Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

Canberra's experts selling valuables
150,000+ buyers nationally

From Canberra to Copenhagen

By Coach 9 December 2009 38

While Copenhagen is in Europe and Canberra is down under, we are all part of what is happening there, and our discussions and our actions here in our little city, are what will make a difference for us. Regardless of what the world leaders decide to do, it is us the people, each one of us individually, that has the power to bring about change, and soon 1 becomes 2, 2 becomes 4 etc.

So lets have the debate in the best forum we have in Canberra to discuss anything that affects our city, this groovy little website called RiotACT.

Here is my contribution to that debate:

The Copenhagen Summit

  1. On the first day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………120 World leaders focused on our planet and humanity instead of domestic politics and their own re-election.
  2. On the second day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:………….An agreement to give the benefit of the doubt to the planet on issues where the science is inconclusive.
  3. On the third day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………A world population that stops using violent protests to achieve its outcomes, and a level of tolerance and understanding that knows we have the ability to solve any challenge facing our planet and mankind.
  4. On the fourth day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………An admission that the world is using an irreplaceable source of energy, and that now is the time to move to sustainable energy, before the pressure to do so becomes even more extreme.
  5. On the fifth day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………An acknowledgement that our farming practises are not sustainable and need to change.
  6. On the sixth day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………A commitment to cease pumping chemical fertilisers into our soils, and replace them with life giving microbes that help our soils to store carbon from the atmosphere, and move us to “Permaculture” (permanent agriculture)
  7. On the seventh day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………120  leaders who took a well earned rest.
  8. On the eight day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………A commitment to start replacing the trees we have removed all around the planet, with an agreement that trees bring rain, and deforestation brings drought and desert.
  9. On the ninth day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………An agreed path and framework for moving away from irreplaceable fossil fuels to renewable energy.
  10. On the tenth day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………An understanding that renewable energy not only takes the climatic pressures of mankind, but also the long term economic pressures, and a major excuse for future wars.
  11. On the eleventh day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………An agreement to keep working together, to help the poorer nations make the required changes, regardless of how tough the challenges seem.
  12. On the twelfth day of Copenhagen, the conference gave to me:……………An outcome that serves the whole of humanity, the planet, and each person alive today and into the future.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
38 Responses to
From Canberra to Copenhagen
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
astrojax 6:58 pm 14 Dec 09

… otherwise we’d have a whole new crop of politicians (of all shades) each and every election. Perhaps that wouldn’t be so bad?

or maybe we’d get some who didn’t need to be replaced..? wouldn’t that be nice!

housebound 1:57 pm 14 Dec 09

astrojax said :

if these smart folk who get elected can’t work that out, they should be dismissed next election – but probably shan’t be…)

… otherwise we’d have a whole new crop of politicians (of all shades) each and every election. Perhaps that wouldn’t be so bad?

neanderthalsis 12:44 pm 14 Dec 09

georgesgenitals said :

http://www.news.com.au/world/australia-may-foot-huge-climate-change-bill-for-china/story-e6frfkyi-1225809806693

I wonder whether this will actually happen? I find it interesting that we hear lots of emotional crapola until we start having to share serious declines in our standard of living. Also interesting is how different a lot of the comments on that site are to this one. Canberra is clearly not typical of wider Australia…

Forking out large sums of moolah to China and India so that they can freely pollute themselves up to the standard of a developed nation will not sit well with the voting public no matter what spin is put on it.

Hells_Bells74 10:02 am 14 Dec 09

They’re probably just trying to imagine how they could get the same if not more money out of people for their energy consumption while having people reduce use to the betterment of mankind, well.. to at least look good.

