The Australian Government's climate change adviser, Professor Ross Garnaut, says a global agreement must be reached to successfully reduce the world's carbon emissions and has urged action without delay. Indeed Professor Garnaut went so far as to suggest in a televised address that, “On a balance of probabilities, the failure of our generation on climate change mitigation would lead to consequences that would haunt humanity until the end of time.”
On the issue of the need for a worldwide response Professor Garnaut suggested:
1. An International Adaptation Assistance Commitment would provide new adaptation assistance to developing countries that join the mitigation effort
2. Early sectoral agreements would seek to ensure that the main trade-exposed, emissions-intensive industries face comparable carbon prices across the world, including metals and international civil aviation and shipping
3. A World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreement is required to support international mitigation agreements and to establish rules for trade measures against countries thought to be doing too little on mitigation
On the issue of an Australian emissions trading scheme, the Professor suggested:
1. The Establishment of an independent carbon bank with all the necessary powers to oversee the long-term stability of the scheme
2. Implementation of a transition period from 2010 to the conclusion of the Kyoto period (end 2012) involving fixed price permits
3. Credits to trade-exposed, emissions-intensive industries to address the failure of our trading partners to adopt similar policies
4. No permits to be freely allocated
5. Scheme coverage that is as broad as possible
Such a trading scheme would be very different to the European Model where I understand credits have been freely allocated and petrol, for example, is exempt.
Professor Garnaut has accepted the science of climate change as explained by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and sections of his earlier reports read like oversimplified versions of the IPCC reports.
Professor Garnaut is close to Australia's Rudd Labor Government and this final report is likely to reflect Australian government thinking on this issue. The Australian Prime Minister, Kelvin Rudd, and his Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong, have both used climate change as a vehicle for self promotion nationally and internationally and are deeply committed to the idea of a climate crisis.
The Garnaut Climate Change Review was commissioned by Australia's Commonwealth, state and territory governments to examine the impacts, challenges and opportunities of climate change for Australia. A Draft Report was released on 4 July 2008. The Supplementary Draft Report Targets and trajectories was released on 5 September 2008. The Final Report was released yesterday on 30 September 2008. All documents can be downloaded from the Garnaut Review website.
Nuts man, really nuts.
Your arguments are without reason and your comments are as misinformed as any I have read on the internet. Quite a feat when you think about it.
It's always amazing to hear someone believe something so strongly yet have no real knowledge of what they are talking about.
I have been a little mean to you Graeme, kind of like messing with an angry child. So I'll let you have the last word. You have been good for a few laughs though.
Really you should calm down man. Life is too short and all kinds of politicized beliefs will be forced down our throats whether we like it or not.
Ok Gerame,
You have convinced me that you are completely off your wagon and quite frightening really. You have referred to me by every name you can think of threatened my physically and all over the fact that you cannot understand a theory you dispute.
I will make one more point to you.
I said,
“There is no point where you cannot speed up.”
You answered.
I agree. But here you contradict special relativity as understood by the priesthood.
This is a mis-characterization of Relativity Theory by you. One of probably a dozen you made.
Really any low level physics course would do you a lot of good.
I suggest you take your meds, calm down get a physics book and read it slowly. After you're done you can make a much stronger argument for your case. Whatever it is.
You also might get some insight into why your links above aren't really breaking the speed of light.
But it must be understood that its not just Pompe. Its the whole lot of these guys. They defend this without making arguments in favour of it. They only refer back to the theory. They say all sorts of things that are unfalsifiable. But they say many things that are immediately falsifiable without experimentation.
So its a bit like the global warming racket. The main difference is that special relativity was at least a pretty good predictive template that served reasonably well for a time. Whereas the global warming idiocy cannot be used to predict anything. It doesn't even backtest.
"No it’s because it’s better discussed on the back porch over a bottle of red and a plate (or two) of cheese and crackers."
You can brush it off fella. But the evidence just isn't there. Thats why you've suddenly fallen away in your argumentative ability displayed elsewhere.
This is why you are forced into going about things on a need to know basis.
Its a stupid paradigm this special relativity. Hence you are backing a dead horse. A paradigm at least four decades out of date. If you made arguments in favour of it certain internal inconsistencies would become obvious.
So instead you have hidden under the desk and are now doing things on a need to know basis.
This is cowardly Pompe. You ought to defend this fantasy-paradigm or admit its indefensible.
You are a coward.
Phillip Adams had a fellow on who had discovered how wrong it was. So he then had a believer on a couple of weeks later. The believer didn't come up with any evidence to defend it beyond saying that it was aesthetically beautiful.
You Pompe haven't even come up with anything so feeble as THAT.
I didn't mischaracterise relativity. You continue to lie about this. I DISPUTED relativity you jerk!!!
You are still lying about this. You haven't come up with any evidence for the wild conjectures that you are mindlessly parrotting.
My only problem with your posts was your mis-characterization of relativity. I didn't dispute your ideas, whatever they are.
Have you considered counseling?
Louis; "is this because of the association with the thunderbolts site, or because of cognitive dissonance."
No it's because it's better discussed on the back porch over a bottle of red and a plate (or two) of cheese and crackers.
So we found out that your argument was in fact NO ARGUMENT and you were just lying.
That leaves us with an argument deficit. Doesn't it?
YES IT DOES!!!!
So lets go over it again!!!!!
Where is your evidence for a universal speed limit?
Where is your evidence for all these wrong and bizzare assertions that you have been making?
Its not there is it?
You cannot find it?
You are just an idiot mate.
I do enjoy a good argument, but you have demonstrated a complete lack of understanding even of high school level general relativity.
If you cannot understand the theory you dispute how can we take you seriously about your own irrational theories.
Best Regards,
The Dummy