Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > aus.computers > #71508 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-12-21 11:50 +1100 |
| Last post | 2024-12-24 20:17 +1100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 184 — 13 participants |
Back to article view | Back to aus.computers
The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-21 11:50 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-21 14:15 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-21 17:43 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-21 17:59 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-21 18:48 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-21 19:33 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-21 20:46 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-22 08:09 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-22 09:41 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-22 00:08 +0000
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-22 11:39 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-22 12:09 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-22 12:45 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-22 13:51 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-22 16:13 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-22 16:22 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-22 17:15 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-22 16:42 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 07:34 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 13:02 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-22 12:35 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> - 2024-12-22 13:29 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-22 13:41 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-22 15:27 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> - 2024-12-22 18:31 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-22 18:33 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-23 11:43 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-23 11:38 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 13:13 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-23 13:40 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-23 14:08 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 15:25 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-23 14:08 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 15:26 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 15:40 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-23 16:30 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 17:14 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-23 19:24 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 20:25 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-23 21:00 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 05:35 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 22:58 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 23:13 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:31 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> - 2024-12-25 08:28 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 07:23 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-23 11:22 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 11:21 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-23 13:57 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 15:16 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 18:07 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:53 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 18:41 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 19:48 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 20:07 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:00 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-25 10:38 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-25 21:52 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 04:51 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-26 19:40 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 20:17 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 05:47 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 13:18 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 14:35 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero MightyMouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 16:06 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 15:14 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-26 19:48 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-28 07:07 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:51 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 18:40 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 19:52 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> - 2024-12-24 19:42 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 21:29 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-24 20:57 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 21:38 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2024-12-25 08:08 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 09:37 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 12:41 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 13:34 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-23 21:27 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 07:16 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-23 11:17 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 11:32 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-23 13:59 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 15:17 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:46 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 18:29 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 18:23 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:48 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 15:40 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 20:00 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 19:11 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 20:16 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-24 21:07 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 21:40 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:16 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-25 22:02 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 04:52 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-26 19:55 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 20:19 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 21:11 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 04:39 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-27 19:36 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 20:07 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 05:51 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 11:42 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 13:22 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 13:39 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> - 2024-12-24 20:34 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 21:46 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-24 21:55 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 23:09 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Lindsay <lindsay00@nunnya.biz> - 2024-12-24 23:51 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:20 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-25 10:51 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 18:50 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Keithr0 <nothing.to.see@here.com.au> - 2024-12-26 16:29 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 18:25 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 18:00 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero MightyMouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 19:08 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 21:05 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 20:26 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 23:24 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Noddy <me@home.com> - 2024-12-26 19:44 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 21:08 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 20:40 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 22:08 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 23:26 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 23:46 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-27 19:53 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 18:33 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:24 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> - 2024-12-25 08:20 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-25 10:43 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 13:03 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-23 14:00 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-23 14:58 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 15:26 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 15:44 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-23 16:32 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 17:19 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> - 2024-12-24 12:29 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 13:10 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 15:32 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 18:42 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:37 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-24 21:24 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-24 21:34 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:21 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 21:43 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-25 00:09 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:27 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> - 2024-12-25 08:24 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 09:15 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-25 10:53 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:18 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-25 22:25 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 04:53 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-26 20:52 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-27 04:44 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:35 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 18:26 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 20:05 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 18:37 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 20:06 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 07:41 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 09:27 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Hans.Andnees@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 06:03 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 13:25 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 14:16 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 15:18 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-26 16:31 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-26 17:40 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero MightyMouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-26 18:58 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero alvey <Factman@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 18:32 +1000
Re: The real cost of net zero Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> - 2024-12-23 21:34 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:34 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 18:26 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-23 15:20 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-23 15:35 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> - 2024-12-24 15:41 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 18:28 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2024-12-24 20:02 +1100
Re: The real cost of net zero Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> - 2024-12-24 20:17 +1100
Page 2 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 10 Next page →
| From | Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-22 12:35 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lsp8miFtdurU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71523 |
On 22/12/2024 11:39 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 22/12/2024 9:41 am, Noddy wrote:
>> On 22/12/2024 8:09 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>> At first the above report was scoffed at. Then it began to look
>>>> real. Now it looks like they might have been a tad optimistic, maybe
>>>> they didn't account for accelerative effects - like permafrost thawing.
>>>
>>> **Indeed. Methane is a big problem.
>>
>> So we kill all the animals and become vegan. Is that it?
>
> **That was not we're discussing you boob. Permafrost thawing. Look it
> up. It is becoming a HUGE problem.
>
It's difficult dealing with the dumb arses of this world, eh Trev?
>>
>> For fuck's sake, the planet is going to die, and we will along with
>> it. There's nothing we can do about that, and the sooner you accept
>> that reality the less stressed your life will be.
>
> **We could a planet that can support human life for another
> approximately 2 billion years, IF we make some changes now.
>
Time's a wastin'.
--
Xeno
Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-22 13:29 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lspbsrFtps3U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71523 |
On 22/12/2024 11:39 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: > On 22/12/2024 9:41 am, Noddy wrote: >> On 22/12/2024 8:09 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: >> >>>> At first the above report was scoffed at. Then it began to look >>>> real. Now it looks like they might have been a tad optimistic, maybe >>>> they didn't account for accelerative effects - like permafrost thawing. >>> >>> **Indeed. Methane is a big problem. >> >> So we kill all the animals and become vegan. Is that it? > > **That was not we're discussing you boob. Permafrost thawing. Look it > up. It is becoming a HUGE problem. > >> >> For fuck's sake, the planet is going to die, and we will along with >> it. There's nothing we can do about that, and the sooner you accept >> that reality the less stressed your life will be. > > **We could a planet that can support human life for another > approximately 2 billion years, IF we make some changes now. > The only change that we can make that will make any significant difference is to cull half the worlds population. Please feel free to start in your LGA, you could start with your local councilors that you already dislike. Down here we could start with the Labor Govt and anyone dumb enough to vote for them, what a massive improvement that would make and we could confiscate all their money and use it to pay off the massive debts they have lumbered the state with. Win win, no more Vic Labor cunts and you won't have whinge about speed bumps:-) -- Daryl
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-22 13:41 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lspci7Ftu20U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71527 |
On 22/12/2024 1:29 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 22/12/2024 11:39 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 22/12/2024 9:41 am, Noddy wrote:
>>> On 22/12/2024 8:09 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>
>>>>> At first the above report was scoffed at. Then it began to look
>>>>> real. Now it looks like they might have been a tad optimistic,
>>>>> maybe they didn't account for accelerative effects - like
>>>>> permafrost thawing.
>>>>
>>>> **Indeed. Methane is a big problem.
>>>
>>> So we kill all the animals and become vegan. Is that it?
