Australian Politics Forum - Catalyst explains extreme weather events 4 dummies

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Catalyst explains extreme weather events 4 dummies
Reply #30 - Jul 7^th, 2013 at 9:19pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 5:07pm:

We need an ETS.

I was just watching BBC Breakfast news.

The ETS we have here is now operating at $3 per tonne.

I tell you, it's the future.....

Unfortunately in Australia, we have "The Australian", which specialises in spreading disinformation. Australia (and Canada) will be dragged into line eventually.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Innocent bystander

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4220
Gender: male

Re: Catalyst explains extreme weather events 4 dummies
Reply #31 - Jul 8^th, 2013 at 9:42am

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 9:08pm:

Innocent bystander wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 9:02pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 8:50pm:

they didn't come out and say that because people like you have a hard time even understanding the correlation between heating of the planet and extreme weather events.

You are aware that we had the exact same weather events 100 years ago under cooler conditions aren't you?, or are you one of those global warming kooks that believe weather only began in 1980 Grin

yeh and the climate has always changed as well and I'm a climate change expert with no formal qualifications because I am a member of the liberal party Cheesy

LOL

I am just glad that the education system has progressed to a level where unqualified dickheads are not respected for the bullshit that they pull out of their arse Sad

OK so I'll take that as a NO you didn't realise that we had the exact same weather events 100 years ago under cooler conditions, all I can suggest is you do a little research, you will be very surprised at what you find.
Alternatively you can remain shrouded in ignorance, I'm fairly certain that this will be the path you choose Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 139078
Gender: male

Re: Catalyst explains extreme weather events 4 dummies
Reply #32 - Jul 8^th, 2013 at 10:44am

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 8:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 6:07pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 6:02pm:

you said

"Where's the bit about "human contributions"?"

and I gave you the correct answer so don't be a f.cken jerk just because you are too lazy to read or listen. Sad

Actually, the answer you gave me said nothing about humans. " ... with the speed that emissions still enter the atmosphere ..."

"For the climate change skeptics who have trouble understanding the relationship between extreme weather events and human contributions to planet warming should watch this episode of Catalyst:-"

The episode wasn't about "the relationship between extreme weather events and human contributions to planet warming". It was about "the relationship between extreme weather events and planet warming".

Stick to the facts.

well what emissions do you think she was referring to ??

She doesn't say. Who knows?

Perhaps she was talking about natural CO2 emissions, although she probably meant human.

It wasn't the focus of the story though.

Moreover, Anja Taylor is a reporter: she's not a scientist.

The qualified people in the story made no mention of 'emissions'. Absolutely none. The 'emissions' comment was a personal opinion, added at the end of the story by the reporter.

No wonder the AGW cult is losing so much credibility.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30096
Gender: male

Re: Catalyst explains extreme weather events 4 dummies
Reply #33 - Jul 8^th, 2013 at 4:00pm

Innocent bystander wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 9:42am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 9:08pm:

Innocent bystander wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 9:02pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 8:50pm:

they didn't come out and say that because people like you have a hard time even understanding the correlation between heating of the planet and extreme weather events.

You are aware that we had the exact same weather events 100 years ago under cooler conditions aren't you?, or are you one of those global warming kooks that believe weather only began in 1980 Grin

yeh and the climate has always changed as well and I'm a climate change expert with no formal qualifications because I am a member of the liberal party Cheesy

LOL

I am just glad that the education system has progressed to a level where unqualified dickheads are not respected for the bullshit that they pull out of their arse Sad

OK so I'll take that as a NO you didn't realise that we had the exact same weather events 100 years ago under cooler conditions, all I can suggest is you do a little research, you will be very surprised at what you find.
Alternatively you can remain shrouded in ignorance, I'm fairly certain that this will be the path you choose Wink

all of the answers to the same tired old recycled questions from dumbarse skeptics can be found here:-

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30096
Gender: male

Re: Catalyst explains extreme weather events 4 dummies
Reply #34 - Jul 8^th, 2013 at 4:02pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 10:44am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 8:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 6:07pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 6:02pm:

you said

"Where's the bit about "human contributions"?"

and I gave you the correct answer so don't be a f.cken jerk just because you are too lazy to read or listen. Sad

Actually, the answer you gave me said nothing about humans. " ... with the speed that emissions still enter the atmosphere ..."

"For the climate change skeptics who have trouble understanding the relationship between extreme weather events and human contributions to planet warming should watch this episode of Catalyst:-"

The episode wasn't about "the relationship between extreme weather events and human contributions to planet warming". It was about "the relationship between extreme weather events and planet warming".

Stick to the facts.

well what emissions do you think she was referring to ??

She doesn't say. Who knows?

Perhaps she was talking about natural CO2 emissions, although she probably meant human.

It wasn't the focus of the story though.

Moreover, Anja Taylor is a reporter: she's not a scientist.

The qualified people in the story made no mention of 'emissions'. Absolutely none. The 'emissions' comment was a personal opinion, added at the end of the story by the reporter.

No wonder the AGW cult is losing so much credibility.

of course she's talking about the emissions on mars why wouldn't she be Cheesy

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 139078
Gender: male

Re: Catalyst explains extreme weather events 4 dummies
Reply #35 - Jul 8^th, 2013 at 5:42pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 4:02pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 10:44am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 8:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 6:07pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 6:02pm:

you said

"Where's the bit about "human contributions"?"

and I gave you the correct answer so don't be a f.cken jerk just because you are too lazy to read or listen. Sad

Actually, the answer you gave me said nothing about humans. " ... with the speed that emissions still enter the atmosphere ..."

"For the climate change skeptics who have trouble understanding the relationship between extreme weather events and human contributions to planet warming should watch this episode of Catalyst:-"

The episode wasn't about "the relationship between extreme weather events and human contributions to planet warming". It was about "the relationship between extreme weather events and planet warming".

Stick to the facts.

well what emissions do you think she was referring to ??

She doesn't say. Who knows?

Perhaps she was talking about natural CO2 emissions, although she probably meant human.

It wasn't the focus of the story though.

Moreover, Anja Taylor is a reporter: she's not a scientist.

The qualified people in the story made no mention of 'emissions'. Absolutely none. The 'emissions' comment was a personal opinion, added at the end of the story by the reporter.

No wonder the AGW cult is losing so much credibility.

of course she's talking about the emissions on mars why wouldn't she be Cheesy

She is a reporter, not a scientist.

None of the scientists mentioned emissions.

However, you'd rather take the word of a reporter and ignore everything the scientists said.

No wonder the AGW cult is losing so much credibility.

Back to top

IP Logged