What was “all over the news” when the [Senator] Fielding issue was perceived to be the political one of exercising a casting vote on carbon dioxide taxation rapidly became unmentionable once the topic became the quality of the science, which our [Australian] media clearly have no capacity to judge. Read more at Quadrant Online.
Footer
About Me
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Read morePayPal
Poor Bob Carter isn’t sounding like his usual calm, wise, sensible, rational, reasoned self. He’s resorting to all kinds of alarming barbs and accusations in his article.
I have a simple question for Bob. How does gravity work? It’s a simple question, you are a scientist, therefore you must be able to offer me a simple answer.
“In a letter to senators yesterday, Senator Fielding — who has recently emerged as parliament’s most vocal climate change sceptic — said carbon emissions had “skyrocketed” over the past 15 years, but temperatures had remained steady.”
So Fielding agrees that CO2 is increasing due to anthropogenic reasons. Can we bury that issue at least?
SJT:
An excellent non sequitur – Your quote of Senator Fielding does not mention “anthropogenic”, just carbon emissions. So you cannot deduce from that, that he said CO2 is increasing due to anthropogenic reasons.
I also note that Bob Carter wrote this article, demanding answers to Fieldings questions. The answers were given, Fielding just wasn’t happy with them. Carter, in contrast, is famous for his interview on New Zealand TV where, when the interviewer asked him a question, completely ignored the question, and what on a half hour rave on what he wanted to talk about.
Louis, you “non sequiturs” are seem to be just ignorance on your part.
“The government needs to explain to the Australian people why global temperatures have remained steady over the last 10-15 years despite skyrocketing man made carbon emissions.”
http://www.stevefielding.com.au/climate_change/
SJT,
In terms of what YOU wrote in that post, it is a non sequitur.
In terms of the senator’s statement which you now quoted correctly it wasn’t. So start posting accurate quotes or continue copping flak.
“I have a simple question for Bob. How does gravity work?”
When you’re discussing gravity you don’t need to put this with it.
“This document is produced for general information only and does not represent a statement of the policy of the Commonwealth of Australia. The Commonwealth of Australia and all persons acting for the Commonwealth preparing this report accept no liability for the accuracy of or inferences from the material contained in this publication, or for any action as a result of any person’s or group’s interpretations, deductions, conclusions or actions in relying on this material. This report was prepared by Professor Will Steffen and funded by the Department of Climate Change.”
“When you’re discussing gravity you don’t need to put this with it.”
You haven’t dealt with the legal department yet, have you?
Typical lefty evasion of personal responsibility – Will Steffen makes assertions, and if they, with time, prove to be wrong, he cannot be held responsible for making misleading assertions.
Coward’s castle with SJT here manning the drawbridge winder.
“Typical lefty evasion of personal responsibility – Will Steffen makes assertions, and if they, with time, prove to be wrong, he cannot be held responsible for making misleading assertions.”
ALL documents will have such a disclaimer. It doesn’t matter what the topic is.