Home Articles Forum Wiki Poll Garden Contact

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

  Australian Politics Forum › General Discussion › General Board › Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10
Send Topic Print
Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries (Read 11288 times)
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #75 - Feb 8th, 2013 at 1:52am  
Emma wrote on Feb 7th, 2013 at 11:01pm:
wasn't it Tony Abbotts idea?? 


What??...the white guilt idea?...No, pre-dates Abbott by years, if not a decade or more.
Very big idea with some of the counter-culture groups in the late 50's through the 60's and on into the early to middle 1970's.

Very much mainstream now and part of the foundation of the Politically Correct idea.
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
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #76 - Feb 8th, 2013 at 1:52am  
test
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
 
Emma
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #77 - Feb 8th, 2013 at 1:57am  
no 
i was referring to cutting Aus in two...   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
live every day
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #78 - Feb 8th, 2013 at 2:42am  
Emma wrote on Feb 8th, 2013 at 1:57am:
no 
i was referring to cutting Aus in two...   Roll Eyes


Nope, that was thought up by rabbitoh07
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
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49030
At my desk.
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #79 - Feb 8th, 2013 at 7:33am  
Quote:
My point is, you (the climate change/per capita faithful) are, in fact demanding that countries with small POPULATIONS ( not small land areas), and pretty small emission amounts, do more about their emissions, than countries with larger popualtions and FAR larger emission amounts.


Countries with more emissions on a per capita basis should do more to cut emissions (on a per capita basis, not on an absolute level). This is regardless of the size of the country. I am still not sure why you keep referring to the size of the country. Are you suggesting the principle does not apply to large countries?

Kyoto incorporates this principle, if a little indirectly, and many countries with higher emissions rates, including Australia, signed up for it. It would be pretty stupid to reject this principle and I have not seen any serious proposal that does. It would simply be unworkable.

Quote:
Blaming or trying to shame Australian people about their emissions (slightly less than 1.5% of the total), while defending and placating China about their emissions


Gizmo it has nothing to do with blame. It is about solutions. Do you have one? You seem to think it is more important to blame shift than do anything about it.

Quote:
the sensible thing would be (in the event that the whole Co2 thing is more than a confidence trick) would be to treat every country by the total tonnage produced as a whole


Let me guess, you will run away now instead of explaining what this actually means because you cannot bear to be faced with the stupidity of your suggestion.

Quote:
(And no, the 'splitting the country' concept is completely ridiculous, but give the source, Rabbitoh, not all that surprising).


It is only as ridiculous as your stance on this issue.

So now we are 6 pages in and still do not even have an explanation of what it means to blurt out 'China is a really big country' in the middle of an otherwise rational debate.
Back to top
 
People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #80 - Feb 8th, 2013 at 10:11am  
freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2013 at 7:33am:
Quote:
My point is, you (the climate change/per capita faithful) are, in fact demanding that countries with small POPULATIONS ( not small land areas), and pretty small emission amounts, do more about their emissions, than countries with larger popualtions and FAR larger emission amounts.


Countries with more emissions on a per capita basis should do more to cut emissions (on a per capita basis, not on an absolute level). This is regardless of the size of the country. I am still not sure why you keep referring to the size of the country. Are you suggesting the principle does not apply to large countries?

Kyoto incorporates this principle, if a little indirectly, and many countries with higher emissions rates, including Australia, signed up for it. It would be pretty stupid to reject this principle and I have not seen any serious proposal that does. It would simply be unworkable.

Quote:
Blaming or trying to shame Australian people about their emissions (slightly less than 1.5% of the total), while defending and placating China about their emissions


Gizmo it has nothing to do with blame. It is about solutions. Do you have one? You seem to think it is more important to blame shift than do anything about it.

Quote:
the sensible thing would be (in the event that the whole Co2 thing is more than a confidence trick) would be to treat every country by the total tonnage produced as a whole


Let me guess, you will run away now instead of explaining what this actually means because you cannot bear to be faced with the stupidity of your suggestion.

Quote:
(And no, the 'splitting the country' concept is completely ridiculous, but give the source, Rabbitoh, not all that surprising).


It is only as ridiculous as your stance on this issue.

So now we are 6 pages in and still do not even have an explanation of what it means to blurt out 'China is a really big country' in the middle of an otherwise rational debate.


Well that's not really surprising, since I don't actually recall say that....can you let me know where I did???

"Countries with more emissions on a per capita basis should do more to cut emissions (on a per capita basis, not on an absolute level). This is regardless of the size of the country. I am still not sure why you keep referring to the size of the country. Are you suggesting the principle does not apply to large countries?"

