lastone

Well if you've used a model (or models), to predict things at several points in time, then certain points in those models start becoming reality, you'll find your theory is being proved correct through evidence (facts).


Global warming is slightly different to climate change.
But you're right, Methane is four times as bad as CO2 when it comes to climate change, but the amount we leak out in waste is absolutely insignificant to the amount on the sea bed.

You don't work for an oil company do you? Just noticed your location.

jad n rich

Krudd releases his ETS papers, today I think wait till the aussie public finds out what thats going to do to the price of fuel and electricity and therefor all things related such as food, housing, building materials, transport..........

Repeat now 'working families'

Letspretend....

Well thanks for your response. Interesting to note that despite your concerns about climate change and global warming. You are going to join the rest of us and forsake your principles and move to Australia where the current expansion in mineral extraction is fueling the economy and therefore the employment market. Or are you going to work for free?

MartinLuther

Actually it depends on whether the word Theory is being used in the common sense or the scientific sense. What you've said is correct for common usage but in the scientific usage a Theory must be backed by facts otherwise it is just a conjecture, an opinion, a speculation, or a hypothesis.

Mr Semantic
Brother to Mr Pedantic

lastone

Don't get me wrong, I'm not putting Australia or the people who live there down, I love the place. This doesn't just apply to OZ, it's the responsibility of single human being on the planet to do something about it.

I don't have a choice about moving there, my wife's job has been relocated there, so we're going. When it comes down to ripping your family apart (or slightly compromising your principles, then I know what I'd choose every time.

Also, I'd just like to add that there is nothing wrong with 'mineral extraction' per se, just the amount of coal that is intended to be burned.
If I was living in Perth for example, I'd be a bit worried about the plans for the new coal fired power station.

nickyjohnt

Nuclear Power the only way to go

upyerfud

Nonsense, solar and wind are hugely inefficient ways to produce electricity. Its dark at least 50% of the day FFS. Drive past any wind farm in the UK and I'll gaurentee at least 1/4 won't be working, even in ideal conditions. Without goverment subsidies, or hugely inflated electricity prices, neither currently can make any meaningful contribution to the electricity requirements of any industrialised country.
Be honest, if a windmill was efficient why don't we still use them to pump water or mill corn?

Don't know about him but I'm a former NE Scotland oil worker, now NSW oil and gas/mining and power station contractor , same s..t, different dog.

If I was living in Perth I'd be more worried about relying on poorly maintained pipelines and facilities to get a gas supply. A coal fired power station in Perth will make a miniscule difference in world terms to enviromental pollution. Think Veranus Island.

Yep, dig it up, ship it out, ship in 4WD gas guzzlers and 300HP Japanese outboard engines in exchange. Who says this country's not got their priorities right.

upyerfud

Correct 100%. Only problem Krudd and Howard before are/were shit scared of coal industry unions and appeasing tree huggers.

MartinLuther

Because the best way to tackle pollution is to introduce another type of pollution?

nickyjohnt

And with the possibly the worlds biggest resources in Uranium easy peasy, The only way to go, With Coal and Gas resourses rapidly depleating I can see it happening here in the not too distant future (Time to Invest in the Uranium Mining Companies) me thinks

John

JAJ

The world is not running short of coal anytime soon.

Amazulu

Or gas.

TheRutters

I'm afraid you're under the mistaken impression that Howard and latterly Krudd or even the unions are calling the shots.

The country is ostensibly owned and run by the two major resource miners. When the CEO of Rio Tinto is calling $147billion (US) a 'serious undevaluement of the company' you have joined a whole new world where calculators have extra zeros on them.

asprilla

The australian government gets significant revenue from taxation of resources, but perhaps not quite as much as you think.

I guess that the UK and the US aren't run by their governments either....perhaps they are they run by a secret illuminati of financial institutions?

lastere

you live on a hill, you got that right.
how many oil rich countries in this world you don't give a shit about are democracies? you think it's a coincidence?

why do you think crony capitalism is flourishing 'down under', you bitch about groceries prices and import anything that requires tightening 2 screws together? i hear holden is a great brand in australia.

i'm not sayin, i'm just sayin.