[paraclete]

No one quite knows how much of the continent of Australia is under water at the moment but just in the State of Queensland it exceeds 800,000 sq KM or about 10% of the continent and guess what? The monsoon season has only just started in the tropical north. To put that in some perspective it is an area larger than France and Germany combined, This won't displace the number of people displaced in the recent flooding in Pakistan but the cost is counted in billions of dollars. I have always said there is a lot of flat land in Australia for a reason and we are being shown the reason.

Where is all that water going to go? Well some of it will go into the Pacific ocean and some of it will go inland to add to the water already making its way to Lake Eyre. Some of it will refresh the Murray Darling system and bring a halt to the senseless buying of water rights by the Federal government. This will transform the inland for years to come, the Pelicans may even return to make their home there again.

Now it might be said all this is the result of global warming, but I remember similar events in my youth long before global warming became popular and we haven't inhabited this continent long enough to know what a thousand year flood might look like. If those events are repeated we are in for years of floods. In fact, nowhere in the world do we have enough information to really understand what nature might throw at us in a normal weather cycle. So how about we stop all this nonsense about global warming and go back to normal variability?

[tomder55]

I read about the flooding this morning . Glad to see our HAARP plans are on schedule. Once we get the glitches ironed out, we will be able to provide enough rain for irrigation and potable use ,without the flooding inconvenience. :rolleyes:

Yeah it's not Pakistan ,but it is impacting nearly a quarter million people and has not gotten the coverage it deserves.
http://www.wtma.com/rssItem.asp?feed...temid=29615526

Are there been any reservoir projects in the works ? If I'm not mistaken Queensland has annual drought and flood cycles. Couldn't some of this water be captured in the rainy season ? It would help agriculture.

[excon]

So how about we stop all this nonsense about global warming and go back to normal variability?

Hello clete:

Until you present your scientific credentials for making a such a statement, I'll consider your plea to be nothing more than right wing politics as usual..
You look around, and see lots of water - ergo, global warming is a hoax... But, the water sits on FLAT land... ergo, the earth is flat... Why is THAT observation different?

Dude! You are a science denier.. You are a believer in Intelligent Design.. That, in and of itself, is clear evidence of your denial... It's clear, that your interest is in promoting religion and NOT science...

excon

[tomder55]

Ironically the very basis for science is skepticism.. yet the cult of AGW calls skeptics 'science deniers'. Sounds like they are promoting their own religious brand.

[excon]

ironically the very basis for science is skepticism .

Hello again, tom:

In the language I speak, being skeptical that something is happening, and denying that it is happening, AREN'T the same thing...

excon

[tomder55]

"denier" is a smear cleverly crafted by AGW proponents to discredit the growing numbers of people ,including retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist, Dr. John S. Theon ,who dispute the so called "consensus " on man made climate change.

When you smear us as being anti-science ,you smear him as well ,along with the growing number of scientists who now dispute the contention.

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

I don't know what your problem is.. You DO deny the scientific consensus... What other word would you prefer I use? Deny, is exactly what you do... The word is accurate. To couch it as skepticism, is political correctness gone nuts... It's DENIAL... It's NOTHING other than denial...

Let's take on the second issue... People who believe in, or give an inkling of credibility to Intelligent Design, are science deniers. They may THINK they're evaluating different opinions equally, but they're not... One is science. One is religion. People who can't tell the difference are science deniers...

That's NOT a smear. It's ACCURATE...

excon

[paraclete]

I read about the flooding this morning . Glad to see our HAARP plans are on schedule. Once we get the glitches ironed out, we will be able to provide enough rain for irrigation and potable use ,without the flooding inconvenience. :rolleyes:

Yeah it's not Pakistan ,but it is impacting nearly a quarter million people and has not gotten the coverage it deserves.
1250 AM WTMA: The Big Talker | News and Talk from Charleston, South Carolina

Are there been any reservoir projects in the works ? If I'm not mistaken Queensland has annual drought and flood cycles. Couldn't some of this water be captured in the rainy season ? It would help agriculture.

