FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Australia
Australia
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Humans are up their arses. Case in point, Scott Morrison. " He's a total pillock. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Humans are up their arses. Case in point, Scott Morrison. He's a total pillock. " I have much stronger words, but I'll refrain. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Humans are up their arses. Case in point, Scott Morrison. He's a total pillock. I have much stronger words, but I'll refrain. " Well so do I but like you I'm refraining. No talk of help or assistance, it's a farce. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Green policy to stop controlled burns of scrub/fire loading. Land owners prevented from removing trees near their dwellings and prevented from putting in fire breaks. This fire was predicted and preventable. " Part of global warming is unseasonably hot weather. This results in dryer forestation. This results in more fires which are harder to control. These fires cause more emissions which increase global warming. Fortunately we have climate change deniers to allow this to continue. Eh Clem  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Green policy to stop controlled burns of scrub/fire loading. Land owners prevented from removing trees near their dwellings and prevented from putting in fire breaks. This fire was predicted and preventable. Part of global warming is unseasonably hot weather. This results in dryer forestation. This results in more fires which are harder to control. These fires cause more emissions which increase global warming. Fortunately we have climate change deniers to allow this to continue. Eh Clem "Especially more fires if people are setting the fires... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Green policy to stop controlled burns of scrub/fire loading. Land owners prevented from removing trees near their dwellings and prevented from putting in fire breaks. This fire was predicted and preventable. Part of global warming is unseasonably hot weather. This results in dryer forestation. This results in more fires which are harder to control. These fires cause more emissions which increase global warming. Fortunately we have climate change deniers to allow this to continue. Eh Clem "Lol ?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore???" If china and India cared then i would, until they stop burning everything to power more factory's, then there is no point in doing anything, they are the main culprits. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore???" I really think we will be seen to be the Nero generation. Fiddling while the world burns. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? If china and India cared then i would, until they stop burning everything to power more factory's, then there is no point in doing anything, they are the main culprits. " These countries only need more power to supply us with our consumer products. Just because we've outsourced our mass production doesn't mean we can now point fingers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Green policy to stop controlled burns of scrub/fire loading. Land owners prevented from removing trees near their dwellings and prevented from putting in fire breaks. This fire was predicted and preventable. Part of global warming is unseasonably hot weather. This results in dryer forestation. This results in more fires which are harder to control. These fires cause more emissions which increase global warming. Fortunately we have climate change deniers to allow this to continue. Eh Clem
Especially more fires if people are setting the fires... "True dat. But what burns more easily. A dry forest or a green one. Forest fire occurance and droughts go hand in hand. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? I really think we will be seen to be the Nero generation. Fiddling while the world burns. " We will be known as the generation who shat the bed. When we are old and frail, it will be the Doomed generation who will be looking after us. Remember what Greta said. "If you fail us. We will NEVER forgive you".... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Green policy to stop controlled burns of scrub/fire loading. Land owners prevented from removing trees near their dwellings and prevented from putting in fire breaks. This fire was predicted and preventable. Part of global warming is unseasonably hot weather. This results in dryer forestation. This results in more fires which are harder to control. These fires cause more emissions which increase global warming. Fortunately we have climate change deniers to allow this to continue. Eh Clem
Especially more fires if people are setting the fires...
True dat.
But what burns more easily. A dry forest or a green one. Forest fire occurance and droughts go hand in hand."Oh, i hadn't realised large fires with loss of life in the Australian summer were uncommon. I guess it must be man made climate change that's responsible and not poor management, a hot summer, and idiots setting fires. Please tax me until it's all better.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years." I think the estimate* of plants and animals killed is around half a billion (500 million or 500,000,000). Don't underestimate the resilience of fauna and flora to recover; quite a few plant species actually require periodic burns in order to seed e.g. lodgepole pine, eucalyptus, and banksia as these have have serotinous cones that are completely sealed with resin and can only open to release their seeds after the heat of a fire has physically melted them. Other species, including a number of shrubs and annual plants, require the chemical signals from smoke and charred plant matter to break seed dormancy. These plants will only sprout in the presence of such chemicals and can remain buried in the soil seed bank for decades until a wildfire awakens them. I was travelling through California last year during the wild fires. My impression was that the environment was likely to recover reasonably quickly but the impact on businesses such as B&Bs, hotels, shops etc. would be considerable as visitors were (and, in future, would) amend their travel plans. There were a number of arrests for fire starting as well; anyone that does this deserves to go to prison for a very, very long time. *University of Sydney | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Green policy to stop controlled burns of scrub/fire loading. Land owners prevented from removing trees near their dwellings and prevented from putting in fire breaks. This fire was predicted and preventable. Part of global warming is unseasonably hot weather. This results in dryer forestation. This results in more fires which are harder to control. These fires cause more emissions which increase global warming. Fortunately we have climate change deniers to allow this to continue. Eh Clem
Especially more fires if people are setting the fires...