>>
>> **That was not we're discussing you boob. Permafrost thawing. Look it
>> up. It is becoming a HUGE problem.
>>
>>>
>>> For fuck's sake, the planet is going to die, and we will along with
>>> it. There's nothing we can do about that, and the sooner you accept
>>> that reality the less stressed your life will be.
>>
>> **We could a planet that can support human life for another
>> approximately 2 billion years, IF we make some changes now.
>>
>
> The only change that we can make that will make any significant
> difference is to cull half the worlds population.
No need, that's happening as a natural consequence of
*industrialisation* with subsequent *urbanisation*.
https://www.cigionline.org/articles/geopolitical-impact-population-decline/
You pricks really need to get an education, you're holding the world back!
> Please feel free to start in your LGA, you could start with your local
> councilors that you already dislike.
> Down here we could start with the Labor Govt and anyone dumb enough to
> vote for them, what a massive improvement that would make and we could
> confiscate all their money and use it to pay off the massive debts they
> have lumbered the state with.
> Win win, no more Vic Labor cunts and you won't have whinge about speed
> bumps:-)
>
>
--
Xeno
Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-22 15:27 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lspiosFu2e9U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71527 |
On 22/12/2024 1:29 pm, Daryl wrote: > On 22/12/2024 11:39 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: >> On 22/12/2024 9:41 am, Noddy wrote: >>> On 22/12/2024 8:09 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> >>>>> At first the above report was scoffed at. Then it began to look >>>>> real. Now it looks like they might have been a tad optimistic, >>>>> maybe they didn't account for accelerative effects - like >>>>> permafrost thawing. >>>> >>>> **Indeed. Methane is a big problem. >>> >>> So we kill all the animals and become vegan. Is that it? >> >> **That was not we're discussing you boob. Permafrost thawing. Look it >> up. It is becoming a HUGE problem. >> >>> >>> For fuck's sake, the planet is going to die, and we will along with >>> it. There's nothing we can do about that, and the sooner you accept >>> that reality the less stressed your life will be. >> >> **We could a planet that can support human life for another >> approximately 2 billion years, IF we make some changes now. >> > > The only change that we can make that will make any significant > difference is to cull half the worlds population. **Nonsense. We can be far more selective than that. Culling every Australian would make as much difference as culling every Brazilian. Far more efficient. Culling 330 million Americans would make MUCH bigger difference than culling 1.45 billion Indians. Culling 25 million Aussies would make a bigger difference than culling 100 million Vietnamese. I have a better solution: Let's reduce our CO2 emissions. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. That way we don't have to kill people. > Please feel free to start in your LGA, you could start with your local > councilors that you already dislike. > Down here we could start with the Labor Govt and anyone dumb enough to > vote for them, **You would be better off culling that election losing machine you call the Victorian Liberal Party. Those idiots can't seem to win an election. what a massive improvement that would make and we could > confiscate all their money and use it to pay off the massive debts they > have lumbered the state with. > Win win, no more Vic Labor cunts and you won't have whinge about speed > bumps:-) **I don't live in Victoria. If you call that living. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daryl <dwalford@westpine.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-22 18:31 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lspti3F20kvU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71530 |
On 22/12/2024 3:27 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote: > On 22/12/2024 1:29 pm, Daryl wrote: >> On 22/12/2024 11:39 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> On 22/12/2024 9:41 am, Noddy wrote: >>>> On 22/12/2024 8:09 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>> >>>>>> At first the above report was scoffed at. Then it began to look >>>>>> real. Now it looks like they might have been a tad optimistic, >>>>>> maybe they didn't account for accelerative effects - like >>>>>> permafrost thawing. >>>>> >>>>> **Indeed. Methane is a big problem. >>>> >>>> So we kill all the animals and become vegan. Is that it? >>> >>> **That was not we're discussing you boob. Permafrost thawing. Look it >>> up. It is becoming a HUGE problem. >>> >>>> >>>> For fuck's sake, the planet is going to die, and we will along with >>>> it. There's nothing we can do about that, and the sooner you accept >>>> that reality the less stressed your life will be. >>> >>> **We could a planet that can support human life for another >>> approximately 2 billion years, IF we make some changes now. >>> >> >> The only change that we can make that will make any significant >> difference is to cull half the worlds population. > > **Nonsense. We can be far more selective than that. Culling every > Australian would make as much difference as culling every Brazilian. Far > more efficient. Culling 330 million Americans would make MUCH bigger > difference than culling 1.45 billion Indians. Culling 25 million Aussies > would make a bigger difference than culling 100 million Vietnamese. > > I have a better solution: > > Let's reduce our CO2 emissions. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. That way we > don't have to kill people. > >> Please feel free to start in your LGA, you could start with your local >> councilors that you already dislike. >> Down here we could start with the Labor Govt and anyone dumb enough to >> vote for them, > > **You would be better off culling that election losing machine you call > the Victorian Liberal Party. Those idiots can't seem to win an election. > > > what a massive improvement that would make and we could >> confiscate all their money and use it to pay off the massive debts >> they have lumbered the state with. >> Win win, no more Vic Labor cunts and you won't have whinge about speed >> bumps:-) > > **I don't live in Victoria. If you call that living. > At least we don't have nasty speed bumps to whinge about:-) -- Daryl
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-22 18:33 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lsptmsF216iU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71535 |
On 22/12/2024 6:31 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 22/12/2024 3:27 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 22/12/2024 1:29 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 22/12/2024 11:39 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 22/12/2024 9:41 am, Noddy wrote:
>>>>> On 22/12/2024 8:09 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> At first the above report was scoffed at. Then it began to look
>>>>>>> real. Now it looks like they might have been a tad optimistic,
>>>>>>> maybe they didn't account for accelerative effects - like
>>>>>>> permafrost thawing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> **Indeed. Methane is a big problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> So we kill all the animals and become vegan. Is that it?
>>>>
>>>> **That was not we're discussing you boob. Permafrost thawing. Look
>>>> it up. It is becoming a HUGE problem.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For fuck's sake, the planet is going to die, and we will along with
>>>>> it. There's nothing we can do about that, and the sooner you accept
>>>>> that reality the less stressed your life will be.
>>>>
>>>> **We could a planet that can support human life for another
>>>> approximately 2 billion years, IF we make some changes now.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The only change that we can make that will make any significant
>>> difference is to cull half the worlds population.
>>
>> **Nonsense. We can be far more selective than that. Culling every
>> Australian would make as much difference as culling every Brazilian.
>> Far more efficient. Culling 330 million Americans would make MUCH
>> bigger difference than culling 1.45 billion Indians. Culling 25
>> million Aussies would make a bigger difference than culling 100
>> million Vietnamese.
>>
>> I have a better solution:
>>
>> Let's reduce our CO2 emissions. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. That way we
>> don't have to kill people.
