How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal

[fly_tornado]

The facts are the facts. Citing Lord Monckton as source always boxes you into the certain category of intellect who know the truth and understand the conspiracy.

 

I am always generous, I just say he's old, he can't help it. The facts are the facts, you just need better ones.

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

......... I just say he's old, he can't help it.

You are playing the man again Effie via your personal insults. That really is unbecoming.

 

 

 

But surely you are not a sycophant of the UN Groups who have hijacked this issue and are the data changers?

 

 

 

If you are, I don't think I can save you and bring you back to the light.

 

 

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[octave]

data changers? can you be specific about this claim?

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

data changers? can you be specific about this claim?

Ocky,

 

 

 

Perhaps start by having a squiz at http://www.galileomovement.com.au/scientific_untruths.php .Some may be a stretch but some looks pretty right in my opinion.

 

 

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Geoff, remember you are dealing with dark forces who will do anything to keep you from discovering their plans for world domination. If you love your family please be careful about what you say.

 

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

Geoff, remember you are dealing with dark forces who will do anything to keep you from discovering their plans for world domination. If you love your family please be careful about what you say.

Thanks Flighty. I and my family appreciate your concern.

 

 

 

But did you take the correct number of tablets this morning?

 

 

 

Regards Geoff (Member # 006 of the Committee of 300)

 

 

[octave]

[/url]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gday Geoff

 

 

 

That's a long document, especially if you follow each link. The first thing I do when reading a document is to determine who it is written by and what thier expertise is. This is not about attacking the man but it is important to do this with any assertions made on either side of the debate. We do need to know what the Galileo movement is.

 

 

 

Just picking one item - the so called climategate -

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just generally I think the problem is that anthropomorphic climate change is involves many areas, firstly it is a scientific issue and then a political/social issue. Accepting the scientific consensus does not mean an automatic acceptance of any particular policy such as a carbon tax. Personally I think the world will have to move away from fossil fuels at some point in time, the countries that develop the new technologies will do very well.

 

 

 

My acceptance of the science is not political or philosophical merely confidence in the scientific method, that does not mean it is the right answer that is not how science works but I accept that it produces the best answer with a given set of data at a particular time. This is not to say that scientists are somehow free of biases and other human frailties, this is where peer review comes in. Peer review is often misunderstood, it is not a brotherhood scientists patting each other n the back and saying "we are right aren't we" it is scientists trying to disprove each others work. Imagine what funding and fame would come from overturning climate change science. Just read a scientific journal e.g. new scientist, scientist

 

challenge each other all the time

 

Clearly I am not a scientist, just an avid reader, my thoughts on this are shaped not by the popular media or any political group. I have no personal knowledge of whether childhood vaccination causes autism so I rely on the peer reviewed evidence that it does not, I accept this as being the best answer with the available data at this time.

 

 

 

There seems to be 2 different approaches from the doubters, the first is the NASA, CSIRO and almost any reputable organisation you can name are scientifically incompetent the second one is that it is some kind of hoax or conspiracy. If it is shoddy science what other findings should ignore? As for a hoax or conspiracy I would thought in these days of Edward Snowden and Wikileaks that there would be more incontrovertible evidence.

 

 

 

As a recreational pilot my natural interests would be better served by dismissing the evidence and if the theory is scientifically debunked I will be the first dancing for joy in the street.

 

Anyway I don't really see much point in sending each other links, for me to change my mind would require a large volume of quality peer review evidence and I am not sure what would be required to change your view. Personally I hope in 10 years history will show that you are right.

 

 

 

Throughout this discussion I have tried to put my view in polite and respectful manner so I am hoping that I have not offended anyone.

 

 

 

 

 

Regards

 

octave

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Geoff, as you know, Lord Monckton has been coming to Australia for while now as the "tin foil tour" as is a good paying gig [rumour is he is asking $400k a tour now], have you ever wonder why previously you have ignored his psuedo science but this time you listened to him in a whole new way?

 

Its the power of the pyramid!