Yes it is a HAARP attack on us, but we won't harp on that particular conspiracy theory.

Yes it is badhttp://www.news.com.au/national/thou...-1225979694261

You can't build a dam in this country anymore, the environmentalists will find some rare species it affects, only recently a large dam project in NSW which would prevent flooding in the Hunter, a natorious area for flooding, was rejected and in Queensland they have sewerage recyclying projects and desalination plants instead of dams. There is a long standing project called the Bradfield plan to turn these coastal rivers inland and send the water to Lake Eyre but it will not ever get off thr ground because of "green" thinking. You can't do nation building any more because of the mentality of the left. Hydro projects are outside their thinking even.

[paraclete]

Hello clete:

Until you present your scientific credentials for making a such a statement, I'll consider your plea to be nothing more than right wing politics as usual..
You look around, and see lots of water - ergo, global warming is a hoax... But, the water sits on FLAT land.... ergo, the earth is flat... Why is THAT observation different?

Dude! You are a science denier.. You are a believer in Intelligent Design.. That, in and of itself, is clear evidence of your denial... It's clear, that your interest is in promoting religion and NOT science...

excon

Ex, without doubt you are an idiot, I have come to that conclusion from patient observation. The Earth is flat because water flows over it, this is why we get flat land between the mountains. That I know this is the result of patient observation over a life time and I didn't need a degree in Earth sciences to discern this.

Do I believe in God? Yes, that same patient observation has left me with no doubt, and yes, I am interested in promoting a particular form of religion which agrees with my observations. That science has not proven God is only because they haven't taken the time to examine the facts. The absence of research doesn't prove anything. Remember Albert Einstein, a brilliant scientist, he said; I just want to know the thoughts of God, everything else is just the details. So Ex, take the time to get out of the details for a while.

Happy New Year, by the way.

[paraclete]

In the language I speak, being skeptical that something is happening, and denying that it is happening, AREN'T the same thing...

Ok Ex I have outlined my SKEPTICISM on a number of occasions but you don't accept what I say as valid, that makes you a denier. I have not denied that industry is adding to CO2 and other gases in the atmosphere. I have not denied that we need to find ways to get away from the carbon fuel cycle. What I am SKEPTIC about are the conclusions that have been drawn that this is the major source of climate change and that we have the science, there is that word again, to effect or even reverse the outcomes we observe.

So why won't you allow my SKEPTICISM that we have been presented with valid conclusions. I'll tell you why and that is that it doesn't fit in with your political views and you feel threatened by this. Yours is a political view EX that we must interfere to SAVE the Planet. The planet is always being saved from some threat or other by bleading hearts like you, whether it is Saddam or climate change, whereas I am completely SKEPTICAL that this is anything other than vested interests pushing their political agenda

[excon]

Ex, without doubt you are an idiot, I have come to that conclusion from patient observation.

Hello again, clete:

You make pronouncements on a scientific subject INSISTING that your religious viewpoint takes precedence, and I'm the idiot... Right..

excon

[paraclete]

Hello again, clete:

You make pronouncements on a scientific subject INSISTING that your religious viewpoint takes precedence, and I'm the idiot.... Right..

excon

You must be, Ex, because you keep making unfounded statements about what I am or am not doing. I have made very few religious statements in this particular forum. You see, EX, I happen to hold the view that man is not God and that he will never replace him, whereas as you apparently hold the view that man, in the form of science, is all knowing and therefore God.

[tomder55]

Ex ,by the nature of the discipline ,consensus science is an oxymoron. It is probably the oxymoron of the decade .

In the words of Michael Crichton

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science, consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

Yet you apparently think some of the most credited scientists in the field who have minority views are not only AGW deniers, or man made climate change deniers ,but are deniers of science itself.

