New Zealand Government to declare a climate emergency

Forums › Off topic › New Zealand Government to declare a climate emergency

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 17

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2614870 2-Dec-2020 16:36

MikeB4: I didn’t miss the point. I don’t believe he would put forward such a proposal as it goes against the evidence and would not receive any backing.

Your response kind of shows you did.
To be less subtle, I believe most establishments like NIWA are no longer accepting of anything other than the prevailing thesis that Anthropological drivers are causing uncontrollable warming.

Honestly, I wouldn’t expect your BIL to have any response other than the status quo. My point is true scientific rigour allows for dissent. So would he be allowed to have a contrary view?

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2614895 2-Dec-2020 17:41

Dingbatt:

MikeB4: I didn’t miss the point. I don’t believe he would put forward such a proposal as it goes against the evidence and would not receive any backing.

Your response kind of shows you did.
To be less subtle, I believe most establishments like NIWA are no longer accepting of anything other than the prevailing thesis that Anthropological drivers are causing uncontrollable warming.

Honestly, I wouldn’t expect your BIL to have any response other than the status quo. My point is true scientific rigour allows for dissent. So would he be allowed to have a contrary view?

I was fully aware of your point you appear to have missed mine. Why would a climate scientist put forward a proposal for funding that is contrary to the position he holds that is based on the evidence at hand that has been through thorough rigor peer reviewed and has models that follow this. He would not waste their time his time and the finite fiscal resources.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9679

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2614900 2-Dec-2020 18:00

networkn:
MikeB4:

In discussions with him he agrees with me on the point that historical evidence shows that climate changes have occurred in the past by natural swings and off earth events such as Asteroid impacts. However the evidence that Anthropological influences are exacerbating and accelerating climate change is overwhelming therefore I don't believe he would push such a narrative the is is overblown. It is clear to me that he believes that the current lack of urgency around planning for and mitigating the affects of climate change worries him and to use his words "scares the friggin pants off him". I am going to text him however to see what his reaction to that notion of putting foreward the idea that Anthropological Global Warming was overblown would be even though his response is reasonably predictable.

I think you missed the point I believe was being made.

I don't think he did. There also isn't much likelihood in getting funding to prove that gravity is a myth or that QAnon is real.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9679

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2614901 2-Dec-2020 18:03

Fred99:
Handle9:
It's an option just a particularly stupid one for a country with the load profile and lack of population density of NZ. To make any sense you'd be looking to build it close to Auckland and shut down renewable generation.

I understand that it's possible (has been proposed) to build relatively safe compact portable (ie thorium) reactors into 20' ISO shipping container format, no maintenance or fuel replacement on site - load them up and ship them away for service at a dedicated facility when the fuel is depleted, drop in a replacement unit and plug it in to the grid.

But nobody has made them, there's no existing market because nuclear power is an increasingly taboo subject (and also other renewable tech is getting cheaper and better), so there's no point investing probably hundreds of billions of dollars in developing a concept that would then need further massive infrastructure investment - yet probably won't be able to be sold. NZ would have the added problem that if something like that was proposed, we'd probably not have the facility to service the units locally, shipping them by sea would be very controversial.

In some markets nuclear does have much more of a viable case. A country which does the vast majority of its base load generation via renewables isn't one of them.

BlinkyBill

1443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1100
Inactive user

#2614902 2-Dec-2020 18:09

Dingbatt:

MikeB4: I didn’t miss the point. I don’t believe he would put forward such a proposal as it goes against the evidence and would not receive any backing.

...
To be less subtle, I believe most establishments like NIWA are no longer accepting of anything other than the prevailing thesis that Anthropological drivers are causing uncontrollable warming.

Honestly, I wouldn’t expect your BIL to have any response other than the status quo. My point is true scientific rigour allows for dissent. So would he be allowed to have a contrary view?

Scientific rigour relies on the testing of a theory by evaluating evidence and determining a conclusion based on a rigourous examination of the evidence.

