a grip and do what is good for the country."


Link -
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Australian-dollar-hits-post-f...
===============================
It seems that vested interests are still harping on about increasing interest rates!

Again, I make it clear that inflation is being drive by increasing costs, mainly relevant to Energy Cost increases.

Consumer Demand, which is the usual reason for increasing interest rates to dampen Demand, is actually already slow and slowing further, as those increasing Energy costs bite into disposable income!

In short, any increase in interest rates now or in the short to medium term, would have an adverse effect on the Australian Economy.

The Truth is, the OZ$ is rising, mainly due to the US$ falling.

In my last report on the "Mighty US$" on July 9th, the US$index was at 75.12, it sits at 73.51 today, owing mainly to recent uncertainty on the US Debt limit issue.

However, I do agree with the comment that the RBA really does need to get a grip and do what is good for the country, because things are so finely balanced that A WRONG MOVE BY THE RBA could indeed mean DIRE CONSEQUENCES!  

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #203 - Jul 27th, 2011 at 4:23pm
 
Earth's Climate History: Implications for Tomorrow

Posted on 26 July 2011 by James Hansen (NASA GISS)

The past is the key to the future. Contrary to popular belief, climate models are not the principal basis for assessing human-made climate effects. Our most precise knowledge comes from Earth's paleoclimate, its ancient climate, and how it responded to past changes of climate forcings, including atmospheric composition. Our second essential source of information is provided by global observations today, especially satellite observations, which reveal how the climate system is responding to rapid human-made changes of atmospheric composition, especially atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). Models help us interpret past and present climate changes, and, in so far as they succeed in simulating past changes, they provide a tool to help evaluate the impacts of alternative policies that affect climate.

Humans lived in a rather different world during the last ice age, which peaked 20,000 years ago. An ice sheet covered Canada and parts of the United States, including Seattle, Minneapolis and New York City. The ice sheet, more than a mile thick on average, would have towered over today's tallest buildings. Glacial-interglacial climate oscillations were driven by climate forcings much smaller than the human-made forcing due to increasing atmospheric CO2 -- but those weak natural forcings had a long time to operate, which allowed slow climate feedbacks such as melting or growing ice sheets to come into play.

Paleoclimate data yield our best assessment of climate sensitivity, which is the eventual global temperature change in response to a specified climate forcing. A climate forcing is an imposed change of Earth's energy balance, as may be caused, for example, by a change of the sun's brightness or a human-made change of atmospheric CO2. For convenience scientists often consider a standard forcing, doubled atmospheric CO2, because that is a level of forcing that humans will impose this century if fossil fuel use continues unabated.

We show from paleoclimate data that the eventual global warming due to doubled CO2 will be about 3°C (5.4°F) when only so-called fast feedbacks have responded to the forcing. Fast feedbacks are changes of quantities such as atmospheric water vapor and clouds, which change as climate changes, thus amplifying or diminishing climate change. Fast feedbacks come into play as global temperature changes, so their full effect is delayed several centuries by the thermal inertia of the ocean, which slows full climate response. However, about half of the fast-feedback climate response is expected to occur within a few decades. Climate response time is one of the important 'details' that climate models help to elucidate.

...

We also show that slow feedbacks amplify the global response to a climate forcing. The principal slow feedback is the area of Earth covered by ice sheets. It is easy to see why this feedback amplifies the climate change, because reduction of ice sheet size due to warming exposes a darker surface, which absorbs more sunlight, thus causing more warming. However, it is difficult for us to say how long it will take ice sheets to respond to human-made climate forcing because there are no documented past changes of atmospheric CO2 nearly as rapid as the current human-made change.

Ice sheet response to climate change is a problem where satellite observations may help. Also ice sheets models, as they become more realistic and are tested against observed ice sheet changes, may aid our understanding. But first let us obtain broad guidance from climate changes in the 'recent' past: the Pliocene and Pleistocene, the past 5.3 million years.

Figure 1 shows global surface temperature for the past 5.3 million years as inferred from cores of ocean sediments taken all around the global ocean. The last 800,000 years are expanded in the lower half of the figure. Assumptions are required to estimate global surface temperature change from deep ocean changes, but we argue and present evidence that the ocean core record yields a better measure of global mean change than that provided by polar ice cores.