>>
>>> Please feel free to start in your LGA, you could start with your
>>> local councilors that you already dislike.
>>> Down here we could start with the Labor Govt and anyone dumb enough
>>> to vote for them,
>>
>> **You would be better off culling that election losing machine you
>> call the Victorian Liberal Party. Those idiots can't seem to win an
>> election.
>>
>>
>> what a massive improvement that would make and we could
>>> confiscate all their money and use it to pay off the massive debts
>>> they have lumbered the state with.
>>> Win win, no more Vic Labor cunts and you won't have whinge about
>>> speed bumps:-)
>>
>> **I don't live in Victoria. If you call that living.
>>
> At least we don't have nasty speed bumps to whinge about:-)
>
Yeah, you pricks have trouble not killing yourselves on standard
intersections.
--
Xeno
Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 11:43 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lsrq18Fb9nsU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71527 |
Daryl wrote: > On 22/12/2024 11:39 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: >> On 22/12/2024 9:41 am, Noddy wrote: >>> On 22/12/2024 8:09 am, Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> >>>>> At first the above report was scoffed at. Then it began to look >>>>> real. Now it looks like they might have been a tad optimistic, >>>>> maybe they didn't account for accelerative effects - like >>>>> permafrost thawing. >>>> >>>> **Indeed. Methane is a big problem. >>> >>> So we kill all the animals and become vegan. Is that it? >> >> **That was not we're discussing you boob. Permafrost thawing. Look it >> up. It is becoming a HUGE problem. >> >>> >>> For fuck's sake, the planet is going to die, and we will along with >>> it. There's nothing we can do about that, and the sooner you accept >>> that reality the less stressed your life will be. >> >> **We could a planet that can support human life for another >> approximately 2 billion years, IF we make some changes now. >> > > The only change that we can make that will make any significant > difference is to cull half the worlds population. > Please feel free to start in your LGA, you could start with your local > councilors that you already dislike. > Down here we could start with the Labor Govt and anyone dumb enough to > vote for them, that would eliminate half the population of Victoria > what a massive improvement that would make and we could confiscate all > their money and use it to pay off the massive debts they have lumbered > the state with. good idea! > Win win, no more Vic Labor cunts and you won't have whinge about speed > bumps:-) > > -- Have a nice day!.. stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mighty Mouse <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 11:38 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lsrpo5Fb9nsU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71516 |
Trevor Wilson wrote: > On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>> >>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, award >>>> winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor >>>> >>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>> >>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>> >>> >>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >> >> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought a >> King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that example. > > **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for > denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a > scientific source of note. > > >> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon emissions, >> but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. > > **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as rapidly > as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. IOW: We > must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it back to > approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race will incur > costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the costs. As has > been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is cheaper than acting > later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 levels below > approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will prevent an utter > catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the planet several times > over. I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could provide us with cheap electricity, but thanks to green ideology we have high electricity prices. we could have kept our coal fired power stations while at the same time transitioning to renewables. the only reason we haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology. so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered electricity generation (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new-coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/ ) and cheap electricity and contribute more than any other country to global warming. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country > >> >>> >>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this: >>> >>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving-economic- >>> costs-australias-climate-inaction/ >>> >>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high. >>> >>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH >>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be able to >>> pay the bill. > > **Did you bother reading my cites? > > did you bother listening/watching mine? -- Have a nice day!.. stay sane, be happy, and enjoy living.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 13:13 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lsrv9dFc06lU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71543 |
On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote:
> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, award
>>>>> winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor
>>>>>
>>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb)
>>>>>
>>>>> or watch the documentary ..
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron?
>>>
>>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought a
>>> King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that example.
>>
>> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for
>> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a
>> scientific source of note.
>>
>>
>>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon emissions,
>>> but how it's done, and setting realistic targets.
>>
>> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as rapidly
>> as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. IOW: We
>> must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it back to
>> approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race will incur
>> costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the costs. As has
>> been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is cheaper than acting
>> later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 levels below
>> approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will prevent an utter
>> catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the planet several times
>> over.
>
> I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-
> dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could provide us
> with cheap electricity, but thanks to green ideology we have high
That cheap electricity isn't so cheap when you factor in the damage that
is done by the emissions, including CO2. What is happening, in reality,
is that a great percentage of the cost of coal fired electricity is in
that can that is being kicked down the road. That cost, I might add,
includes sequestration and *resequestration* of CO2. Remember, the coal
you burn now was sequestrated in primeval times.
> electricity prices. we could have kept our coal fired power stations
Most of the coal fired power stations are already beyond their use by date.
> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. the only reason we
We are in the process of transitioning to renewables. Gas is a
(relatively) low emissions fuel, if you want a transition, coal should
be out, gas should be in. Better for peaking loads too.
> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology.
> so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered electricity
That's called hypocrisy.
> generation (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new-
> coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/ ) and cheap electricity and
> contribute more than any other country to global warming.
>
> https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving-economic-
>>>> costs-australias-climate-inaction/
>>>>
>>>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high.
>>>>
>>>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH
>>>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be able to
>>>> pay the bill.
>>
>> **Did you bother reading my cites?
>>
>>
>
> did you bother listening/watching mine?
