Tony

[asic46]

Tony Abbott wakes one morning with a toothache, so he goes to the Dentist. The Dentist takes an x-ray and says "I am afraid that you need a filling Mr Abbott" Tony doesn't like needles and drilling (Who does ?) so he says "I'll think about it" Later that night, down the pub, he tells his mates about his problem. They decide to have a look for themselves, so Tony stands in a corner with his mouth open while they file past taking turns to stare in to his gob. After some discussion, a spokesman for the group says "We don't reckon you need a filling at all" "Wow that is great, thanks fellas" says Tony "I don't suppose you blokes know anything about climate change?" "Do we what !" they chorus. The rest is history....

 

 

[cscotthendry]

Brilliant!!!

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

^ Gillard voters!

 

 

 

[Admin]

I don't get it

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

^ Gillard voters!

No, just fed up with bullsh*t!

 

 

[Deskpilot]

I don't get it

I think it infers he gets his information from those who don't know anything about the problem. Worse thing is, he acts on it. Poor bugger, hasn't a clue. Have you noticed, when he walks, he apes our nearest relative in the animal kingdom.

And then the fight started.

 

 

[Admin]

[Deskpilot]

Why? Did I say something outrageous?

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

I keep hearing about 'The Science of Climate Change', then nobody puts forward any actual science! All I hear are anecdotes and untested hypothesis, which are mistakingly called 'facts'.

 

Here is my take on the politics of it all. Tony Abbott will not lead the Liberal party to the next election (as he has said that he will remove the tax) and the carbon tax will stay! The new leader will promise to 'review the tax once elected' so will be off the hook with regard to promises.

 

Finally here is some basic year 7 science - What happens when the ice in your drink melts?

 

 

[Wayne T Mathews]

.......Finally here is some basic year 7 science - What happens when the ice in your drink melts?

Just guessing... The volume decreases by roughly 9%?

 

No... Hang on, that's not right 'cause only the ice's volume decreases, eh? Aargh shoot, I dunno. This's above my pay scale...

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

I keep hearing about 'The Science of Climate Change', then nobody puts forward any actual science! All I hear are anecdotes and untested hypothesis, which are mistakingly called facts.

You must be looking in all the wrong places, HH. Have a look at Science and Environment News feeds. You will see regular reports by a host of scientists finding more evidence that something is seriously out of whack with our climate, and no, it hasn't happened like this before.

 

Do you really want to test the Climate Change Hypothesis? The stakes are rather high.

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

Thanks Old Koorelah, I will have a look as I am waiting to be convinced!

 

 

[cscotthendry]

Finally here is some basic year 7 science - What happens when the ice in your drink melts?

Here's some year 1 physics: If you take some ice cubes out of the fridge (Ice and snow sitting on land in the arctic and antarctic) and put them in your glass of water, what happens to the level of the water in the glass?

 

 

[horsefeathers]

a read of the last 2 years of Scientic American (an oxymoron for a large proportion of American Republicans) will give you enough information to scare the pants off you re global warming. Geeze, there is so much being published in peer reviewed, respected publications, that anyone who doubts the evidence (no, not the ALan Jones variety) of climate change has their head firmly stuck somewhere the sun dont shine.

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

Yeah I think horsefeathers has pretty much nailed it. You aren't ever going to see man-made / anthropogenic global warming by observation. As Dorothea put it this has always been a country of "droughts and flooding rains".

 

So the only way to accept AGW is to believe it by faith. You can listen to the doctrines and predictions of the well paid climate prophets and read their encyclicals like S-A. You will need to overlook their own lifestyles not matching their own dire predictions. You will need to overlook the data fiddling and at other times the refusals to reveal source data under FOI. And overlook the many failed predictions and the fact the computer models the prophets use are unable to accurately predict the current global climate, trusting instead that their future predictions are going to be correct. Also accept their own self agreement and strong censorship of those who disagree; you need to understand majority consensus is the scientific process of today. And as H-F says this is all tied into ones political beliefs i.e. the denomination one adheres to (evil party vs stupid party).

 

This system works well for kids that have grown up unquestioningly accepting what the school teacher / Uni lecturer taught them. On the original post in my opinion the Tony / Liberal 'climate policy' is indeed stupidity, as are the climate policies of the others. Conveniently many of the climate prophets appear to be on the public teat so it's all sweet while sufficient numbers of Joe public keep buying it.

 

 

[horsefeathers]

ah, not sure i was clear enough in my last post GG.

 

The peer reviewed, scientific basis for climate change is pretty overwhelming.

 

Have a look at this site for example from University of Colorado re sea level rises. Then all the naysayers (deniers, if you wish) may wish to point out all the obvious flaws in data gathering, all the data that has been hidden (oh really? Hidden data? sheese), and why their results are wrong.

 

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/map-sea-level-trends/

 

 

[kgwilson]

The climate has always changed. There were times that the polar areas were tropical and others when there was ice at the equator. The earth is about 4.5 billion years old and our human ancestors evolved about 1 million years ago and modern history only goes back about 4 or 5 thousand years. As I recall in the 24 hour clock of the planet's history we have been around since about 2 seconds to midnight.

 

When we talk about climate change it is extremely short term compared to the whole of evolution and we only know what it is like for that last few seconds before midnight.

 

What we have done to accelerate the natural change, is 200 odd years of industrialisation releasing carbon locked into fossil fuels that took evolution several hundred million years to create. We have probably used half of it by now increasing exponentially every year. You can't do this and then say there is no effect on the current ecosystem. Alan Jones & Lord whatshisface & followers have their heads firmly planted in the sand. We have the power & greed to completely stuff it all up or the wisdom & knowledge to avoid or at least delay the impending catastrophe that will change the planet as we know it. Luckily I will not be around to find out what happens.

 

 

[Yenn]

Tony Abbot. The labor party's secret weapon.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

How come both major parties deposed charismatic, intelligent leaders? Are we aftraid to be led by statesmen?

 

 

[pudestcon]

Yep, I was right - Just looked and this thread is indeed in the Aviation Laughter section.

 

Wot the???

 

Pud

 

 

[Yenn]

Charismatic?.The Labor party is so bereft of charisma that they had to get an old state hack to go to the senate to provide them with a foreign minister. Even so he has no idea how to sort out the Julian Assange problem, let alone refugees.

 

 

[spacesailor]

All this hot air, makes one Hot under the collar!,

 

The reason is simple, We cut down trees faster than they can replace themselves, From Ireland to the far east, was forest, trees make oxygen, o2 shields the earth from the sun, the tree canopy shields the soil, And every things stays damp, PUT the TREEs Back.

 

spacesailor