Civilization developed during the Holocene, the interglacial period of the past 10,000 years during which global temperature and sea level have been unusually stable. Figure 1 shows two prior interglacial periods that were warmer than the Holocene: the Eemian (about 130,000 years ago) and the Holsteinian (about 400,000 years ago). In both periods sea level reached heights at least 4-6 meters (13-20 feet) greater than today. In the early Pliocene global temperature was no more than 1-2°C warmer than today, yet sea level was 15-25 meters (50-80 feet) higher.

The paleoclimate record makes it clear that a target to keep human made global warming less than 2°C, as proposed in some international discussions, is not sufficient – it is a prescription for disaster. Assessment of the dangerous level of CO2, and the dangerous level of warming, is made difficult by the inertia of the climate system. The inertia, especially of the ocean and ice sheets, allows us to introduce powerful climate forcings such as atmospheric CO2 with only moderate initial response. But that inertia is not our friend – it means that we are building in changes for future generations that will be difficult, if not impossible, to avoid.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #204 - Jul 27th, 2011 at 4:42pm
 
Earth's Climate History: Implications for Tomorrow (Cont)

...

Fig. 2. Greenland (a) and Antarctic (b) ice mass changes deduced from gravity field measurements by Velicogna (2009) and best-fits with 5-year and 10-year mass loss doubling times.

One big uncertainty is how fast ice sheets can respond to warming. Our best assessment will probably be from precise measurements of changes in the mass of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, which can be monitored via measurements of Earth's gravitational field by satellites.

Figure 2 shows that both Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are now losing mass at significant rates, as much as a few hundred cubic kilometers per year. We suggest that mass loss from disintegrating ice sheets probably can be approximated better by exponential mass loss than by linear mass loss. If either ice sheet were to lose mass at a rate with doubling time of 10 years or less, multi-meter sea level rise would occur this century.

The available record (Figure 2) is too brief to provide an indication of the shape of future ice mass loss, but the data will become extremely useful as the record lengthens. Continuation of these satellite measurements should have high priority.

Link -
http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=903
========================================
The Truth is, we are at OR near the Peak of this particular warming cycle and when that Peak actually occurs, it will most likely mark the start the next Ice Age.

Climatic movements on these scales are often measured in centuries or even thousands of years, but given our (human) input on this ocassion that timescale could be substantially shorter.

If additional human induced warming, does actually quicken the whole process, then the usual warming Peak may arrive sooner and therefore the decent into the next Ice Age may also happen sooner?

So, whilst there are many uncertainties, the Truth is, we are near the Peak!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #205 - Jul 27th, 2011 at 11:08pm
 
...

It wasn’t CO2: Global sea levels started rising before 1800
http://joannenova.com.au/2011/07/global-sea-levels-started-rising-before-1800-je...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #206 - Jul 28th, 2011 at 12:13am
 
Markets continue with current jitters, as DOW Down over 100 points, in early trading!

http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^DJI
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #207 - Jul 29th, 2011 at 8:44am
 
New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

http://blogs.forbes.com/jamestaylor/2011/07/27/new-nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-in...

“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
progressiveslol
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17029
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #208 - Jul 29th, 2011 at 8:53am
 

New science papers discrediting greenhouse gas effect fit with findings of top climatologist. Emerging group of skeptics re-ignite debate.

http://climaterealists.com/?id=8138
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
O)))
Full Member
***
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 153
Gender: male
Re: What's the Real truth?
Reply #209 - Jul 29th, 2011 at 11:28am
 
progressiveslol wrote on Jul 19th, 2011 at 9:33am:
Greenhouse gas theory of global warming is refuted in momentous Mexican lab experiment


Did you read the experiment? Did you understand what it is saying? I think not...

This in no way refutes the greenhouse effect. What the experiment shows is that an actual greenhouse works by preventing convective heat transfer ie: preventing absorbed heat from escaping. The greenhouse effect on the atmosphere works in a fundamentally different way. Greenhouse gasses absorb outgoing radiative energy and re-emit some of that energy back toward Earth, rather than retaining heat by preventing the movement of air.

So yes, it is relevant for how an actual greenhouse heats up, but it does not refute the greenhouse effect in any way. I don't know how they came to that conclusion unless they either (a) didn't read the document or (b) didn't understand it.

Makes me very skeptical about that 'climaterealists' website. That was an incredibly misleading article that does nothing to lend them credibility.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 ... 23
Send Topic Print