>
--
Xeno
Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 13:40 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lss0shFc93hU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71543 |
On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: > Trevor Wilson wrote: >> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, award >>>>> winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor >>>>> >>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>>> >>>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>>> >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>>> >>>> >>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >>> >>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought a >>> King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that example. >> >> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for >> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a >> scientific source of note. >> >> >>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon emissions, >>> but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. >> >> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as rapidly >> as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. IOW: We >> must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it back to >> approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race will incur >> costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the costs. As has >> been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is cheaper than acting >> later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 levels below >> approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will prevent an utter >> catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the planet several times >> over. > > I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon- > dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could provide us > with cheap electricity, **How about the CO2 emissions? Did you forget that? We MUST move away from coal. but thanks to green ideology we have high > electricity prices. **BULLSHIT. Most places in Australia have high electricity prices because we have stupid state governments that sold off profitable state assets. Like electricity generation. Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity generating assets? we could have kept our coal fired power stations > while at the same time transitioning to renewables. **We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are very well advanced in fact. the only reason we > haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology. **Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott. He is singularly responsible for Australia's situation. NEVER forget that. Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, most planet damaging politician in Australian history. > so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered electricity > generation (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new- > coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/ ) and cheap electricity and > contribute more than any other country to global warming. **Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 emissions compared to each Australian. Further; China is installing VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than coal or nukes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China > > https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country > >> >>> >>>> >>>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this: >>>> >>>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving-economic- >>>> costs-australias-climate-inaction/ >>>> >>>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high. >>>> >>>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH >>>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be able to >>>> pay the bill. >> >> **Did you bother reading my cites? >> >> > > did you bother listening/watching mine? > **Murdoch shit? Nope. Tell you what: I will watch it, if you promise to read my cites. Deal? BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, should you agree to my conditions. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 14:08 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <vkak6n$11ba3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #71551 |
On 23/12/2024 1:40 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote: > On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: > but thanks to green ideology we have high >> electricity prices. > > **BULLSHIT. Most places in Australia have high electricity prices > because we have stupid state governments that sold off profitable state > assets. Like electricity generation. > > Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity > generating assets? Yeah, sure. I'll remind you. Which state government put us in such a perilous financial position that the *only* option available was to sell off public assets, which at the time were *liabilities*? Take your time here Trev, and please. Throw in your idea of a more appropriate way the incoming Libs could have worked around the state being left on the verge of bankruptcy. Please...... > we could have kept our coal fired power stations >> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. > > **We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are > very well advanced in fact. Yeah, they are. And they have the most expensive power prices in the country. Not to mention a *massive* conversion cost for a state with less that 2 million people. > the only reason we >> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology. > > **Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott. He is > singularly responsible for Australia's situation. NEVER forget that. > Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, most planet damaging > politician in Australian history. Will it just? :) Lets forget all about Gillard and the absolute fucking *mess* she and Rudd left behind in the shitfight that was the Labor party rule. Just sweep that crap straight under the carpet :) > **Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 > emissions compared to each Australian. Further; China is installing > VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than coal or nukes. There you go with more of your nonsensical per capita bullshit again. 26 million people in Oz. 1.4 *billion* in China. You might want to recheck your figures. > BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, > should you agree to my conditions. Hahahahahaha :) Who the fuck do you think you are? :) -- -- -- Regards, Noddy. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 15:25 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lss70uFd56jU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71555 |
On 23/12/2024 2:08 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 23/12/2024 1:40 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote:
>
>> but thanks to green ideology we have high
>>> electricity prices.
>>
>> **BULLSHIT. Most places in Australia have high electricity prices
>> because we have stupid state governments that sold off profitable
>> state assets. Like electricity generation.
>>
>> Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity
>> generating assets?
>
> Yeah, sure. I'll remind you. Which state government put us in such a
> perilous financial position that the *only* option available was to sell
> off public assets, which at the time were *liabilities*?
Assets that make money are *never* liabilities. They continue to be
assets until this very day and still making money for their new owners.
>
> Take your time here Trev, and please. Throw in your idea of a more
> appropriate way the incoming Libs could have worked around the state
> being left on the verge of bankruptcy.
>
> Please......
Please show proof of your claims! To not do so is to perpetuate fraud.
>
>> we could have kept our coal fired power stations
>>> while at the same time transitioning to renewables.
>>
>> **We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are
>> very well advanced in fact.
>
> Yeah, they are. And they have the most expensive power prices in the
> country. Not to mention a *massive* conversion cost for a state with
> less that 2 million people.
That cost will come down in time. Those states relying on coal will see
costs inexorably rise - and not all costs will be fiscal.
>
>> the only reason we
>>> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology.
>>
>> **Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott. He is
>> singularly responsible for Australia's situation. NEVER forget that.
>> Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, most planet
>> damaging politician in Australian history.
>
> Will it just? :)
It has and it continues to this day.
>
> Lets forget all about Gillard and the absolute fucking *mess* she and
> Rudd left behind in the shitfight that was the Labor party rule. Just
> sweep that crap straight under the carpet :)
>
>> **Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2
>> emissions compared to each Australian. Further; China is installing
>> VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than coal or nukes.
>
> There you go with more of your nonsensical per capita bullshit again.
Just because the per capita concept is beyond your ken...
>
> 26 million people in Oz. 1.4 *billion* in China. You might want to
> recheck your figures.
>
>> BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites,
>> should you agree to my conditions.
>
> Hahahahahaha :)
>
> Who the fuck do you think you are? :)
Seem to recall you offering conditions to see the *proof* I *know* you
do not have.
--
Xeno
Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noddy <me@home.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 14:08 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <vkak7h$11ba3$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #71551 |
On 23/12/2024 1:40 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote: > On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: > but thanks to green ideology we have high >> electricity prices. > > **BULLSHIT. Most places in Australia have high electricity prices > because we have stupid state governments that sold off profitable state > assets. Like electricity generation. > > Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity > generating assets? Yeah, sure. I'll remind you. Which state government put us in such a perilous financial position that the *only* option available was to sell off public assets, which at the time were *liabilities*? Take your time here Trev, and please. Throw in your idea of a more appropriate way the incoming Libs could have worked around the state being left on the verge of bankruptcy. Please...... > we could have kept our coal fired power stations >> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. > > **We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are > very well advanced in fact. Yeah, they are. And they have the most expensive power prices in the country. Not to mention a *massive* conversion cost for a state with less that 2 million people. > the only reason we >> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology. > > **Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott. He is > singularly responsible for Australia's situation. NEVER forget that. > Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, most planet damaging > politician in Australian history. Will it just? :) Lets forget all about Gillard and the absolute fucking *mess* she and Rudd left behind in the shitfight that was the Labor party rule. Just sweep that crap straight under the carpet :) > **Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 > emissions compared to each Australian. Further; China is installing > VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than coal or nukes. There you go with more of your nonsensical per capita bullshit again. 26 million people in Oz. 1.4 *billion* in China. You might want to recheck your figures. > BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, > should you agree to my conditions. Hahahahahaha :) Who the fuck do you think you are? :) -- -- -- Regards, Noddy. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 15:26 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lss731Fd56jU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71556 |
On 23/12/2024 2:08 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 23/12/2024 1:40 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote:
>
>> but thanks to green ideology we have high
>>> electricity prices.
>>
>> **BULLSHIT. Most places in Australia have high electricity prices
>> because we have stupid state governments that sold off profitable
>> state assets. Like electricity generation.
>>
>> Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity
>> generating assets?
>
> Yeah, sure. I'll remind you. Which state government put us in such a
> perilous financial position that the *only* option available was to sell
> off public assets, which at the time were *liabilities*?
>
> Take your time here Trev, and please. Throw in your idea of a more
> appropriate way the incoming Libs could have worked around the state
> being left on the verge of bankruptcy.
>
> Please......
>
>> we could have kept our coal fired power stations
>>> while at the same time transitioning to renewables.
>>
>> **We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are
>> very well advanced in fact.
>
> Yeah, they are. And they have the most expensive power prices in the
> country. Not to mention a *massive* conversion cost for a state with
> less that 2 million people.
>
>> the only reason we
>>> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology.
>>
>> **Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott. He is
>> singularly responsible for Australia's situation. NEVER forget that.
>> Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, most planet
>> damaging politician in Australian history.
