Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Climate Change and YSSY crosswinds?

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Climate Change and YSSY crosswinds?

Old 23rd Nov 2019, 11:58
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 87
Well of course the planet is warming, it has been since the last ice age. Fact. Situation normal...
Stickshift3000 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 13:07
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: BackofBourke
Posts: 339
Originally Posted by Derfred View Post
The scientific naivety of pilots constantly astounds me.

Aircraft fly because science works.

Aircraft and indeed spacecraft have evolved since first flight because scientists worked out how they work, and how to make them fly faster, higher and more efficiently using... I hate to say it... science.

Now that science says something that economists don’t want to hear, the pilots all go right wing and agree with the economists: scientists must be full of shit.... this can’t be right because it might affect my nice little world.
Yep, scientists gave the Wright Brothers all the data to build an aeroplane, And scientists said the world was flat, the earth was the centre of the universe, and that the world would warm 1.5 degrees if you leave an incandescent light on.
tio540 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 13:08
  #23 (permalink)  
601
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 1,034
Now that science says something that economists don’t want to hear, the pilots all go right wing and agree with the economists:
Seems to me that the loudest voices are in fact the climate economists.
Would you fly an aircraft designed by an accountant rather than a aeronautical engineer?
601 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 15:43
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by tio540 View Post
Yep, scientists gave the Wright Brothers all the data to build an aeroplane, And scientists said the world was flat, the earth was the centre of the universe, and that the world would warm 1.5 degrees if you leave an incandescent light on.
Actually, no.

Modern science began with Copernicus, Gallileo et al in the 16th century, and no serious scientist has ever said that the Earth is flat or the universe revolves around the earth since then.

In fact it has been widely known for about 2500 years that the earth is spherical, since the time of Pythagoras and Aristotle.
dr dre is online now  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 18:02
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Doomagee
Age: 6
Posts: 647
People start going all “right wing” when information is shoved down their throat 24/7.

The first to bleet would be the types you see getting around in Melbourne with multicoloured hair if we switched it all off and went back to cave living.

Most people support doing the right thing when it comes to the environment and most people couldn’t care less what their neighbour does in their bedroom. They do care when media, politicians etc start ramming hysteria and propaganda down children’s throats for their own ideological gain.
Berealgetreal is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 19:37
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: on the ground
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by Green.Dot View Post
Moronic. Why can’t people just accept that sometimes the weather differs from the historical average. Doesn’t mean it’s going to continue as the new norm 🤦🏼*♂️
How long, and by how much, does weather need to differ before you would consider it a new norm?
nonsense is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 20:42
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Goolwa
Age: 55
Posts: 124
As usual the truth is somewhere in the middle.
fact 1. The earths climate is always changing, due to many factors from the suns activity, tectonic plate movement, the earths tilt etc. etc. as well as by biological organisms, anything from microbes, phytoplankton, and all the way up to humans.
fact 2. Humans have been influencing micro climates for at least 30,000 years due to practices such as slash and burn, deforestation, damming etc.
fact 3. Humans are certainly polluting the atmosphere with all sorts of gasses and particles, which at some point needs to be addressed and reversed if possible.
The problem occurs when ideologies, political point scoring, beliefs, righteous anger and noble cause corruption take precedence over the facts and practical scientific solutions.
Dexta is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 22:07
  #28 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 312
The scientific naivety of pilots constantly astounds me.
I’m not so sure about that. I think that groups of pragmatic logical people might be more likely identify the anti-scientific methods being passed as science in the media.
For example;

A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, implying that it is possible to identify a possible outcome of an experiment or observation that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis; otherwise, the hypothesis cannot be meaningfully tested.[7]
and
Physicist Richard Feynman invoked the informal approach to communicating the basic principles of science in his 1974 commencement address at the California Institute of Technology (Feynman, 1985):

[There is an] idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school—we never explicitly say what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty—a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid—not only what you think is right about it; other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked—to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can—if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong—to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it. In summary, the idea is to try to give all the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution, not just the information that leads to judgment in one particular direction or another. (pp. 311-312)

These are basics in my mind and the use of climate models that are constantly being refined and manipulated and have often been inaccurate in the past just produce more hypothesis without a result of ‘scientific fact’. We are left with ‘general consensus’ and concern which is very different to scientific fact.
When people question why the hypothesis are being presented as fact they are met with insults and statement like
The scientific naivety of pilots constantly astounds me.
which is really a thinly disguised insult.
73qanda is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 22:40
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: BackofBourke
Posts: 339
Originally Posted by nonsense View Post
How long, and by how much, does weather need to differ before you would consider it a new norm?
The atmosphere contains 0.041% carbon dioxide. Not even 1/2 of one percent.
tio540 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 23:03
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 1,612
Originally Posted by tio540 View Post
The atmosphere contains 0.041% carbon dioxide. Not even 1/2 of one percent.
But how do you know if that’s too much or not? Maybe 0.51% could mean catastrophic consequences.

Look, man made or not, it’s happening. The main thing now is what are we doing to adapt to the new norm?

And I can tell you now, living in one of the most polluted parts of the world, creating cleaner technologies and removing coal fired power stations will not only potentially improve the environments health, but it’ll certainly improve the health of billions of people!
morno is online now  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 23:20
  #31 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 312
I agree with anyone that says it’s a good idea to clean up our environment and significantly reduce pollution.
Like every other poster I can’t ‘know’ that we are in a ‘climate emergency’.
There appears to be no middle ground on this subject.
73qanda is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2019, 23:52
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by morno View Post
Look, man made or not, it’s happening. The main thing now is what are we doing to adapt to the new norm?
23 former heads of Fire and Emergency Services in Australia have been trying to meet with the PM all year to warn of the “new norm” in regards to bushfires in this country (hotter, longer, earlier, less capacity to perform Hazard Reduction Burns) and the need to adapt to it by vastly expanding firefighting capability to counter it. He’s refused to.

