Welcome to 2UE. Skip directly to: Search Box, Section Navigation, Content.

2UE - Fairfax Radio Network

Saturday July 31, 2010

What we're talking about

Why we must act on climate change

Posted by: 2UE | 13 August, 2009 - 3:46 PM
John Stanley: Time to act now on climate change Unless skeptics can prove 100% they are right, we owe it to our children to do something now on climate change. But John Stanley says, should politics come to the fore, will any meaningful action be done at all.


Blog comments Your Say

  • Climate change has developed into a political debate on how can i gain politically fory benefit, the science has been lost. We shouild remeber that the developement of scienceis based in scepticism, without the sceptics there would be no scientific developement.

    Maxwell Stewart Monday 17 August, 2009 - 10:25 AM

  • part 2:
    Even if it goes up to 1000ppm so what, paleo records show CO2 was much much higher than this in the past and the earth is still around today.
    You guys remind me of The Jehovah's witnesses when they used to come aknocking to make you repent and renounce the devil and accept Jesus Christ in ur life. Of course being Catholic that did not xcite me.
    But do you notice the similarity here.
    The new religion is climate change. Dont accept it and you and your children will be doomed with rising temperatures, rising seas, more hurricanes, cyclones, bush fires, malaria etc.
    Please we've seen all this in the past,Most recently Taiwan being hit by the worst typhoon in '50 YEARS!'Notice that statement, in'50 years'.
    50 years ago there was no global warming, but global cooling and imagine that they had severe weather then.
    To say that we must act just in case really is neither here nor there. I could say I'm not stepping out my house today because I might get hit by a bus or part of a plane falling out of the sky. I mean there is no science in this only a morbid fear of the unknown.
    We are grown ups and should not subscribe to these flawed sciences.
    There are over 33,000 scientists that have come out against this and courageously signed their names on the internet. The ipcc can only boast 2500 of which some of the lead authors like John Christy have denounced them to be a political club and not a scientific body.

    robert s Friday 14 August, 2009 - 2:44 AM

  • with all respect to Mr Stanley I beg to differ. We Skeptics believe that climate always changes and that the recent warming was due to the earth coming out of the little Ice age that ended in 1850. What's so alarming for temps to have gone up by 0.7degc.since 1900. What is so alarming is certain people are prepared to abandon all common sense in favour of 'alarmism'. It is quite possible that they were never told the story of chicken little when they were children.
    Let me put it another way, We, the people who disagree, are not the ones forcing our ideology on you guys, please remember that. If you want to force this alarmism on us you must prove that Co2 causes warming and that other factors like the earth's rotation, tilt,the moon, the sun, the earth's molten core, continental drift, the tidal movements, these are just some of the things that affect climate and hence climate change. If you alarmists can control all these factors then I will believe that you are right about 385 parts per million, not hundreds, not thousands, not even hundred thousands, but 385 parts per million.

    robert s Friday 14 August, 2009 - 2:29 AM

  • John
    Unfortunately all you have done is show your ideology and bigotry re Global Warming. You state that "skeptics" need to prove their side of the debate 100%. The only trouble is that science is about proving hypotheses. The global warming alarmists (on which side your clearly are) have not proved at all that CO2 is causing runaway global warming, let alone the few percent that humans emit. Even the IPCC in their last assessment report only use terms like confident, etc. The IPCC, which as we all know is a political body with an agenda has not conclusively proved or demonstrated that CO2 is driving climate, yet you place greater demands on the Climate Realists than you do on the Climate fear mongerers.

    What you are proposing is a classic case of the "precautionary principle", which is "let's do something just in case".Without going into it here in this comment, I'll simply state that this is a naive view You are proposing to do something about man made CO2 but it will have no effect on the climate and simply cost jobs and stuff the economy.

    Trevor Thursday 13 August, 2009 - 8:48 PM

  • PLEASE! DO YOURSELF A FAVOUR & LISTEN TO STEVE PRICES' INTERVIEW THIS MORNING WITH PROF PLIMER. GOING BY YOUR COMMENTS, YOU TO HAVE BEEN CONNED BY SO CALLED SCIENTISTS/ECONOMISTS JUST OUT OF NAPPIES & POLITITIONS. I THINK I'D BELIEVE A CAR SALESMAN OR CHRISTOPHER SKASE BEFORE I BELIEVED A POLY. DO SOME RESEARCH FOR YOURSELF ON THE SOLAR SYSTEM & ITS EFFECT ON THE PLANETS & THEN MAKE YOUR COMMENTS OR HAVE YOU TO PUT MONEY INTO CARBON TRADING COMPANIES. ASK YOURSELF WHY HAS THE CLIMATE BEEN CHANGING FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS WHEN HUMANS WERE NOT CAPABLE POLLUTING LIKE WE DO NOW. PERHAPS TOO MANY PEOPLE LIGHTING FIRES TO KEEP WARM & ANIMALS FARTING. FOR GODS SAKE GIVE US A BREAK. I CAN'T BELIEVE SO MANY PEOPLE ARE BEING DUPED. BUT THIS IS GULLIBLE AUSTRALIA. MOST PEOPLE USUALLY BELIEVE THE BEST STORY TELLER & NOT THE FACTS.

    wayne hackett Thursday 13 August, 2009 - 4:16 PM

Post a comment * Mandatory fields