 Notice. New forum software under development. It's going to miss a few functions and look a bit ugly for a while, but I'm working on it full time now as the old forum was too unstable. Couple days, all good. If you notice any issues, please contact me. |
Forum Index : Off topic archive. : Political non religious fairy stories
Page 1 of 8   |
|||||
| Author | Message | ||||
| VK4AYQ Guru  Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539 |
Hi All We all know that the planet is undergoing some form of change as it has done in cycles over the 1000.'s of years of history and also prehistoric times. The point of this is to show how politics and government use any excuse to levy a new tax or surcharge in the sheeple. While we do all we can with our hobbies and contraptions to recycle and reduce our carbon footprint, nature has a way of making all people small and insignificant. One Volcano Exposes the Massive Carbon Scheme Fraud - Where Does the Carbon Really Come From? - Source unknown - June 19, 2011 Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better! If you've read his book you will agree, this is a good summary. Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption at Iceland's Eyjafjallajokull volcano, since its first spewed volcanic ash, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you. And now with Iceland's Grimsvotn volcano erupting on May 21, 2011, it has been a losing battle. Of course you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it's that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life. I know, it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of: driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kid's "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cents light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs ... well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days. The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes - FOUR DAYS ONLY by that volcano in Iceland, has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time - EVERY DAY. I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on Earth. Yes folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over one year - think about it. Of course I shouldn't spoil this touchy-feely tree-hugging moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keep happening, despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change. And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year. Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you on the basis of the bogus "human-caused" climate change scenario. Hey, isn't it interesting how they don't mention "Global Warming" any more, but just "Climate Change" - you know why? It's because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down. And just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you, that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer. It won't stop any volcanoes from erupting, that's for sure... The sheeple will pay. Bob Foolin Around |
||||
vasi Guru Joined: 23/03/2007 Location: RomaniaPosts: 1697 |
Right! 
And expect more. 
Vasi Hobbit name: Togo Toadfoot of Frogmorton Elvish name: Mablung Miriel Beyound Arduino Lang |
||||
Greenbelt Guru Joined: 11/01/2009 Location: United StatesPosts: 566 |
Hi all, It is possible for the World temperature to fall .7 Deg. as an average and still have the effect of global warming. I've noticed the weather locally has been colder and more rain, way into spring and summer, there has not been more than 9 days of sunshine yet this year. Watching the weather channel I see the jet stream bringing arctic air a long way south even to central California. this is unusual. This southward flow is causing Warm air to go North to the poles melting the Glacier Ice so while it may seem colder than normal to some of us. it is much warmer in areas that were frozen. The following is in reference to the article on volcanic emissions. (One volcano) 42 gallons per barrell = 433 kg. Carbon Dioxide per barrell when burned. The C- O2 weight is 2/3rds oxygen. People should worry about Oxygen depletion with this enormous quanity being used daily while the forests are being cut to the ground and being burned to add more C-O2 . 34,640,000,000 KGs. .---Daily. Just from Oil! How about Natural Gas and Wood fires 80,000,000 barrells of oil used Daily in the world. (This was Googled 77-88 million Daily ) To store the daily world wide oil requirement. it would take 5101 acres , 43,560 sq.ft per acre. 400 sq. inch per bbl. (20 inch dia.) 15,681 barrells per acre. If stacked 10 high. it would be 510 acres, almost a square mile.(every day) In 2002, the United States used about 22.8 Tcf of natural gas, making it one of the worldwide leaders in natural gas.- More C-O2 . As large as a volcano is I find it hard to believe that 4 days of emissions would equal all manmade emissions through out history.-------Cheers, Roe Time has proven that I am blind to the Obvious, some of the above may be True? |
||||
| grub Senior Member  Joined: 27/11/2007 Location: AustraliaPosts: 169 |
I have compared the data for earth temperature change via CO2 and via sun spot activity, and I personally believe sun spot activity is more accurate at determining earth temperature than CO2 is. Carbon TAX is just another TAX. |
||||
niall1 Senior Member Joined: 20/11/2008 Location: IrelandPosts: 331 |
i,d agree carbon tax is just a cop out ...its wide open to abuse by governments that apply it.... we have a carbon tax here...some of the money raised was supposedly meant to go into renewable research ...nope , just another stealth tax ...carbon credits ? whats that all about ?... are we polluting the planet ,the air ,the oceans ?...i,d say definitively yes ..but like George Carlin said (not your average greennie either)... quote... "this little blue green ball just a floating around the sun will find a way to get rid of any pesky species that mildly irritates it" "the planets not going anywhere ..." WE ARE " ...pack your sh*t folks..we,re going away ....  .."
