Climate Change Rally - Melbourne

[bobt]

Bob, I really do not understand how you could misinterpret what I wrote in the manner you have.

I'm not sure I have misinterpreted you, but if I have then that's unfortunate. Your comments about our young have been largely disparaging, and similarly you are clearly sceptical about the global scientific assessment of climate change. It makes little difference to me whether an estimated change has proven to be inaccurate, only if it is proven to be wrong - which is not the case. Today's news makes it clear that the rate of global warming is increasing rather than decreasing, so the estimates have been underestimates rather than over estimates.

It is not a religious mania, but an increasing sense of concern based on so little action from politicians. Politicians are clearly more focused on the electoral repercussions than on the health of the planet, and that means that no significant action is in the pipeline to reduce the impact and speed of global warming.

Despite your scepticism about the legitimacy of scientific evidence, the evidence of our eyes is more than sufficient when you look at the shrinking glaciers and other visual and obvious results. It is interesting that there is currently a trend in various academic journals to ignore those who continue to deny these changes because the evidence is now so overwhelming. It is becoming about as sensible to deny the science as it is for the "Flat Earth Society" to believe that the world is indeed flat!

So although you are perhaps "doing your bit" for the environment, it would perhaps be more useful to promote the reality of climate change than to argue against what is now a self-evident fact. Environmental pollution is actually a part of the problem rather than a separate issue, and as for population control I'm not quite sure what your strategy is. The Chinese tried that one with absolutely dreadful results!

[Gazza]

An interesting thread/discussion, Bob. You have a wonderful way to get so many good points across with a few words. Thanks.

I'm not sure I have misinterpreted you, but if I have then that's unfortunate. Your comments about our young have been largely disparaging, and similarly you are clearly sceptical about the global scientific assessment of climate change. It makes little difference to me whether an estimated change has proven to be inaccurate, only if it is proven to be wrong - which is not the case. Today's news makes it clear that the rate of global warming is increasing rather than decreasing, so the estimates have been underestimates rather than over estimates.

It is not a religious mania, but an increasing sense of concern based on so little action from politicians. Politicians are clearly more focused on the electoral repercussions than on the health of the planet, and that means that no significant action is in the pipeline to reduce the impact and speed of global warming.

Despite your scepticism about the legitimacy of scientific evidence, the evidence of our eyes is more than sufficient when you look at the shrinking glaciers and other visual and obvious results. It is interesting that there is currently a trend in various academic journals to ignore those who continue to deny these changes because the evidence is now so overwhelming. It is becoming about as sensible to deny the science as it is for the "Flat Earth Society" to believe that the world is indeed flat!

So although you are perhaps "doing your bit" for the environment, it would perhaps be more useful to promote the reality of climate change than to argue against what is now a self-evident fact. Environmental pollution is actually a part of the problem rather than a separate issue, and as for population control I'm not quite sure what your strategy is. The Chinese tried that one with absolutely dreadful results!

Slightly off topic?; hopefully the side effect from the trending same sex marriage/relationships should start having an impact in the near future?

[bobt]

An interesting thread/discussion, Bob. You have a wonderful way to get so many good points across with a few words. Thanks.

John Clarke (AKA Fred Dagg) had a theory that we are all born with only a set number of words, and when we use them all up we die. I don't want to risk it!

Slightly off topic?; hopefully the side effect from the trending same sex marriage/relationships should start having an impact in the near future?

It's interesting actually, there seems to be a decline in the West's desire to have kids and as John points out we do have too many people as it is. However, developing countries still manage to reproduce like rabbits, which the world could do without. However, I can't see the increasing numbers of same sex marriages impacting that any time soon. If they want kids they still get them one way or another, and they are still statistically only a blip on the radar.

Our two biggest threats in my view is (a) a shortage of world leaders who are prepared to make the hard decisions which are necessary if we are to overcome the more pressing issues facing us all, and (b) a willingness of the electorate to accept those decisions without focusing on short term selfishness. There is a bigger picture.