Peak Oil – Peak Oil; Don’t prepare anyone lets find alternate ways, we communicate by computers not letters sent over on boats across the oceans as in the 1800′s. Surely we can produce an alternate to oil. Seems as if we are held hostage by our own complacence to feed the oil barrens. As for the climate change, even if everyone was doing what they could, I’m not sure it would be enough to change what is out of our hands. I don’t think we have figure out how to control the weather.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BB I don’t really care what you think in fact I think green’s who spend time trying to warn people about global climate change are wasting their time. I don’t support the Kyoto agreement, I don’t support any carbon trading schemes I do support preparing NZ for both climate change and peak oil.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Just saving you the time Toad

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Actually, don’t think I mentioned Exxon on this thread!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Toad

Oh yes….they are all funded by Exxon, how silly of me to forget.

Face it Toad, the wheels are beginning to come off the climate change con, you will need to find another Trojan horse to ride your Marxist ideology in on.
————————————————————————————–

Turnip

32,000…are you really suggesting that all of them are wrong?

Stop acting like a child who has had its favourite toy taken away, as I said to Toad the end is near for the climate change con, deal with it and move on.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

So by your logic BB you would be very happy to have a Computer Scientist
perform open heart surgery on you. I mean if you are a computer scientist then you must also know everything there is about open heart surgery.

Why does the general public have this image that a scientist is this person who knows everything about all subjects and is an expert on everything.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“American Thinker” as a reference BB? That’s really stretching it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

tom

“There is no “choose the economy over the environmentâ€? option”

Oh yes there is

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/are_32000_scientists_enough_to.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

OK, who on this thread actually believes there’s a “wait and see” option on climate change and what evidence have you got to back it up to out-argue the world’s best economists and scientists?

The economy is the reason for action on climate change. It’s not about flowers and small fury animals. It’s about avoiding a world economy in permanent reverse.

There is no “choose the economy over the environment” option.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Ari,

“Gerrit: You mention sending off so much cash to Russia like there’s an alternative.

yes there is an alternative, a very BIG and BRAVE alternative.

We state that we will not be party to Kyoto any longer as the moneymen are lining up to gild their cages on this fraudulent and unauditted scam called the carbon trading scheme.

As an alternative we will lead the way in becoming carbon neutral by taxing local emmisions and keeping the tax take internal. Spending the emmisions tax take locally on reducing our own emmissons.

That is what people will vote for. Provided you leave them some money in the back pocket (done by getting the hugely bloated, over managed, public sector back in to productive work)

And that is what every country in the world will be following.

Turnip28

Cant have been a “well know” fact. I for one did not know about that research. However it does not mitigate my argument that we absolutely do not know if the weather patterns are now more severe then in the last 300 (was going for the 1000) years.

Theoretically it has based on 30 years of studying water temperatures. But what was the water temperature 300 years ago?

That is my argument. It is not known, so that we cannot draw the conclusion that the weather has gotten more extreme.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I thought it was a well known fact that hurricanes have a correlation with sea surface temperatures. If the sea surface temperature starts to rise we can see huricanes further north and more frequently further north.

Oh BTW you think Katrina was bad try a Hurricane like that hitting New York City and Long Island. That will make New Orleans look like a boy scout retreat.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

There is absolutely no proof that todays weather systems consisting of storms, droughts, rains, tornadoes, heat, cold or any variations thereoff and combination of one or more, is any worse or any better then any other time in the earths history.

gerrit, you may want to check this paper out then:
http://www.groen.be/folders/docPage/NATURE03906.pdf

Kerry Emanuel wrote the definitive paper on hurricane intensity ‘Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years’. Emanuel found a close correlation between hurricane intensity and sea surface temperature.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Firstly, the relationship between the environment and the economy isn’t an inverse one. In fact, the economy depends on the integrity of the environment- it’s only in the very short-term that sacrificing environmental integrity for economic gain seems to be a good idea. Unfortunately, because economic success is measured in terms of annual growth, not only are companies encouraged to think in the short term, they’re also encouraged to jump through hoops to grow significantly rather than providing a good linear return on investments.

