On 30/12/2023 9:41 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote:
> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 30/12/2023 4:45 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote:
>>> Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 30/12/2023 3:17 pm, Mighty Mouse wrote:
>>>>> Peter Jason wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 13:52:20 +1100, Mighty Mouse
>>>>>> <"squeak!"@thecheesefactory.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://auslink.info/video/hillary.mp4
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sure she's right..
>>>>>> Or maybe she's barking frothing mad?
>>>>>
>>>>> I was being sarcastic. it's a fake video of course. AI can
>>>>> reproduce voices.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **Were you joking when you claimed:
>>>>
>>>> "just making fun of the climate change hoax"
>>>>
>>>> To which, I asked:
>>>>
>>>> Do tell.
>>>>
>>>> In your response, address the following:
>>>>
>>>> * Cite your climate science credentials, that we may accept your
>>>> hypothesis as valid.
>>>> * Cite your climate change hypothesis that explains the reasons
>>>> behind the present warming trend.
>>>> * Cite your climate change hypothesis that proves Arrhenius' theory
>>>> on human induced climate change is wrong. A theory, BTW, that was
>>>> presented back in 1899 and has NEVER been successfully challenged.
>>>> NOT ONCE.
>>>>
>>>> So, will you continue to avoid responding? Or will you admit that
>>>> you are either an idiot, or joking?
>>>>
>>>
>>> neither. it's a hoax in the sense that we are being lied to,
>>
>> **Who is lying to us?
>> What are they lying about?
>>
>>
>
> the necessity to do the sort of things I've mentioned

**OK, I'll ask once more:

WHO is lying to us?
What (specifically) are they lying about?

>
>>
>>
>>>  to make us do things here in Australia that wont make a scrap of
>>> difference to global warming. examples.. reduce farming because cow
>>> farts supposedly cause global warming.
>>
>> **The vast majority of methane from ruminants is emitted from their
>> mouths. So, it's not cow farts that are the problem. Here's the thing:
>> Methane is around TWENTY TIMES more potent as a GHG (GreenHouse Gas)
>> than CO2. Reducing the amount of methane from ruminants would be very
>> significant.
>>
>>
>>>  ride bikes, don't drive cars, because car exhausts cause global
>>> warming.
>>
>> **Burning ANY fossil fuel is causing the amount of CO2 in the
>> atmosphere to rise and is thus causing global warming to accelerate.
>>
>>  install stupid visually polluting wind turbines,
>>
>> **"Visually polluting wind turbines"?
>
> yes.
> https://www.greenorbits.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Do-wind-turbines-cause-visual-pollution.jpg

**Have you seen the once beautiful Hunter Valley recently?

>
>>
>> Have you SEEN the once beautiful Hunter Valley recently?
>>
>> https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/photo/an-open-cast-or-drift-coal-mine-in-the-hunter-royalty-free-image/578842426?adppopup=true
>>
>> https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/photo/coal-mining-royalty-free-image/1279738823?adppopup=true
>
> one or two coal mines. big deal. bloody wind turbines are popping up
> everywhere!

**Sure. Have you seen the once beautiful Hunter Valley recently?

>
>>
>> You need to get out more.
>
> I know

**Well do so, before you demonstrate yet more of your ignorance.

>
>>
>>> the manufacture, upkeep, and replacement of which is environmentally
>>> polluting,
>>
>> **EVERYTHING humans do is polluting. The trick is to REDUCE the amount
>> of pollution (notably CO2 and other GHGs) whilst doing things.
>
> I would suggest the best course of action is to implement measures to
> offset the effects of what's causing the problem, so we don't have to
> change things/our lifestyle. and before you say "like what?'" that's for
> the scientists and engineers to discover.

**Points and questions:

* We know EXACTLY what is causing the problem. We are causing the
release of excessive amounts of GHGs.
* We must reduce the amount of GHGs entering the atmosphere.
* We already know exactly how to reduce GHGs.

>
>>
>>  and pay higher electricity prices for the privilege.
>>
>> **Coal is already a more expensive method of generating electricity
>> than renewables. You're paying more, because of privatisation. Mostly
>> of poles and wires. Blame the arseholes who sold off public assets to
>> private corporations.
>
> I'll blame the arseholes who made the sale of public assets necessary

**It was never necessary. POLITICIANS decided that it was a good idea.

>
>>
>>
>>>  use electric cars when their production is also environmentally
>>> polluting,
>>
>> **Production of ICE cars is polluting. AND whilst they're operating
>> those ICE cars emit vast amounts of CO2 and other noxious chemicals.
>
> how do they emit those?

