Do you think the planets are off axis and is this is what is causing the climate changes?
- Thread starter Ms Sue
- Start date
C
Contrarian
No, it's a well known fact that the weather changes particularly in the US is a result of a joint venture between Al Qaeda, the IRA and CIA. Bastards! 
P
Perth boy
I think because of all the mining in WA we took to much out of the world in one area and now it's of balance.
Demon
Legend Member
- Points
- 0
No, it's a well known fact that the weather changes particularly in the US is a result of a joint venture between Al Qaeda, the IRA and CIA. Bastards!
and Iran and North Korea, and the biggest threat to humanity(according to the US) CUBA.
The storm was sent by Cuba.
Demon
Legend Member
- Points
- 0
Seriously, though, it is just the natural cycle of the planet. This 'biggest storm in history' is based on 24 years of records (i.e. since 1988).
No climate records have been set for the 150 years that most places have records.
Notice we went from 'global warming' to 'climate change'. Because the warming turned out not to be true.
We are about 2 degrees C colder than the 1500s. This is the same 2 degrees which will destroy the planet. It is why England became the power it was. Its climate was similar to the current Mediterranean climate, and made it the best agricultural country in Europe.
The computer models (and they are just that) can produce whatever the programmer wants. And they have not been able to predict the past and current climate (this is called back-testing).
That is the equivalent to an opinion poll done in 2012 not being able to predict the 2010 federal election result.
The ice sheet on Antarctica is the biggest it has ever been since we have records, while the Arctic is shrinking. The extra ice in Antarctica exceeds the loss of ice in the Arctic. Oops, the world has more ice, not less. Better not mention the Antarctic too often, because the Antarctic has much more ice than the Arctic.
No climate records have been set for the 150 years that most places have records.
Notice we went from 'global warming' to 'climate change'. Because the warming turned out not to be true.
We are about 2 degrees C colder than the 1500s. This is the same 2 degrees which will destroy the planet. It is why England became the power it was. Its climate was similar to the current Mediterranean climate, and made it the best agricultural country in Europe.
The computer models (and they are just that) can produce whatever the programmer wants. And they have not been able to predict the past and current climate (this is called back-testing).
That is the equivalent to an opinion poll done in 2012 not being able to predict the 2010 federal election result.
The ice sheet on Antarctica is the biggest it has ever been since we have records, while the Arctic is shrinking. The extra ice in Antarctica exceeds the loss of ice in the Arctic. Oops, the world has more ice, not less. Better not mention the Antarctic too often, because the Antarctic has much more ice than the Arctic.
svengali
Foundation Member
- Points
- 3
Amen Demon,
Most of the "Global Warming" guff we have been reading about is alarmist crap put out by greenies and other left-wing types who would have us go back to living in caves. They cherrypick research and get in the ear of Government and cause more strife than they are worth. Nothing wrong with caring for the environment, of course we should, but regulation needs to be based on proper science, not knee-jerk reactions.
By the way, I have it on good authority from a Government source that that storm was actually caused by Tony Abbot.
Most of the "Global Warming" guff we have been reading about is alarmist crap put out by greenies and other left-wing types who would have us go back to living in caves. They cherrypick research and get in the ear of Government and cause more strife than they are worth. Nothing wrong with caring for the environment, of course we should, but regulation needs to be based on proper science, not knee-jerk reactions.
By the way, I have it on good authority from a Government source that that storm was actually caused by Tony Abbot.
Happy2
Legend Member
- Points
- 22
We all know smokestacks and a billion + cars are not helping our planet with their pollution but it is not the sole cause . Or as Demon stated earlier we would not have seen spikes in temperature in the past.
One thing that gets me is if a respected figure raises a valid point he is shouted down and branded a climate sceptic There was a time when science was advanced through scepticism Not accepting the status quo Now its follow the leader or your a marginalised figure That bloke in the corner with the weird ideas
That said climate change may well be real but if it cant be studied rationally we will never really know until our kids are wearing snowshoes to school or taking the camel
One thing that gets me is if a respected figure raises a valid point he is shouted down and branded a climate sceptic There was a time when science was advanced through scepticism Not accepting the status quo Now its follow the leader or your a marginalised figure That bloke in the corner with the weird ideas
That said climate change may well be real but if it cant be studied rationally we will never really know until our kids are wearing snowshoes to school or taking the camel
F
Farm Boy
No the NY flooding was caused by BHP RIo and FMG loading too many boats at the same time.
C
Contrarian
I disagree - the biggest threats to humanity are Ronald Reagan (still), Rose Porteous, Burger King, Coca Cola and Lionel Yorke!
C
colzilla
I reckon its caused by all the hot in Canberra... Julia and The Gang.
T
Tania Admin
The planet is just doing what it does. I remember going on a Hammersley Iron tour as a teenager and they were telling us how they did soil samples 10km inland at a massive depth and they had found a huge amount of beach sand, there geos or whomever told us that approx 300 years ago a tidal wave hit the coast of WA and it would have been about 2km's high. The earth is constantly changing and the weather is and has always been doing it's own thing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Demon
Legend Member
- Points
- 0
Remember that the Earth is a closed system. Everything that goes around comes around. The same atoms just reformulate over billions of years.
The only exception is some energy comes in from the sun.
Humans do not change this. Anyone who really believes that humans are the cause, should be doing something about reducing the number of humans on the planet, but every politician seems to want more people.
In 1900 there were about 1 billion people on the planet. Now there are 7 billion.
Our biggest real problem is water, and no politician seems to want to solve that. Instead they go for a nebulus 'climate change' (after finding the 'global warming' was a lie (after Al Gore made several hundred million dollars peddling his inconvenient truth lie). There is money to be made from this climate change con.
Just like Y2K.
I believe in climate change, but only as a part of natural fluctuations and change which humans have little (if any) effect. The estimated human impact is about 0.0001% (I might be out by a '0' or so).
The same guys (and gals) who brought you the GFC want these 'carbon credits' to trade to try and make billions (but it is a zero-sum game, i.e. gambling), so there must be losers for ever winner.
Pollies and their mates (finance is the biggest political spender in the world) are the 'winners' in this con. There are those who are paid to 'spread the religion'.
Everyone else (about 99% of the world) are the losers.
The only exception is some energy comes in from the sun.
Humans do not change this. Anyone who really believes that humans are the cause, should be doing something about reducing the number of humans on the planet, but every politician seems to want more people.
In 1900 there were about 1 billion people on the planet. Now there are 7 billion.
Our biggest real problem is water, and no politician seems to want to solve that. Instead they go for a nebulus 'climate change' (after finding the 'global warming' was a lie (after Al Gore made several hundred million dollars peddling his inconvenient truth lie). There is money to be made from this climate change con.
Just like Y2K.
I believe in climate change, but only as a part of natural fluctuations and change which humans have little (if any) effect. The estimated human impact is about 0.0001% (I might be out by a '0' or so).
The same guys (and gals) who brought you the GFC want these 'carbon credits' to trade to try and make billions (but it is a zero-sum game, i.e. gambling), so there must be losers for ever winner.
Pollies and their mates (finance is the biggest political spender in the world) are the 'winners' in this con. There are those who are paid to 'spread the religion'.
Everyone else (about 99% of the world) are the losers.