Sent: 30-03-2011 11:52:04
In this issue:
Return to full article list
HomeFree weekly newsletterSelf Managed Super Fund ArticlesContact usLogin
Global Warming: Who is Arguing?
"Freedom from falsehood" - I read this phrase in a book I discovered on Friday at Brisbane's Avid Book Shop.
The author is describing what people have come to expect from science: #FFF, interesting that it's also the digital colour code for white.
You must understand that the author's intention in writing this phrase, "Freedom From Falsehood", is not to condone absolute, unflinching, blind faith in science of The Enlightenment kind when logic replaced faith.
At least then they tried to stick to the facts.
Anyone follow Fox News?
The media, government, industry, advertisers, and other barrow pushers - everyone from the age of two to a guy who throws his own daughter off a bridge to get back at his ex-wife spins their own "truth" to justify their behaviour.
We are steeped in mythology ... or should I say spin - it's science and this #FFF idea which has been pushed aside.
Unlike true myth that tries to explain big ideas such as existence itself, today's myths are designed to justify the self-interest and profit. Fair enough. Everyone has a right to their own opinion but they don't have a right to call it fact.
Anyone born in 1980 is aged over 30 today - right?
Well back in 1980 scientists worldwide were investigating global warming. By 1985, at least, some were concluding that human activity was the cause.
A report for the Energy Department USA by the Carbon Dioxide Information Centre called "Global Paleoclimatic Data for 6000 yr B.P. compiled a global data set by carbon dating pollen, marine plankton and measuring lake levels.
"Only anthropogenic forcing of climate, however, can explain the recent anomalous warming in the late 20th century." _
Abstract: Climate Over Past Millennia, National Climatic Data Centre, North Carolina
Do you realise that in the scientific community there is no climate debate? There is however concern about how we are going to produce as much food between now and 2030 as we've produced in the last 500 years to feed the world, as Queensland Chief Scientist Geoff Garrett told a National Science Week doco launch in February.
I switched the TV on about 9pm and I saw the Climate Commissioner Professor Tim Flannery and his team of climate scientists and economists sitting in a community meeting in Geelong answering questions from the public.
How much will petrol go up under a carbon tax? How many jobs will be lost at Alcoa? Isn't the ocean responsible for CO2 emissions? Where are the scientists?
Well, 98 percent of the scientific community accepts that climate change exists and is caused mainly by human activity. Scientists stopped arguing with the non-scientific community and went back to their benches, exploration boats and equipment to quietly continue working because no one was interested in the facts.
The Climate Commission, appointed by the Gillard Government in February, will be travelling the country holding community forums. Friday was the first one.
BTW, the cost of filling up your average petrol tank would go up by between $2-$4 a week if a carbon tax of between $20-30 a tonne is introduced.
And all the action plans that the commission know of provide support for Alcoa to protect jobs - until alternative power solutions are found.
Electricity demand is not going to drop over the coming decades as these Garnaut Climate Change Review graphs predict. So the Climate Commission is out there trying to convince people that reasoning behind a carbon tax contains good business logic - not myth.
Geelong Climate Commission Forum:
Learn about Paleoclimatology: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/education.html
Energy Department USA report by the Carbon Dioxide Information Centre called "Global Paleoclimatic Data for 6000 yr B.P.
Garnaut Climate Change Review:
This email is general in nature only and does not constitute or convey specific or professional advice. Legislation changes may occur quickly. Formal advice should be sought before acting in any of the areas discussed. Be aware that the information in these articles may become innaccurate with time. Responsibility is disclaimed for any inaccuracies, errors or omissions. Particular investments are neither invited nor recommended and hence this publication is not "financial product advice" as defined in Section 766B of the above legislation. All expressions of opinion by contributors are published on the basis that they are not to be regarded as expressing the official opinion of any other person or entity unless expressly stated. No responsibility for the accuracy of the opinions or information contained in the contributor's articles is accepted by any other person or entity. Copyright: This publication is copyright. If you wish to reproduce this article you require a license, which can be purchased here, to do so.