True dat.
But what burns more easily. A dry forest or a green one. Forest fire occurance and droughts go hand in hand.
Oh, i hadn't realised large fires with loss of life in the Australian summer were uncommon. I guess it must be man made climate change that's responsible and not poor management, a hot summer, and idiots setting fires. Please tax me until it's all better. "Fires this extensive? Geeesh even Sydney university hasn't had time to use my data.... Don't worry Clem. I know a guy who can get you out of paying Aussie tax... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would bet some of these extinction protester types have been responsible for some fires to validate their behaviour. It's what environmental protesters do. Cause misery for others in the name of saving the planet yet all got mobiles, laptops, eat at Macdonald's etc. I sympathize for everyone who has suffered in these fires it's terrible. " You know this for a fact? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would bet some of these extinction protester types have been responsible for some fires to validate their behaviour. It's what environmental protesters do. Cause misery for others in the name of saving the planet yet all got mobiles, laptops, eat at Macdonald's etc. I sympathize for everyone who has suffered in these fires it's terrible. You know this for a fact?" I don't think that's been proven in Oz. The Amazon yes, but not Oz so far. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!! "Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow. Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!"Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south. "Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China "Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore???" I did post exact the same kind of thread in the lounge and in Australian group. I had a few replies. Just shows if your more popular. I hope Australian government now take head on carbon footprint | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?"Yes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?"Per Capita | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada."The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Yes "Second in the world after the USA | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Per Capita "Oh, so in real terms it's not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Yes
Second in the world after the USA"Yep | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident. "Are you messing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?"Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes. It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident.
Are you messing "Nope. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases."Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident.
Are you messing
Nope."Our ice cap from the North Pole has been melting continuesly for decades , our global warming has an effect on this. What don’t you understand | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident. "2019 has become known as the year the world accepted that anthropogenic climate change was not a myth. What has become apparent is that industrialists such as the Koch Brothers paid scientists to publish false data and theories to make the climate change into a debate. Of course humans are like currents, they follow the path of least resistance. Whether its denying climate change, the existence of STDs etc etc we will believe whatever makes our lives easier. Paul Simon wrote: All lies and jests, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?"Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident.
Are you messing
Nope.
Our ice cap from the North Pole has been melting continuesly for decades , our global warming has an effect on this. What don’t you understand "The ice cap is normal, arctic temperatures are at record lows. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident.
2019 has become known as the year the world accepted that anthropogenic climate change was not a myth.
What has become apparent is that industrialists such as the Koch Brothers paid scientists to publish false data and theories to make the climate change into a debate.
Of course humans are like currents, they follow the path of least resistance. Whether its denying climate change, the existence of STDs etc etc we will believe whatever makes our lives easier.
Paul Simon wrote:
All lies and jests, still a man hears what he
wants to hear and disregards the rest"Australia need to take responsibility for their carbon footprint. END OF | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though."Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident.
Are you messing
Nope.
Our ice cap from the North Pole has been melting continuesly for decades , our global warming has an effect on this. What don’t you understand
The ice cap is normal, arctic temperatures are at record lows."No it’s not. North and South Pole temps are and have been erratic for the past decade | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes. "Australia ( I think ) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Record low temperature in Greenland overnight btw, -66! That's flippin parky!!
Did you know that as global warming gets worse the UK will get colder. We will probably end up with 6 months of snow.
Our reliance on Europe for food will increase. Good thing we're part of the EU!!!
Well that's bound to happen as the gsm has an effect on the jet stream, the jet stream will move south, allowing arctic air to flow south with it. Nothing to do with carbon emissions, just the next gsm. We're already starting to see the jet stream loose its position, hence why it's so mild at the moment. The jet stream has developed a huge sine wave. But it will settle, further south.
Nope. I'm talking about the gulf stream. Warm water pushing up from North Africa keeping the UK warm. But melting ice from the glaciers (that IS caused by global warming) is causing the Gulf Stream to slow down. When it stops we will be the same as any other country at the same degree of latitude. Think Canada.
The arctic ice sheet is normal this winter. You must have read about the failed eco journalists who were hoping to sail to close to the north pole having to be rescued from the ice? It's situation normal there. The ice cap isn't going anywhere but south as the effect of the gsm becomes evident.
2019 has become known as the year the world accepted that anthropogenic climate change was not a myth.
Not it isn't COPA25 proved that.