end quote... edit...the gas fracking companies are slowly coming near me....about 30 mins drive to the site ...maybe i,ll be able to do the party trick and set fire to the cold water tap....doesnt seem right somehow... niall |
||||
| Greenbelt Guru Joined: 11/01/2009 Location: United StatesPosts: 566 |
grub-niall 1, The Carbon Tax was an opportunity to grab Money, penalize a Company making its bottom line drop below profit level? How can the Company afford to upgrade its processes to lower emissions? And even if it could upgrade. The bar would be raised to keep the Money flowing. Yes The Carbon Tax is just another Government office to support. The Earth its self will exist in space as Mars does, barren and lifeless if changes are not made. In Just 2,600 days the storage area for oil will span the USA.1 mile wide and 10 bbls. high. at the current use rate 7.13 years. Sunspots or not there is no where to put the Co2 forever, whether we need to do this now or wait a while, it will need to be done. and I think its good we are starting. A carbon tax will not help it happen any sooner and people should let their Public Serpents know that if they support a carbon Tax they will not get you Vote. ------Cheers, Roe A Mars Rover Photograph NASA 
Time has proven that I am blind to the Obvious, some of the above may be True? |
||||
Gizmo Admin Group  Joined: 05/06/2004 Location: AustraliaPosts: 5116 |
The problem with the global warming debate is the conflicting information sources, and human tendency to only listen to what you agree with. For example, there has been a decline in the number of cyclones since the 1970's. Yeah, proof the climate is cooling and becoming stable. But hang on, the cyclones have become more intense, with many more cat 3 and 4 compared to 50 years ago. Yeah, proof of a warmer unstable climate. See my point, it depends on how you look at the information, and the colour of your glasses. Yeah I've heard the volcano argument, its viral over the internet, but I wonder how accurate the figures are, and where they come from. I was listening to a interview on the ABC a few weeks ago, wish I could find a link, but anyway, it was about a New York based company that is paid by big business to release false information about a product. They are very good at it. For example, they released made up scientific reports that university so and so did a 25 year research into lung cancer and found no connection to smoking. And of course they are on the oil companies pay role, and release "scientific" reports that try to disprove the global warming theory. Unfortunately this means a lot of the scientific reports we read could be bogus, either for or against any argument. Then there is the "Well how does that affect me" attitude. My Dad surprised me a few weeks ago when he was talking about a report he read about ocean level rises, and in 100 years a lot of the beach front properties on the Gold Coast will go under during king tides. His comment was "Those houses wont be there in 100 years, so who cares". But at some time in the next 100 years, the property owners, or their kids, are going to have to walk away, or spend a fortune to lift their property. Just because it doesn't affect you doesn't means its not an important issue, if it happens. The way I see it, we dont have a lot of atmosphere. 10km up and there's not enough air to breath, 30k up and we cant fly, 100km up and thats it, vacuum. Look at the entire globe and our air is only a thing skin over the surface. If I cut down a tree and burn the timber, I release the CO2 that was captured in the last 100 years, thats OK, especially if I plant another tree in its place, closed cycle. But drive my car to the shops and I release the CO2 that was captured a long time ago. Thats what scares me, we are releasing a few million years of CO2 capture, in a 100 odd years. Another argument is the climate cooled in the middle to later part of the last century. True, and I remember the warnings of a ice age. But then I thought about it more. From the early 1800's to the early 1900's, our main source of energy was coal, and we burned a lot of it, with no care about the atmosphere. There was smog in London and New York long before we had motor cars. Then in the early 1900's the petrol and diesel replaced coal. Cleaner more efficient fuels, less CO2 released, so the atmosphere started to recover and cooled. But in the last 40 years, my life time, the number of people on this planet has doubled, and is using more energy per person. That cant go on, its a finite space, it will fill up. Thats what I'm worried about, the population needs a reality check! I dont agree with a CO2 tax either. I could see some merit in a emissions trading scheme, but that idiot Abbot put an end to that ( dont worry, I cant stand Gillard either, but hey, Abbot is an idiot, bring back Turnbull ). But I do think we need to do something to wake people up to how much energy we waste, and more importantly, the effects, if they happen, of global warming. Global warming may be fact or fiction, but is it worth the gamble. Its not like loosing the house at the races! Population is the problem. With our increasingly efficient cars and current energy technology, its very easy to become almost CO2 neutral, and a cared for environment and oceans will take care of the excess. It really is simple and will cost us nothing more. But only if we stop population growth. Surely everyone can understand we live on a fixed size planet, and we need a lot of it to grow food, so we got look at population numbers and how to control them. Glenn The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago, the second best time is right now. JAQ |
||||
| Gizmo Admin Group Joined: 05/06/2004 Location: AustraliaPosts: 5116 |