[paraclete]

Well said Tom

[excon]

Hello again,

Let's get back to basics. You observe that it's cold, or there's lots of water - ergo, there's no such thing as global warming...

I observe that throwing trash into the air does something bad, even if I don't know exactly what it is - ergo, there MIGHT be global warming, and if not warming, it's doing something bad.

But, I don't have a stake in global warming. I don't CARE. I have a stake in keeping my skies clean. I have a stake in keeping my cushy lifestyle. I have a stake in keeping my country fully employed.. I have a stake in NOT sending tons of our money to our enemy's. I have a stake in finding alternative energy. I have grandchildren. I have a stake in their future.

I have a stake in doing those things, because whether global warming is real or NOT, doing those things will nip it in the bud, alongside with accomplishing those other good things... It's win, win, win.

Yet, you don't want to do those things... I have no idea why, even if you HATE Al Gore.

excon

[paraclete]

But, I don't have a stake in global warming. I don't CARE. I have a stake in keeping my skies clean. I have a stake in keeping my cushy lifestyle. I have a stake in keeping my country fully employed.. I have a stake in NOT sending tons of our money to our enemy's. I have a stake in finding alternative energy. I have grandchildren. I have a stake in their future.

excon

Ah, Ex, your mistake is you think that we aren't all in the same boat and have similar aspirations. But I do have news for you, you cannot keep your cushy lifestyle and sign on to the argument that we should change everything that provides that lifestyle. The basic sign of madness and idiocy is that we want change and keep doing the same things. It all starts not with renewable energy and less CO2 but with changing our lifestyle. It starts with less food produced by non sustainable means adding to surplusses that have to transported all over the world, less turkeys and chickens on the table, less corn churned up to make fuel and less air conditioning and cities lit up like christmas trees, less SUV's and as far as keeping your country fully employed, start with less illegal immigrants, an immediate fix, so long as you are prepared to do the meniel jobs, or make the real decision and decide you can have someone in another country do those jobs for you.

[TUT317]

Ex ,by the nature of the discipline ,consensus science is an oxymoron. It is probably the oxymoron of the decade .

In the words of Michael Crichton

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science, consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

Hi Tom,

Based on what Crichton says above I would disagree in principle. However, I would be interested in seeing what else he has to say. As I said in an earlier post I think we need to get away from viewing science as some type of 'ideal'. Be it right or wrong there has always been a consensus when it comes to science.

In his book 'The Struggle for the Soul of Science', Steve Fuller puts forward an interesting 'twist' on an old debate concerning the growth of scientific knowledge. I don't necessarily agree with everything that is advocated but it puts the scientific debate into perspective.

http:academicevergreen.edu/circular/atpsmpa/Fuller.pdf

[paraclete]

http:academicevergreen.edu/circular/atpsmpa/Fuller.pdf

Hi Tut would have liked to take a look at your article but that link doesn't go anywhere

[TUT317]

Hi Tut would have liked to take a look at your article but that link doesn't go anywhere

Sorry, try..

http://academic.evergreen.edu/curric...mpa/Fuller.pdf

[excon]

Ah, Ex, your mistake is you think that we arn't all in the same boat and have similiar aspirations. But I do have news for you, you cannot keep your cushy lifestyle and sign on to the argument that we should change everything that provides that lifestyle.

Hello again, clete:

You're out to lunch... I've never met anybody so wedded to being wrong.

Nobody is talking about STOPPING one technology while we develop another... It's called a TRANSITION.. Like we transitioned from gas lights to electricity, without missing a beat.. Like we transitioned from horse drawn carriages to autos, without missing a beat.. Like we transitioned from an analog world to a digital one, without missing a beat.

As a matter of fact, those transitions didn't END cushy lifestyles, they ENHANCED them. I don't see why this one won't do the same thing... You, on the other hand, think it's the end of civilization as we know it.. I have NO clue where you get that stuff..

The fact is, we ARE going to make that transition, whether you like it or not, or we'll wind up on the trash heap of history. It's time to start.

excon