The evidence overwhelmingly points to man-made drivers causing warming that is uncontrolled. The implications of the warming are debatable in terms of intensity of affect, but the evidence is there that conditions are worsening, so it is reasonable to conclude that if warming worsens, the effects will be catastrophic.

Suggesting that this contention is not real is not scientifically rigorous, it is simple ignorance or stupidity.

The good thing about this is it doesn’t really matter what any individual thinks, we have a government that has taken a view and acted as they feel appropriate.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2614903 2-Dec-2020 18:11

Handle9:

I don't think he did. There also isn't much likelihood in getting funding to prove that gravity is a myth or that QAnon is real.

You forgot to include flat earth and 5G.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2614919 2-Dec-2020 19:34

MikeB4:

I was fully aware of your point you appear to have missed mine. Why would a climate scientist put forward a proposal for funding that is contrary to the position he holds that is based on the evidence at hand that has been through thorough rigor peer reviewed and has models that follow this. He would not waste their time his time and the finite fiscal resources.

Anyone in fact, the climate change argument is I believe known, not speculated. Climate Change is not new, it take eons to change and eons to change back. Since the 1800's its a vertical spike.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2614920 2-Dec-2020 19:37

Dingbatt:

Handle9:

I don't think he did. There also isn't much likelihood in getting funding to prove that gravity is a myth or that QAnon is real.

You forgot to include flat earth and 5G.

Lol Flat Earth I still don't get that. I was in Mackay Nth QLD a couple of years ago. The port had a number of huge coal tankers offshore. You can see the far away ones disappearing under the horizon. Makes me feel that Flat Earth is a cult than a belief.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2617202 7-Dec-2020 08:29

Clearly this meant nothing. Two seaside baches in the Aucklanders holiday zone just sold for over $3 million.

I think any seaside property bought post the last 5 years at least ought to be specifically excluded from discussions about compensating owners for climate related property loss.

tripper1000

1648 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1176

#2618641 9-Dec-2020 13:34

tdgeek: Anyone in fact, the climate change argument is I believe known, not speculated. Climate Change is not new, it take eons to change and eons to change back. Since the 1800's its a vertical spike.

Isn't it odd that despite the climate taking eons to change and eons to change back, people are hanging their hats on just 200 years worth of data? If you take a narrow enough sample of data in just about anything, you can prove just about any position you want. The last ice age lasted 2 million years and only finished 15,000 years ago. Yes the glaciers are retreating and poles are melting - they've been doing it rapidly for the past 15 centuries.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2618646 9-Dec-2020 13:46

@tripper1000 You had better get on a Zoom meeting with climate scientists globally and inform them that they are all wrong. There could be a Nobel prize for you.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2618661 9-Dec-2020 14:07

tripper1000:

tdgeek: Anyone in fact, the climate change argument is I believe known, not speculated. Climate Change is not new, it take eons to change and eons to change back. Since the 1800's its a vertical spike.

Isn't it odd that despite the climate taking eons to change and eons to change back, people are hanging their hats on just 200 years worth of data? If you take a narrow enough sample of data in just about anything, you can prove just about any position you want. The last ice age lasted 2 million years and only finished 15,000 years ago. Yes the glaciers are retreating and poles are melting - they've been doing it rapidly for the past 15 centuries.

What you say sounds fair enough but it has a flaw. Natural changes take eons. 200 years massive pumping of gases into our finite atmosphere is not natural and its quick. 200 years is less than a blink in time, yet look what we did in that blink.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2618667 9-Dec-2020 14:12

MikeB4:

@tripper1000 You had better get on a Zoom meeting with climate scientists globally and inform them that they are all wrong. There could be a Nobel prize for you.

You could save him some time in the zoom call by pointing out which part of his post is incorrect.......

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

BlinkyBill

1443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1100
Inactive user

#2618671 9-Dec-2020 14:17

His post didn’t address the accelerating rate of change and vertical spike, correlated with the industrial age and CO2 levels and pollution levels.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2618675 9-Dec-2020 14:18

BlinkyBill:

His post didn’t address the accelerating rate of change and vertical spike, correlated with the industrial age and CO2 levels and pollution levels.

Correct

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 17