Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

If you can everyone try and watch 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' tonight on ABC. It is a controversial documentary goes against popular scientific belief and states that humans are not the main contributors to global warming.....

It has been a while since we've had a truly heated debate on here and this is just the program to stir us up.

US folks, you can get it on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f8v5du5_ag

Here is some info to read after you've seen it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_ ... ng_Swindle


BTW - It appears I may be getting divorced very soon.... 1000 POSTS YAY!

Nothin like global warming to fire us all up eh!

Yeah, I watched it a while ago and after seeing it I felt so ripped off, bloody hell, global warming is a farse...

Untill I began some research, and found out some more truths about the documentary maker and his past, as well as the current people on the doco who are thinking of sueing because of misrepresentation..



Some things about the show just don't stack up.. Like the "Killing the African dream of development" What?????

Anyway, well worth watching, and I'm more looking forward to seeing the debate straight after the show on lateline...

The "scientist" who wrote and directed this and all his scientist mates have, according to an adelaide climate research professor, done other "documentaries" discrediting stuff from passive smoking and lung cancer to cfc's and the ozone layer. He has also been in trouble for misrepresenting facts and the adelaide professor stated the documentary as being fraudulent in its content. Can't wait to take a few hours off packing and watch it.

Very Interesting indeed.... who to believe. CO2 or not CO2.....

They have some very valid points. But the thing is unless I have hard physical data at my disposal, I don't think I could believe either side of the argument.

Someone is lying, but who?

I think the point that Africans need access to power to develop, I don't know if there is any truth in the fact that they can only have renewable energies.... The fact is that solar and wind are expensive here let alone in the 3rd world, but it is a good idea, just not practical.

I did catch onto a few discrepancies, I was overwhelmed at first but then if you listen carefully most of the argument was all over the place, had no point or was just stuck in there for factual goodness.

Yes the weather is influenced by the sun, HOW? They didn't explain how the sun was causing the fluctuations and we have gamma radiation entering out atmosphere and forming clouds, where did that come from?

I am now sitting on the global warming fence.....

Just another large crock of manure designed to obscure the truth and be 'controversial' for money IMO.

Personally, I've always quite liked Tony Jones, I'm a regular ABC viewer (current affairs etc) and I fully appreciated the rigorous, impartial manner he punched gaping holes through the credibility of that worthless mockumentary.

On another note, I'm increasingly saddened that both the IPCC and the 'climate sceptics' are still failing to account for the effects of 'global dimming' through particle pollution.

We'd already have temps 2C above what we have now without the layer of particle pollution (from fossil fuel pollution, forest fires etc) which extends around the globe.

In other words, we will end up with the IPCC's 'worst case scenario' warming even if we cut fossil fuel usage to zero tomorrow, then add the CO2 fueled warming on top of it.

Perhaps even more worrying, almost nobody seems to be talking about what the world was like when we had similar higher temps over centuries - almost no marine life in much of our oceans (anoxic oceans) and highly acidic rainfall which not much edible (at least for humans) plant life can endure.

I guess none of the above sells carbon credits for Al Gore's company...and neither does the STOP CONSUMING AT ANYWHERE NEAR CURRENT LEVELS message.

Dad has been suckered right in.... He did bring up a good point though. The ads on TV say if we each turn off 2 light bulbs when they are not in use will save so many tonnes of CO2 emissions... but what is the point when china is commissioning a coal power station every other week.

Think globaly act localy Tim.. If everyone says whats the point? It will just increase the problems... Turn the light globes off, but even more importantly, don't buy the cheap chinese disposable crap that isn't really needed. We are indirectly responsible for the fact that China is building a new power station each week, China is fueling our out of control consumption...

The show tonight?? Very interesting to see that they had edited it and removed some bits from the originally televised show. I think that really it's almost impossible to take seriously when you examine the data that is available... And boy there were a couple of fruitloops in the audience....

.Go solar power,wind power,tidal power! .low watt light bulbs!
And AQUAPONICS!

I've got to agree with you on the consumption of cheap goods from China causing some of the problem in relation to the increasing number of high pollution industries that country.

As to using low wattage light bulbs, right now the big push has been for CFL's (Compact Flourescent Lighting). The biggest problem that I have with them is thier use of mercury, a known neuro toxin, and the proper disposal of them. As many of you are aware you can not dispose of flourescent light tubes by simply tossing them into the trash bin, but yet, that is what will be happening to thousands of the CFL's within just a few years. When these bulbs are broken in the landfill we could be looking at a disaster in many areas if the groundwater becomes contaminated by the mercury. I know that they say that one CFL will save much more mercury from being emitted into the atmosphere from coal burning power plants, but I want to ask if the risk of groundwater contamination is worth the amount of gain in reducing emissions? (I bought some of the early ones, and I didn't find them to last any longer than my old incandescent bulbs. Also I found that they produce a blue wave length of light, rather than a red one, and that I ended up with eye strain from being under them. I hate the amount of time they take to reach operating temp, also the constant humming of the ballast drove me nuts!)

