The REAL global warming

[maiden22]

Very balanced discussion here Craig - John Coleman (who founded the WEATHER CHANNEL, before you start carping about peer-review and "qualifications") is very restrained. He only calls AGW the greatest scam in history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ft8LfE7AI2w&feature=related

They identify the reasons people are spouting your crap - money, power, and a desire to set up a global socialist system.

 

[maiden22]

Craig, let me ask you a question. Isn't it worth losing a few species, polar bears and so on, a few low-lying nations and whatnot, for all the benefits that global warming brings us?

Consider the most important effect of AGW:

 

[maiden22]

Craig, don't worry about polar bears suffering from global warming - as you probably know but will almost certainly deny, they are thriving and their numbers are increasing.

Look at how this one has managed to adapt:

 

[maiden22]

Craig, I've finally found it! The proof that you've been searching for:

 

[Ingot54]

The great global warming collapse

Craighole, you're really going to love this one.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/5745566/by-the-waters-of-denial-they-sit-and-weep.thtml

Melanie Phillips weighs in. I've picked out a few quotes that should have special appeal:

"the green movement was using climate change as a cover to smuggle in other agendas such as poverty or equality."

"the fact is that from the start environmentalism has self-evidently been all about changing the nature of society rather than changing society’s views about nature."

"there is a very strong green fascism in much of the environmental world. I’ve heard it said at meetings I’ve been at – that climate change is so important - democracy has to be sacrificed"

"The ‘scientific’ basis for it [AGW] is de-materialising day by day, leaving merely the sulphurous stink of intellectual fraud on an epic scale."

"And what can one say about ‘the science’? ‘The ‘science’ is already paying dearly for its abuse of freedom of information, for unacceptable cronyism, for unwonted arrogance, and for the disgraceful misuse of data at every level, from temperature measurements to glaciers to the Amazon rain forest. What is worse, the usurping of the scientific method, and of justified scientific scepticism, by political policies and political propaganda could well damage science sensu lato - never mind just climate science - in the public eye for decades." (Quoting Philip Stott)

"Miliband resembles one of those people who are discovered living in the jungle decades after the end of a war without realising it is all over. Someone should sit him down with a nice strong cup of hot sweet Fairtrade tea and a blanket over his shoulders, and embark him without delay upon a course of post-traumatic stress counselling. An awful lot of reputations are about to be reduced to, um, carbon – his included."

Maiden22

I have actually had a great week trading, and missed most of the posts here.

Thank you sincerely for taking the fight right up to this nonsensical bum.

I see he tore right into my last post, but I didn't bother reading any of it - I knew what was coming.

And I have decided not to respond to anything he posts from now on - ie I will maintain a monologue, unless of course I am speaking to you. It is impossible to have a rational debate with a nutter.

As the science scandals keep coming, the air has gone out of the climate-change movement:

Margaret Wente wrote this in "The Globe and Mail":

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/

In 2007, the most comprehensive report to date on global warming, issued by the respected United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made a shocking claim: The Himalayan glaciers could melt away as soon as 2035.

These glaciers provide the headwaters for Asia's nine largest rivers and lifelines for the more than one billion people who live downstream. Melting ice and snow would create mass flooding, followed by mass drought. The glacier story was reported around the world. Last December, a spokesman for the World Wildlife Fund, an environmental pressure group, warned, “The deal reached at Copenhagen will have huge ramifications for the lives of hundreds of millions of people who are already highly vulnerable due to widespread poverty.” To dramatize their country's plight, Nepal's top politicians strapped on oxygen tanks and held a cabinet meeting on Mount Everest.

But the claim was rubbish, and the world's top glaciologists knew it. It was based not on rigorously peer-reviewed science but on an anecdotal report by the WWF itself. When its background came to light on the eve of Copenhagen, Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC, shrugged it off. But now, even leading scientists and environmental groups admit the IPCC is facing a crisis of credibility that makes the Climategate affair look like small change.

“The global warming movement as we have known it is dead,” the brilliant analyst Walter Russell Mead says in his blog on The American Interest. It was done in by a combination of bad science and bad politics.

The impetus for the Copenhagen conference was that the science makes it imperative for us to act. But even if that were true – and even if we knew what to do – a global deal was never in the cards. As Mr. Mead writes, “The global warming movement proposed a complex set of international agreements involving vast transfers of funds, intrusive regulations in national economies, and substantial changes to the domestic political economies of most countries on the planet.” Copenhagen was never going to produce a breakthrough. It was a dead end.

And now, the science scandals just keep on coming. First there was the vast cache of e-mails leaked from the University of East Anglia, home of a crucial research unit responsible for collecting temperature data. Although not fatal to the science, they revealed a snakepit of scheming to keep contradictory research from being published, make imperfect data look better, and withhold information from unfriendly third parties. If science is supposed to be open and transparent, these guys acted as if they had a lot to hide.

Despite widespread efforts to play down the Climategate e-mails, they were very damaging. An investigation by the British newspaper The Guardian – among the most aggressive advocates for action on climate change – has found that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed, and that documents relating to them could not be produced.

Meantime, the IPCC – the body widely regarded, until now, as the ultimate authority on climate science – is looking worse and worse. After it was forced to retract its claim about melting glaciers, Mr. Pachauri dismissed the error as a one-off. But other IPCC claims have turned out to be just as groundless.

For example, it warned that large tracts of the Amazon rain forest might be wiped out by global warming because they are extremely susceptible to even modest decreases in rainfall. The sole source for that claim, reports The Sunday Times of London, was a magazine article written by a pair of climate activists, one of whom worked for the WWF. One scientist contacted by the Times, a specialist in tropical forest ecology, called the article “a mess.”

Worse still, the Times has discovered that Mr. Pachauri's own Energy and Resources Unit, based in New Delhi, has collected millions in grants to study the effects of glacial melting – all on the strength of that bogus glacier claim, which happens to have been endorsed by the same scientist who now runs the unit that got the money. Even so, the IPCC chief is hanging tough. He insists the attacks on him are being orchestrated by companies facing lower profits.

Until now, anyone who questioned the credibility of the IPCC was labelled as a climate skeptic, or worse. But many climate scientists now sense a sinking ship, and they're bailing out. Among them is Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at the University of Victoria who acknowledges that the climate body has crossed the line into advocacy. Even Britain's Greenpeace has called for Mr. Pachauri's resignation. India says it will establish its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the IPCC.

None of this is to say that global warming isn't real, or that human activity doesn't play a role, or that the IPCC is entirely wrong, or that measures to curb greenhouse-gas emissions aren't valid. But the strategy pursued by activists (including scientists who have crossed the line into advocacy) has turned out to be fatally flawed.

By exaggerating the certainties, papering over the gaps, demonizing the skeptics and peddling tales of imminent catastrophe, they've discredited the entire climate-change movement. The political damage will be severe. As Mr. Mead succinctly puts it: “Skeptics up, Obama down, cap-and-trade dead.” That also goes for Canada, whose climate policies are inevitably tied to those of the United States.

“I don't think it's healthy to dismiss proper skepticism,” says John Beddington, the chief scientific adviser to the British government. He is a staunch believer in man-made climate change, but he also points out the complexity of climate science. “Science grows and improves in the light of criticism. There is a fundamental uncertainty about climate change prediction that can't be changed.” In his view, it's time to stop circling the wagons and throw open the doors. How much the public will keep caring is another matter.

Of course you can expect a tirade against every name mentioned there, because the armchair climatologist (read: "nutter Craig") deems it thus!

I may be away from the thread this week, as I have hit a golden streak in my trading, and don't want to be too distracted.

But it's nice to be exonerated as a denialist - an honour to be a sceptic - I take my hat off to John Beddington - he may/may not be correct, but he is humble.

Will probably post stuff as it comes up ... or not ...

There is simply an avalanche of material now appearing (possibly too much to post everything now) as the warmistra's back-pedal so fast they are clogging the newsletters and news pages with page after page of admissions and revelations of lies, non-peer-reviewed material, and plagiarised stories from Grand-dad's latest ski vacation in the Bahamas ... "Where's de snow, Mon?"

Funny how the wheel turns, and the respectable "science" and the "Craig-like-crackpots" are finally on the defensive, where the science should have been from the beginning.

Mann and Jones et al have actually done the world a huge favour through their deceit and guile.

 

[maiden22]

A strong argument Craig that you should consider carefully.

 

[maiden22]

Ingot,

Glad you're having a good time trading. You're right about it being funny how the wheel can turn so quickly. That's consensus for you lol.

I hope your success continues.

 

[Ingot54]

Ingot,

Glad you're having a good time trading. You're right about it being funny how the wheel can turn so quickly. That's consensus for you lol.

I hope your success continues.

I have posted this article elsewhere, and I am wondering how scientific research into the consequences of it are going:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2009/12/091224-north-pole-magnetic-russia-earth-core.html

Richard A. Lovett in San Francisco

for National Geographic News

December 24, 2009



Earth's north magnetic pole is racing toward Russia at almost 40 miles (64 kilometers) a year due to magnetic changes in the planet's core, new research says.

The core is too deep for scientists to directly detect its magnetic field. But researchers can infer the field's movements by tracking how Earth's magnetic field has been changing at the surface and in space.

Now, newly analyzed data suggest that there's a region of rapidly changing magnetism on the core's surface, possibly being created by a mysterious "plume" of magnetism arising from deeper in the core.

And it's this region that could be pulling the magnetic pole away from its long-time location in northern Canada, said Arnaud Chulliat, a geophysicist at the Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris in France.

Finding North

Magnetic north, which is the place where compass needles actually point, is near but not exactly in the same place as the geographic North Pole. Right now, magnetic north is close to Canada's Ellesmere Island.

Navigators have used magnetic north for centuries to orient themselves when they're far from recognizable landmarks.

Although global positioning systems have largely replaced such traditional techniques, many people still find compasses useful for getting around underwater and underground where GPS satellites can't communicate.

The magnetic north pole had moved little from the time scientists first located it in 1831. Then in 1904, the pole began shifting northeastward at a steady pace of about 9 miles (15 kilometers) a year.

In 1989 it sped up again, and in 2007 scientists confirmed that the pole is now galloping toward Siberia at 34 to 37 miles (55 to 60 kilometers) a year.

A rapidly shifting magnetic pole means that magnetic-field maps need to be updated more often to allow compass users to make the crucial adjustment from magnetic north to true North.

Wandering Pole

Geologists think Earth has a magnetic field because the core is made up of a solid iron center surrounded by rapidly spinning liquid metal. This creates a "dynamo" that drives our magnetic field.

(Get more facts about Earth's insides.)

Scientists had long suspected that, since the molten core is constantly moving, changes in its magnetism might be affecting the surface location of magnetic north.

Although the new research seems to back up this idea, Chulliat is not ready to say whether magnetic north will eventually cross into Russia.

"It's too difficult to forecast," Chulliat said.

Also, nobody knows when another change in the core might pop up elsewhere, sending magnetic north wandering in a new direction.

Chulliat presented his work this week at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco.

Much has been suggested about the behaviour of birds and animals over recent years, in that some anomalous departures from established norms, may be attributed to AGW.

I'd like to propose another possibility, which excludes AGW.

In fact it is suspected that the homing behaviour of some bird species, and some animal species, is directly attributed to their ability to sense the earth's magnetic field. eg the Monarch Butterfly, Pigeons, Marine Turtles, Whales and Honey-Bees to name some.

This link has a series of animations that hypothesize how the earth's magnetic field flips occasionally, in a polarity reversal.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/magnetic/reversals.html

I have not been able to find anything on this, but I suspect that the dumping of snow on the USA today, instead of in Canada where it was expected (and needed for the Winter Olympics) may be attributed to the moving of the North Pole - or more correctly, true Magnetic North, and the effect it has on the development of weather.

I have not gone into this - it may well be the opposite - but the movement of the North Pole towards Russia at over 40 miles per year, seems significant to me.

And it might just explain the change in the pattern of the annual melting and re-freezing of the Arctic and the North Sea Ice sheets - not to mention unusual freezing in strange places!

Amazingly, Australia is in the middle of the El Nino effect, where we oscillate and share the swapping of the La Nina weather-pattern twins, with South America. Right now, Australia is is the grip of the El Nino, and SHOULD be experiencing a drought. But we have had, and are having as I write, unusual and very blessed rainfalls right across the nation, filling dams and streams, and establishing pastures in the deserts that will make dry "hay" which will last for years, and maintain its protein potency for stock feed for years as well.

Such blessing can only come from a benevolence outside of the understanding of men, and which one day will be understood by science, as they use "evidence" and "knowledge" to come up to speed with simple folk who accept things in faith. The two are actually inseparable, but not according to definition ... just cause and effect.

I actually enjoy watching science solve our deepest questions, but sometimes we simply need to accept things, until we can build understanding.

I think the promise was made to Noah after the flood (I'll definitely lose a few here) but I simply quote:

As long as the earth exists, planting and harvesting, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never stop. Genesis 8:22

I understand it as "Intelligent Design", but not everyone will, and that's OK too. Why would a promise like that be made, if the earth was about to be damaged/destroyed by AGW?

 

[dcraig1]

I have posted this article elsewhere, and I am wondering how scientific research into the consequences of it are going:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com.au/news/2009/12/091224-north-pole-magnetic-russia-earth-core.html

Richard A. Lovett in San Francisco

for National Geographic News

December 24, 2009



Earth's north magnetic pole is racing toward Russia at almost 40 miles (64 kilometers) a year due to magnetic changes in the planet's core, new research says.

The core is too deep for scientists to directly detect its magnetic field. But researchers can infer the field's movements by tracking how Earth's magnetic field has been changing at the surface and in space.

Now, newly analyzed data suggest that there's a region of rapidly changing magnetism on the core's surface, possibly being created by a mysterious "plume" of magnetism arising from deeper in the core.

And it's this region that could be pulling the magnetic pole away from its long-time location in northern Canada, said Arnaud Chulliat, a geophysicist at the Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris in France.

Finding North

Magnetic north, which is the place where compass needles actually point, is near but not exactly in the same place as the geographic North Pole. Right now, magnetic north is close to Canada's Ellesmere Island.

Navigators have used magnetic north for centuries to orient themselves when they're far from recognizable landmarks.

Although global positioning systems have largely replaced such traditional techniques, many people still find compasses useful for getting around underwater and underground where GPS satellites can't communicate.

The magnetic north pole had moved little from the time scientists first located it in 1831. Then in 1904, the pole began shifting northeastward at a steady pace of about 9 miles (15 kilometers) a year.

In 1989 it sped up again, and in 2007 scientists confirmed that the pole is now galloping toward Siberia at 34 to 37 miles (55 to 60 kilometers) a year.

A rapidly shifting magnetic pole means that magnetic-field maps need to be updated more often to allow compass users to make the crucial adjustment from magnetic north to true North.

Wandering Pole

Geologists think Earth has a magnetic field because the core is made up of a solid iron center surrounded by rapidly spinning liquid metal. This creates a "dynamo" that drives our magnetic field.

(Get more facts about Earth's insides.)

Scientists had long suspected that, since the molten core is constantly moving, changes in its magnetism might be affecting the surface location of magnetic north.

Although the new research seems to back up this idea, Chulliat is not ready to say whether magnetic north will eventually cross into Russia.

"It's too difficult to forecast," Chulliat said.

Also, nobody knows when another change in the core might pop up elsewhere, sending magnetic north wandering in a new direction.

Chulliat presented his work this week at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco.

Much has been suggested about the behaviour of birds and animals over recent years, in that some anomalous departures from established norms, may be attributed to AGW.

I'd like to propose another possibility, which excludes AGW.

In fact it is suspected that the homing behaviour of some bird species, and some animal species, is directly attributed to their ability to sense the earth's magnetic field. eg the Monarch Butterfly, Pigeons, Marine Turtles, Whales and Honey-Bees to name some.

This link has a series of animations that hypothesize how the earth's magnetic field flips occasionally, in a polarity reversal.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/magnetic/reversals.html

I have not been able to find anything on this, but I suspect that the dumping of snow on the USA today, instead of in Canada where it was expected (and needed for the Winter Olympics) may be attributed to the moving of the North Pole - or more correctly, true Magnetic North, and the effect it has on the development of weather.

I have not gone into this - it may well be the opposite - but the movement of the North Pole towards Russia at over 40 miles per year, seems significant to me.

And it might just explain the change in the pattern of the annual melting and re-freezing of the Arctic and the North Sea Ice sheets - not to mention unusual freezing in strange places!

Amazingly, Australia is in the middle of the El Nino effect, where we oscillate and share the swapping of the La Nina weather-pattern twins, with South America. Right now, Australia is is the grip of the El Nino, and SHOULD be experiencing a drought. But we have had, and are having as I write, unusual and very blessed rainfalls right across the nation, filling dams and streams, and establishing pastures in the deserts that will make dry "hay" which will last for years, and maintain its protein potency for stock feed for years as well.

Such blessing can only come from a benevolence outside of the understanding of men, and which one day will be understood by science, as they use "evidence" and "knowledge" to come up to speed with simple folk who accept things in faith. The two are actually inseparable, but not according to definition ... just cause and effect.

I actually enjoy watching science solve our deepest questions, but sometimes we simply need to accept things, until we can build understanding.

I think the promise was made to Noah after the flood (I'll definitely lose a few here) but I simply quote:

As long as the earth exists, planting and harvesting, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never stop. Genesis 8:22

I understand it as "Intelligent Design", but not everyone will, and that's OK too. Why would a promise like that be made, if the earth was about to be damaged/destroyed by AGW?

Pseudo science (and I'm being very generous in calling it that) and creationism all rolled up in one err .... unholy mess. Your anti-science mindset is obvious.

 

[dcraig1]

Very balanced discussion here Craighole - John Coleman (who founded the WEATHER CHANNEL, before you start carping about peer-review and "qualifications") is very restrained. He only calls AGW the greatest scam in history.
They identify the reasons people are spouting your crap - money, power, and a desire to set up a global socialist system.

Joe McCarthy lives on.

"McCarthyism is the politically motivated practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence."

"The term is also now used more generally to describe reckless, unsubstantiated accusations, as well as demagogic attacks on the character or patriotism of political adversaries."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

Yup, the the second paragraph certainly seems to sum up the behavior of extremist deniers. Not surprising really. Unable to deal with the weight of scientific evidence, it is the only course open to them.

 

[maiden22]

Well done Craig - you got something right for once. McCarthyism does indeed live on - in the extremist warmist camp.

The sceptic camp relys on honesty and reason.

 

[Ingot54]

Well done Craighole - you got something right for once. McCarthyism does indeed live on - in the extremist warmist camp.

The sceptic camp relys on honesty and reason.

Maiden22

It is because of the McCarthyist warmistra's/alarmists, that the "science" of AGW has received the bad press it deserves, and mainstream media are falling over themselves to run with the truth of the scam/hoax now.

But Google found me this article that is pointing to a different scenario - for disrupted climate/weather patterns over years: shifting poles.

http://ku-prism.org/polarscientist/hollowworld/Aug81897ChiHerald.htm

Few phenomena tend to prove the instability of present climatic conditions of the earth more than does the fact that the arctic regions, now covered by snow and ice, have formerly enjoyed a climate which permitted tropical vegetation. The fossil flora of those regions has proved that, although the climate appears to have grown colder before the middle of the tertiary period, Spitzbergen at that time was covered by forests of maple, linden, magnolia, sycamore, oak, hazel, beech, poplar, cypress, sequoia and other trees.

Also refer to the heading: "Europe's Climate Was Warmer" in that article.

Professor Nathorst (Paleontologist) sums up with this: "Still, I purposely use the expression, "for the present," for the history of science has proved only too often that the hypothesis which at one time seems to explain everything later on must make room for something better."

The science is NOT settled, Mr Gore.

My earlier post attempted to show that since the creation of the earth, through whatever processes that occurred that made it conducive to human life (some say creation, others say evolution, some say both) the fact is that over the past 10,000 years we have enjoyed stability of climate, with a few aberrations in certain localities.

The climate we have enjoyed over the past 1200 years may not actually be the "norm" for the planet. It is because this period has seen the most growth in modern agriculture, industry, scientific progress and establishment of national borders, that we have come to accept and take for granted that this is how it "should be".

Maybe what we are experiencing at the moment is one of hundreds of fluctuations due to normal earth-cycles, that tend to cleanse itself, as opposed to hurting itself. The mechanism has nothing to do with what happens above the ground at all - it may have everything to do with changing polarity.

While the article linked to above anticipates such changes occurred over millions of years, it may also be that the actual change of polarity occurred over a few years. This would be one explanation for why the dinosaurs disappeared quickly, and did not migrate to more conducive climates, or evolve further.

Because it has been assumed that change on earth has happened over millions of years, there is an exclusion of any ideas that it could happen suddenly.

The movement of the North Pole of 40 miles per year, towards Russia, is one such "sudden" event. ie it is happening NOW, not over one million years. Of course, it could just be wandering, and eventually return to its "normal" position of about 5 degrees away from "true north". In terms of geo-time, the current movement of the pole has happened/is happening in a nano-second, depending on the view you take of the creation of the earth.

Those who ascribe to the view of a created earth, about 10,000 years ago, will however, see it as less sudden.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. Genesis 1:5

I introduce this NOT as a religious point, but as a point to illustrate how time can be seen through different interpretations.

I am saying that science has been able to demonstrate through carbon dating techniques (not always accurate nor reliable, but a tool nevertheless) that certain organic materials existed quite some time back, in pre-history.

Yet creationists believe that the creation of the earth happened literally in 24 hour time, because of the Genesis record. One creationist day, is 24 hours, because "the evening and the morning were the first day" not thousands of years.

My point is that what we are seeing with the current movement of the North Pole, could continue, making life very different on the planet, and it has nothing to do with AGW. It is simply the earth doing its thing, and we can not stop it.

No one knows if the poles will move/reverse/go back where they came from etc.

But the current dump of snow on the lower lattitudes of the USA, while Canada gets very little, might be an aberration, or it could be a reversion to the mean. It may take 10,000 years, a million years, or 5 years, or 100 years - no one knows or can say with any certainty.

Man has only recently begun to look more deeply that his navel, except for the alarmists, who seem to want to hang the guilt on the whole species.

I contend that we do not understand climatology at all, because we are looking at ridiculously tiny changes in CO2 in the atmosphere and pointing the finger at that. But no one has explained how this is significant, given that science has also shown that global temperatures were much cooler when we had hundreds of times more CO2 present in the atmosphere than we have today.

MY thoughts on this are that we will soon put the hypothesis of AGW aside, and begin to focus on a much bigger picture - that of geo-physical changes in earth's magnetic polarity.

But I leave this to the physicists - my training does not get within a hogs breath of global physics, only the laboratory kind, which is infantile in comparison.

I think the title of this thread is apt - and we are now getting to other causes for what has been termed "climate change" - a euphemism invented because "global warming" was unprovable, and unable to be differentiated from "global cooling".

The REAL global warming is far different from some corrupted and manipulated data; far more than the blocking from peer review (and subsequent publication) of opposing viewpoints and opposing data; far removed from the "missing data" from Chinese weather stations; far less than the Copenhagen rabid alarmists wanted the world to believe, and certainly far different from the picture the hockey player Michael Mann wanted to portray.

Climate Change I can run with.

Global Warming?

Incidentally I had a read of the response to my post #538 on page 68 of the thread.

I said:

I happen to work with people who can not even afford decent health-care.
I see people die because they can not afford the treatment that may have saved them.

The response was

In Australia? Really? Pull the other one. It may be well short of perfect, but it's largely free in the public system.

Now I don't know how that person's mind works, but you don't just walk in off the street and get a Cardiac Artery Bypass Graft on demand - people are on a waiting list for such surgery and are dying before they can get it.

They die before they can get Angioplasty.
They die because they have no private health cover, and the public waiting list is too long for them to receive care in time. In Victoria (Australia) alone, to April 2009: "more than 2,300 people have died over the past five years while awaiting elective surgery."

Here's another: "over 1,000 children waiting over 600 days for ear, nose and throat surgery in Warnbro, a suburb in Western Australia."

The respondent is confused - they are thinking that "free" means "timely care".

I think after 26 years working in every state in Australia as a Registered Nurse (except the ACT and Victoria) I may have picked up a thing or two about the parlous state of Australia's medical care system in both the Private and Public systems.

I can categorically state that the Public Health system in Australia is falling behind in dealing with "emergency" surgery and diagnostics.

Yes, people ARE dying on waiting lists. I can tell you of cases where people awaiting diagnostic tests (colonoscopy, bronchoscopy, colposcopy) were put back for a year because of waiting lists, only to find that the cancer (undiagnosed) had progressed to inoperable.

There is immeasurable pain and anxiety out there because of waiting lists for orthopaedic surgery, and many cancellations of the same, in the months waiting times on the public lists. With the private system charging from $700 per day for just the bed, and up to $1500 depending on the facility, and $7000 per day for an ICU bed, even Privately covered patients have to reconsider whether they can afford the "gap fees" for costs not covered by their Health Fund.

The respondent was clearly out of their depth making such a facile comment. They are quite incapable of processing facts in a rational manner ... owned!

Here's just ONE story, from January 10 2010 "The Age"

http://www.theage.com.au/national/never-again-in-a-public-hospital-20100108-lyyo.html

The Copenhagen agreement was going to suck more money out of every participating country, leaving less of the "pie" to be divided up for very-much over-stretched utilities and services, and for what???

Sorry about the length of the post Maiden22, and the possibly controversial nature of some of the thoughts - but I think there may be many people who subscribe to something similar, in looking for the truth about shifting weather patterns, and longer-term climate anomalies.

Just for fun, Google "Expanding Earth Theory" and enjoy the youtube and other articles. I think there is an article attempting to show why it is discredited, but the majority favor an expanding - food for thought for sure.

Might even explain shifting polarity ... who knows?

 

[Adamus]

The main problem that we have as a society & civilisation is not climate change -because we could sort that out (we have the technology): the problem is, society doesn't want to sort it out. Most of us are so entrenched in our lifestyles and have so much inertia in the way we live, that we couldn't change unless we were forced.

It's too easy to pick up on the doubts and uncertainties surrounding climate change and just think "it's all too much to bear thinking about so I'll just live in denial until something forces me to act"

Can't remember who it was who said it, but it's true that the main challenge now is to motivate the population to accept (let alone want) to change to a low energy future.

What we've got here is a perfect case of people in denial - big time denial.

The more you push them to face reality, the more entrenched they become in their position. So the most constructive thing to do is just to forgeddaboutit and leave them to it, coz you aint got a chance. And baiting them is strictly counterproductive - the equivalent of doubling up on your losses!

 

[Ingot54]

The main problem that we have as a society & civilisation is not climate change -because we could sort that out (we have the technology): the problem is, society doesn't want to sort it out. Most of us are so entrenched in our lifestyles and have so much inertia in the way we live, that we couldn't change unless we were forced.

It's too easy to pick up on the doubts and uncertainties surrounding climate change and just think "it's all too much to bear thinking about so I'll just live in denial until something forces me to act"

Can't remember who it was who said it, but it's true that the main challenge now is to motivate the population to accept (let alone want) to change to a low energy future.

What we've got here is a perfect case of people in denial - big time denial.

The more you push them to face reality, the more entrenched they become in their position. So the most constructive thing to do is just to forgeddaboutit and leave them to it, coz you aint got a chance. And baiting them is strictly counterproductive - the equivalent of doubling up on your losses!

Hi Adamus

A low energy future I can live with.

Tell me lies and try to manipulate me, and you definitely will have resistance, lack of trust, and a promise to do my best to get rid of you and your ideas.

This is not personal - because I accept your point. And thank you for the perspective.

I was raised on a farm in the early 1950's, and had to milk cows before riding my horse to school, 12 klm away. with a brother and sister who were older than I.

We didn't have time under those conditions to deal with lies and deception - our energy was directed in winning the battles that were squarely in front of us, not some namby-pamby beat-up that enhances the ego of some obscure wannabe report-writer for the IPCC or other ...!

Just so you know where I'm coming from, and how much I hate story-tellers (read: liars and manipulators) .

The society I grew up in was close-knit, honest and God-respecting.

Today on a forum you can show as much disrespect as you like towards others and their beliefs, but that does not change the facts.

In Australia we have a PM who wanted to show the world what a wonderful leader he is, and how he got his house in order before Copenhagen yada yada. Unfortunately, he mingled a bit of myth with the truth, and the electorate didn't buy it, and he went to Copenhagen, with egg on his face, and only an illegal in-principal agreement nutted out by some other countries before the meetings, who had the most to win from this hoax.

Now you understand why I am so dead-set against the hoax - one of the biggest con jobs ever organised, and the shame is that good scientists (who are now deserting) were sucked into it.

I welcome any suggestion on cleaning up the planet, lowering energy consumption, developing efficiency in every possible energy-saving area and so on.

But don't lie to me and tell me that the sky is falling just to spur me into compliance.

I respond far better to truth.

 

[dcraig1]

Now I don't know how that person's mind works, but you don't just walk in off the street and get a Cardiac Artery Bypass Graft on demand - people are on a waiting list for such surgery and are dying before they can get it.

They die before they can get Angioplasty.
They die because they have no private health cover, and the public waiting list is too long for them to receive care in time. In Victoria (Australia) alone, to April 2009: "more than 2,300 people have died over the past five years while awaiting elective surgery."

Here's another: "over 1,000 children waiting over 600 days for ear, nose and throat surgery in Warnbro, a suburb in Western Australia."

The respondent is confused - they are thinking that "free" means "timely care".

I think after 26 years working in every state in Australia as a Registered Nurse (except the ACT and Victoria) I may have picked up a thing or two about the parlous state of Australia's medical care system in both the Private and Public systems.

I can categorically state that the Public Health system in Australia is falling behind in dealing with "emergency" surgery and diagnostics.

Yes, people ARE dying on waiting lists. I can tell you of cases where people awaiting diagnostic tests (colonoscopy, bronchoscopy, colposcopy) were put back for a year because of waiting lists, only to find that the cancer (undiagnosed) had progressed to inoperable.

There is immeasurable pain and anxiety out there because of waiting lists for orthopaedic surgery, and many cancellations of the same, in the months waiting times on the public lists. With the private system charging from $700 per day for just the bed, and up to $1500 depending on the facility, and $7000 per day for an ICU bed, even Privately covered patients have to reconsider whether they can afford the "gap fees" for costs not covered by their Health Fund.

You contended that people are dying in Australia because of poverty and consequent lack of access to heathcare. No, it is because the public heath system needs improvement. There is an important distinction. In the US people don't have access to heath care because of poverty. It's not a question in the US of waiting lists, it's a question of no access at all.

You won't find any argument from me about better funding for public health care. We in Australia could raise a few billion by desisting from engagement in imperialist wars in the middle east for starters. Australia is quite wealthy enough to have an excellent public heath care system AND move to a low carbon economy at the same time.

I have had plenty of contact with heath care in Australia in the last few years through a number of closest family members. It certainly isn't all bad by any means. Most recently through my daughter who was diagnosed with an auto immune condition. In her case the only thing I can say that I rate the public system very very highly. From initial contact with a GP (bulk bill - no charge) who got the provisional diagnosis right for a fairly rare condition, emergency medical response (GP arriving on doorstep to check on her condition), initial treatment (IVIG rather than Prednisone with a cost difference of the order of 1000x due to patient preference despite no clinical preference), free hospitalization, something like 50 blood tests over a twelve month period and ultimately highly successful treatment with a agent neither on the Medicare Schedule or FDA approved for that condition but still provided for free. Top notch, timely care, most up to date treatment, successful outcome at essentially no cost. Oh and did I mention the empathetic staff? Near perfect.

 

[dcraig1]

Craighole, let me ask you a question. Isn't it worth losing a few species, polar bears and so on, a few low-lying nations and whatnot, for all the benefits that global warming brings us?

Lets not stop at the polar bears, let's do away with the grizzly and black bears too. How about the rain forests and the coral reefs. Rain forests are quite sensitive to climate change as well evidenced by the massive shrinking of the Australian rain forests over a quite short time period. And coral reefs are sensitive to both temperature and acidity. Of course the significance of all of it pales in comparison with the profits of Exxon-Mobil, BHP and RIO doesn't it?

And who is the "we" to dictate that pacific islanders should be evicted from their homelands? I think you should go and tell them in person and see what happens.

 

[dcraig1]

The main problem that we have as a society & civilisation is not climate change -because we could sort that out (we have the technology): the problem is, society doesn't want to sort it out. Most of us are so entrenched in our lifestyles and have so much inertia in the way we live, that we couldn't change unless we were forced.

It's too easy to pick up on the doubts and uncertainties surrounding climate change and just think "it's all too much to bear thinking about so I'll just live in denial until something forces me to act"

Can't remember who it was who said it, but it's true that the main challenge now is to motivate the population to accept (let alone want) to change to a low energy future.

What we've got here is a perfect case of people in denial - big time denial.

The more you push them to face reality, the more entrenched they become in their position. So the most constructive thing to do is just to forgeddaboutit and leave them to it, coz you aint got a chance. And baiting them is strictly counterproductive - the equivalent of doubling up on your losses!

Many people are confused because of the current concerted campaign of disinformation modeled on the that run by "think tanks" paid for the tobacco lobby. Just as that campaign failed so ultimately will this one, in the face of the facts.

The methods being employed are rather similar. Even some of the same people are involved. This video presentation by a professor of the history of science makes for interesting viewing.

Most people do not subscribe to all the conspiracy theory drivel espoused on this thread.

 

[maiden22]

Lets not stop at the polar bears, let's do away with the grizzly and black bears too. How about the rain forests and the coral reefs. Rain forests are quite sensitive to climate change as well evidenced by the massive shrinking of the Australian rain forests over a quite short time period. And coral reefs are sensitive to both temperature and acidity. Of course the significance of all of it pales in comparison with the profits of Exxon-Mobil, BHP and RIO doesn't it?

And who is the "we" to dictate that pacific islanders should be evicted from their homelands? I think you should go and tell them in person and see what happens.

Lets see. That post was accompanied by photographs showing how swimwear had shrunk since Edwardian times. I described this as one of the greatest benefits of a warming world.

Do you think that there is any chance that it might have been a joke to annoy you? Thank you for the hilarious response - I couldn't have hoped for better.

 

[dcraig1]

On the importance of the rain forests:

"Possible cancer cure found in blushwood shrub"

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,1,26677869-23272,00.html

If we ignore the journalistic hyperbole that so often accompanies medical stories, one lesson to be taken away is that the destruction of rain forests means elimination of species with very useful attributes even before there has been any opportunity to research them and in many cases even to identify them. Global warming will damage rain forests. There is more than enough evidence in the peer reviewed literature to be certain of this.

There is no way to put the bio-diversity humpty dumpty back together again once it is broken. That is way beyond human capabilities for the foreseeable future.

Some people maintain that burdening future generations with debt is a crime. That pales into insignificance in comparison to the destruction of their natural heritage from which so many benefits flow.

 

[maiden22]

On the importance of the rain forests:

"Possible cancer cure found in blushwood shrub"

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,1,26677869-23272,00.html

If we ignore the journalistic hyperbole that so often accompanies medical stories, one lesson to be taken away is that the destruction of rain forests means elimination of species with very useful attributes even before there has been any opportunity to research them and in many cases even to identify them. Global warming will damage rain forests. There is more than enough evidence in the peer reviewed literature to be certain of this.

There is no way to put the bio-diversity humpty dumpty back together again once it is broken. That is way beyond human capabilities for the foreseeable future.

Some people maintain that burdening future generations with debt is a crime. That pales into insignificance in comparison to the destruction of their natural heritage from which so many benefits flow.

More scaremongering Craig (conspiracy theorist?)?

Nobody wants the destruction of rain forest, or the extinction of species (although some people are prepared to do it anyway for money).

Forests are under threat because of man - man cutting it down that is.

Are you going with the IPCC's claim of 40% under threat - another claim based on sound peer-reviewed science lol. If you're not aware of the growing scandal, google "amazongate" when you've finished trying to twist "glaciergate" into one of your mad conspiracy theories.