Arguments
Recent Comments
Prev 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 Next
Comments 57151 to 57200:
-
Johns777 at 19:35 PM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Phil, Your work protects my children. Thank you. John Stewart Sydney Australia. -
Ann Owen at 18:40 PM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Keep going,your work is invaluable. Ann Owen, Wales, UK -
shoyemore at 17:34 PM on 3 July 2012New research from last week 26/2012
Great post as usual, Ari. Is the date right for Damon et al - 2012? -
barry1487 at 15:44 PM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
I remember Jones' interview on the darkness he felt following the rotten attacks on him. It made me sad and angry for him. There are now 6 pages of signers here and no doubt a number of emails. This is heartening. Email sent, full support. -
Tristan at 15:41 PM on 3 July 2012Carbon Pricing Alarmists Disproven by the Reality of RGGI
This post is missing a critical piece of information. It states: The [RGGI] states have far exceeded their emissions reduction target, with a 23% overall reduction in 2009-2011 power plant CO2 emissions as compared to the 2006-2008 How does that compare to the non-RGGI states, whose emissions have also reduced? Without that context, the above isn't all that meaningful. -
John Donovan at 14:42 PM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
John Donovan, Eugene, Oregon, USA -
Tom Curtis at 14:02 PM on 3 July 2012Ian Plimer Pens Aussie Geologist Gish Gallop #2 of the Week
Further to dissembly @13, he suggests that the Carbon Tax virtually pointless because it is only predicted to reduce domestic emissions by 2%. It is however, also predicted to stop emissions growth of 66.7% by 2050. In other words, while not a complete solution it moves us away from uncontrolled emissions growth, and prevents approximately 8 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions.
Dissembly suggests alternative policies for tackling climate change, and he is certainly welcome to pursue them. Optimistically it would take around 10 years for him to achieve the political capital to implement his preferred solution. In that 10 years, without the carbon tax emissions would have grown by another 60 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent per annum. With out the Carbon Tax, therefore, he would face a much more difficult task to reduce emissions because a much larger (and faster) reduction would be required. (This is assuming his plan could in fact be implemented, which I doubt.)
-
scaddenp at 13:56 PM on 3 July 2012Ian Plimer Pens Aussie Geologist Gish Gallop #2 of the Week
Dissembly, I'm on other side of Ditch and so not following developments in West Island as close as you obviously, but I had perceived the aims of the scheme differently. I would have thought that the carbon tax was incentive to de-carbonize industry (especially use alternative generation) because you would then have more competitive advantage of industry that didnt. Consumer would buy so as to avoid tax. Not necessarily "reduce unnecessary production" (what defines "unnecessary"). I would have thought biggest criticism was that it didnt hand back 100% of the tax? It seems a lot simpler and cleaner than our ETS which has been further slowed down. A 2% reduction by 2050 sounds like a very pessimistic assessment of alternative energy. -
Tom Curtis at 13:45 PM on 3 July 2012Ian Plimer Pens Aussie Geologist Gish Gallop #2 of the Week
dissembly @13 it is impossible to keep a close eye on the Australian political scene without realizing that all left wing or centrist political parties with enough support to have seats in parliament support the Carbon Tax. That even extends to most of the independents in Federal Parliament, with three conservative and one left leaning independent all voting for the tax. The same is true outside of parliament, with all organized opposition to the Carbon Tax coming from conservative political parties, right wing think tanks, and denier organizations. Many of the opponents of the Carbon Tax are quite happy to dissemble; and those who are more honest still never call the others on their falsehoods. The result has been a perfect storm of misinformation. Given that, it is no surprise that there is substantial uncertainty about the Carbon Tax in Australia. The question is, then, will you increase that uncertainty, as appears to be your intention, or provide accurate clear information to dispel? -
p.hughes001 at 13:29 PM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Patricia Hughes, NSW Australia -
dissembly at 13:08 PM on 3 July 2012Ian Plimer Pens Aussie Geologist Gish Gallop #2 of the Week