I keep referring to the size of population of countries...because that's what the per capita system is based on---punishing countries that that DON'T have massive populations.
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
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #81 - Feb 9th, 2013 at 7:19am  
gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 7th, 2013 at 10:50pm:
freediver wrote on Feb 7th, 2013 at 9:51pm:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 7th, 2013 at 10:09am:
freediver wrote on Feb 6th, 2013 at 10:10pm:
Quote:
Let's face it, demanding that countries, with small populations and not much tonnage of emissions (but high 'per captia' footprints) lead the way


No one is demanding that small countries lead the way. Rather, countries with the highest per capita emissions should naturally lead the way. The size of the country should not make any difference to this. If you double the size, you double both the problem and the resources to solve it, but the burden on individual people comes back to how much they contribute. It goes for America just as much as it goes for Australia. Your own suggestion of a global per capita basis would achieve pretty much the same thing, and would become identical once you tried to flesh it out into workable international agreements or laws.



Wow FD nice misqoute (OMG,I'm channelling a certain person..)
Countries with small POPULATIONS.....and yes, you are demanding that......

And if you noticed, America was second on my list..because America has the 2nd highest total tonnage..And America is NOT a 'small country', neither does it have a small population, nor does it have a higher per capita rate than Australian.....which, once again, is the whole point...


What exactly is your point, other than a few dots?


My point is, you (the climate change/per capita faithful) are, in fact demanding that countries with small POPULATIONS ( not small land areas), and pretty small emission amounts, do more about their emissions, than countries with larger popualtions and FAR larger emission amounts.

Blaming or trying to shame Australian people about their emissions (slightly less than 1.5% of the total), while defending and placating China about their emissions ( slightly under 25% of the World total) is a pathetic and silly move (and possibly even somewhat racist?), the sensible thing would be (in the event that the whole Co2 thing is more than a confidence trick) would be to treat every country by the total tonnage produced as a whole. (And no, the 'splitting the country' concept is completely ridiculous, but give the source, Rabbitoh, not all that surprising).

But don't worry Freediver, I do understand where the idea comes from, and the concepts behind it, the 'White Guilt' thing was still around when I was at school so I know we're all supposed to hate ourselves for being born into white, western, non-poverty stricken families..


well said and is exactly what the problem is! 'per capita' is blame-shifting exercise so beloeved of politicians where by a sleight of numbers, someone else is to blame and voila! australias 1.5% is suddenly the root of all evil - forgetting our size and the fact we feed a lot of the world AND provide so much of its building materials. yep, go ahead and cast blame.

OR you treat the problem of CO2 as a serious problem. The per capita argument seems predicated on the belief that CO2 isnt really a problem at all. No other outcome is possible.
Back to top
 
AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #82 - Feb 9th, 2013 at 7:21am  
freediver wrote on Feb 8th, 2013 at 7:33am:
Quote:
My point is, you (the climate change/per capita faithful) are, in fact demanding that countries with small POPULATIONS ( not small land areas), and pretty small emission amounts, do more about their emissions, than countries with larger popualtions and FAR larger emission amounts.


Countries with more emissions on a per capita basis should do more to cut emissions (on a per capita basis, not on an absolute level). This is regardless of the size of the country. I am still not sure why you keep referring to the size of the country. Are you suggesting the principle does not apply to large countries?

Kyoto incorporates this principle, if a little indirectly, and many countries with higher emissions rates, including Australia, signed up for it. It would be pretty stupid to reject this principle and I have not seen any serious proposal that does. It would simply be unworkable.

Quote:
Blaming or trying to shame Australian people about their emissions (slightly less than 1.5% of the total), while defending and placating China about their emissions


Gizmo it has nothing to do with blame. It is about solutions. Do you have one? You seem to think it is more important to blame shift than do anything about it.

Quote:
the sensible thing would be (in the event that the whole Co2 thing is more than a confidence trick) would be to treat every country by the total tonnage produced as a whole


Let me guess, you will run away now instead of explaining what this actually means because you cannot bear to be faced with the stupidity of your suggestion.

Quote:
(And no, the 'splitting the country' concept is completely ridiculous, but give the source, Rabbitoh, not all that surprising).


It is only as ridiculous as your stance on this issue.

So now we are 6 pages in and still do not even have an explanation of what it means to blurt out 'China is a really big country' in the middle of an otherwise rational debate.


You are starting to get quite rude and skippy-like to people who disagree with you. it is not a good look.
Back to top
 
AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49030
At my desk.
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #83 - Feb 9th, 2013 at 9:24am  
Quote:
I keep referring to the size of population of countries...because that's what the per capita system is based on---punishing countries that that DON'T have massive populations.