>
> Will it just? :)
>
> Lets forget all about Gillard and the absolute fucking *mess* she and
> Rudd left behind in the shitfight that was the Labor party rule. Just
> sweep that crap straight under the carpet :)
>
>> **Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2
>> emissions compared to each Australian. Further; China is installing
>> VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than coal or nukes.
>
> There you go with more of your nonsensical per capita bullshit again.
>
> 26 million people in Oz. 1.4 *billion* in China. You might want to
> recheck your figures.
>
>> BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites,
>> should you agree to my conditions.
>
> Hahahahahaha :)
>
> Who the fuck do you think you are? :)
>
Someone who's smarter than you. Hey, that is no achievement.
--
Xeno
Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 15:40 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <op.2y7tx3wkbyq249@pvr2.lan> |
| In reply to | #71551 |
On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 13:40:17 +1100, Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: > On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, award >>>>>> winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor >>>>>> >>>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>>>> >>>>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >>>> >>>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought a >>>> King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that example. >>> >>> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for >>> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a >>> scientific source of note. >>> >>> >>>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon emissions, >>>> but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. >>> >>> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as rapidly >>> as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. IOW: We >>> must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it back to >>> approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race will incur >>> costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the costs. As has >>> been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is cheaper than acting >>> later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 levels below >>> approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will prevent an utter >>> catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the planet several times >>> over. >> I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon- >> dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could provide us >> with cheap electricity, > How about the CO2 emissions? Irrelevant as far as this country is concerned. Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. > Did you forget that? We MUST move away from coal. Mindless bullshit. > but thanks to green ideology we have high >> electricity prices. > BULLSHIT. Fact actually. > Most places in Australia have high electricity prices because we have > stupid state governments that soldoff profitable state assets. Like > electricity generation. We would still have higher electricity prices even if we had not done that, simply because the changes to the grid and paying for renewables and stuff like Snowy 2.0 which is because of the much higher level of renewables would still have to be paid for. > Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity > generating assets? Because Labor had driven the govt finances in Victoria into the ground and there was no other way to fix that. >> we could have kept our coal fired power stations >> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. > We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are very > well advanced in fact. And got much higher electricity prices because they were that stupid and got to wear the mega grid failure when the transmission line from Victoria which was crucial to viability was wrecked. >> the only reason we >> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology. > Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott.He is singularly > responsible for Australia's situation. Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. > NEVER forget that. Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, > most planet damaging politician in Australian history. Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. >> so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered >> electricity generation >> (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-responsible-for-95-of-new- >> coal-power-construction-in-2023-report-says/ ) and cheap electricity >> and contribute more than any other country to global warming. > Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 emissions > compared to each Australian. But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. > Further; China is installing VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than coal > or nukes. Their stupidity is their problem > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China >> https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country >> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this: >>>>> >>>>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving-economic- >>>>> costs-australias-climate-inaction/ >>>>> >>>>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high. >>>>> >>>>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH >>>>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be able to >>>>> pay the bill. >>> >>> **Did you bother reading my cites? >>> >>> >> did you bother listening/watching mine? >> > > Murdoch shit? Nope. > > Tell you what: I will watch it, if you promise to read my cites. > > Deal? > > BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, > should you agree to my conditions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 16:30 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lssasfFdorbU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71565 |
On 23/12/2024 3:40 pm, Rod Speed wrote: > On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 13:40:17 +1100, Trevor Wilson > <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: > >> On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, >>>>>>> award winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >>>>> >>>>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought a >>>>> King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that example. >>>> >>>> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for >>>> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a >>>> scientific source of note. >>>> >>>> >>>>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon emissions, >>>>> but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. >>>> >>>> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as >>>> rapidly as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. >>>> IOW: We must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it >>>> back to approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race will >>>> incur costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the costs. >>>> As has been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is cheaper >>>> than acting later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 levels >>>> below approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will prevent >>>> an utter catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the planet >>>> several times over. >>> I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ >>> carbon- dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could >>> provide us with cheap electricity, > >> How about the CO2 emissions? > > Irrelevant as far as this country is concerned. > > Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired > and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have > NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. **Would it affect AUSTRALIA'S CO2 emissions? > >> Did you forget that? We MUST move away from coal. > > Mindless bullshit. **Fact, you moronic boob. > >> but thanks to green ideology we have high >>> electricity prices. > >> BULLSHIT. > > Fact actually. **BULLSHIT. We have high electricity prices because various state governments sold electricity assets to private companies. Private companies can gouge consumers. After all, they have to pay huge chunks of cash to overseas shareholders, overpaid corporate directors and other entities. > >> Most places in Australia have high electricity prices because we have >> stupid state governments that soldoff profitable state assets. Like >> electricity generation. > > We would still have higher electricity prices even if > we had not done that, **Not even REMOTELY close to what we have now. Power prices went through the roof as soon as power companies were sold off. simply because the changes > to the grid and paying for renewables and stuff like > Snowy 2.0 which is because of the much higher > level of renewables would still have to be paid for. **Snowy 2.0 was always dumb. Thanks to the Libs. > >> Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity >> generating assets? > > Because Labor had driven the govt finances in Victoria > into the ground and there was no other way to fix that. **Bullshit. > >>> we could have kept our coal fired power stations >>> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. > >> We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are >> very well advanced in fact. > > And got much higher electricity prices because they were that > stupid and got to wear the mega grid failure when the transmission > line from Victoria which was crucial to viability was wrecked. **Overhead power lines are cheap. And dumb. > >>> the only reason we >>> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by ideology. > >> Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott.He is >> singularly responsible for Australia's situation. > > Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. **Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, is travelling the world sprouting climate change denialism. > >> NEVER forget that. Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, >> most planet damaging politician in Australian history. > > Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. **Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, is travelling the world sprouting climate change denialism. > >>> so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered >>> electricity generation (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china- >>> responsible-for-95-of-new- coal-power-construction-in-2023-report- >>> says/ ) and cheap electricity and contribute more than any other >>> country to global warming. > >> Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 >> emissions compared to each Australian. > > But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR > more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. **Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 emissions compared to each Australian. > >> Further; China is installing VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than >> coal or nukes. > > Their stupidity is their problem **So you say. Do you think they might know more than Abbott's band of vandals? > >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China > >>> https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving- >>>>>> economic- costs-australias-climate-inaction/ >>>>>> >>>>>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high. >>>>>> >>>>>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH >>>>>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be able >>>>>> to pay the bill. >>>> >>>> **Did you bother reading my cites? >>>> >>>> >>> did you bother listening/watching mine? >>> >> >> Murdoch shit? Nope. >> >> Tell you what: I will watch it, if you promise to read my cites. >> >> Deal? >> >> BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, >> should you agree to my conditions. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 17:14 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <op.2y7x9obqbyq249@pvr2.lan> |
| In reply to | #71567 |
On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 16:30:55 +1100, Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: > On 23/12/2024 3:40 pm, Rod Speed wrote: >> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 13:40:17 +1100, Trevor Wilson >> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: >> >>> On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, >>>>>>>> award winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >>>>>> >>>>>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought a >>>>>> King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that >>>>>> example. >>>>> >>>>> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for >>>>> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a >>>>> scientific source of note. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon emissions, >>>>>> but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. >>>>> >>>>> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as >>>>> rapidly as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. >>>>> IOW: We must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it >>>>> back to approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race will >>>>> incur costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the costs. >>>>> As has been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is cheaper >>>>> than acting later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 levels >>>>> below approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will prevent >>>>> an utter catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the planet >>>>> several times over. >>>> I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ >>>> carbon- dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could >>>> provide us with cheap electricity, >>> How about the CO2 emissions? >> Irrelevant as far as this country is concerned. >> Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired >> and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have >> NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. > Would it affect AUSTRALIA'S CO2 emissions? Irrelevant. Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. >>> Did you forget that? We MUST move away from coal. >> Mindless bullshit. > Fact Nothing even remotely like a fact. Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. >>> but thanks to green ideology we have high >>>> electricity prices. >>> BULLSHIT. >> Fact actually. > BULLSHIT. We have high electricity prices because various state > governments sold electricity assets to private companies. Victoria only did that because Labor drove the state govt finances into the ground and there was no other viable alternative. > Private companies can gouge consumers. Not when there is real competition between them, as there is. > After all, they have to pay huge chunks of cash to overseas shareholders, Another lie. > overpaid corporate directors Trivial part of their costs. > and other entities. Fantasy >>> Most places in Australia have high electricity prices because we have >>> stupid state governments that soldoff profitable state assets. Like >>> electricity generation. >> We would still have higher electricity prices even if >> we had not done that, > Not even REMOTELY close to what we have now. Power prices went through > the roof as soon as power companies were sold off. They never went thru the roof and the increase happened in the states which did not sell off their power generation, > simply because the changes >> to the grid and paying for renewables and stuff like >> Snowy 2.0 which is because of the much higher >> level of renewables would still have to be paid for. > Snowy 2.0 was always dumb. It was the only viable way to do load levelling when govts were stupid enough to do renewables. > Thanks to the Libs. >>> Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity >>> generating assets? >> Because Labor had driven the govt finances in Victoria >> into the ground and there was no other way to fix that. > Bullshit. How do you claim that would have been fixed otherwise ? >>>> we could have kept our coal fired power stations >>>> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. >>> We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are >>> very well advanced in fact. >> And got much higher electricity prices because they were that >> stupid and got to wear the mega grid failure when the transmission >> line from Victoria which was crucial to viability was wrecked. > Overhead power lines are cheap. Bullshit the new transmission line to SA is and the other new transmission lines. > And dumb. So how do you propose to get the power from the renewables to the consumers ? >>>> the only reason we >>>> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by >>>> ideology. >>> Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott.He is >>> singularly responsible for Australia's situation. >> Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. > Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, istravelling the > world sprouting climate change denialism. That's not australia's situation. >>> NEVER forget that. Abbott's name will go down in history as the worst, >>> most planet damaging politician in Australian history. >> Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. > Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, is travelling the > world sprouting climate change denialism. That's not australia's situation. >>>> so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered >>>> electricity generation (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china- >>>> responsible-for-95-of-new- coal-power-construction-in-2023-report- >>>> says/ ) and cheap electricity and contribute more than any other >>>> country to global warming. >> >>> Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 >>> emissions compared to each Australian. >> But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR >> more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. > Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 > emissions compared to each Australian. But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. >>> Further; China is installing VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than >>> coal or nukes. >> Their stupidity is their problem > So you say. Do you think they might know more than Abbott's band of > vandals? I know they dont and will get to wear the cost of that stupidity >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China >> >>>> https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving- >>>>>>> economic- costs-australias-climate-inaction/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH >>>>>>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be able >>>>>>> to pay the bill. >>>>> >>>>> **Did you bother reading my cites? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> did you bother listening/watching mine? >>>> >>> >>> Murdoch shit? Nope. >>> >>> Tell you what: I will watch it, if you promise to read my cites. >>> >>> Deal? >>> >>> BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, >>> should you agree to my conditions. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 19:24 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <lssl2cFf8u7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #71569 |
