PDA

View Full Version : So 'green taxes' are just a government rip off?


Shaggy Sheep Driver
10th Dec 2014, 20:00
Where does Carbon Dioxide really come from?

Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies.
He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology.


Born
12 February 1946 (age 67)
Residence
Australia
Nationality
Australian
Fields
Earth Science, Geology, Mining Engineering
Institutions
University of New England,University of Newcastle,University of Melbourne,University of Adelaide
Alma mater
University of New South Wales,Macquarie University
Thesis
The pipe deposits of tungsten-molybdenum-bismuth in eastern Australia (1976)
Notable awards
Eureka Prize (1995, 2002),Centenary Medal (2003), Clarke Medal
(2004)


Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better!

If you've read his book you will agree; this is a good summary.

PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland.
Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.

Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - its that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.

I know....it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs.....
well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes, FOUR DAYS - by that volcano in Iceland which has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time - EVERY DAY.

I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt. Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.

Yes, folks, Mt. Pinatubo was active for over one year - think about it.

Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.

And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.
Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario.

Hey, isn't it interesting how they don't mention 'Global Warming' anymore, but just "Climate Change" - you know why?

It's because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull**** artists got caught with their pants down.
And, just keep in mind that you might yet be stuck with an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer.

It won't stop any volcanoes from erupting, that's for sure.

But, hey, relax...give the world a hug and have a nice day!"

Wingswinger
10th Dec 2014, 20:55
I know, I know. I've read a lot of contrarian climate change stuff too, especially from Professor Bob Carter. It just bounces off the backs of the watermelons. They don't even flinch as their climate change theories are ripped apart by men who know what they are talking about. They don't count, they're "deniers".

bosnich71
10th Dec 2014, 21:23
I posted the following a couple of days ago on another blog on Prune.....


"Ottmar Edenhofer of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research,( co-chair of the IPCC Working Group 111), said in 2009, " climate change has almost nothing to do with environmental protection", and " we distribute,de facto, the world's wealth by climate policy".
So there you have it, from the horse's mouth as it were, it is of course, a scam!

pigboat
10th Dec 2014, 22:19
SteynOnline: The Emperor's New Carbon Credits. (http://www.steynonline.com/2729/the-emperor-new-carbon-credits)

Dark Knight
10th Dec 2014, 22:57
All that is needed is to Carefully read Copenhagen which explains in detail the whole scam which is no more than a `Wealth Reditribution Scheme' designed by and to make the `Burgermeisters of Europe' and the Traders even wealthier.

Read it and weep!

Katamarino
10th Dec 2014, 23:50
Why does the "Professor" write in the style of a tinfoil-hat wearing lunatic on Facebook...? :rolleyes:

The entire "article" is also complete bollocks. Science written by scientists, and not by nutters on social media, gives reliable calculations of volcanoes emitting between 0.5% and 1.5% the CO2 that humans do. The 1.5% is using the very highest figures for volcanoes, and lowest figures for anthropogenic CO2.

Before I'm accused of being a "watermelon", I work for an oil company. I'm just not enough of an idiot to believe the crap posted at the beginning of this thread.

Katamarino
11th Dec 2014, 00:48
I'm curious. Do you think that humans aren't actually emitting CO2, or that CO2 does not have any impact on climate?

Katamarino
11th Dec 2014, 00:51
You make me laugh. Can't even answer a simple question! You don't actually have a clue what I think about climate change, all I did was point out that the article posted in the first post was easily shown to be complete lies.

con-pilot
11th Dec 2014, 01:31
I'm curious. Do you think that humans aren't actually emitting CO2, or that CO2 does not have any impact on climate?

Not too sure what you are asking here, of course humans emit CO2, humans do breath you know.

As for impact, about the same as a drop of rainwater in the oceans does on desalinization of said oceans.

rh200
11th Dec 2014, 01:42
What is needed is some reputable comparison statistics.

If indeed Volcano "x" emits "y" amount of CO2 then it should be published in a reputable source so that it can be compared to established dogma.

If bush fires emit "y" amounts of CO2 it too should be published for comparison.

All these are easily modeled, if the models are wrong then we need to know why.

As for personkinds (sorry trying to be PC:p) emissions, we are a 24/7 systematic, what impact depends upon the model.