You are confused gizmo. That is not what it is based on. It is based on per capita emissions. There are big and small countries with high per capita emissions. There are big and small countries with low per capita emissions. I am not sure why you are having such trouble with this concept.

Quote:
well said and is exactly what the problem is! 'per capita' is blame-shifting exercise so beloeved of politicians where by a sleight of numbers, someone else is to blame and voila! australias 1.5% is suddenly the root of all evil - forgetting our size and the fact we feed a lot of the world AND provide so much of its building materials. yep, go ahead and cast blame.


Actually longy it is the basis for negotiating an outcome that is actually acceptable to all parties. It is the 'China is a big country' group that is doing the blame shifting, while not actually coming up with anything meaningful. Their argument disappears as soon as you try to look at it, just like yours.

Quote:
OR you treat the problem of CO2 as a serious problem. The per capita argument seems predicated on the belief that CO2 isnt really a problem at all. No other outcome is possible.


You are confused Longy. Perhaps you should try to explain your position.
Back to top
 
People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #84 - Feb 9th, 2013 at 10:57am  
freediver wrote on Feb 9th, 2013 at 9:24am:
Quote:
I keep referring to the size of population of countries...because that's what the per capita system is based on---punishing countries that that DON'T have massive populations.


You are confused gizmo. That is not what it is based on. It is based on per capita emissions. There are big and small countries with high per capita emissions. There are big and small countries with low per capita emissions. I am not sure why you are having such trouble with this concept.

Quote:
well said and is exactly what the problem is! 'per capita' is blame-shifting exercise so beloeved of politicians where by a sleight of numbers, someone else is to blame and voila! australias 1.5% is suddenly the root of all evil - forgetting our size and the fact we feed a lot of the world AND provide so much of its building materials. yep, go ahead and cast blame.


Actually longy it is the basis for negotiating an outcome that is actually acceptable to all parties. It is the 'China is a big country' group that is doing the blame shifting, while not actually coming up with anything meaningful. Their argument disappears as soon as you try to look at it, just like yours.

Quote:
OR you treat the problem of CO2 as a serious problem. The per capita argument seems predicated on the belief that CO2 isnt really a problem at all. No other outcome is possible.


You are confused Longy. Perhaps you should try to explain your position.


The only one suffering confusion is you. You absolutely and resolutely refuse to understand anyone elses position. it is one thing to disagree - that is civil. But your position is to claim that any opposing argument is based on stupidty, ignorance and an inability to formulate a basis for disagreement.

Your argument amounts to little more that "I am right' and everybody Else's is a moron who doesnt get your 'wisdom'. How about you grow up and accept that people dont think you are a genius. They dont think that the fact you hold an opinion invalidates everyone else's

Gizmo and I (and a lot of others) hold the opinion that per capita is an invalid way of dealing with Co2 emissions. We have our reasons and have articulated them clearly and powerfully. I could go through them again but to what point? You like things your way. Thats doesnt make your way right and in fact, attitudes like yours usually support the WRONG way.
Back to top
 
AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #85 - Feb 9th, 2013 at 11:00am  
freediver wrote on Feb 9th, 2013 at 9:24am:
Quote:
I keep referring to the size of population of countries...because that's what the per capita system is based on---punishing countries that that DON'T have massive populations.


You are confused gizmo. That is not what it is based on. It is based on per capita emissions. There are big and small countries with high per capita emissions. There are big and small countries with low per capita emissions. I am not sure why you are having such trouble with this concept.

Quote:
well said and is exactly what the problem is! 'per capita' is blame-shifting exercise so beloeved of politicians where by a sleight of numbers, someone else is to blame and voila! australias 1.5% is suddenly the root of all evil - forgetting our size and the fact we feed a lot of the world AND provide so much of its building materials. yep, go ahead and cast blame.


Actually longy it is the basis for negotiating an outcome that is actually acceptable to all parties. It is the 'China is a big country' group that is doing the blame shifting, while not actually coming up with anything meaningful. Their argument disappears as soon as you try to look at it, just like yours.

Quote:
OR you treat the problem of CO2 as a serious problem. The per capita argument seems predicated on the belief that CO2 isnt really a problem at all. No other outcome is possible.


You are confused Longy. Perhaps you should try to explain your position.


re the highlighted comment. How dumb do can you be???  The argument is that China emits 25% of the CO2. Thats not blame SHIFTING at all. The BLAME is clearly already there without any actual shifting.
Back to top
 
AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49030
At my desk.
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #86 - Feb 9th, 2013 at 11:06am  
Quote:
But your position is to claim that any opposing argument is based on stupidty, ignorance and an inability to formulate a basis for disagreement.