On 23/12/2024 5:14 pm, Rod Speed wrote: > On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 16:30:55 +1100, Trevor Wilson > <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: > >> On 23/12/2024 3:40 pm, Rod Speed wrote: >>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 13:40:17 +1100, Trevor Wilson >>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: >>> >>>> On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, >>>>>>>>> award winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought >>>>>>> a King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that >>>>>>> example. >>>>>> >>>>>> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for >>>>>> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a >>>>>> scientific source of note. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon >>>>>>> emissions, but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. >>>>>> >>>>>> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as >>>>>> rapidly as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. >>>>>> IOW: We must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it >>>>>> back to approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race >>>>>> will incur costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the >>>>>> costs. As has been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is >>>>>> cheaper than acting later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 >>>>>> levels below approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will >>>>>> prevent an utter catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the >>>>>> planet several times over. >>>>> I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ >>>>> carbon- dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could >>>>> provide us with cheap electricity, > >>>> How about the CO2 emissions? > >>> Irrelevant as far as this country is concerned. > >>> Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired >>> and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have >>> NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. > >> Would it affect AUSTRALIA'S CO2 emissions? > > Irrelevant. **Yes or no. Answer the fucking question. > > Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired > and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have > NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. **Would it affect Australia's emissions. Yes or no. > >>>> Did you forget that? We MUST move away from coal. > >>> Mindless bullshit. > >> Fact > > Nothing even remotely like a fact. **Fact. Humans are releasing far too much CO2. We must reduce those emissions. No excuses. No exceptions. > > Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired > and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have > NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. **Would it affect Australia's emissions. Yes or no. > >>>> but thanks to green ideology we have high >>>>> electricity prices. > >>>> BULLSHIT. > >>> Fact actually. > >> BULLSHIT. We have high electricity prices because various state >> governments sold electricity assets to private companies. > > Victoria only did that because Labor drove the state govt finances > into the ground and there was no other viable alternative. **There you go. It was entirely due to the sell off of electricity assets. Did the Libs need to. Of course not. They did it, because every other state, except Qld did. NSW didn't need to sell it's electricity assets, but did so anyway. > >> Private companies can gouge consumers. > > Not when there is real competition between them, as there is. **There is no effective competition. > >> After all, they have to pay huge chunks of cash to overseas shareholders, > > Another lie. **Really? Who owns the electricity companies? > >> overpaid corporate directors > > Trivial part of their costs. **It all adds up. > >> and other entities. > > Fantasy > >>>> Most places in Australia have high electricity prices because we >>>> have stupid state governments that soldoff profitable state assets. >>>> Like electricity generation. > >>> We would still have higher electricity prices even if >>> we had not done that, > >> Not even REMOTELY close to what we have now. Power prices went through >> the roof as soon as power companies were sold off. > > They never went thru the roof and the increase happened > in the states which did not sell off their power generation, **Wrong. Qld and ACT have cheaper prices. > >> simply because the changes >>> to the grid and paying for renewables and stuff like >>> Snowy 2.0 which is because of the much higher >>> level of renewables would still have to be paid for. > >> Snowy 2.0 was always dumb. > > It was the only viable way to do load levelling when > govts were stupid enough to do renewables. **Wrong. It was dumb. > >> Thanks to the Libs. > >>>> Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity >>>> generating assets? > >>> Because Labor had driven the govt finances in Victoria >>> into the ground and there was no other way to fix that. > >> Bullshit. > > How do you claim that would have been fixed otherwise ? **Borrow money, like every other government. > >>>>> we could have kept our coal fired power stations >>>>> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. > >>>> We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are >>>> very well advanced in fact. > >>> And got much higher electricity prices because they were that >>> stupid and got to wear the mega grid failure when the transmission >>> line from Victoria which was crucial to viability was wrecked. > >> Overhead power lines are cheap. > > Bullshit the new transmission line to SA is and the other new > transmission lines. > >> And dumb. > > So how do you propose to get the power from the renewables > to the consumers ? **Underground cables. It won't be done, because the private companies don't want to spend the money. > >>>>> the only reason we >>>>> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by >>>>> ideology. > >>>> Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott.He is >>>> singularly responsible for Australia's situation. > >>> Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. > >> Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, istravelling the >> world sprouting climate change denialism. > > That's not australia's situation. > >>>> NEVER forget that. Abbott's name will go down in history as the >>>> worst, most planet damaging politician in Australian history. > >>> Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. > >> Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, is travelling the >> world sprouting climate change denialism. > > That's not australia's situation. > >>>>> so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered >>>>> electricity generation (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china- >>>>> responsible-for-95-of-new- coal-power-construction-in-2023-report- >>>>> says/ ) and cheap electricity and contribute more than any other >>>>> country to global warming. >>> >>>> Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 >>>> emissions compared to each Australian. > >>> But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR >>> more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. > >> Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 >> emissions compared to each Australian. > > But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR > more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. **Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 emissions compared to each Australian. > >>>> Further; China is installing VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than >>>> coal or nukes. > >>> Their stupidity is their problem > >> So you say. Do you think they might know more than Abbott's band of >> vandals? > > I know they dont and will get to wear the cost of that stupidity > >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China >>> >>>>> https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving- >>>>>>>> economic- costs-australias-climate-inaction/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH >>>>>>>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be >>>>>>>> able to pay the bill. >>>>>> >>>>>> **Did you bother reading my cites? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> did you bother listening/watching mine? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Murdoch shit? Nope. >>>> >>>> Tell you what: I will watch it, if you promise to read my cites. >>>> >>>> Deal? >>>> >>>> BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, >>>> should you agree to my conditions. >> -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 20:25 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <op.2y764kuxbyq249@pvr2.lan> |
| In reply to | #71575 |
On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:24:44 +1100, Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: > On 23/12/2024 5:14 pm, Rod Speed wrote: >> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 16:30:55 +1100, Trevor Wilson >> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: >> >>> On 23/12/2024 3:40 pm, Rod Speed wrote: >>>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 13:40:17 +1100, Trevor Wilson >>>> <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris Uhlmann, >>>>>>>>>> award winning journalist and Sky News Political Contributor >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who brought >>>>>>>> a King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're following that >>>>>>>> example. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for >>>>>>> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not a >>>>>>> scientific source of note. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon >>>>>>>> emissions, but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as >>>>>>> rapidly as possible and then we must aim to reverse net emissions. >>>>>>> IOW: We must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere to bring it >>>>>>> back to approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the human race >>>>>>> will incur costs that are so high that we cannot ever pay for the >>>>>>> costs. As has been said for at least 25 years: Acting sooner is >>>>>>> cheaper than acting later. Should we fail to keep atmospheric CO2 >>>>>>> levels below approximately 500ppm, then nothing humans can do will >>>>>>> prevent an utter catastrophe. The cost will exceed the GDP of the >>>>>>> planet several times over. >>>>>> I'm aware of the problem (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ >>>>>> carbon- dioxide/), however we have vast reserves of coal that could >>>>>> provide us with cheap electricity, >> >>>>> How about the CO2 emissions? >> >>>> Irrelevant as far as this country is concerned. >> >>>> Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired >>>> and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have >>>> NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. >>> Would it affect AUSTRALIA'S CO2 emissions? >> Irrelevant. > Yes or no. Answer the fucking question. Irrelevant Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. >> Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired >> and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have >> NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. > Would it affect Australia's emissions. > Yes or no. Irrelevant Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. >>>>> Did you forget that? We MUST move away from coal. >>>> Mindless bullshit. >>> Fact >> Nothing even remotely like a fact. > Fact. Nothing even remotely like a fact. > Humans are releasing far too much CO2. Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. > We must reduce those emissions. No excuses. No exceptions. You get no say what so ever on that or anything else, ever >> Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired >> and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have >> NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. > Would it affect Australia's emissions. > Yes or no. Even if we were stupid enough to shut down all coal fired and gas fired power generation tomorrow that would have NO measurable effect on global temps what so eveer. >>>>> but thanks to green ideology we have high >>>>>> electricity prices. >>>>> BULLSHIT. >>>> Fact actually. >>> BULLSHIT. We have high electricity prices because various state >>> governments sold electricity assets to private companies. >> Victoria only did that because Labor drove the state govt finances >> into the ground and there was no other viable alternative. > There you go. There the labor govt went, down the tubes, financially and got flushed by the voters, for a reason. > It was entirely due to the sell off of electricity assets. That happened after labor flushed the govt finances down the tubes > Did the Libs need to. Of course not. They did it,because every other > state, except Qld did. Victoria did that before anyone else, fuckwit. > NSW didn't need to sell it's electricity assets, but did so anyway. It didnt in fact sell the power generation, fuckwit. >>> Private companies can gouge consumers. >> Not when there is real competition between them, as there is. > There is no effective competition. Even sillier and more pig ignorant than you usually manage given that you are free to use whatever retail supplier you like and even get to choose one that has not been sold off too. >>> After all, they have to pay huge chunks of cash to overseas >>> shareholders, >> Another lie. > Really? Who owns the electricity companies? It isnt just overseas shareholders, fuckwit. >>> overpaid corporate directors >> Trivial part of their costs. > It all adds up. Bullshit it does. >>> and other entities. >> Fantasy >>>>> Most places in Australia have high electricity prices because we >>>>> have stupid state governments that soldoff profitable state assets. >>>>> Like electricity generation. >>>> We would still have higher electricity prices even if >>>> we had not done that, >>> Not even REMOTELY close to what we have now. Power prices went through >>> the roof as soon as power companies were sold off. >> They never went thru the roof and the increase happened >> in the states which did not sell off their power generation, > Wrong. Qld and ACT have cheaper prices. No prices went thru the roof and Red has not been sold off and any on is free to use them as their supplier >>>> simply because the changes >>>> to the grid and paying for renewables and stuff like >>>> Snowy 2.0 which is because of the much higher >>>> level of renewables would still have to be paid for. >>> Snowy 2.0 was always dumb. >> It was the only viable way to do load levelling when >> govts were stupid enough to do renewables. > Wrong. It was dumb. Batterys are much dumber because they don't last anything like as long. >>> Thanks to the Libs. >>>>> Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity >>>>> generating assets? >>>> Because Labor had driven the govt finances in Victoria >>>> into the ground and there was no other way to fix that. >>> Bullshit. >> How do you claim that would have been fixed otherwise ? > Borrow money, like every other government. Made no sense at the interest rates there were then and the other govts didnt have anthing like the stupid level of debt that the victorian govt had run up then. >>>>>> we could have kept our coal fired power stations >>>>>> while at the same time transitioning to renewables. >> >>>>> We ARE transitioning to renewables. Places like South Australia are >>>>> very well advanced in fact. >> >>>> And got much higher electricity prices because they were that >>>> stupid and got to wear the mega grid failure when the transmission >>>> line from Victoria which was crucial to viability was wrecked. >>> Overhead power lines are cheap. >> Bullshit the new transmission line to SA is and the other new >> transmission lines. >>> And dumb. >> So how do you propose to get the power from the renewables >> to the consumers ? > Underground cables. Stupidly expensive for the long distance transmission lines. > It won't be done, because the private companies don't want to spend the > money. Because they aren't stupid enough to waste far more money which would produce MUCH higher electricity prices with the major transmission lines. >>>>>> the only reason we >>>>>> haven't done so is because practicality has been supplanted by >>>>>> ideology. >> >>>>> Nope. The blame lies squarely with Tony fucking Abbott.He is >>>>> singularly responsible for Australia's situation. >> >>>> Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. >> >>> Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, istravelling the >>> world sprouting climate change denialism. >> That's not australia's situation. >> >>>>> NEVER forget that. Abbott's name will go down in history as the >>>>> worst, most planet damaging politician in Australian history. >> >>>> Even sillier than you usually manage and that's saying something. >> >>> Nope. I am 100% correct. That fucking idiot, Abbott, is travelling the >>> world sprouting climate change denialism. >> That's not australia's situation. >> >>>>>> so we export our coal to China so they can have coal powered >>>>>> electricity generation (https://www.carbonbrief.org/china- >>>>>> responsible-for-95-of-new- coal-power-construction-in-2023-report- >>>>>> says/ ) and cheap electricity and contribute more than any other >>>>>> country to global warming. >>>> >>>>> Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 >>>>> emissions compared to each Australian. >> >>>> But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR >>>> more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. >> >>> Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 >>> emissions compared to each Australian. >> But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR >> more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. > Each Chinese citizen is responsible for less than half the CO2 > emissions compared to each Australian. But because there are so many of them, china contributes FAR more CO2 to the atmosphere than we do and that's what matters. >>>>> Further; China is installing VASTLY more Solar and wind energy than >>>>> coal or nukes. >> >>>> Their stupidity is their problem >> >>> So you say. Do you think they might know more than Abbott's band of >>> vandals? >> I know they dont and will get to wear the cost of that stupidity >> >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China >>>> >>>>>> https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have a better idea for you. Try READING this: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/markets-moving- >>>>>>>>> economic- costs-australias-climate-inaction/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The costs associated with achieving net zero are very high. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The costs associated with failing to achieve net zero are MUCH >>>>>>>>> higher. In fact, they are so high that the planet may not be >>>>>>>>> able to pay the bill. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **Did you bother reading my cites? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> did you bother listening/watching mine? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Murdoch shit? Nope. >>>>> >>>>> Tell you what: I will watch it, if you promise to read my cites. >>>>> >>>>> Deal? >>>>> >>>>> BTW: There will be a quiz to test if you actually do read my cites, >>>>> should you agree to my conditions. >>> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-23 21:00 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <vkbcch$159mk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #71551 |
Trevor Wilson wrote on 23/12/24 1:40 pm: > On 23/12/2024 11:38 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>> On 21/12/2024 5:59 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>> Trevor Wilson wrote: >>>>> On 21/12/2024 11:50 am, Mighty Mouse wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Get the facts. radio interview I recorded with Chris >>>>>> Uhlmann, award winning journalist and Sky News Political >>>>>> Contributor >>>>>> >>>>>> https://auslink.info/audio/netzero.mp4 (20Kb) >>>>>> >>>>>> or watch the documentary .. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxpieEQ7bc >>>>>> >>>>> **Sky News? Are you fucking serious, you fucking moron? >>>> >>>> in ancient times it was customary to kill a messenger who >>>> brought a King news he didn't want to hear. I see you're >>>> following that example. >>> >>> **Nope. I am merely pointing out that Sky is a mouthpiece for >>> denialists. NOTHING Sky reports can be trusted. Ever. Sky is not >>> a scientific source of note. >>> >>>> deal with the facts. it's not about not reducing carbon >>>> emissions, but how it's done, and setting realistic targets. >>> >>> **The target is zero net emissions. Simple. It must be done as >>> rapidly as possible and then we must aim to reverse net >>> emissions. IOW: We must begin to remove CO2 from the atmosphere >>> to bring it back to approximately 300ppm. Failure means that the >>> human race will incur costs that are so high that we cannot ever >>> pay for the costs. As has been said for at least 25 years: Acting >>> sooner is cheaper than acting later. Should we fail to keep >>> atmospheric CO2 levels below approximately 500ppm, then nothing >>> humans can do will prevent an utter catastrophe. The cost will >>> exceed the GDP of the planet several times over. >> >> I'm aware of the problem >> (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon- dioxide/), however we >> have vast reserves of coal that could provide us with cheap >> electricity, > > **How about the CO2 emissions? Did you forget that? We MUST move away > from coal. > >> but thanks to green ideology we have high electricity prices. > > **BULLSHIT. Most places in Australia have high electricity prices > because we have stupid state governments that sold off profitable > state assets. Like electricity generation. > > Remind us: Which Victorian state government sold off electricity > generating assets? Umm! That was Jeff Kennett, wasn't it?? Doing his Business Mates a favour. -- Daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | aus.computers
csiph-web