Barry, I could say the same thing about earthquakes. In the last few years I cannot re-call there being so many earthquakes as what has been happening in this time. And even the biggest climate alarmists would have trouble blaming that on climate change- although no doubt they'd love to. Our cousins across the water in NZ are living a terrible existence in some places as their beautiful country has been hit by so many in the last 12 months. Then there was the big earthquake in Indonesia 5 years ago that caused the huge tsunami that killed 250,000. There have been lots of others in Europe and Asia and elsewhere. The weather is cyclical- no doubt after a quiet spell for a couple of decades when it returns to a previous cycle things seem worse. Of course, there are certain people who take advantage of our poor memories and lack of of knowledge and most governments around the world seem happy to fund these profits (and prophets) of doom.
Rally,
I'm always happy to discuss / banter with mates.
My concern about the so-called 'debate' on climate is the way in which motives are ascribed, assertions made, without evidence. (In which general category I would place the parts of the quote in bold.)
On the issue of climate change debate I ask for only 3 things.
- An acknowledgement of self interest. As an Ausie who drives long kms I think it only fair that we acknowledge that we have the highest per capita 'energy footprint' on the planet, and so it would be in the interest of us maintaining that lifestyle for anything we have done / might do to be of no impact in ameliorating climate change.
- That evidence be tested in the established scientific manner. i.e. papers independently published and peer reviewed.
- A basic understanding of the scientific process. i.e. All scientific theory is a matter of the development of hypotheses and the testing of same. It is the testing which identifies anomalies / errors and leads to refinement through review.
The last point, in particular, seems beyond the understanding of the popular press, which seem to prefer headlines based on conflict / sensationalism. In turn, this is fed by the oppositional, and hence opportunist, nature of our political system.
For the sake of my / all of our kids, and theirs, etc, I would like to think that there may be something that could be done to ensure a better standard of life for the vast majority of the world's population and a more stable climate.
If so, in general, I'd be happy with the standard of living I grew up with in the 1960s and '70s being available to everyone on the planet. I certainly never felt 'deprived' in my single income, 1 car, 4 kids in a 12 square californian bungalow home, with the local shops, public transport and schools all within walking distance.
Of course, none of that is to say we can't deliver any of those things in a better way than we did in the past - e.g. solar / wind / geothermal power replacing much of the brown coal power, in the case of Victoria.
And apologies to all for encouraging the off-topic direction. Perhaps we need a thread in the 'off topic' section...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c5189/c51896754cb68cae40a1e4aa6cce06ce95147f43" alt="Wink ;) ;)"