Katamarino
11th Dec 2014, 01:58
As for impact, about the same as a drop of rainwater in the oceans does on desalinization of said oceans.

Fair enough.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/images/temperature-change.jpg

I don't think there's any doubt that CO2 and temperatures have, for as long as we have data, been correlated. The nature of that correlation is harder to determine. Seems that while most theoretical models agree that CO2 does act as a "Greenhouse Gas", the magnitude of that effect on temperatures is hard to know. There are mechanisms by which CO2 changes can be caused by temperature changes, as well as the other way around.

I've no doubt that CO2 levels are changing due to mankind's activity. What the effects will be, however, are where the most interesting debate and uncertainty lie. I sure as heck don't know the answer.

I definitely think that most green taxes are just another way for government to raise and waste money, however...

OFSO
11th Dec 2014, 13:04
Eco-taxes are collected and spent on bettering the environment in the same way the UK Government collects "road tax" from every car owner and spends it on improving the roads.

ExXB
11th Dec 2014, 13:22
When APD was introduced (or increased) the government in power at the time blamed it on the environment.

When the industry pointed out that it was not going to fund environment 'solutions' and it was poorly thought out as it didn't take efficiency into account (a new aircraft producing less CO2 per flight-hour, etc) they said:

"You're right, it isn't an environment tax, its a tax, and we are not going to change it".

... and Bob was my Uncle.

con-pilot
11th Dec 2014, 17:27
I definitely think that most green taxes are just another way for government to raise and waste money

We certainly agree on that.

ShyTorque
11th Dec 2014, 17:30
Eco-taxes are collected and spent on bettering the environment in the same way the UK Government collects "road tax" from every car owner and spends it on improving the roads.

They now call it "vehicle tax" and it certainly doesn't go into improving vehicles.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
14th Dec 2014, 21:17
I see they're at it again today. Massive conference (how much carbon did that release in getting them all there and back?) calling for 'more money' to to be spent on green solutions.

So governments can whack up taxes on the back of that, while avoiding their responsibility in ensuring reliable base electric power is available and stick up some more useless (but very visible for the gullible) wind mills instead!

Grrr! :(

indiscipline_girl
15th Dec 2014, 02:26
Plimer is just another sell-out denialist lying whore in the pay of fossil fuel interests. Sad really.

Ian Plimer is a professor of Mining Geology at the University of Adelaide, South Australia, and Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne.

Plimer has two climate science denial books. The first, which has been referred to as the “denier's bible,” was Heaven and Earth. The second, published in late 2011, was called How To Get Expelled From School: A guide to climate change for pupils, parents and punters.

Plimer has been a director of numerous mining companies including Ivanhoe Australia, a subsidiary of Bob Friedland's Ivanhoe Mines, CBH Resources, Kefi Minerals, Silver City Minerals, Ormil Energy Ltd, TNT Mines, Niuminco Group and Lakes Oil.

Plimer was appointed to the boards of Roy Hill Holdings and Queensland Coal Investments by mining magnate and climate skeptic promoter Gina Rinehart on January 25, 2012. [3]

As non-executive Director and Deputy Chairman of Kefi, he owns 3.6 million shares which would be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in today's market.

Ian Plimer | DeSmogBlog (http://www.desmogblog.com/ian-plimer)

porch monkey
15th Dec 2014, 02:49
Ah, I see. So, because of his past, he is more of a lying, self serving sack of shit than, say, oh I don't know, maybe Al Gore?

Whatever....".:rolleyes:

rh200
15th Dec 2014, 03:02
Plimer is just another sell-out denialist lying whore in the pay of fossil fuel interests. Sad really.

Well, I fall into the category that I think we are most likely accelerating climate variability. But to be fair if he is a lying #$%% etc, how about some facts to back up you statement.

hoofie
15th Dec 2014, 06:36
Indiscipline_girl wrote:
Plimer is just another sell-out denialist lying whore in the pay of fossil fuel interests. Sad really.

You do realise that with that one leading statement you completely invalidate any rebuttal you have of his claim ?

The good Professor may well be full of it but that pointless [and I might add, extremely highly defamatory statement] is WHY many people dig their heels in when faced with the juggernaut of the "rightness" of human-caused climate change, global warming etc.