Of course humans are like currents, they follow the path of least resistance. "I absolutely agree. That's why it's easier to believe the bbc than it is for people to do their own research. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Revelation 20:14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire." Ah, they said that during the last fire!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Revelation 20:14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. Ah, they said that during the last fire! "It’s a bit of a dated quote. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )"According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan. ... The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal. 1.China. ... 2.The U.S. ... 2.India. ... 4.The Russian Federation. ... 5.Japan. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes. "It's all measured in 'per capita GHG Emissions' it's a measuring system of greenhouse gas emissions per person in each country. You can't just say its China, because the population there is massively higher so obviously overall it will be more, its all per capita. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan."Yes this is per county. Do you know how big Australia is, ? Do another search you will find Australia are the biggest import of coal and apologise | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan."That's not how it works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is not a time for blame because the whole world is responsible it’s time to act and see if we can reverse this or at least slow it " Ok Australia won’t commit to a 2% carbon footprint;, they said they couldn’t do it. So now we are looking at a 1.5 carbon footprint and Australia are in the shit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
Yes this is per county. Do you know how big Australia is, ? Do another search you will find Australia are the biggest import of coal and apologise"It exports coal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works. "We know that , | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works. "You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
Yes this is per county. Do you know how big Australia is, ? Do another search you will find Australia are the biggest import of coal and apologise
It exports coal."Yes!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What happened to all the old Russian nuclear submarines that’s were decommissioning on the Baltic coast 15 years ago all with rotting reactors ???? Never heard about the disposal of those have we ? " Can you be made to feel guilty and then taxed for these? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
Yes this is per county. Do you know how big Australia is, ? Do another search you will find Australia are the biggest import of coal and apologise
It exports coal.
Yes!!"Not imports, like you said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon..."Wtf are you on about. You are asking me does Australia export coal ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon..."You need to scrub up on how it's measured. 'Per capita GHG Emissions is a measure of greenhouse gas emissions per person in each country' You can't just say its China, yes China is a bigger country so it will produce more, doesn't mean to say it's worse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon...
You need to scrub up on how it's measured.
'Per capita GHG Emissions is a measure of greenhouse gas emissions per person in each country'
You can't just say its China, yes China is a bigger country so it will produce more, doesn't mean to say it's worse. "Is Australia commissioning as many new coal powered power stations as China and India are? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon...
Wtf are you on about. You are asking me does Australia export coal ? "No, I'm really not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What happened to all the old Russian nuclear submarines that’s were decommissioning on the Baltic coast 15 years ago all with rotting reactors ???? Never heard about the disposal of those have we ? Can you be made to feel guilty and then taxed for these?" I’m not Russian or a ruler, u prick | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon...
Wtf are you on about. You are asking me does Australia export coal ?
No, I'm really not. "Well it does | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon...
Wtf are you on about. You are asking me does Australia export coal ?
No, I'm really not.
Well it does "And it’s one of the country’s largest exports | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon...
Wtf are you on about. You are asking me does Australia export coal ?
No, I'm really not.
Well it does
And it’s one of the country’s largest exports "No shit, how much do they burn? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon...
Wtf are you on about. You are asking me does Australia export coal ?
No, I'm really not.
Well it does
And it’s one of the country’s largest exports
No shit, how much do they burn?"How much do they export? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What happened to all the old Russian nuclear submarines that’s were decommissioning on the Baltic coast 15 years ago all with rotting reactors ???? Never heard about the disposal of those have we ? Can you be made to feel guilty and then taxed for these? I’m not Russian or a ruler, u prick " I see you haven't yet grasped hypothetical questions... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works. "Obviously China will produce more CO2 with such a large population. What do you want them to do about that? Shoot people? It's also a really large country. Moving the borders would change the statistics but wouldn't change climate change. Clem suggest you read up on the Koch Brothers and the money they put into false news and false science. Why would they do that? Rupert Murdoch is now saying his papers never denied climate change. And people are digging up hundreds of his papers articles denying climate change. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
You can google as well as i can. So stop guessing, and go and have a look at which countries pump out the most carbon...
Wtf are you on about. You are asking me does Australia export coal ?
No, I'm really not.
Well it does
And it’s one of the country’s largest exports
No shit, how much do they burn?
How much do they export?"But they're not producing CO2..... do you see. You can't blame every death at the hands of ISIS on Russia just because they manufacture the Kalashnikov! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic! "I'm not sure what you don't understand? Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet. Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
Obviously China will produce more CO2 with such a large population. What do you want them to do about that? Shoot people?
It's also a really large country. Moving the borders would change the statistics but wouldn't change climate change.
Clem suggest you read up on the Koch Brothers and the money they put into false news and false science. Why would they do that?