 

Or it could just be you are in a vulnerable state and susceptible to messages. Perhaps you are in a vulnerable state because you heard on talk back that our next PM most likely will be

 

Prime Minister Tanya Joan Plibersek

 

 

 

 

here is a picture of the polar ice growing, proof enough that you must be onto something

 

 

 

[turboplanner]

You're so subtle FT, only ever mentioning your Party in the most circuitous way, even to the extent of expecting a spelling mistake in Labor at the bottom of the pyramid, (also spelled incorrectly "Labour" at the Party's Shrine of history Theme Park at Barcaldine), but now it comes out that we're going to get Tania shoved down our necks.

 

The Arctic ice by the way varies considerably year by year due to the weather conditions we are all familiar with. In the Southern Hemisphere Australia actually knows what the cyclic change is, is any because a CSIRO Satellite constantly measures the ice.

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

Geoff, as you know, Lord Monckton has been coming to Australia for while now as the "tin foil tour" as is a good paying gig [rumour is he is asking $400k a tour now], have you ever wonder why previously you have ignored his psuedo science but this time you listened to him in a whole new way?

Your above post is full of ratbag assumptions, Flighty.

 

 

 

You have no idea what has been my previous position on climate science, nor what I have done to research the arguments of Monckton and others, or to evaluate the worth of those various arguments. More playing of the man by you, methinks.

 

 

 

And I note that you appears to begrudge him the fees from a speaking tour. How is that possibly relevant ..... and do you think that Monckton might charge more or less that Big Al Gore or even bigger Michael Moore?

 

 

 

I say again that in my opinion, you and your ilk have it wrong or are deliberately attempting to distort the position in your final line as above. From what I have heard and read of Monckton's presentations, he is not presenting "pseudo science" as you have distorted it to be. He is presenting arguments backed by scientific data & argument from others.

 

 

 

That is a valid position for him to take and he must be pressing cogent data or the climate doomsday cultists like you would not be responding about him in the way that you are, via personal attack and ratbag misinformation.

 

 

 

The logic or your argument in this thread, and in others recently, leads me to conclude that you have run out of reasoned contributions that justify further consideration, or the time to read your stuff. That's a shame really.

 

 

 

Let me know via a PM when you think you have something to say that will really contribute to a discussion.

 

 

 

Regards Geoff

 

 

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I am still waiting for the evidence of collusion within the scientific community.

 

Unlike the faking of the moon landings:roflmao: or the Russian sub that kidnapped Holt , there are 10,000s of scientists that need to fabricate thousands of years of research to make the global warming conspiracy work.

 

Check and mate!

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

Flighty,

 

 

 

Please don't call me "mate".

 

 

 

I have enough other problems.

 

 

[facthunter]

Check and mate is a chess situation. Nev

 

 

[nomadpete]

1

 

Our east coast grid is already one of the longest in the world - so we already know how to minimise transmission costs for bulk supply of electrons.

 

2

 

I believe that transmission and distribution represents 40% of our power bills. Adding distributed sources (solar,wind,etc) makes no difference to this infrastructure cost.

 

3

 

Diversifying our electricity sources makes the same sense as diversifying my superannuation portfolio

 

(just some food for thought)

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well how's this for logic?

 

My electricity supplier installed a smart meter, and supplied wonderful information about how I could use it to reduce my power bill, mainly by using power in the middle of the night.

 

So I started by buying a Hot Water System - not a cheap one but one designed for Off - Peak use

 

When I asked the HWS supplier how its timing was set for off peak usage, he didn't know ("No one has ever asked that before")

 

So I went back to my electricity supplier, who said the appliance must be wired directly to the smart meter.

 

That has cost me $300.00 so far. My electrician couldn't find a tab to connect to, so he phoned the electricity supply company.

 

They told him that I had to order an off peak connection, then they would come out and fit it, then he could come back and connect to it - which didn't improve his mood on the day at all.

 

The electrician had never connected to a smart meter off peak connector before.

 

In talking to the electricity supplier, I was warned that an off peak supply connection wouldn't necessarily save me money, because when I ordered and off peak connection to be fitted, my base tariff would automatically increase.

 

So they suggested I should think through whether the saving on the hot water service at night, would offset the higher rate for ALL my other lights and appliances during the day.

 

The answer of course was that I would be paying more if I got an off peak connector.

 

I'm just wondering if tens of thousands of people who have smart meters are just assuming when they pay extra for an "off peak" appliance, that they will save money................