Then we get into the area of "Hybrid" vehicles. It was seen by most Americans that the fuel mileage estimate was a farce!!! Certain manufacturers fudged the figures to make them look like they are using less fuel than they are. What happened was that the US EPA made the estimates off of an assumption of higher urban use than what most buyers actually did. (They thought of the car as being more an urban short mileage vehicle, the most practical means of getting better mileage with one of them.) However, most Americans who have the financial ability to buy a vehicle in the price range of the Hybrids live out in the suburbs of larger urban centers and commute 30 or more highway miles to work. What happens is that when the vehicle is being operated at speeds of over 30 mph it runs on the internal combustion engine, and the electric motor and system is just added weight. As most commuters on America's trafficways operate thier vehicle at the posted speed limit (or above it), which in most areas is 65 or 70 mph, then they do not get the benefit of the electrical motor in reducing gas consumption. (By the by. Al Gore's son, Al Gore the III, got caught going over ninety in his Hybrid. So much for his fuel economy and "carbon footprint"!) The net result, we had cars a little over twenty years ago giving us better fuel mileage than what we have now! My Pontiac Phoenix, with a 2.5 liter in line 4 with a 4 spd transmission was getting me 32 mpg, now it is hard for you to find a "mid" sized sedan or coupe that will do that. Most of the current models have smaller engines, and give you lower EPA estimates, and even lower end user averages!

Here in the US there are two camps forming up. The one lead by Al Gore and others who say "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" and claim that by the day after tomorrow the planet will be a burned up cinder hurtling itself into the sun. Then the other is made up of ultra conservatives who say, "it is Situation Normal, All F---ed Up!" For them there is no cause for alarm, that human kind has not aided in the problem, that it is all natural processes and in the end will rectify itself.

Personally, I feel like we have had a hand to play in this situation and need to take steps to correct it. I agree with some of the conservative statements that there has been global temp changes through out history, and some of it is contrary to current data. (We actually had lower temps during the start of the industrial revolution when all heating, lighting, and industries relied primarily upon coal and petroleum for energy. While it is arguable that there were fewer people and users at the time, it can not be disputed that coal was the driving force at the end of the 1800's and the beginning of the 1900's.) The biggest problem is that we are seeing rapidly increasing effects and yet are doing nothing to resolve the situation.

Kevin

Thanks for the link Tim.
I agree one step at a time, comsume less. We affect China's production by what we purchase. Do folks get tv's repaired any more? Such a disposable world from what I see.
I doubt I make much of a difference in the big picture but Global Warming or not it makes sense to me to reduce consumption.
Kevin, we may indeed be creating a problem with bulb disposable. Many signs of short sightedness.
I don't think Mr, Gore's son getting picked up for speeding really has much to do with anything. Of course that will be used over and over to discredit the father.
I think I have found another camp, in the U.S. at least. Those that believe "Global Warming" is being used by the New World Order crowd and such other strange and scarry stuff.
And in the Words of Niloc "Go AQUAPONICS"

Interesting reading.
I still pick up the lolly wrapper in the street rather than walk over it.
Switch the light off when not required and save water by showering with a friend!!hehe
Best way to save is not to spend.

One point Jez raised which is very important and overlooked by so many, is global dimming. Global dimming is the effect of smoke and polution particulates in the air acting as a screen that keeps the sunlight away from the earths surface, which means that it has a cooling effect.

Well worth looking into further if you're interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming

It is indisputable that greenhouse gases are being pumped into the atmosphere look at some the bigger cities, where the smog covers the sun and people have to wear masks.

Fact is CO2 makes up 0.05% of the earths atmosphere.
The maximum recommended exposure for CO2 is 0.1%
If we removed all the CO2 in the atmosphere the greenhouse effect would only reduce by 12%

I agree with their main argument that CO2 is not the main cause for global warming. I believe that man is most likely the main cause of the increase in global warming, but the media has cause a lot of hype over the issue.

Dad was also saying in the 50's when he was young there was a heat wave of 40+ days that lasted close to a week. Now that was in Feburary. What caused that?

Here is a good theory:

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index ... rctic-ice/

TC I remember it being much hotter and drier late 60's n 70's Than it has ever been since!
Black soot eh??
Mmm...will have to quit smoking!