The all encompassing Climate Change/AGW Thread..

[CSP]

.....discuss!

From me...

Fact: Climate has and will always change regardless of human influences.
Fact: Humans cannot significantly impact climate change either adversely or positively.

Any tax or costs imposed by governments anywhere in the world is purely a cash grab based on scaremongering.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't manage and consume our planet's resources smarter and cleaner. I'm all for that!

 

[minux]

I have one question.

How is taxing business a better way of reducing carbon dioxide than say, planting trees?

 

[CSP]

As a follow-on question to that, regarding taxing individuals...

How is it smart to tax individuals, most of whom are already struggling to get from pay to pay, and then use that tax to support the same individuals who struggled to pay it in the first place? It's going to cost X millions of dollars to administer and the money is just going to go round in circles. All without any impact on lowering carbon dioxide levels - the excuse with which the tax is meant to be for.

 

[nathanVY]

Fact: Climate has and will always change regardless of human influences.
Fact: Humans cannot significantly impact climate change either adversely or positively.

Any tax or costs imposed by governments anywhere in the world is purely a cash grab based on scaremongering.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't manage and consume our planet's resources smarter and cleaner. I'm all for that!

Agree 718%

Summed it up pretty well there CSP, Yes obviously the climate does change, no we didn't do it.

Yes we should be smart about how we treat the planet, etc

 

[Jesterarts]

I have one question.

How is taxing business a better way of reducing carbon dioxide than say, planting trees?

It's not. It's purely a financial decisions.

Taxing business = revenue for govermenent directly from carbon tax and then increased tax from individuals who are going to be paying more for a product when the business passes on the cost. Very clever.

Planting trees = no revenue for goverment.

I agree that we should be looking to cut down emissions but not because of stupid climate change, but purely because I think need to cut down polution.

I think we would all benefit if the air we breath was simply cleaner. Plus we eat fish from the sea etc so we should try to avoid those fish absorbing pollution from the water they live in and then us eating it.

In regards to climate change, I agree it's happening, the climate is constantly changing as it has for millions of years. There have been 5 ice ages in the history of the planet. So safe to say the planet has gone through a cooling stage which caused them and then warming stage which ended them. This is a process that takes thousands and thousands of years. People today are running around waving their hands in the air panicing over comperative data that has been gathered over what, 100 years? Pfft. Somewhat melodramatic isn't it?

So what it temperatures rise 1 degree in 50 years... in 500 they may drop 10. It's all about cycles, everything in nature is and so it the earths CO2 levels, temp, etc... see below.

Also, people are saying that climate change is bad because it's causing extintion, rising sea levels, etc.

Mightly big assumption that right now the world is at it's peak of perfection in species and geographical features. Maybe the species that are going to because extinct will allow other species to become superior and evolve more.

Survival of the fittest, isn't that what nature is about?

And I'm fairly confident the whales and dolphins will be pretty pumped it sea levels rise destroying man made areas. They will have more space to swim in and the population to build.

Plus at the moment industry and power generation methods are dirty and cause polution, but thing about how far technology has come in the last 50 years. In another 50 fossil fuels will be just that, fossils and industry will have developed technology to cut down their impact in regards to pollution and environmental effect.

 

[vr94ss]

Sure Jester, that graph shows cycles of temperature rise and fall. It also shows a strong correlation of CO2 levels in the atmosphere to the temperature. CO2 ppm goes up, temp goes up.. Where is this CO2 coming from that has raised the ppm from a pre-industrial 280 to the current 387(2009) levels? You'll also notice that in the last 400,000 years it hasn't risen over 300ppm. How would you explain this?

 

[CSP]

That graph just goes to show that the best prediction for the next 50 - 100 years is that temperatures are going to start to go down, and along with it CO2 levels.

 

[torch]

I have one question.

How is taxing business a better way of reducing carbon dioxide than say, planting trees?

shouldnt politics best be in the all things political thread?

 

[torch]

.....discuss!

From me...

Fact: Climate has and will always change regardless of human influences.
Fact: Humans cannot significantly impact climate change either adversely or positively.

Any tax or costs imposed by governments anywhere in the world is purely a cash grab based on scaremongering.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't manage and consume our planet's resources smarter and cleaner. I'm all for that!

Facts?, Humans cannot significantly impact climate change either adversely or positively.

According to who is this a fact? and where it is proven to be so.

 

[minux]

shouldnt politics best be in the all things political thread?

Are you for real?

This is an all topic AGW thread. Seeing as this tax is coming in because of the AGW alarmists, then it is a valid question in this thread.