Gerrit: You mention sending off so much cash to Russia like there’s an alternative. The fact is that successful countries like New Zealand have reached their current level of development by trashing the environment. It’s hard to get an international agreement for a consistent drop of greenhouse emissions without acknowledging that the developed world is largely responsible and has to bear the cost. You say we should dump Kyoto as soon as we can- but if we do that, why would anyone else try to lower their emissions? We were already losing what little credibility we had on climate change by paying lip service to an ETS with Labour and National’s brief stint in grand coalition over it.

Basically, we are in a very scary place- where success can’t be measured the way businesses think it is supposed to be, where we are stuck with an obligation to do the more of the legwork on climate change than less developed countries when we’ve hardly started on it, and in that sort of situation business doesn’t want to take risks. It wants to push as hard as it can to post a profit and look like it’s weathering the storm. And in doing so they’re effectively trying to wreck the one small step towards dealing with it that we were about to make.

As for the Greens showing how to make money off being pro-environment? I think we’ve already pointed out dozens of ways that this can be done. The problem is that business doesn’t want to listen at all and is instead throwing a tantrum. It’s just a matter of whether the Government will find a way around that or not.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Somehow there is a perception out there that pro environment=anti economy.
The job of the Greens should be to show the pro environment initiatives that will benefit the economy.
Now I’m sure you guys (frogs, sorry) think you are doing that, the trouble is the 90+% of the public don’t see you that way.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

toad,

Problem with Kyoto is that it is so bad, it should be thrown out.

As it is so bad it wont do nothing to combat climate change.

Just line the pockets of the Al Gore’s and the multi nationals bankers. How dumb are we?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Just that successive Canadian governments have not been honest to the international comitments they signed up to.

I’m not saying Kyoto is perfect – it is far from perfect. But at the moment it is the only international mechanism we have to combat climate change.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

“The Canadians have all but pulled out of Kyoto”

The wheels are already falling off aye Toad

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

treesoft,

“The recent cyclone in Burma demonstrates all too starkly the damage and suffering caused by extreme weather events. Expect more of these events in coming years, and expect them to be more extreme if we don’t take action to deal to their root cause.”

There is absolutely no proof that todays weather systems consisting of storms, droughts, rains, tornadoes, heat, cold or any variations thereoff and combination of one or more, is any worse or any better then any other time in the earths history.

There are no records that measured these weather occurances over a extended period of time. Even the last 150 years the measurement accuracy has to be questioned.

Simply put, it is scaremongering based on no scientifically measured figures.

Pure fabrication by the weather change proponents.

For about the hundreth time I will ask this question of the Green movement.

How will (through taxation) sending a billion dollars to Russia every year help New Zealands emmision standards?

While people may be concerned about climate change, the answer to controlling the climate (becasue that is what you are trying to achieve) through taxation to send a billion dollars to Russia is pretty much entenable.

What they want to know is who will audit that the carbon credits bought actually exist, that the middle men like Al Gore dont clip the ticket at an expected 30%.

But most importantly they want to know if it will actually make a difference.

You make think so but when I see figures of $100B in PROFIT for big corporates to participate in carbon trading, i know it is a scam.

Another question not answed going back to the replanting of forests. Who owns the carbon credits. The State or the land/plantation owner?

With the tightening of the belt through Cullens 8 years of overspending in the public service (which if it reaches 36 percent of all working person will collapse the economy totally) there is no more room for extra taxation.

In fact the new government (Labour or National) is going to have to clear out the non productive (becasue of being non taxpaying) public sector to relieve the burden on the productive tax payer sector.

You cannot tax the tax payer anymore then you do now so where the money for the Kyoto scam iss going to come from I really dont know.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I see Greenpeace have their heads in the usual place…

Taking action to prevent climate change = good.

Thinking that a taxation scheme qualifies as action = myopic, stupidity, etc.

Of course we as New Zealanders want climate change. What we don’t want is what the politicians want to deliver, which is no climate change action, and more cost to consumers. Thats the bit that politicos (inc our very own Fwog) can’t seem to get their heads around…

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

uk-kiwi said: The Canadians have all but pulled out of Kyoto

No, it’s actually worse than that. The Tory-led Government in Canada remains part of Kyoto, but fails to comply with its Kyoto reporting requirements.

In doing so, they blame their Liberal predecessors (with at least some justification), but are promising they will eventually comply with those requirements – they just need more time. Yeah, right!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)