Found it. Merchants of Doubt tells the story of how a loose-knit group of high-level scientists and scientific advisers, with deep connections in politics and industry, ran effective campaigns to mislead the public and deny well-established scientific knowledge over four decades. Remarkably, the same individuals surface repeatedly-some of the same figures who have claimed that the science of global warming is "not settled" denied the truth of studies linking smoking to lung cancer, coal smoke to acid rain, and CFCs to the ozone hole. "Doubt is our product," wrote one tobacco executive. These "experts" supplied it. http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/05/18/3220237.htm?s ite=conversations&date=201105 The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago, the second best time is right now. JAQ |
||||
| VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539 |
A good read. Hi All Another perspective on the coal fire power stations from a person who isn't a scientist but an operator within the industry. It raises some valid points as well as questions in relation to the power industry. Bob This article appeared in the Rockhampton morning Bulletin on 22.12.09. Although I have never ever met the author I was, after some difficulty, able to contact him by phone. This is an excellent piece for my friends to send to their politicians or to anybody who needs to be educated about Australia's Coal driven power houses. Terry is now retired and is in excellent health at age 69. Nobody paid him to write the article which was, (to their credit), published by the local press. Terry told me I could distribute his article as I saw fit. Written By Terence Cardwell <terrycar@iinet.net.au> The Editor The Morning Bulletin. I have sat by for a number of years frustrated at the rubbish being put forth about carbon dioxide emissions, thermal coal fired power stations and renewable energy and the ridiculous Emissions Trading Scheme. Frustration at the lies told (particularly during the election) about global pollution. Using Power Station cooling towers for an example. The condensation coming from those cooling towers is as pure as that that comes out of any kettle. Frustration about the so called incorrectly named man made 'carbon emissions' which of course is Carbon Dioxide emissions and what it is supposedly doing to our planet. Frustration about the lies told about renewable energy and the deliberate distortion of renewable energy and its ability to replace fossil fuel energy generation. And frustration at the ridiculous carbon credit programme which is beyond comprehension. And further frustration at some members of the public who have not got a clue about thermal Power Stations or Renewable Energy. Quoting ridiculous figures about something they clearly have little or no knowledge of. First coal fired power stations do NOT send 60 to 70% of the energy up the chimney. The boilers of modern power station are 96% efficient and the exhaust heat is captured by the economisers and reheaters and heat the air and water before entering the boilers. The very slight amount exiting the stack is moist as in condensation and CO2. There is virtually no fly ash because this is removed by the precipitators or bagging plant that are 99.98% efficient. The 4% lost is heat through boiler wall convection. Coal fired Power Stations are highly efficient with very little heat loss and can generate massive amount of energy for our needs. They can generate power at efficiency of less than 10,000 b.t.u. per kilowatt and cost wise that is very low. The percentage cost of mining and freight is very low. The total cost of fuel is 8% of total generation cost and does NOT constitute a major production cost. As for being laughed out of the country, China is building multitudes of coal fired power stations because they are the most efficient for bulk power generation. We have, like, the USA, coal fired power stations because we HAVE the raw materials and are VERY fortunate to have them. Believe me no one is laughing at Australia - exactly the reverse, they are very envious of our raw materials and independence. The major percentage of power in Europe and U.K. is nuclear because they don't have the coal supply for the future. Yes it would be very nice to have clean, quiet, cheap energy in bulk supply. Everyone agrees that it would be ideal. You don't have to be a genius to work that out. But there is only one problem---It doesn't exist. Yes - there are wind and solar generators being built all over the world but they only add a small amount to the overall power demand. The maximum size wind generator is 3 Megawatts, which can rarely be attained on a continuous basis because it requires substantial forces of wind. And for the same reason only generate when there is sufficient wind to drive them. This of course depends where they are located but usually they only run for 45% -65% of the time, mostly well below maximum capacity. They cannot be relied for a 'base load' because they are too variable. And they certainly could not be used for load control. The peak load demand for electricity in Australia is approximately 50,000 Megawatts and only small part of this comes from the Snowy Hydro Electric System (The ultimate power Generation) because it is only available when water is there from snow melt or rain. And yes they can pump it back but it cost to do that. (Long Story). Tasmania is very fortunate in that they have mostly hydro electric generation because of their high amounts of snow and rainfall. They also have wind generators (located in the roaring forties) but that is only a small amount of total power generated. Based on a average generating output of 1.5 megawatts (of unreliable power) you would require over 33,300 wind generators. As for solar power generation much research has been done over the decades and there are two types. Solar thermal generation and Solar Electric generation but in each case they cannot generate large amounts of electricity. Any clean, cheap energy is obviously welcomed but they would NEVER have the capability of replacing Thermal power generation. So get your