Meanwhile, they can’t make a car now without air-con and I’m pretty sure we used to survive without it. Just need a few more bogans with bogan air-con around town 🙂

Thumper 8:21 am 14 Dec 09

I see that protesters obviously think that cars and windows and private property are to blame for global warming. Why else would they riot and destroy these things?

georgesgenitals 1:35 pm 13 Dec 09

http://www.news.com.au/world/australia-may-foot-huge-climate-change-bill-for-china/story-e6frfkyi-1225809806693

I wonder whether this will actually happen? I find it interesting that we hear lots of emotional crapola until we start having to share serious declines in our standard of living. Also interesting is how different a lot of the comments on that site are to this one. Canberra is clearly not typical of wider Australia…

astrojax 8:28 am 13 Dec 09

Chop71 said :

Whistler Blackcomb smashed the record for snowiest month EVER with over 5.5 metres (18 feet) of snowfall – November 2009 took the podium as Whistler Blackcomb’s snowiest month in recorded history!

global warming my @#$%

don’t think of it as ‘global warming’ so much as ‘climate disruption’… yes, overall, the surface temperature of the globe is rising, but this is disrupting climates to give more severe climatic events (storms, snows, droughts, etc) in the interim. and in such a complex model, cherry-picking one minute spot on the globe and citing weather for a few days is utterly futile. ‘climate’ isn’t a day’s weather; it must be seen over an extended period. and over an extended period, mankind has f*cked with it too much and we are now reaping the seeds of our own destruction. good on us, eh? and you want to quibble while rome burns. thanks nero.

the ETS, on the other hand, is an economic method to address some potential behaviour changes – it is insufficient and will be shown to be so by the eventual agreement reached through the copenhagen process. and ck, the coalition is not-so-quietly imploding with the stupidity of its deniers, whose voice was a whisper when the more stable and sane howard (for all his appalling faults) held the reins. we don’t need a ‘tax’ on carbon – we just need a price. (which will effectively ‘tax’ some elements of the economy, but if these smart folk who get elected can’t work that out, they should be dismissed next election – but probably shan’t be…)

Clown Killer 11:00 pm 12 Dec 09

Abandoning for a moment the whole idea of whether we need an ETS or not … we get a bunch of Government policy we don’t ‘need’ – middleclass welfare: Medicare, childcare subsidies, first homeowner handouts – so let’s just accept that it’s hypocritical to argue against an ETS but to support other wasteful pandering.

I find it interesting that the coalition will so readily abandon the exact same ETS it developed, refined and nurtured since 2003 for the political expediency of making life difficult for a Labor Government. For what purpose? why call something that isn’t a tax a tax – just to rule out the other perfectly acceptable policy avenue of having a tax on carbon?

BigDave 1:05 pm 12 Dec 09

It must be true then with only 150 years worth of data to back it up. Duh! Silly me.

youami 4:14 pm 11 Dec 09

As they say “It must be true because the evidence supports it.” What evidence?! Apparently, WMO states that this decade will be the hottest on record. Maybe it is but that is only because the records go back to just 1850. This means we have no evidence for the previous 4-billion-odd years other than digging up ice caps and guestimating. 150-years out of 4-billion isn’t really a good sample to justify the notion of global warming that we insitgated. Don’t get me wrong, I think we could make the environment cleaner but let’s think about it. There was once an inland sea in the outback, there were once dinosaurs walking in snow in India (or something like that), so why would we be so bold not to suggest that this “warming” is just part of a 1 in 1-million cycle or something.

Oh and if we were serious about carbon footprint we wouldn’t be living in one of the highest private car use cities in the world! I think from memory without looking at the stats that we now beat LA!

Chop71 2:03 pm 11 Dec 09

Whistler Blackcomb smashed the record for snowiest month EVER with over 5.5 metres (18 feet) of snowfall – November 2009 took the podium as Whistler Blackcomb’s snowiest month in recorded history!

global warming my @#$%

Buzz2600 12:13 pm 11 Dec 09

Big Dave said:

It’s farcical to think that we can change the climate anyway! LMAO!

Sorry Big Dave, you might not be old enough to remember the ozone depleting CFC issue .. but it was real and it was caused by humans. Luckily, we actually had a simple solution and the issue was dealt with. Carbon pollution is not so easy .. doesn’t mean it isn’t real or not caused by humans.