@dana1981 I take exception to this: "the Australian government (primarily their Labor Party) passed Clean Energy Bill 2011, which implemented a national carbon pricing system (starting as a tax, then becoming an emissions trading system). This was a major achievement for Australia, but one which political conservatives tended to oppose". In fact, opposition to the carbon pricing scheme is not limited to political conservatives, and, according to surveys, includes the majority of people in Australia. Polls I have seen have shown that up to 80% of Australians believe that AGW is a real issue, yet as many as 75% are opposed to the carbon tax. (And despite rumours to the contrary, Australians are not necessarily politically conservative when it gets down to the polling details: http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2012/06/11/what-australians-believe/ ). So I think it is factually incorrect to present opposition to the carbon tax as something associated with political conservatism (or AGW denial) - that is certainly not the case in Australia. The Liberal Party's position on the carbon tax is seen as a populist move, even though most people polled disagree with their AGW-denialist stance. I also disagree with the description of the carbon tax as "a major achievement for Australia", and I say this as someone who fully agrees with the science on global warming, and sits far to the left on the political spectrum. This is actually a point of contention among the environmentalist movement in Australia. In my own experience, the carbon tax has made the Greens (and environmental issues) quite unpopular, where previously they were seen as having a moral high ground. It has alienated people who agreed with us on AGW, because it is seen as a measure in which average people will be made to pay for a problem created by big business. A conservative government in the next election is a near-certainty at this stage, and the carbon tax is one of the policy decisions that has contributed to this near-certainty. macoles wrote: "The only plausible criticism of the CEF package is that low incomes earners will be overcompensated via the "Household assistance measures", and that could be seen as vote buying."" In fact, there are more people in tricky economic circumstances in Australia than is commonly reported, as cost of living increases have been eating away at us for some time. There's a lot of doubt that the carbon tax's compensation packages will actually compensate for all the increases, much of which will be difficult to track (as businesses fold their cost increases into the prices that they pass on to consumers). Perhaps more importantly, Treasury figures have shown that the carbon tax and cap & trade program is only expected to reduce emissions by something like 2% by 2050 - the reason that higher figures are often quoted is that they include "reductions" from the purchasing of carbon offsets from overseas. This is an especially fraught issue; in some cases businesses will be "purchasing" things such as 'a promise not to log an area of forest that (supposedly) otherwise would have been logged'. One could write essays on the problems with cap & trade (and many already have, so I'll stop myself there). Another consideration is the role of economic recession - already in full swing overseas, and definitely en route to Australia (via recent drops in Chinese manufacturing/infrastructure, which partly relies on Australian mining exports; and via the high Australian dollar that has already caused substantial job losses in manufacturing, retail and tourism; a lot of people are already 'underemployed', if not unemployed). Carbon pricing is an incentive scheme to reduce unnecessary production, but recession already raises the price of production and pares things down to a bare minimum (even below the bare minimum, as unemployment & poverty rise). The 1990s economic crash in Eastern Europe did more for carbon emissions than any carbon price has. The alternatives I would propose involve nationalisation of energy production & active development of alternatives (rather than using a market incentive system), which I'm sure I don't need to go into (and it'd take me OT anyway). So I question the characterisation of opposition to carbon pricing as a hallmark of political conservatism, and the description of it as a step forward for those of us who know that AGW is a problem and want to do something about it. Both implications are factually incorrect. -
tonydunc at 12:28 PM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
AH. Tony Duncan, Vt, USA -
tonydunc at 12:27 PM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Posting on my facebook page. You have gone through hell because of ideological thuggery. I know scientists aren't perfect and science isn't perfect, yet you should never have been subjected to the hostility and paranoid delusions of these people. Your have my sympathy and support, and what you have gone through has strengthened my resolve to do what I can to get the facts as we know them out to the public -
Lambda 3.0 at 08:47 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Phil, I regard you as an honest and brave scientist. My children will learn to take you as a role model. Their children and those of the fake skeptics will be inspired by your great contributions to the survival of civilization. Keep up the good work. There are many of us who will stand up for dealing with reality rather than preserving personal interest. Thank you for all you do! Bill Rumbley USA -
MikeD at 08:39 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Long time reader (and learner) here and had to register to show support. Let us hope the increasingly desperate talk from the deniers shows they realise that the end game has arrived for them. No one should have to receive the sort of stuff Professor Jones has so I totally support this show of support for him. Mike Doyle, London -
Byron Smith at 08:26 AM on 3 July 2012Mercury rising: Greater L.A. to heat up an average 4 to 5 degrees by mid-century