**By burning fossil fuels.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/gasoline/gasoline-and-the-environment.php

"Gasoline is a toxic and highly flammable liquid. The vapors given off
when gasoline evaporates and the substances produced when gasoline is
burned (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and
unburned hydrocarbons) contribute to air pollution. Burning gasoline
also produces carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas."

And:

https://www.epa.gov/dera/learn-about-impacts-diesel-exhaust-and-diesel-emissions-reduction-act-dera

>
>>
>>> etc., etc., but having said that, I have no great interest in the
>>> debate.
>>
>> **[Translation] YOU don't understand squat about the issue.
>
> I've never studied the issue, like you obviously have.

**Then why do you make idiotic claims like this?:

"just making fun of the climate change hoax"

You just admitted that you know nothing about the subject that you
previously claimed was a hoax.

as I've said, I
> just object to being told I have to do this or that, or not do this or
> that, to 'save the planet' when what we're told won't make any
> difference.

**Huh? First you tell us it is a hoax. Then, you admit you know nothing
about the subject. Now you tell us that what humans do cannot affect
global warming anyway.

YIKES!

Do you have a brain injury?

it's been said that if every car in Australia disappeared
> overnight, it would have absolutely no effect on global warming.

**Well, clearly, that is bullshit. Think logically, if you can. If
Australia's CO2 emissions fell to zero tomorrow, there would be an
effect on CO2 levels. That is just plain common sense and logic. Would
the effect be small? Yes, but there would be an effect.

Here's the thing: All of us (8.1 billion) are causing the problem. That
means we all need to act to reduce CO2 emissions. That applies doubly so
to those people in wealthy nations that have caused and are causing most
of the problem.

it's
> the big polluters, India, China, and the USA who need to take severe
> measures, since they can make a difference, not us.

**WE ALL NEED TO ACT. NO exceptions. NO excuses.

>>
>>>
>>>  I'm too old to care anymore. I just object to stupid decisions based
>>> on an agenda, that have no benefit to us and are detrimental to our
>>> lifestyle or finances.
>>
>> **Your lifestyle is already being affected by global warming and it's
>> getting worse.
>>
>>>
>>> I saw an interesting video showing how many supposedly disastrous
>>> climate predictions have not come true,
>>
>> **No, you did not.
>
> yes I did.

**No, you did not. At least you did not see one that was properly
researched and produced by proper scientists.

>
>> Arrhenius' predictions have been remarkably accurate. Then there's this:
>>
>> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/
>>
>> The facts are simple enough: CLIMATE SCIENTISTS have been warning us
>> about human induced global warming for more than 120 years.
>>
>>
>>>  but I haven't been able to find it again.
>>
>> **Duh. What a surprise.
>
> you're welcome to help me look

**I'm not wasting my valuable time searching for a non-existent thing.

>
>>
>>
>>>  so I question how much about the current scenario is fact or fiction.
>>
>> **You may question whatever you wish, but as long as you fail
>> miserably to study the science, you will remain ever ignorant.
>>
>>
>>>  the latest nonsense I just saw is that humans breathing is causing
>>> climate change.
>>
>> **Well, it's pretty bloody obvious that humans are causing climate
>> change. We are the ones burning fossil fuels.
>
> but this is going further, saying our mere existence is a problem.

**Well, that's been obvious for quite some time.

>
>>
>>
>>>  guess we have to kill a billion or so ppl to fix that!
>>
>> **I hate to burst your bubble, but reliable estimates of the number of
>> humans that this planet can support in a lifestyle similar to the
>> average Aussie, run to around 500 million. That's it. Anymore and we
>> begin to eat into irreplaceable resources.
>>
>>
>
> that's hard to believe. looks like it's time to colonise other planets then

**Great idea. Which planets do you have in mind?

Venus? Average daytime (and night time) temperature is 464 degrees C.
Mars? Average daytime temperature is 35 degrees C Average night time
temperature is -60 degrees C. Oh yeah, bugger all atmosphere too.

BTW: How do you propose to send large numbers of people to other planets?

Let's do some rough maths:

The only US built vehicle to visit another body in our Solar system was
the mighty Saturn V rocket. It was able to carry 3 people to the Moon.
At launch, the Saturn V burned 20 Tonnes of fossil fuel every SECOND. At
launch, the Saturn V weighed around 3,000 Tonnes. Approximately half
that mass was fuel, which was either fossil fuel (kerosene) or hydrogen.

FOR THREE PEOPLE!

Got any other ideas?

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com