On Jul 10, 9:01 pm, "George W. Frost" wrote:

You cannot blame "climate change"

Eastern Australia has been having El Nino events for a very long time,
we seem to be just starting to come out of a particularly nasty one.
This is the major factor in the drought overall and your water
restrictions in particular, not climate change. However consider that
climate scientists think that if present trends continue the frequency
and severity of El Nino is likely to get worse. This _would_ be a
consequence of climate change.

El Nino's effects are usually only around for abour 7 - 8 months



But this time several years. If it isn't EL Nino causing the drought
what is it? Climate change?


this is a made up phrase to suit the purpose of greenies and politicians

Why would they make it up? How come the great majority of
climatologists world wide say it is happening? Are they part of the
same vast global conspiracy? Who is bribing them and why?

Who said anything about bribery?


OK why do greenies and poltician use a made up word? Why do most
climatologists say it is real and not made up?

No such thing as "climate change" it has been going on for thousands of
years

The climate has been changing for millions of years without help from
mankind.

You have just answered my argument

Not at all. Just because climate change has had natural causes in the
past does not mean that there can be no changes caused by humans now
or in the future.


But now WE are having an effect as well as all the natural
forces.

Not really, nature is doing it well by itself.


What evidence do you have for this other than that you say so?

Was mankind to blame for the Ice Age"
Was mankind to blame for the thawing of the Ice Age?
Was mankind to blame for the eventual drying up of the inland lakes and
seas
leaving deserts?

No way, because man wasn't invented then

No because this is a straw man argument. No climatolost says mankind
was responsible for all those things back millions of years. That
these things happened in the past is quite within the climate models,
what we need to consider is why some things are changing now. Have a
look at the rate that glaciers and ice sheets are melting now ask
yourself what is the cause.

read the next sentence again.

It is the same in these years now, mankind cannot be held to blame.


Once again you are making bald assertions with no evidence supplied.

It is measurably and demonstrably not the same. The growth of the
amount of CO2 in the atmosphere in the last 100 years has no
explanation other than from human activity.

Any change in the climate is due to the atomic reaction of the earth and
its
environs

I haven't heard this explanation before. Please tell me where you got
it from and how this has increased the CO2 in the air in the last 100
years.

You know nothing about atomic reaction?
if not, then your argument is baseless.

This is no explanaton of your position. What exactly is the way that
atomic reactions are affecting climate? Where are these atomic
reactions happening? What are they doing to the atmosphere? I need
enough detail to follow your argument, what you have said doesn't tell
me anything.

You know something about physical reaction.
You know something about mental reaction.
then you should know something about atomic reaction, seeing that everything
on this planet is created from atoms
a mixture of particular atoms create a reaction, even to the atoms in your
body.

This is no explanation either. If you don't have the words yourself
then give a reference to somebody who is making this case. As it is
you aren't saying anything.


We cannot control the earth's interiors, lava flows, winds, earthquakes,
tides, seasons etc

No we cannot control those things but we can control how much carbon
dioxide etc we put into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel.

This is also my argument and I agree with you on this,but on a different
agenda

What agenda is that? If you agree that humans are responsible for the
extra CO2 in the air then explain why this is not causing climate
change.


so you are not going to be able to control any type of climate change
that
may or may not come along

It does not follow.

Every day, the volcano in Hawaii spews more than 2,500 tons of sulfur
dioxide into the atmosphere, enough noxious gas to fill 100 Goodyear blimps.
a natural occurance from one volcano which no-one would be able to contain
or control.


I will accept your figures for the point of discusion for now. What
effect do you think that 2500 tons a day of sulphur dioxide has on
global climate change? If you say it is a significant effect on
global climate then you need to show me the climate modeling or other
scientific work (or a reference to it) that supports the case.

David