Can I ask that headlines referring to temps in ºF and so departing from the international scientific convention of ºC make this clear in the headline itself? -
HerwigR at 08:18 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
It's a sad world where you have to thank people for doing there job, but here it is : thank you a lot. Herwig Regelbrugge, Belgium -
bibasir at 08:01 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
It is shameful that this abuse is so extreme and has gone on so long; all as the result of the unsolved crime of stolen emails. I hope you feel the support of your many friends who appreciate your scientific expertise. Jon Parker Houston, Texas -
Martinm at 06:03 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Martin Mathers, Scotland -
Jim Powell at 05:16 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
James Lawrence Powell, USA -
Utahn at 04:42 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Gary Kunkel, Utah, USA -
KR at 04:38 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Sent by email. -
BoulderBob at 04:30 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Robert Evans Boulder, Colorado USA -
Mark-US at 04:16 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
When I find myself asking "Why bother?", sooner or later some of Gandhi's words come back. Something along the lines of: Almost everything you do may seem insignificant, but it is IMPERATIVE that you do it as well as you can. Chin up! And that goes out to all of us. Mark E, USA -
pbjamm at 03:14 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Stephan Reed Long Beach CA USA -
monkeyorchid at 02:22 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Dr Richard Milne, Edinburgh -
Miriam O'Brien (Sou) at 02:05 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Miriam O'Brien, Victoria, Australia. -
stewart at 01:58 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Stewart Longman, Calgary, Canada -
Svatli at 01:46 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Sveinn Atli Gunnarsson Reykjavik, Iceland -
Publicola at 01:41 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Prof. Jones, You have the deep respect and gratitude of innumerable people, including mine. -
heb0 at 01:24 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Evan Bush, Kentucky -
Climatemama at 01:20 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Harriet Shugarman USA -
RichG at 00:43 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Richard G, UK -
Manwichstick at 00:32 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Shawn Brooks, Toronto -
Sudden_Disillusion at 00:14 AM on 3 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Stefan Meier, Switzerland -
DMarshall at 22:57 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Not at all an expert in Latin but I think the title isn't right. It should be NOLI not NILModerator Response: [Sph] "Nil" is one of several common, valid slang variations (of which none are truly good Latin). The phrase originated during WW II. -
jeremyd at 22:35 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Jeremy Dawes - UK -
Chookmustard at 22:27 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Adrian O'Hara Australia -
kristofv at 21:57 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Kristof Vandoorne, Belgium -
Yvan Dutil at 21:53 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Yvan Dutil, Québec, Qc, Canada -
BC at 21:29 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Bruce Cooke, Australia -
wilbs2 at 20:05 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
We all stand beside you Phil, with every new day, comes new strength. John Wilby, Australia. -
Cornelius Breadbasket at 19:03 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Dear Dr Jones, I am sorry that you have been the centre of a politically and industrially motivated storm resulting in such dreadful emails. Ever since your own emails were hacked I have wanted to say how appalled I was that you have been hauled over the coals – it should never have happened to the extent that it did. While it has been reassuring to know that your work is sound and that you have been exonerated, the personal cost to you must have been horrendous. You have my utmost respect for bearing this burden in the name of objective scientific research. James Pavitt (UK) -
Phil Glynn at 17:46 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
As Duke Ellington used to say: " I will not let them tear down my magnificent personality " Ignore the fools and cowards Dr Jones. -
lpryor at 16:57 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Larry Pryor, USA -
skymccain at 16:49 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Sky McCain UK -
MichaelK at 16:48 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
The campaign against climate scientists is an attack on science and all that it represents: knowledge and reason. It must not be allowed to succeed. Mike Korsch, Australia -
Leigh at 16:39 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Leigh Thompson Australia -
andeem at 16:30 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Anders Emretsson, Sweden -
Pierre-Normand at 16:26 PM on 2 July 2012Nil Illegitimi Carborundum
Pierre-Normand Houle Montreal, Canada
Prev 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 Next