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Geoff, the facts are the facts, you still need some to have a theory, if you don't have facts then you have religion.

 

When I was at uni one of the things I studied was how cults recruit people, sadly the more absurd the theory, once you have accepted it as fact, the harder it is to stop believing.

 

 

[skeptic36]

sadly the more absurd the theory, once you have accepted it as fact, the harder it is to stop believing.

I know FT, but there is help available. Don't give up there is still a chance you could get out of the Labor Party.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Well how's this for logic?My electricity supplier installed a smart meter, and supplied wonderful information about how I could use it to reduce my power bill, mainly by using power in the middle of the night.

 

So I started by buying a Hot Water System - not a cheap one but one designed for Off - ................

A bit like government, Turbs: infested with people who have more expertise in spin than in the area they have been given control over.

 

Remember the KISS principle. Simple, low-tech passive solar design usually beats the complicated systems salesmen try to sell you. Why are Australians still installing appliances that rely on burning coal to heat water?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

I know FT, but there is help available. Don't give up there is still a chance you could get out of the Labor Party.

I keep telling the my Fairfax journos commie mates that the ICAC is a once in a generation news story, until Clive's "get square" on the LNP starts.

 

 

[Guest Captain1]

Check and mate is a chess situation. Nev

Durrrrrrrrrrrr ............. Thanks Nev.

 

 

[eightyknots]

Well how's this for logic?My electricity supplier installed a smart meter, and supplied wonderful information about how I could use it to reduce my power bill, mainly by using power in the middle of the night.

 

So I started by buying a Hot Water System - not a cheap one but one designed for Off - Peak use

 

When I asked the HWS supplier how its timing was set for off peak usage, he didn't know ("No one has ever asked that before")

 

So I went back to my electricity supplier, who said the appliance must be wired directly to the smart meter.

 

That has cost me $300.00 so far. My electrician couldn't find a tab to connect to, so he phoned the electricity supply company.

 

They told him that I had to order an off peak connection, then they would come out and fit it, then he could come back and connect to it - which didn't improve his mood on the day at all.

 

The electrician had never connected to a smart meter off peak connector before.

 

In talking to the electricity supplier, I was warned that an off peak supply connection wouldn't necessarily save me money, because when I ordered and off peak connection to be fitted, my base tariff would automatically increase.

 

So they suggested I should think through whether the saving on the hot water service at night, would offset the higher rate for ALL my other lights and appliances during the day.

 

The answer of course was that I would be paying more if I got an off peak connector.

 

I'm just wondering if tens of thousands of people who have smart meters are just assuming when they pay extra for an "off peak" appliance, that they will save money................

I went through a similar experience in New Zealand. I ended up ditching the off-peak and going to a single tariff as the combined electricity consumption is cheaper that way.

 

 

[eightyknots]

I am still waiting for the evidence of collusion within the scientific community.

Unlike the faking of the moon landings:roflmao: or the Russian sub that kidnapped Holt , there are 10,000s of scientists that need to fabricate thousands of years of research to make the global warming conspiracy work.

 

Check and mate!

How about the 31,487 American scientists have signed a petition (including 9,029 with PhDs) all claiming that there is no scientific evidence of human induced global warming. See: http://www.petitionproject.org/

 

 

[geoffreywh]

That argument doesn't cut the mustard! 40% of Americans believe the Noah's ark story!

 

 

[eightyknots]

That argument doesn't cut the mustard! 40% of Americans believe the Noah's ark story!

I am not sure how 40% of Americans believing the Noah's ark event has anything to do with 31,000 scientists signing a petition. The petitioners want to dispel the claim of a Consensus Science or “settled science” in favour of the theory that global warming (and the climatic effects supposedly resulting from this) is just incorrect. Over 31,000 scientists who are prepared to sign this means there are a significant number who don't subscribe to Consensus Science on this matter. Noah's ark is completely irrelevant.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

80knots you just need to ggl "petition project criticism" and you can easily find enough information to make your own evaluation of the validity of that petition.

 

this is an ok article which is easy to read http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-11-12/

 

As a proponent of the invisible hand of the free market you must accept that Al Gore's book however inaccurate was a best seller so there for global warming must exist.