heads out of the clouds, do some basic mathematics and look at the facts not going off with the fairies (or some would say the extreme greenies.) We are all greenies in one form or another and care very much about our planet. The difference is most of us are realistic. Not in some idyllic utopia where everything can be made perfect by standing around holding a banner and being a general pain in the backside. Here are some facts that will show how ridiculous this financial madness the government is following. Do the simple maths and see for yourselves. According to the 'believers' the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in air over the last 50 years. To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in a clearer perspective; If you had a room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x 3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon dioxide would occupy in that room would be .25m x .25m x .17m or the size of a large packet of cereal. Australia emits 1 percent of the world's total carbon Dioxide and the government wants to reduce this by twenty percent or reduce emissions by .2 percent of the world's total CO2 emissions. What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels? By their own figures they state the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in 50 years. Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 has increased in 50 years by .004 percent. Per year that is .004 divided by 50 = .00008 percent. (Getting confusing -but stay with me). Of that because we only contribute 1% our emissions would cause CO2 to rise .00008 divided by 100 = .0000008 percent. Of that 1%, we supposedly emit, the governments wants to reduce it by 20% which is 1/5th of .0000008 = .00000016 percent effect per year they would have on the world CO2 emissions based on their own figures. That would equate to a area in the same room, as the size of a small pin.!!! For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and roofing installations, Clean coal technology. Renewable energy, etc, etc. How ridiculous it that. The cost to the general public and industry will be enormous. Cripple and even closing some smaller business. T.L. Cardwell To the Editor I thought I should clarify. I spent 25 years in the Electricity Commission of NSW working, commissioning and operating the various power units. My last was the 4 X 350 MW Munmorah Power Station near Newcastle. I would be pleased to supply you any information you may require. Foolin Around |
||||
| VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539 |
Taxing time Contributed by Isaiah "The average taxpayer in Germany or Japan pays less for the defense of his country than the average taxpayer in America pays for the defense of Germany or Japan." -- David Bergland lawyer, law professor, writer, lecturer, publisher, libertarian Source: Libertarianism In One Lesson, P. 41 (Sixth Edition 1993). http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/David.Bergland.Quot e.555F "Taxes should be continued by annual or biennial reenactments, because a constant hold, by the nation, of the strings of the public purse is a salutary restraint from which an honest government ought not wish, nor a corrupt one to be permitted, to be free." -- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), US Founding Father, drafted the Declaration of Independence, 3rd US President http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Thomas.Jefferson.Qu ote.B52F "One of the most insidious consequences of the present burden of personal income tax is that it strips many middle-class families of financial reserves. [It] has made the individual vastly more dependent on the State." -- W. H. Chamberlin (1897-1969) American historian, journalist, author http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/W..H..Chamberlin.Qu ote.D56F Foolin Around |
||||
| VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539 |
Hi All you USA members. A common sense comentary for the rationalization of Government. Contributed by Isaiah The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc. Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure. I'm asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn, ask each of those to do likewise. In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around. Congressional Reform Act of 2011 1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office. 2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose. 3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do. 4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%. 5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people. 6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people. 7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work. If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is time. THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!! Foolin Around |
||||
| VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539 |
IF WE LOOK AT THE PICTURES WE SEE THE BEAUTY OF NATURE AND ALSO ITS DESTRUCTIVE FORCE NOT TO MENTION THE CO2 THAT IS RELEASED BY THIS SINGLE EVENT THAT HAS ENOUGH ENERGY TO CIRCUMNAVIGATE THE SOUTHERN SKIES WITH DUST AND GAS. THE QUESTION HOW MUCH CO2 IS RELEASED IN COMPARISON TO HUMAN INTERVENTION IN GASSING THE ATMOSPHERE? NEWS RELEASE Thousands flee their homes and flights are grounded as Chilean volcano sends plumes of ash showering down Last updated at 7:56 AM on Tuesday, 7th June 2011 
The Chilean volcano which erupted on Monday has sent a towering plume of ash across South America, forcing thousands from their homes, grounding airline flights in southern Argentina and coating ski resorts with a gritty layer of dust instead of snow. Booming explosions echoed across the Andes as toxic gases belched up from a three-mile-long fissure in the Puyehue-Cordon Caulle volcanic complex - a ridge between two craters just west of the Chilean-Argentine border that began erupting Saturday. 