Firefighters generally aren’t, like what another poster alluded to, “multicoloured hair types living in inner city Melbourne”, or as our Deputy PM and leader of the National Party called “raving inner city lunatics”.

So if the experts in their field, acting on scientific evidence, who are trying to warn of the dangers are rudely dismissed by the second most important politician in this nation as a bunch a “raving lunatics” it seems there isn’t much politcial will to act and adapt to the “new norm”.
dr dre is online now  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 01:42
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post


23 former heads of Fire and Emergency Services in Australia have been trying to meet with the PM all year to warn of the “new norm” in regards to bushfires in this country (hotter, longer, earlier, less capacity to perform Hazard Reduction Burns) and the need to adapt to it by vastly expanding firefighting capability to counter it. He’s refused to.

Firefighters generally aren’t, like what another poster alluded to, “multicoloured hair types living in inner city Melbourne”, or as our Deputy PM and leader of the National Party called “raving inner city lunatics”.

So if the experts in their field, acting on scientific evidence, who are trying to warn of the dangers are rudely dismissed by the second most important politician in this nation as a bunch a “raving lunatics” it seems there isn’t much politcial will to act and adapt to the “new norm”.
What is the “new norm”, what was the norm prior to the Aborigines?
We get all worked up if things aren’t within our very limited norm.
We are all living on a rather large molten core, covered by a thin crust, hurtling around a massive fusion reactor, the poles and continents are constantly moving, as this 3rd rock from the sun is in constant threat of either a super volcano awakening, Yellowstone Caldera, or one of the many very large lump of rocks currently flying around in space, whose orbits we have no idea of and are capable of species extinction.
Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Emergency means money transfer, from our pockets to theirs, that’s all.
Here in CA the increase in fires used to be blamed on Climate Change, until the causes of most of them was ascertained, ill maintained utility transmission lines, homeless folks, car accidents and the odd firebug.
i wonder what the animals used to think way back before humans arrived, lightning strikes, forest fires, sure wish the humans would hurry up and build around here, so they will pour millions of dollars into protecting them and us?

its a religion, nothing more, nothing less.
fltlt is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 04:04
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by fltlt View Post
Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Emergency means money transfer, from our pockets to theirs, that’s all.
Here in CA the increase in fires used to be blamed on Climate Change, until the causes of most of them was ascertained, ill maintained utility transmission lines, homeless folks, car accidents and the odd firebug

its a religion, nothing more, nothing less.
If you’d listened to the scientists and the fire chiefs you’d know that changing climate conditions aren’t the ignition source but are exacerbating the fires. The season is now starting in winter, burning hotter, burning longer, burning in regions that previously weren’t at risk of bushfires and the number of safe days to perform controlled hazard reduction burns has decreased. You’d also know the wildfires in the northern hemisphere lasted far longer this season, meaning firefighting assets were tied up there for longer before arriving in Australia..
dr dre is online now  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 04:39
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: home
Posts: 336
So cute when they talk about "historic" measurements of the past 10,20,30 or even 200 years in regards to a planet that's some 2 billion years old
airdualbleedfault is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 08:13
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: International
Age: 72
Posts: 1,183
Morno. If you are living in China you will be disappointed to hear China is adding 1171 new coal powered power stations to the 2363 coal powered power stations they already have. In Australia we are planning to shut down the remaining 6 coal powered power stations to save the world.
B772 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 09:07
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by B772 View Post
Morno. If you are living in China you will be disappointed to hear China is adding 1171 new coal powered power stations to the 2363 coal powered power stations they already have. In Australia we are planning to shut down the remaining 6 coal powered power stations to save the world.
Well you are admitting that coal burning does have an effect on global temperatures. If that’s the case and it’s not going to stop better get used to negative effects on our economy and society. Agricultural impacts, Bushfires, Natural Disasters, Health, Infrastructure will all be affected.

Wonder which government will be the first to inevitably raise taxes to counter those effects?
dr dre is online now  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 09:32
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 574
Wonder which government will be the first to inevitably raise taxes to counter those effects?
It will be the one that is happy to increase the upper income tax threshold as their votes lie with the 50%+ who currently pay no net tax and push that sector out to 60-odd% of all taxpayers.
C441 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 10:06
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: BackofBourke
Posts: 339
Originally Posted by morno View Post


But how do you know if that’s too much or not? Maybe 0.51% could mean catastrophic consequences.

Look, man made or not, it’s happening. The main thing now is what are we doing to adapt to the new norm?

And I can tell you now, living in one of the most polluted parts of the world, creating cleaner technologies and removing coal fired power stations will not only potentially improve the environments health, but it’ll certainly improve the health of billions of people!
If you are serious, stop flying aeroplanes, stop taking international holidays, stop drinking imported coffee, and sell your 350 hp Audi.

Only then, will you be taken serious that 0.05% carbon dioxide could be catastrophic.
tio540 is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2019, 10:35
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... Still!
Posts: 3,386
Originally Posted by tio540 View Post
If you are serious, stop flying aeroplanes, stop taking international holidays, stop drinking imported coffee, and sell your 350 hp Audi.
So who on here does any of that?
Capt Fathom is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.