TonyAbbott said..
The 97% consensus is a made up imaginary number
Of the 11,994 papers used for the Cook et al. (2013) 97% claim, 99.5 did not say recent global warming was mostly man made.
Only 0.5 did (Legates et al., 2013). It took massive amounts of creativity and deception to invent the 97% consensus theory.

I'm OK arguing about the consensus figure but not about the science of CC which as I lay person I don't understand well enough - I accept what the experts say

Some suggest that the 97% consensus figure is too low;
www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/may/03/is-the-climate-consensus-97-999-or-is-plate-tectonics-a-hoax

The chief scientists of the CSIRO has stated that even if we got our co2 output to zero it will have zero impact on climate change

How many trillions should we spend to achieve nothing?

Tony Abbott was the worst Australian Prime Minister of all time.

An attack dog brought out in desparation that won a race to the bottom. A political experiment. A leader stuck in reverse. A character lacking character. A national embarrassment.

No-one's debating you dude.

evlPanda said..
No-one's debating you dude.

C'mon... I understand his confusion... Tony Abbott is a giant mass debater and is merely misinterpreting your comments as part of his regular mass debating over his pet subjects of boating, SSM, climate change and clean energy.

TonyAbbott said..
I'm guessing the personal insults mean I won the debate

Gaslighting
"The intention is to, in a systematic way, target the victim's mental equilibrium, self confidence, and self esteem so that they are no longer able to function in an independent way. Gaslighting involves the abuser to frequently and systematically withhold factual information from the victim, and replacing it with false information. Because of it's subtly, this cunning Machiavellian behaviour is a deeply insidious set of manipulations that is difficult for anybody to work out, and with time it finally undermines the mental stability of the victim. "
ref: narcissisticbehavior.net/the-effects-of-gaslighting-in-narcissistic-victim-syndrome/

Am I the only one who finds Adriano's fascination with Tony Abbott a bit....weird?

AUS1111 said..
Am I the only one who finds Adriano's fascination with Tony Abbott a bit....weird?

Ahh mate, he's here talking to us. Haven't you noticed? Where's your sense of humour?

It's not a fascination, I just like making fun of morons like TA. He's a sitting target. The moron can't stay out of the press and he's on Seabreeze now spreading more bull.

I'd suggest the person most fascinated with Tony Abbott is they loser hiding behind the Tony Abbott avatar on Seabreeze.

I still liked this thread better when it was about god karate chopping mountain ranges into existence. That seems much more plausible than this global warming fashion.

^^^
Starting to look like Adriano's theme there. Having had an inverter fail on me a couple of months ago, I'm left with the thought that there must be other solar PV arrays on other roofs that have the same problem. I only realised that mine was busted because I frequently check the output. Somebody who is more of a "set & forget" personality might easily go months without noticing. Unless they're foolish enough to go off grid, so would find out within a day or 2.

evlPanda said..
Solar Panels could Destroy U.S. Utilies, according to U.S. Utilities
grist.org/article/solar-panels-could-destroy-u-s-utilities-according-to-u-s-utilities/

If anything it will happen here first, the way the price and popularity of one is outweighing the other. And how much sunshine we have. There will come a tipping point where everyone jumps from one to the other because it becomes too expensive not to.

@ Tony: As for poor people they'll rent the properties that have solar over the ones that don't. It's up the the landlords and wether they want to attract tenants or not.

Aren't they effectively saying that as long as some technology that doesn't currently exist, does in fact come into existence, the utilities are knackered?

The Paris agreement to address climate-change does essentially the same thing; while acknowledging that if every country meets all of its obligations in every respect, this will do basically nothing to address man-made warming, but the world will at least be on the right track, assuming the invention of new technologies that don't currently exist.

AUS1111 said..

evlPanda said..
Solar Panels could Destroy U.S. Utilies, according to U.S. Utilities

Aren't they effectively saying that as long as some technology that doesn't currently exist, does in fact come into existence, the utilities are knackered?

Only partly saying that. What they are ignoring in their claims about reduced revenues is that householders with PV are doing some of their investment in new generation for them. So their costs are reduced along with revenues.

When it comes to batteries, I'm against subsidising them for domestic installation, which I think Qld Labor is promising.
Solar PV has the benefit of reducing the need for other sources of generation at peak times. A lot of my power gets used by other people on sunny days. A battery gives nobody benefits but me, so why should the public subsidise it? On top of that, it's inefficient to have lots of small batteries not being properly managed in private houses. Much better to have grid scale batteries run by people who know what they are doing

Hahahah the Daily Mail.

Reality? Fantasy? Pffft. Quote the Daily Mail!

Today's top story in the right column is just as factual as that piece of tripe you posted Phoney Toney:

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5057603/Kylie-Jenner-sparks-pregnancy-confusion.html

Don't worry, no one's taking you seriously pbrain.

TonyAbbott said..
Climate models are nearly all wrong

We need policy based on reality, not fantasy

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2485772/Global-warming-pause-20-years-Arctic-sea-ice-started-recover.html

All models are wrong, some are useful.