Rupert Murdoch is now saying his papers never denied climate change. And people are digging up hundreds of his papers articles denying climate change."I suggest you read up on Piers Corbyn. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
"So which country is worse for the environment? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?"America | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
Obviously China will produce more CO2 with such a large population. What do you want them to do about that? Shoot people?
It's also a really large country. Moving the borders would change the statistics but wouldn't change climate change.
Clem suggest you read up on the Koch Brothers and the money they put into false news and false science. Why would they do that?
Rupert Murdoch is now saying his papers never denied climate change. And people are digging up hundreds of his papers articles denying climate change."Australia for such a small climate of living use much more than any other country | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America "Nope. According to records Australia is worse | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
Obviously China will produce more CO2 with such a large population. What do you want them to do about that? Shoot people?
It's also a really large country. Moving the borders would change the statistics but wouldn't change climate change.
Clem suggest you read up on the Koch Brothers and the money they put into false news and false science. Why would they do that?
Rupert Murdoch is now saying his papers never denied climate change. And people are digging up hundreds of his papers articles denying climate change."Why would the bbc report warm temperatures in Norway, but not record cold temperatures in Greenland? Why wouldn't they report that the polar ice cap is normal? Why wouldn't they report the long term effects of gsm? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse "Can you share a link? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Can you share a link?"Yes I will | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Per capita, Saudi Arabia is worse than Australia. " Here’s one https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/13/australias-carbon-emissions-highest-on-record-data-shows | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse "Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records. 1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita. 2nd Australia 15.4 47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Per capita, Saudi Arabia is worse than Australia. Here’s one https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/13/australias-carbon-emissions-highest-on-record-data-shows" That doesn't give any comparisons. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low. "I was right | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Per capita, Saudi Arabia is worse than Australia. Here’s one https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/13/australias-carbon-emissions-highest-on-record-data-shows That doesn't give any comparisons. " Are you messing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low. "Saudi arabia 16.85 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low.
Saudi arabia 16.85"https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/10296/economics/top-co2-polluters-highest-per-capita/ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low.
Saudi arabia 16.85"Saudi , it’s all political , | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low.
Saudi arabia 16.85
Saudi , it’s all political , "I will say again Australia are one of the worst for carbon footprint | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low.
Saudi arabia 16.85"It's higher than that, but that's oil production so will be. Not necessarily classed as emmisions tho | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
Obviously China will produce more CO2 with such a large population. What do you want them to do about that? Shoot people?
It's also a really large country. Moving the borders would change the statistics but wouldn't change climate change.
Clem suggest you read up on the Koch Brothers and the money they put into false news and false science. Why would they do that?
Rupert Murdoch is now saying his papers never denied climate change. And people are digging up hundreds of his papers articles denying climate change.
I suggest you read up on Piers Corbyn. "He has satellites collecting data on climate change? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China
Australia worse than China for CO2 emissions?! Really?
Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, yes.
It has 0.3% of the world's population releasing 1.07% of the world's greenhouse gases.
Oh right, soo, which countries produce the largest percentage of carbon emissions?
Per capita I believe its USA, someone may correct me though.
Which countries produce most CO2 ? Not per capita, but by tonnes.
Australia ( I think )
According to the most recent data from the Global Carbon Project 2018, the top five countries that produce the most CO2 are China, U.S., India, Russia, and Japan.
...
The biggest culprit of CO2 emissions for these countries is electricity, notably, burning coal.
1.China. ...
2.The U.S. ...
2.India. ...
4.The Russian Federation. ...
5.Japan.
That's not how it works.
Obviously China will produce more CO2 with such a large population. What do you want them to do about that? Shoot people?
It's also a really large country. Moving the borders would change the statistics but wouldn't change climate change.
Clem suggest you read up on the Koch Brothers and the money they put into false news and false science. Why would they do that?
Rupert Murdoch is now saying his papers never denied climate change. And people are digging up hundreds of his papers articles denying climate change.
I suggest you read up on Piers Corbyn.
He has satellites collecting data on climate change?"Ask him, he's on Twitter. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low.
Saudi arabia 16.85
Saudi , it’s all political ,
I will say again Australia are one of the worst for carbon footprint "They live in a continent which is mostly baron , and yet their priminister won’t support them on carbon emissions, their continent is our little county plus the whole of Europe in one!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Total emissions. China. 9 billion tons Australia. 381 million tons. Less than the uk. 390 million tons. " It's not measured on total emissions, that's like saying a solar factory produces more than a coal burning house so it's worse, the solar factory will because its bigger, but the factory is still greener. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Total emissions. China. 9 billion tons Australia. 381 million tons. Less than the uk. 390 million tons. It's not measured on total emissions, that's like saying a solar factory produces more than a coal burning house so it's worse, the solar factory will because its bigger, but the factory is still greener. " Exactly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Total emissions. China. 9 billion tons Australia. 381 million tons. Less than the uk. 390 million tons. " Total emissions are meaningless. It means regardless of environmental policies, high population countries will always be the culprits. Apart from that many first world countries have outsourced their industry to China. Eg. When I bought my Dell that's where it was shipped from. An American product manufacturered in China. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528" Why are you spouting this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low.
