Are we in danger

[Merv and Sharon]

We all have our views on this. Those of us who work in scientific communities hear about their research and the consolidated views of the large body of research, that they choose to quote, and the long term 'trend' data. You form an opinion depending, to some extent, on the initial orientation or vested interest that you have.

I tend to agree with Cameron on most of this, and also can see the folly of thinking in short time frames. At a personal level, I am deeply concerned about the increasing control of our media by the owners of big business and now the mining companies (Palmer/Rinehart) and how this whole issue is presented. I also think that 7 billion people on this planet with cars, stoves, factories and animals, might just have a bit of an effect on the contents of the atmosphere and give old 'mother nature' somewhat of a challenge.

However, whether you are a believer or not, cynicism is the best attitude. Be cynical of the scientific claims until you have spent some time in the journals and doing your own search, but also be cynical of some of the leading nay-sayers and question their motives as well.

[Rog246]

Originally Posted by Merv and Sharon

We all have our views on this. Those of us who work in scientific communities hear about their research and the consolidated views of the large body of research, that they choose to quote, and the long term 'trend' data. You form an opinion depending, to some extent, on the initial orientation or vested interest that you have.

I tend to agree with Cameron on most of this, and also can see the folly of thinking in short time frames. At a personal level, I am deeply concerned about the increasing control of our media by the owners of big business and now the mining companies (Palmer/Rinehart) and how this whole issue is presented. I also think that 7 billion people on this planet with cars, stoves, factories and animals, might just have a bit of an effect on the contents of the atmosphere and give old 'mother nature' somewhat of a challenge.

However, whether you are a believer or not, cynicism is the best attitude. Be cynical of the scientific claims until you have spent some time in the journals and doing your own search, but also be cynical of some of the leading nay-sayers and question their motives as well.

Well said young Mervyn, well said !

[HSVREDSLED]

"Motive" is probably the most important word in this whole debate.

What was AL Gores Motive?

What is Gillards Motive.

Blind Freddy can see, that the motive of an imposition of a CO2 tax on Australia, is NOT primarliy to reduce global emmissions.

[Maurice Butler]

Originally Posted by HSVREDSLED

"Motive" is probably the most important word in this whole debate.

What was AL Gores Motive?

What is Gillards Motive.

Blind Freddy can see, that the motive of an imposition of a CO2 tax on Australia, is NOT primarliy to reduce global emmissions.

Money - who's making the money - all very simple really

[cameron02]

I assume Gillards motive is to stay in government. Labour lost a lot of votes to the Greens.

When you say who's making the money. I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that The Carbon Tax is going into Gillards personal bank account?

Over population. Yes I agree that it is probably the major cause of the climate problem and many others. Are we willing to change our vote?
Stable Population Party of Australia - Home