Winds blew a six-mile high cloud of ash all the way to the Atlantic Ocean and even into southern Buenos Aires province, hundreds of miles to the north-east. Raining ash: The plume above the Puyehue-Cordon Caulle volcano chain threw ash up to six miles into the sky 
Engulfed in ash: A policeman walks between rocks and ash near the volcano site in southern Chile Authorities in Chile went house to house, trying to persuade stragglers near the volcano to evacuate because of an increasing danger of toxic gas and flash floods. Winds fanned the ash toward neighbouring Argentina, darkening the sky in the ski resort city of San Carlos de Bariloche, in the centre of the country, and its airport has also been closed. The eruption in the Puyehue-Cordon Caulle volcanic chain, about 575 miles south of the capital, Santiago, also prompted authorities to close a busy border crossing into Argentina. It was not immediately clear which of the chain's four volcanoes had erupted because of ash cover and weather conditions. The chain last saw a major eruption in 1960. 
Grounded: An aircraft belonging to Austral with ash on it from Chile's Puyehue-Cordon Caulle volcano chain remains stranded on the tarmac of the sky resort San Carlos de Bariloche in Argentina's Patagonia. Covering: This road near the volcano site was left completely coated in pumice rocks from the Puyehue-Cordon Caulle chain volcano. Massive: An example of a pumice rock from Chile's Puyehue-Cordon Caulle chain volcano is displayed 
Local media said the smell of sulphur hung in the air and there was constant seismic activity. 'The Cordon Caulle (volcanic range) has entered an eruptive process, with an explosion resulting in a 10-kilometre-high gas column,' the state emergency office ONEMI said. As a precaution, the government said it was evacuating 3,500 people from the surrounding area. This development is the latest volcanic activity to affect the country. Three years ago, Chile's Chaiten volcano erupted spectacularly for the first time in thousands of years, spewing molten rock and a vast cloud of ash that reached the stratosphere and was visible from space. 
It also drifted over neighbouring Argentina, coating towns. Chile's Llaima volcano, one of South America's most active, also erupted that year and again in 2009. Chile's chain of about 2,000 volcanoes is the world's second largest after Indonesia. Some 50 to 60 are on record as having erupted, and 500 are potentially active. 
Winter come early: In scenes more reminiscent of a snow storm, residents walk through an ash covered street in the resort San Carlos de Bariloche in Argentina. Spectacular: A time-lapse photo shows lightning bolts striking around the Puyehue-Cordon Caulle volcanic chain. 
As a precaution, the government said it was evacuating 3,500 people from the surrounding area. An extraordinary cloud formation is created by the ash rising several miles into the atmosphere. It was the latest in a series of volcanic eruptions in Chile in recent years. Chile's Chaiten volcano erupted spectacularly in 2008 for the first time in thousands of years, spewing molten rock and a vast cloud of ash that reached the stratosphere. The ash also swelled a nearby river and ravaged a nearby town of the same name. 
The ash cloud from Chaiten coated towns in Argentina and was visible from space. Chile's Llaima volcano, one of South America's most active, erupted in 2008 and 2009. 
Chile's chain of about 2,000 volcanoes is the world's second largest after Indonesia. Some 50 to 60 are on record as having erupted, and 500 are potentially active. 
Above cloud level the plume looks like a nuclear bomb has just exploded with its mushroom cloud bursting towards the skies. 
A woman wipes a thick layer of volcanic ash away from the windscreen of her car. Headlights on, a car creeps through a street covered in ash. One could be forgiven for thinking this was a wintry scene covered in snow. 
Caught in the sunlight: Beautiful but deadly, the cloud turns fiery red in the sunshine as the eruption continues to belch ash skyward. 
Smiling lightning: As molten rock and gases are ejected from the core of the volcano below, what appears to be a 'have a nice day' face is formed from the electrically charged air. 
Protection: Carrying bottles of water and soft drinks this man wears a gas mask to avoid breathing in ash. 
As darkness falls the centre of this Argentinian town looks like it could be a wintry wonderland in the Austrian mountains. 
A car drives through a street covered by ash in the Argentine resort city of San Carlos de Bariloche. It lies 100 miles from Chile's Puyehue volcano. HOW MUCH GLOBAL WARMING WILL THIS CAUSE? NOT AS MUCH AS THE HOT AIR EMANATING FROM POLITICIANS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR TAX ON CARBON BOB Foolin Around |
||||
norcold Guru Joined: 06/02/2011 Location: AustraliaPosts: 670 |
Remarkable, reading through all this. Here we are a group possibly of mainly non-believers in the new religion "Climate Change" We play around with alternative energy, some of us are farmers whom I believe are the real greenies (apologise to all farmers for using that term). You would think we would be prime candidates for such a religion. Yeah OK Bob 2 sleeps to go and I`ll get us a barra. When I grow up I wanna be a kid meanwhile I`ll stay an old cynic.  We come from the land downunder. Vic |
||||
| neil0mac Senior Member Joined: 26/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 210 |
Bob, You say ... "Smiling lightning: As molten rock and gases are ejected from the core of the volcano below, what appears to be a 'have a nice day' face is formed from the electrically charged air. " Did you see the 'face' (well, eyes and mouth anyway) in the first picture. |
||||
| VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539 |
Sunny Queensland supports global warming. With all the added CO2 we have in the atmosphere in the southern hemisphere as a result of the volcanic activity in Chile temperatures are going to climb by .02 degrees over the next 14 months. Does that sound good enough to be a politician or a climate change scientist? Even the hot air emanating from Canberra cannot save Queensland from overheating. All the best Bob PS News Flash Sorry about that it must be next week it gets hot I hope. Freezing conditions were recorded across parts of southern and western Queensland this morning. Among the coldest spots were Kingaroy and Oakey in southern Queensland, where the mercury plummeted to -2.8 degrees Celsius. Other areas recording below zero temperatures included Ipswich and Amberley west of Brisbane, as well as Miles and Roma in the state's southern inland. Temperatures in Charleville in the south-west also plummeted below zero, as well as Applethorpe on Granite Belt, and Beaudesert on the Gold Coast hinterland. On the Gold and Sunshine coasts, temperatures dropped to 3 degrees at Coolangatta and Maroochydore, while Brisbane was down to 6 . Bureau of Meteorology senior forecaster Brett Harrison says the temperatures are unseasonably cold, but there should be some relief as cloud increases over the weekend. "We do expect those minimums to rise over the next few days, tomorrow only just slightly, but back into double figures over the weekend," he said. Overnight temperatures have been well below average this week. Foolin Around |
||||
| niall1 Senior Member Joined: 20/11/2008 Location: IrelandPosts: 331 |
i think i posted a bit vaguely about carbon tax... heres another stab.....the government (our economy) needs the tax revenue generated by petrol , diesel, gas ,new auto sales etc ....its essential for tax return but on the other hand they say ....thats not good for our co2 emissions !, we have to do the right thing for the environment so we,re going to tax you for the continued privilege of maintaining the current system ...in other words ...please keep buying the stuff , but be aware ...your being very bold !.... the carbon tax should really be put into public transport ,rail etc ....but not likely going to happen greenbelt wrote ..."there is no where to put the Co2 forever"...that makes sense i think volcanoes and god knows what other catastrophic natural events have been happening long before we arrived ,but that doesent give us the right to leave a toxic mess in our own back yard... its like saying a 1 mile square meteorite could hit us next week and game over ...so why bother ? thats why i wouldnt use the volcano argument.... just an opinion .... niall |
||||
| Gizmo Admin Group Joined: 05/06/2004 Location: AustraliaPosts: 5116 |
Is anyone asking them selves "What IF the science thats taking the measurements today, and making the predictions for tomorrow, is right?" While we may not like the idea of a carbon tax, for most of us it will have little effect on our day to day living. Fuel and electricity prices are going up anyway without the tax. And a few small changes in our life styles, ie, CF lights, smaller car, will offset any tax. And we still dont know how the tax will play out, some of us may even be better off. I have an old V8. Its a high compression motor, built when we still had lead in the fuel. Since I built it, leaded fuel has been phased out, science told us it was bad for the environment. If I want to put that car back on the road, I'll need to spend money modifying the motor to run on unleaded fuel. To bad, so sad, I might not like it, or agree with the science, but I accept it because people a lot smarter tham me tell me lead in the atmosphere is bad. Same with the OZone layer, laws came into place to ban CFC's, it cost big money, but the science told us we needed to do it. My own basic understanding tells me releasing a several million years of captured CO2 in the last 100 years cant be good. I dont know if a carbon tax will help, cause I dont know how this tax will work yet, but I do think we need to do something now. But getting back to the first sentence. What if the science is right? Glenn The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago, the second best time is right now. JAQ |
||||
| Air Bender Senior Member Joined: 25/01/2011 Location: AustraliaPosts: 206 |
I agree Glenn For me it makes no diference weather the science is correct or not, fosil fuel will continue to become more expensive as the reserves dry up and we need to start developing alternatives now. It is realy a no brainer weather the science is right or not. I began working as a trainee in a boilerhouse when i first left school over 35 years ago and have worked operating boilers ever since and as well I have branched of into operating waste treatment plants. The first boilers i operated as a trainee burnt waste oil, and I beleive my health has suffered ever since. Over the last few years there has been improvements made that i dont beleive would have been made if there was not as much pressure to improve our carbon foot print. The savings they have made in reducing our fuel and chemicl use easly outweigh the cost of implementing them by 10 fold in the first 12 months. I beleive a carbon tax will help clean the industry up a bit, and i beleive industry need to make these changes to survive in the future weather there is a carbon tax or not. All the best Dean. |
||||
| norcold Guru Joined: 06/02/2011 Location: AustraliaPosts: 670 |
The fear of the science being right should not justify the total disruption of man`s current lifestyle. That fear is certainly providing a lot of employment paid for by the public purse, but are they genuine? Back a few years ago a journalist from The Australian newspaper tried to contact the fellow that organised lights out for an hour in Sydney, the day after the occasion. Apparently he was on his way by jet to a Climate Change conference in Europe. The Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change attracts thousands from all over the world, do not think they travel by pushbike, sail boats etc. Would they have much more support if they stood by their convictions? Science must be able to be used to prove we are overpopulating this planet, I suspect it has but I can not see us researching ways to cut the population. Politicians could bring in a living tax perhaps, those who cannot pay well........ But we are messing up our own nest, more so with each generation, the current "enlightened" generation being probably the worst by far. Stastistics (if they can be believed) tell us the average green voter is Tertiary educated lives in Suburbia and is well paid. He/she has been and is well served by the very mechanisms they protest about. Glen I`m with you, I believe overpopulation is our major problem but I don`t think we`ll get many votes for that belief. Guess we`ll never be politicians. We come from the land downunder. Vic |
||||
| Air Bender Senior Member Joined: 25/01/2011 Location: AustraliaPosts: 206 |
Unfortunatly there will always be people jumping on the bandwagon for a free ride, but that is human nature. At the end of the day it dosnt matter who you vote for or who is in power, we will move away from the use of fosil fuel it will be unvoidable and people have known this for many years. I realy dont understand what all the who-har is about, we just need to get on with the job. We have people walking around at work turning of lights, but i turn them back on as I refuse to work in the dark. All the best Dean. |
||||
| Page 1 of 8 |
|||||
 Print this page |
 |
The Back Shed's forum code is written, and hosted, in Australia. | © JAQ Software 2025 |