If I were you, I'd remove your post before m'learned friends get hold of it.

G&T ice n slice
15th Dec 2014, 08:11
So 'green taxes' are just a government rip off?

Yes.


What we need to do is to gather together all the greenie-yoghurt-knitting-sandal-wearing-climate-liers and ship them all off to South Georgia and see how well "global warming" works at keeping them safe & warm.

Oh, of course, sorry, it isn't "global warming" anymore is it, especially since everyone has cottoned on to the fact there hasn't been any "warming" for oooo what is it 20 years or something? Now it's "Climate Change". And climate change can't just happen naturally can it?

I am now surrounded by annoying windmills and there's almost nowhere I can go for a walk locally where I have a view that doesn't include a ffff windmill.

Build the fffff things in the middle of Hyde Park or other city-dweller green spaces, close to where the demand is.

Also Nuclear powerplants - why up here??? it's a flaming long way to anywhere from here which means a gazillion pylons. Why not put the nuclear powerstations in the middle of Manchester, Birmingham, London where they're close to the biggest power users.

bah humbug!

Shaggy Sheep Driver
15th Dec 2014, 10:48
The use of 'denialist' to describe those who do not swallow all this bull indicates that it is more of a belief system than a thought-through scientific proposition.

Science has those who agree and those who disagree with any proposed theory. Faith systems have believers and deniers.

ORAC
15th Dec 2014, 11:15
The climate change thing is worse than this (http://www.timworstall.com/2013/03/06/the-climate-change-thing-is-worse-than-this/)

Lord Stern doesn’t believe his own Stern Review (http://www.timworstall.com/2010/12/12/lord-stern-doesnt-believe-his-own-stern-review/)

Air Passenger Duty should be abolished (http://www.timworstall.com/2011/10/11/air-passenger-duty-should-be-abolished/)

The problem with Pigou Taxes (http://www.timworstall.com/2013/12/01/the-problem-with-pigou-taxes/)

Rwy in Sight
15th Dec 2014, 18:51
If we question the independence of the deniers, we have also to consider how much money all these believers of Global warming are receiving just to prove their point and how much of those funds will be lost if the anthropogenic impact is non existent.

Rwy in Sight

Katamarino
15th Dec 2014, 18:58
Plimmer does have zero credibility. I posted the actual CO2 quantities generated by man's activities vs volcanoes earlier in this thread. Plimmer's claims are so far from the accepted reality that they would be laughable if so many idiots didn't swallow them without engaging their brains.

Of course, the original poster decided to ignore that.

Those who pretend that humans are not affecting the balance of gases in the atmosphere are fooling themselves. That is not in question. The point of uncertainty is not whether the change in composition is happening, but what the impacts will be.

I think one thing that most agree on, however, is that the taxes are just another excuse to suck more money into the state, climate change or no climate change.

Shaggy Sheep Driver
15th Dec 2014, 19:09
I posted the actual CO2 quantities generated by man's activities vs volcanoes earlier in this thread. Plimmer's claims are so far from the accepted reality that they would be laughable if so many idiots didn't swallow them without engaging their brains.

Of course, the original poster decided to ignore that.

Um, when the original poster (me) posted Plimmer's claims your post didn't exist. I can hardly, therefore, be accused of 'deciding to ignore that'.

Maybe you can lend me your time machine some time.

fltlt
15th Dec 2014, 19:17
If the whole situation wasn't so reminiscent of Monty Pythons Argument sketch folks might listen.
Here in SoCal we actually are having some rain, the farcical thing is that the AGW folks of course blame all our woes on Climate Change.
Then the other green Government folks chime in with but its behaving opposite to our models, we should be wetter, not drier.
Along comes NOAA and sticks its oar in the water saying nope, its just normal variability, nothing to see here, move along.


Oh dear, for a couple of days there were panties wadded up everywhere, all it garnered was a couple of lines in a few local papers.


I think the word must have been passed around that they hadn't paid for this argument and if they carried on no one would. Greenpeace returned to the promised land.


And that is how it goes here in LaLa land, whatever you do don't mention the war.
The folks who wrote for MP couldn't even make this stuff up.


Cynical on AGW, not me, just follow the money.