[LINK] IPA, astroturfing and fantsy themes

TKoltai tomk at unwired.com.au
Tue Feb 21 03:00:18 AEDT 2012

> -----Original Message-----
> From: link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au 
> [mailto:link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au] On Behalf Of Craig Sanders
> Sent: Monday, 20 February 2012 11:06 PM
> To: link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [LINK] IPA, astroturfing and fantsy themes
> <SNIP>
> The IPA tells such lies because that is what they are paid to do.
> a tiny handful of crackpots and industry shills and 
> right-wing propaganda-farms are presented as being of equal - 
> or greater - worth as the consensus of the vast majority of 
> scientists. it's just FUD.

Ignoring for a moment, the debate of "actual" climate, change, I'd like
to posit an alternative scenario.

1.  Let us assume that your currency has depreciated by 98% since it was
first issued.
2.  It no longer is considered to be as safe as metals it replaced and
is being shunned by the worlds trading partners.
3.  The currencies hedge formerly allowed your citizens to be a more
efficient industrialised nation with a higher standard of living owing
to the ability to mobilise rapidly, over long distances at lower
individual cost.
4.  Obviously a form of similar global fiscal control is needed.

Choices are: (A) Intellectual Property management.
             (B) A new alternative "Desirable" currency that all trading
partners are forced to trade in.

We all know how how option (A) is proceeding, so onto option (B). Whilst
a Global Carbon currency (/tax, same thing) brings with it the
advantages AND disadvantages of global government, it has the principal
advantage that it creates a global welfare state where the most
populated countries of the world will then pay for the life styles of
the least populated. Their industrialisation will continue the hedge
money flow towards those those countries that get to the greenest energy

So that would be probably New Zealand in the lead... Scandinavian
countries and Canada second with Australia so far down the list that
we'll paying a fortune with our minimg dollars, unless out Government
can elimninate the Coal plants. Which explains the Primie Minister's
push on the carbon tax.

I think that answers the big question about the two dominant
international political themes emanating from the US.

Regarding the scientific concerns; I would like to comment that
climatologists are ignoring the pertubatious orbit that the earth
actually travels in, i.e. in addition to the accepted  elliptical orbit,
(it resembles a bell curve (Ref [2]] with peaks and troughs).

These wave type perambulations peak (approx.) every 26 thousand years
and at the top and bottom of the waves, we have a 14-24 ('000) year thaw
in between the extremes. [Ref [1]]

In the centre of the bell curve (half way up and half way down),
gravitational pull of planets lined up, tend to change the wobble effect
and we may have an ice age.

This doesn't have a lot to do with pollution.

On the other hand... If someone could get those damn trucks off the road
outside my place, I could breathe a lot easier and maybe live for an
extra decade or two.



[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eccentricity_rocky_planets.jpg

More information about the Link mailing list