Saudi arabia 16.85
Saudi , it’s all political ,
I will say again Australia are one of the worst for carbon footprint
They live in a continent which is mostly baron , and yet their priminister won’t support them on carbon emissions, their continent is our little county plus the whole of Europe in one!! "He won't even support them on Forest fire management! He's a prick. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528" Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So. If 10 people pour 100 gallons of crude oil into the sea, that's better than one guy pouring 30 gallons in is it? If you're a seagull, which is worse for you?" https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/we-re-far-behind-many-developed-nations-how-australia-s-carbon-emissions-stack-up-20190917-p52s9r.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. " Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, even though China produces more carbon than Oz, it's not as bad for the environment as Australia Because its less per capita..Classic!
I'm not sure what you don't understand?
Per person per country China is well down on emmisions. Australian population is tiny per land mass but produces more emmisions per person, so yes 'per capita' which is how its all measured, Australia is a lot worse for the planet.
Can't explain it any easier than that, it's ot what's pumped out, it's about the carbon footprint per person, Australians are way above China, as in massively.
So which country is worse for the environment?
America
Nope. According to records Australia is worse
Nope just checked the World Bank per capita records.
1st America 16.5 tonnes per capita.
2nd Australia 15.4
47th China 7.5
That's shocked me actually that China are so low.
Saudi arabia 16.85
Saudi , it’s all political ,
I will say again Australia are one of the worst for carbon footprint
They live in a continent which is mostly baron , and yet their priminister won’t support them on carbon emissions, their continent is our little county plus the whole of Europe in one!!
He won't even support them on Forest fire management! He's a prick. "I hate him. Did you see him trying to shake fire fighters hand,? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? " Your deffo not labour are you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? Your deffo not labour are you " Wrong again. And a trade union member too, i think that's why i know a con when i see one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go?" Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil?" Again, this is a hypothetical question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. " But Australia is ruled by the uk | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk" Wtf. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk" Middle East isn’t so it’s not really hypothetical | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Wtf." Wtf ? What ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So. If 10 people pour 100 gallons of crude oil into the sea, that's better than one guy pouring 30 gallons in is it? If you're a seagull, which is worse for you? So on your example, the per capita measurements would be: 10 x 100 gallons 1 x 30 gallons. So that one person has produced a bigger carbon footprint than the 10, so yes that person is worse for the environment, that's how it's measured, not on the total devastating mess it would cause, the devastating mess is then the total figure. You must understand that, surely? " If you're the seagull, or the planet, do you care? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Wtf. Wtf ? What ?" Australia is not ruled by the uk. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Wtf. Wtf ? What ? Australia is not ruled by the uk." Is it not. ... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Wtf. Wtf ? What ? Australia is not ruled by the uk. Is it not. ... " Does it’s flag not have our flag ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Middle East isn’t so it’s not really hypothetical " Ok let's try again... If the isle of Wight brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Wtf. Wtf ? What ? Australia is not ruled by the uk. Is it not. ... Does it’s flag not have our flag ?" Oh my God. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Wtf. Wtf ? What ? Australia is not ruled by the uk. Is it not. ... " No, just In the commenwealth, our Queen is head of state though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Middle East isn’t so it’s not really hypothetical Ok let's try again... If the isle of Wight brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go?" It should be used to fund green emmisions, like wind and solar so you as a person can get your power more efficiently for example. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the Australia brought in a carbon tax of let's say 10p on every unit of carbon you use, and China did nothing, but built more power stations, how would that help the planet? And where would the 10p go? Australia have nothing to do with carbon tax. Ok so should they start Being like the Middle East with oil? Again, this is a hypothetical question. But Australia is ruled by the uk Wtf. Wtf ? What ? Australia is not ruled by the uk. Is it not. ... No, just In the commenwealth, our Queen is head of state though ". That’s what I meant  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore???" Ask the Australian Government. The world's largest exporter of coal surely should be able to do more to reduce climate change? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? Your deffo not labour are you Wrong again. And a trade union member too, i think that's why i know a con when i see one. " Clem. How do you know the things you know? Where do you get your data? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? Ask the Australian Government. The world's largest exporter of coal surely should be able to do more to reduce climate change? " Oh really largest export of coal? I said this earlier and got lambasted | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? " If they wanted to tax us they would just tax us. They don't have to spend billions on a conspiracy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? Your deffo not labour are you Wrong again. And a trade union member too, i think that's why i know a con when i see one. Clem. How do you know the things you know? Where do you get your data?" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does it’s flag not have our flag ?" Many countries around the world still show the Union Flag as part of their own Flag, normally in the top left corner. This does not denote they are owned, governed, ruled or otherwise controlled by the UK, it is merely symbolic and chosen by that country to show it's empirical past. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? Ask the Australian Government. The world's largest exporter of coal surely should be able to do more to reduce climate change? Oh really largest export of coal? I said this earlier and got lambasted " Why is an exporter the villain? If somebody is selling something, someone is is buying it... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? Ask the Australian Government. The world's largest exporter of coal surely should be able to do more to reduce climate change? Oh really largest export of coal? I said this earlier and got lambasted Why is an exporter the villain? If somebody is selling something, someone is is buying it..." . No not at all. But all I was saying is Australia is the largest exporter of coal. And he said it wasn’t | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? Your deffo not labour are you Wrong again. And a trade union member too, i think that's why i know a con when i see one. Clem. How do you know the things you know? Where do you get your data? Google " And Google does not lie? Do you own satellites? Take measurements, collect and analyse data with your expert environmental knowledge? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? Your deffo not labour are you Wrong again. And a trade union member too, i think that's why i know a con when i see one. Clem. How do you know the things you know? Where do you get your data? Google And Google does not lie? Do you own satellites? Take measurements, collect and analyse data with your expert environmental knowledge?" Oh come on dude really | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So, this table shows country, total carbon emission, per capita, then population. Sorry it doesn't paste particularly well! India 2.07 billion 1.58 1,366,417,754 Indonesia 441.91 million 1.72 270,625,568 Brazil 450.79 million 2.17 211,049,527 Mexico 442.31 million 3.66 127,575,529 Turkey 317.22 million 4.1 83,429,615 France 290.49 million 4.37 65,129,728 Italy 330.75 million 5.45 60,550,075 United Kingdom 389.75 million 5.99 67,530,172 China 9.04 billion 6.59 1,433,783,686 Iran 552.40 million 6.98 82,913,906 Poland 282.40 million 7.34 37,887,768 South Africa 427.57 million 7.77 58,558,270 Germany 729.77 million 8.93 83,517,045 Japan 1.14 billion 8.99 126,860,301 Russia 1.47 billion 10.19 145,872,256 South Korea 585.99 million 11.58 51,225,308 Canada 549.23 million 15.32 37,411,047 United States 5.00 billion 15.53 329,064,917 Australia 380.93 million 15.83 25,203,198 Saudi Arabia 531.46 million 16.85 34,268,528 Total emmisions is irrelevant, its the carbon footprint per person that's measured. Surely you've heard people saying they're going to reduce their carbon footprint, this is why. Because it's easier to tax an individual rather than a country? Your deffo not labour are you Wrong again. And a trade union member too, i think that's why i know a con when i see one. Clem. How do you know the things you know? Where do you get your data? Google " So all your expert knowledge is based on Google searches | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Oh come on dude really" Yes really. I want to know how a person using Google knows more than scientists with PhDs who are using everything science has to offer to determine the facts. If you Google Copernicus Programme. Sentinel 4 and 5. Then that's what pays my bills. They sure pay me a lot of money to make their charade real." Ahhh ok so Australia haven’t got the largest carbon footprint? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why is an exporter the villain? If somebody is selling something, someone is is buying it..." If someone stops selling something that is bad for 6 billion people then the people buying it will have to look elsewhere. I get it's a chicken and egg scenario, but Australia exports coal to the four biggest importers of coal in the world. If the coal wasn't sold, it wouldn't be burnt, it wouldn't affect the climate so much and maybe Australia wouldn't be currently facing all of the present situation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why is an exporter the villain? If somebody is selling something, someone is is buying it... If someone stops selling something that is bad for 6 billion people then the people buying it will have to look elsewhere. I get it's a chicken and egg scenario, but Australia exports coal to the four biggest importers of coal in the world. If the coal wasn't sold, it wouldn't be burnt, it wouldn't affect the climate so much and maybe Australia wouldn't be currently facing all of the present situation. " Exactly!! Australia were told in the G2 emissions meeting to lower there carbon footprint to 2%,, Australia said NO they couldn’t do that ?? Why when China UK USA we’re all going along. Actually I think I 2020 it’s actually 1.5? And I believe Australia being naughty were trying to borrow other countries emissions?!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore???" Sorry to be pedantic but I don't think 5 trillion animals have died, more around 500 million. And an area the size of the UK burned to the ground and expected to get worse | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China "5 billion is an additional 100% to 2.5 billion, ie twice the normal amount. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? Sorry to be pedantic but I don't think 5 trillion animals have died, more around 500 million. And an area the size of the UK burned to the ground and expected to get worse "Sorry but your VERY WRONG. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? Sorry to be pedantic but I don't think 5 trillion animals have died, more around 500 million. And an area the size of the UK burned to the ground and expected to get worse