I only call the stupid arguments stupid. In fact I would go further to say that the opposing argument does not even exist. Feel free to correct me.

Quote:
Gizmo and I (and a lot of others) hold the opinion that per capita is an invalid way of dealing with Co2 emissions.


Did you offer an alternative position that makes sense?

Quote:
We have our reasons and have articulated them clearly and powerfully.


I must have missed that bit. Gizmo for example appears to think that a per capita comparison means smaller countries always compare unfavourably. Not that I am sure what he is getting at. Like you, he is unable to answer basic questions about what he is trying to say.

Quote:
re the highlighted comment. How dumb do can you be???  The argument is that China emits 25% of the CO2. Thats not blame SHIFTING at all. The BLAME is clearly already there without any actual shifting.


OK. We have established that China is a big country. So now what?
Back to top
 
People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #87 - Feb 9th, 2013 at 12:15pm  
freediver wrote on Feb 9th, 2013 at 11:06am:
Quote:
But your position is to claim that any opposing argument is based on stupidty, ignorance and an inability to formulate a basis for disagreement.


I only call the stupid arguments stupid. In fact I would go further to say that the opposing argument does not even exist. Feel free to correct me.

Quote:
Gizmo and I (and a lot of others) hold the opinion that per capita is an invalid way of dealing with Co2 emissions.


Did you offer an alternative position that makes sense?

Quote:
We have our reasons and have articulated them clearly and powerfully.


I must have missed that bit. Gizmo for example appears to think that a per capita comparison means smaller countries always compare unfavourably. Not that I am sure what he is getting at. Like you, he is unable to answer basic questions about what he is trying to say.

Quote:
re the highlighted comment. How dumb do can you be???  The argument is that China emits 25% of the CO2. Thats not blame SHIFTING at all. The BLAME is clearly already there without any actual shifting.


OK. We have established that China is a big country. So now what?


you know how we both mutually despise the kind of stupidity that SOB puts up regularly? You are starting to reach his level. I suspect that it is not possible to actually put up an opposing argument that you are capable of understanding or accepting. It seems very much that you simply pretend that all opposing argument either doesn't exist or is idiotic.

So here we ago again.  see if you can understand the following argument. I'm not asking for you agreement, but your UNDERSTANDING.

we believe (me gizmo et al) that ALL COUNTRIES should have the same  CO2 emission restrictions placed upon them ie 1990 levels. every country, same rule.

before you argue, just tell me that you understand it and that see that it is an ACTUAL ARGUMENT founded on our ideological position. once you have done that - and not before - you may argue our position. Just don't adopt the pitiful argument that we don't have a coherent argument.

I await your response. Please don't emulate SOB.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 9th, 2013 at 3:03pm by longweekend58 »  
AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49030
At my desk.
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #88 - Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:28am  
Quote:
we believe (me gizmo et al) that ALL COUNTRIES should have the same  CO2 emission restrictions placed upon them ie 1990 levels. every country, same rule.


Oh that. Yes I do remember someone posting that. I also responded at the time by pointing out how ridiculous that would get and got ignored. Gizmo then started going on about shame and I assumed it was something to do with holding such a silly position. It seems strange that such a strong critic of Kyoto would cling so strongly to one of it's mechanisms.

Anyway, in case you have forgotten, the problem with that is that it would mean that poor countries have to give money to rich countries for the right to pollute at the same levels. Would you agree that such a position is totally unworkable in international negotiations?
Back to top
 
People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #89 - Feb 10th, 2013 at 2:21pm  
freediver wrote on Feb 10th, 2013 at 9:28am:
Quote:
we believe (me gizmo et al) that ALL COUNTRIES should have the same  CO2 emission restrictions placed upon them ie 1990 levels. every country, same rule.


Oh that. Yes I do remember someone posting that. I also responded at the time by pointing out how ridiculous that would get and got ignored. Gizmo then started going on about shame and I assumed it was something to do with holding such a silly position. It seems strange that such a strong critic of Kyoto would cling so strongly to one of it's mechanisms.

Anyway, in case you have forgotten, the problem with that is that it would mean that poor countries have to give money to rich countries for the right to pollute at the same levels. Would you agree that such a position is totally unworkable in international negotiations?






do you want to solve CO2 emission problems or not? it seems you want something, but certinaly not a solution!
Back to top
 
AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10
Send Topic Print
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
 
 

  « Forum ‹ Board Top of this page

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge