Why cars are taxed on CO2 emission?

cardinalbiggles

Strider590 wrote: »

"Climate change" was born...... What is "climate change"?
Yet more b*llsh*t, another buzz word.
The climate is always changing!!!! That's why we have Winter/Spring/Summer/Autumn!!!! On a longer term scale, over millions or years, the earth doing EXACTLY what it's always done!

Not quite and again missing the point.

Strider590 wrote: »

We need to stop listening to those who make money out of the whole scam.

Its clearly not a scam, since you are quoting the denialist Schumacher (which funnily enough is German for cobblers is it not?) have a wee look at the Wikipedia article which is pretty much an accurate reflection on these people

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

I think we need to get this 100% straight. There is no credible argument for humans and our use of fossil fuels / greenhouse gas output not being the cause of major climate change.

Harry_Flashman

cardinalbiggles wrote: »

Its clearly not a scam, since you are quoting the denialist Schumacher (which funnily enough is German for cobblers is it not?) have a wee look at the Wikipedia article which is pretty much an accurate reflection on these people

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

I think we need to get this 100% straight. There is no credible argument for humans and our use of fossil fuels / greenhouse gas output not being the cause of major climate change.

Of course it's a scam. The earth's climate changes - it's done it for millions of years and will continue to do so either with or without us.

The whole green movement is run by champagne socialists (who can well afford a few extra charges and taxes) who are followed by simple minded do-gooders desperately looking for a 'good' cause to support.

It would be easier to believe it wasn't a scam if it wasn't used as an excuse to prise the remaining few banknotes from my wallet.

Strider590

cardinalbiggles wrote: »

Not quite and again missing the point.

Its clearly not a scam, since you are quoting the denialist Schumacher (which funnily enough is German for cobblers is it not?) have a wee look at the Wikipedia article which is pretty much an accurate reflection on these people

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

I think we need to get this 100% straight. There is no credible argument for humans and our use of fossil fuels / greenhouse gas output not being the cause of major climate change.

I'm not denying "climate change", im denying that we're causing it and im pointing out that every single bit "scientific" research that has not been buried by interested parties, has only shown that the planet is doing exactly what it's always done.
In fact most of our climate is controlled by events outside our planets atmosphere.......

Not long ago they were banging on about solar flares as if it was something we'd caused.

Man's greatest disaster, our biggest single planet impacting event, was Chernobyl in 1986, 30 years on it's a tourist attraction.

I don't deny that we affect our planets climate (albeit minimal), but it's typical human arrogance to assume that we can control or change it.

We need to stop focusing on what we're told to focus on (carbon footprints), and we need to start looking at how we reduce consumerism and conserve resources.
All we do at the moment is think "oh I need to be green, let's by a new car"......

cardinalbiggles

Strider590 wrote: »

I'm not denying "climate change", im denying that we're causing it and im pointing out that every single bit "scientific" research that has not been buried by interested parties, has only shown that the planet is doing exactly what it's always done.

Sorry, but that is completely misleading. There is no doubt that it is being made worse by human habits, absolutely no doubt, absolutely no credible argument.

If you are so sure just present here a couple of peer reviewed papers that suggest that the burning of fossil fuels and release of noxious gasses are not exacerbating the situation. Go on, just a couple of them. High impact factor journals as well and not the made up journal of denial.

The whole argument is a ridiculous one, the analogy I always give is you may get away !!!!ing in your bath once but how often before you won't get into it any more? Our atmosphere is the same, there is an identifiable change due to our use of commodities and even if these were not the cause of the accelerated climate change and ozone layer issues its in our best interest to reduce what we pump into our atmosphere. Argue with that all you want, common sense really.

Joe_Horner

Oh the Ironing!!!

While converting wind’s kinetic energy into electricity, wind turbines modify surface–atmosphere exchanges and the transfer of energy, momentum, mass and moisture within the atmosphere4, 5, 6. These changes, if spatially large enough, may have noticeable impacts on local to regional weather and climate.Here we present observational evidence
[*] for such impacts based on analyses of satellite data for the period of 2003–2011 over a region in west-central Texas, where four of the world’s largest wind farms are located7. Our results show a significant warming trend of up to 0.72 °C per decade, particularly at night-time, over wind farms relative to nearby non-wind-farm regions. We attribute this warming primarily to wind farms as its spatial pattern and magnitude couples very well with the geographic distribution of wind turbines.

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1505.html

Unfortunately the full paper is behind a paywall so I can only link the abstract but I'm sure, as people who care about the science, the True Believers here have subscriptions to Nature as I do?





* Note: proper science - no computer models needed

Ultrasonic

Going purely by the quoted abstract, that Nature paper is talking about a LOCAL effect. A major point about the climate change issue is that it is a global phenomenon. It also does not in any way address cardinalbiggles' request for specific published evidence.

I'm surprised and a little worried by the level of climate change skepticism in this thread. Much as I'm sure we'd all love the climate change problem to somehow be the fevered imaginings of the global scientific community, the evidence is overwhelming that human activity is causing real harm.

dacouch

Strider590 wrote: »

The climate is always changing!!!! That's why we have Winter/Spring/Summer/Autumn!!!!

The seasons are due to the tilt of the earth

Joe_Horner

Ultrasonic wrote: »

Going purely by the quoted abstract, that Nature paper is talking about a LOCAL effect. A major point about the climate change issue is that it is a global phenomenon. It also does not in any way address cardinalbiggles' request for specific published evidence.

I'm surprised and a little worried by the level of climate change skepticism in this thread. Much as I'm sure we'd all love the climate change problem to somehow be the fevered imaginings of the global scientific community, the evidence is overwhelming that human activity is causing real harm.

No, the paper (and abstract) is finds a possible regional effect (bigger than local but smaller than global). The trouble there is, if you create regional effects in enough regions then they become global by definition, and the alarmists are actively trying to get these things built just about everywhere.

It also wasn't posted in answer to CB's request - if it was I would have made that clear. It was posted simply because the irony of the cure possibly having the same effects as the claimed illness amuses me. Much like the anti-depressants that have "suicide attempts" listed as a potential side effect.

Lum

Ultrasonic wrote: »

I'm surprised and a little worried by the level of climate change skepticism in this thread. Much as I'm sure we'd all love the climate change problem to somehow be the fevered imaginings of the global scientific community, the evidence is overwhelming that human activity is causing real harm.

No, just the evidence presented to the masses is overwhelmingly in support. The evidence against it is generally hushed away. Same with funding for research.

Far too many vested interests; whether it's tax excuses, or Al Gore's very profitable carbon trading company; to not be sceptical about it really. Funding for research is also heavily biassed in favour of pro-climate-change research.

It's actually the underhanded tactics involved that make me sceptical, not the science itself. Most scientists who are genuinely doing what they do out of interest in advancing science are happy to share their data, see their work challenged and enter into open debate with their detractors. Why doesn't this happen in the area of climate change? If it did I'd be more inclined to believe it.

I'm not outright denying man made climate change, but there's more going on than meets the eye here, and some people are getting very rich while the masses just pay more taxes.

Harry_Flashman

Ultrasonic wrote: »

I'm surprised and a little worried by the level of climate change skepticism in this thread. Much as I'm sure we'd all love the climate change problem to somehow be the fevered imaginings of the global scientific community, the evidence is overwhelming that human activity is causing real harm.

No-one disputes that the climate is changing, but that's been happening since the dawn of time.

The sad fact of the matter is that, given that there may be the remote possibility of this being in some way man-made, the issues will always be clouded by the fact that some people and organisations are making a lot of money out of the working man over it.