Sorry but your VERY WRONG. "Well ok maybe not on animal side but on burning hector size? I do believe it’d bigger than the U.K. easily | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sorry to be pedantic but I don't think 5 trillion animals have died, more around 500 million. And an area the size of the UK burned to the ground and expected to get worse "https://www.9news.com.au/national/australian-bushfires-size-of-the-fires-compared-to-london-singapore-europe/f8ad9361-7109-4e2b-b82e-efbdfb65c288 You've got to see that it's still a large area right? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guys it all starts with choosing politicians whose number one agenda is saving the plannet. We are all still voting for politicians who promise to make us richer. Making a few token gestures that have a miniscule effect on climate change are not going to save our planet. Right now the destruction of the Amazon is the biggest problem. Something that could be stopped tomorrow. The right pressure just has to be placed on the right people. Trump has now reversed Obama to allow the hunting of endangered woldlife around the world. Brilliant. " It’s about AUSTRALIA. Are you a politician? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore???" It's just HORRIFIC what's happening in Australia..unreal...a lot of Aussies are blaming the greens for getting the government to stop what was the controlled burning of scrub land during the winter months to prevent what is exactly happening now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots of brits emigrated to here, but looking at it now, my god it’s looking in places like hell on Earth.. 5,000,000,000,000 animals have estimated to have died in the bush fires. Whole species are expected to be wiped out.. Devastation isn’t strong enough words to use to describe this. Cataclysmic disaster will scar Australia for hundreds of years. Question is this the evidence needed to at last get governments across the globe to address the issue of climate change, or are humans too far up their own assholes to care anymore??? It's just HORRIFIC what's happening in Australia..unreal...a lot of Aussies are blaming the greens for getting the government to stop what was the controlled burning of scrub land during the winter months to prevent what is exactly happening now." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sorry to be pedantic but I don't think 5 trillion animals have died, more around 500 million. And an area the size of the UK burned to the ground and expected to get worse
https://www.9news.com.au/national/australian-bushfires-size-of-the-fires-compared-to-london-singapore-europe/f8ad9361-7109-4e2b-b82e-efbdfb65c288
You've got to see that it's still a large area right?"My brother in Victoria says it's an area equivalent from Manchester to Cornwall that's gone up in flames, normally they'd get half that size in a normal season. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guys it all starts with choosing politicians whose number one agenda is saving the plannet. We are all still voting for politicians who promise to make us richer. Making a few token gestures that have a miniscule effect on climate change are not going to save our planet. Right now the destruction of the Amazon is the biggest problem. Something that could be stopped tomorrow. The right pressure just has to be placed on the right people. Trump has now reversed Obama to allow the hunting of endangered woldlife around the world. Brilliant. It’s about AUSTRALIA. Are you a politician?" The state of the planet is a global concern. This is a time for mankind to put aside political and petty differences. This is the single biggest issue of our time. It's worldwide. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guys it all starts with choosing politicians whose number one agenda is saving the plannet. We are all still voting for politicians who promise to make us richer. Making a few token gestures that have a miniscule effect on climate change are not going to save our planet. Right now the destruction of the Amazon is the biggest problem. Something that could be stopped tomorrow. The right pressure just has to be placed on the right people. Trump has now reversed Obama to allow the hunting of endangered woldlife around the world. Brilliant. It’s about AUSTRALIA. Are you a politician? The state of the planet is a global concern. This is a time for mankind to put aside political and petty differences. This is the single biggest issue of our time. It's worldwide. " I’m sure that was my Op! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guys it all starts with choosing politicians whose number one agenda is saving the plannet. We are all still voting for politicians who promise to make us richer. Making a few token gestures that have a miniscule effect on climate change are not going to save our planet. Right now the destruction of the Amazon is the biggest problem. Something that could be stopped tomorrow. The right pressure just has to be placed on the right people. Trump has now reversed Obama to allow the hunting of endangered woldlife around the world. Brilliant. It’s about AUSTRALIA. Are you a politician? The state of the planet is a global concern. This is a time for mankind to put aside political and petty differences. This is the single biggest issue of our time. It's worldwide. I’m sure that was my Op!" I apologise, I started a thread hours ago “Australia “ I’m getting confused. I do apologise | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guys it all starts with choosing politicians whose number one agenda is saving the plannet. We are all still voting for politicians who promise to make us richer. Making a few token gestures that have a miniscule effect on climate change are not going to save our planet. Right now the destruction of the Amazon is the biggest problem. Something that could be stopped tomorrow. The right pressure just has to be placed on the right people. Trump has now reversed Obama to allow the hunting of endangered woldlife around the world. Brilliant. It’s about AUSTRALIA. Are you a politician? The state of the planet is a global concern. This is a time for mankind to put aside political and petty differences. This is the single biggest issue of our time. It's worldwide. I’m sure that was my Op! I apologise, I started a thread hours ago “Australia “ I’m getting confused. I do apologise " It's all those Google search 'facts' people have been throwing at you haha | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would bet some of these extinction protester types have been responsible for some fires to validate their behaviour. It's what environmental protesters do. Cause misery for others in the name of saving the planet yet all got mobiles, laptops, eat at Macdonald's etc. I sympathize for everyone who has suffered in these fires it's terrible. You know this for a fact? I don't think that's been proven in Oz. The Amazon yes, but not Oz so far. " No. Not proven in either location. The fires in Brazil were caused by the loggers who were emboldened by Balsanaro - he then tried to blame the fires on environmental campaignersin order to discredit them, since they were among him most vocal critics. The fires in Oz were caused initially by careless campers burning BBQs and a few 'vandals', and then self ignited by airborne embers settling on unusually dry vegetation more easily ignited by increased volatility of their natural oils - a result of hotter and drier conditions blowing eastward from a much hotter and drier continental interior. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's all those Google search 'facts' people have been throwing at you haha "NB. I don't rely on such 'factoids' other than in passing to find the actual science - on which I am very qualified to comment. You tend to find the preudi-facts from internet memes, InfoWars, Breitbart, David Icke, etc are trotted out in an attempt to suggest there's some kind of evil corporate plot to create a 'climate change myth' to make them even richer somehow... by reducing consumption?.. not sure how that's supposed to make sense. Buy hey... Soros!!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My brother lives in Victoria which the fires have now reached. This is all down to human idiots causing these fires, temperatures are hotter there because of the fires creating more heat. It's about 5 billion hectares so far, on average the normal season gets around 2.5 billion hectares damaged each year anyway, so it's 50% higher than normal, so not exactly down to global warming. Also, someone above said China were worse, think you'll find Australia are worse than China "Confusing your millions and billions one thinks..... There's a bit of a difference the whole of Australia is 0.8 billion hectares  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Im a perminent Australian Visa holder and lived there for 10yrs. I've seen bushfires during the summer months and witnessed at first hand there devastation. Sadly they're often caused deliberately or by human error. Once they take a hold in remote areas theres little that can be done as using water bombers (planes) and the helicopters are like throwing a cup of water on a bonfire. Smoke rises like mushrooms clouds and the heat generates it's own wind that fans the flames so it travels at car driving speeds. I had such a fire in a nature reserve that was stopped eventually only 100 meters or so from my house, I stood ready as did the rest of the street with hosepipe in hand but it was contained in time. Australia is vast, across its length its bigger then from the east coast of Ireland to the other side of Turkey but only a population of 22 odd million. There aren't enough SES (state emergency servises) or firefighters to cope with fires that are so far out in the Bush so they will burn uncontrolled. If you've ever stood in the sun during 50°c heat just for 10 seconds you can feel your brain boil, tinder dry brush has no chance. Much love to my Aussie friends and family, it'll be a sad Australia Day this month but the ANZAC spirit's alive..." Thanks very informative | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Im a perminent Australian Visa holder and lived there for 10yrs. I've seen bushfires during the summer months and witnessed at first hand there devastation. Sadly they're often caused deliberately or by human error. Once they take a hold in remote areas theres little that can be done as using water bombers (planes) and the helicopters are like throwing a cup of water on a bonfire. Smoke rises like mushrooms clouds and the heat generates it's own wind that fans the flames so it travels at car driving speeds. I had such a fire in a nature reserve that was stopped eventually only 100 meters or so from my house, I stood ready as did the rest of the street with hosepipe in hand but it was contained in time. Australia is vast, across its length its bigger then from the east coast of Ireland to the other side of Turkey but only a population of 22 odd million. There aren't enough SES (state emergency servises) or firefighters to cope with fires that are so far out in the Bush so they will burn uncontrolled. If you've ever stood in the sun during 50°c heat just for 10 seconds you can feel your brain boil, tinder dry brush has no chance. Much love to my Aussie friends and family, it'll be a sad Australia Day this month but the ANZAC spirit's alive..." Thanks very informative | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
