The views expressed below are those of the American Gardener and not the Busted Blonde. BB's credentials remain intact on this issue :-)
With all the teeth gnashing by the troll lords & cetacean masters of middle earth deprecating Nationals intention to proceed with the ETS we thought we would take a look at the policies of the various political parties on anthropogenic global warming.
A quick flick through www.policy.net.nz appears to indicate that all the political parties except one accept the science of AGW. They have different ideas about what to do about it but they all appear to accept that somethings needs to be done. ACT Party Climate Change Policy reads a little like something Glen Beck or our own Garth George might have written.
Does it not, seem rather unlikely that the majority of our politicians and all their advisors have been misled by some global conspiracy ?
Of course there are some other solutions we can take after the consequences have occurred:
Posts
4 comments:
Is it just possible that nearly all politicians see "AGW" theory as another opportunity to gain money and therefore power from a "science" that is easy to promote but difficult to disprove.
I accept that 20th/21st century developed economies are burning amounts of carbon that are historically high but just as alarmists from the late 19th century who predicted doom for the world when the coal ran out I believe it is the same for oil now.
Nuclear energy is almost untapped and when the worlds emissions are placed alongside Krakatoa, Mt St Helens,Pinatabo and the current volcano that I dont even pretend to be able to pronounce, I find those who are blaming industrialised mankind for climate change ludicrous. Resource depletion yes but what we do alongside the truly enormous effects of volcanic activity and sunspot/solar storm activity, give me a break.
I hope Mr Hide who you try to demean with inane name calling will prevail and at least get Dr Smith who is definitely a tortured soul and his patron Mr Key to at least accept the economic insanity of risking our economy in the face of all our economic partners delaying and or canceling ETS costs on the recovering financial world.
Dear American Gardener
I dont know what drug you are on, but what ever it is, is causing brain degradation. You make no sense at all.
"Does it not, seem rather unlikely that the majority of our politicians and all their advisors have been misled by some global conspiracy?"
It may seem unlikely, as does the likelihood that the ball will land on the number you chose at the roulette wheel. However the ball still lands on that number sometimes.
So put that aside, the question is not whether to believe in AGW because our politicians have largely bought into it. In fact there are several questions inherent in the post, but I'll address two:
1) Is the world going to get catastrophically hot because humans are emitting too much C02?
While much argument is made about the science etc, the empirical evidence suggests not, and if you read widely and balance the opinions you may come up with a best guesstimate of about 1.5 deg C by 2100. Of that about one third may be attributable to AGW.
You may also note the Urban Heat Island effect has not been well accounted for, and the temperature stations that have recorded the most warming in the latter decades are usually in areas where someone recently built an airport. AGW is just as likely to be UHI.
2) If catastrophic AGW was real then is an ETS or even a carbon tax an effective way to deal with it?
No - among the best ways to deal with it is to massively increase vegetation coverage (which ironically is what happens when CO2 is increased in the atmosphere).
Redistributing trillions of dollars and ruining the economies of the western world to shift CO2 emissions to China and India is pointless.
I agree completely with WiseUp.
Linda
Post a Comment