Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

34 Excellent

About XCom

  • Rank
    Transitions Addict in Progress

Previous Fields

  • Year of first Tri race?
  1. To be fair... He says that he is stopping the Death Cult from getting all of us.
  2. She found God. That trumps the need for making sense.
  3. So... submissions for Heydon's disqualification are to be heard on Friday by... Heydon ?
  4. Too many of the hard-right can't abide Turnbull for that to work other than as a last minute act of election desperation. So... are we in for a repeat of the killing season?
  5. Although... I'm not sure how much Labor can take out of that... pretty much gains for Greens, Palmer and 'Others'.
  6. I disagree with that interpretation of the science. The IPCC is 99+% certain of what is happening (basically, the measuring) and at its last report stated it was 97% certain of why it is happening (anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations). The part that is less certain is the outcome (if no action is taken) because climate is a chaotic system. They can make reasonable short-term predictions based on models, but modelling chaos becomes less accurate the further out you need to predict - it could be less severe or far worse than predicted... you wouldn't want to be on the far worse end of the spectrum. That part I totally agree with. Problem is that LNP won't accept the need for it, and Labor/Greens are locked in to renewables. I've pretty much given up on any of the clowns in Canberra doing anything worthwhile.
  7. Actually, I disagree with that conclusion. Climate science says that here is what is happening, and this is what we believe is causing it to happen. As for what will be the result if we don't stop causing it to happen, we're not so sure we can predict, but we believe it will likely be much worse rather than better. This is the concluding remarks from a 5-YO report by the Royal Society - probably the bastion of reserved scientific commentary. Since then the evidence supporting the first paragraph has only gown stronger and more certain. However, note the 2nd paragraph concerning the unpredictability of the results of warming. "There is strong evidence that changes in greenhouse gas concentrations due to human activity are the dominant cause of the global warming that has taken place over the last half century. This warming trend is expected to continue as are changes in precipitation over the long term in many regions. Further and more rapid increases in sea level are likely which will have profound implications for coastal communities and ecosystems. It is not possible to determine exactly how much the Earth will warm or exactly how the climate will change in the future, but careful estimates of potential changes and associated uncertainties have been made. Scientists continue to work to narrow these areas of uncertainty. Uncertainty can work both ways, since the changes and their impacts may be either smaller or larger than those projected. Like many important decisions, policy choices about climate change have to be made in the absence of perfect knowledge. Even if the remaining uncertainties were substantially resolved, the wide variety of interests, cultures and beliefs in society would make consensus about such choices difficult to achieve. However, the potential impacts of climate change are sufficiently serious that important decisions will need to be made. Climate science – including the substantial body of knowledge that is already well established, and the results of future research – is the essential basis for future climate projections and planning, and must be a vital component of public reasoning in this complex and challenging area.
  8. Surely, that assumes you can predict chaos ? For me, the approach of adapting to change rather than addressing the (scientifically) suspected cause of change, is analogous to having scientific evidence that smoking causes cancer, and deciding that rather than stop smoking, we'll focus on learning to live with cancer.
  9. XCom

    nick kyriois

    As an impressionable young boy, I spent an hour with Ken Rosewall listening to him talk about his (still current) career, and deciding that THIS your actual true hero... and everyone else after that sucked... LOL.
  10. But does that not itself assume we can predict, control and adapt to potentially chaotic changes ?
  11. That assumes you accept there is a risk. Too many in the govt still believe it's all Hocus Pocus (Cory Bernardi's description) for it to make more than a token effort.
  12. I see... so that that's known by... you.
  • Create New...