One question for all the doubters … what does any politician get out of creating a “big new tax” on anything other than being hugely unpopular and creating a backlash? Nothing. Politicians are just as allergic to creating new taxes as the little people who have to pay it are.

BigDave 10:59 am 11 Dec 09

Sorry imhotep, I’m just not gullible enough to be taken in by this scam. You only have to look at the proposed ETS that Rudd wants to suspiciously steamroll through. Nothing but a blatant tax grab that will do absolutely zero for the environment and everything for the government coffers! It’s farcical to think that we can change the climate anyway! LMAO! Mother Nature always has done and will continue to do it herself long after we are gone.

justin heywood 10:59 am 11 Dec 09

housebound said :

…. it makes it hard for anyone not working in the field to know who and what to believe. In variably, we (the unwashed masses) end up believing the better (louder, better funded and more organised) communicators or those who say what we want to hear in a way we can understand it.

You don’t have to be part of the ‘unwashed masses’ in this debate. You can easily educate yourself about merits of either side of the climate-change ‘debate’ by objectively looking at the evidence (simply via Google if you wish). Look at which side cherry-picks the evidence. Look at which sides claims any uncertainties as ‘proof’ in their argument. Look at the sort of people who are promoting each side.

In reality, amongst the scientific community there is no real debate about human-caused climate change -the jury came in on that one a long while ago. The climate-change deniers (and the media) create an illusion of debate by giving a dispropotionately loud voice to anyone who supports their cause and can plausibly be called a scientist.

Coach 10:28 am 11 Dec 09

housebound said :

When it comes to scientific debate, most scientists are right at least some of the time, all are wrong at least some of the time, and almost all have a vested interest in having their version of science (whatever it may be) heard above all others.

The CRU scandal – with evidence of suppression of alternative views from being published – is just one example. Here’s another closer to home. The need to chase external grants in lieu of core funding for research has caused this type of problem, so it won’t stop anytime soon.

But it does mean that when we come to a high stakes debate, it makes it hard for anyone not working in the field to know who and what to believe. In variably, we (the unwashed masses) end up believing the better (louder, better funded and more organised) communicators or those who say what we want to hear in a way we can understand it.

What a good response. How very true. We become unstuck when we believe our view of something is totally correct. Every adult human changes his view of the world and everything in it many times during their journey through life as he/she develops. Look how much our “Proven” scientific knowledge has changed over the last century.

So when it comes to this debate, put self interest aside for one moment and seek to listen to your instinct, your inner voice. Is our current life style, energy consumption, farming practises sustainable or not?

Can the next 50 years be the same as the last 50 years, or do we have to change. When you take your emotional reaction out of the picture, what does your inner voice say?

There is no need for panic or hysteria, for that is how we will stuff it all up, but what we as the little people can do is stop listening to the media and educate ourselves from many different varying sources, and be open to listening to all the opposing opinions.

housebound 10:09 am 11 Dec 09

When it comes to scientific debate, most scientists are right at least some of the time, all are wrong at least some of the time, and almost all have a vested interest in having their version of science (whatever it may be) heard above all others.

The CRU scandal – with evidence of suppression of alternative views from being published – is just one example. Here’s another closer to home. The need to chase external grants in lieu of core funding for research has caused this type of problem, so it won’t stop anytime soon.

But it does mean that when we come to a high stakes debate, it makes it hard for anyone not working in the field to know who and what to believe. In variably, we (the unwashed masses) end up believing the better (louder, better funded and more organised) communicators or those who say what we want to hear in a way we can understand it.

imhotep 8:32 pm 10 Dec 09

BigDave said :

It’s a shame that these “climate scientists” can’t tell us the truth for fear of their government funding being cut, eh?!

Sounds to me like the scientists simply aren’t telling you the ‘truth’ that you want to hear.

.

fabforty 8:27 pm 10 Dec 09

I am totally in favour of global warming. Canberra needs a beach.

Sorry Tuvalu. My advice is to try to discover some oil.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site