Why the West fears the rise of China
China has done very little (internationally) to cause concern over their rise as of yet, but of course if you were still only a rising power, you’d keep your head down too. They’re simply following the pattern laid down before them. What were the U.S and Britain before they rose to global…
The Video You Were Never Supposed to See
Appalling assault on democracy - vested interests in media ownership do NOT reflect a healthy democracy, regardless of the interests themselves.
This video gives an invaluable insight into the anti-science lobby’s plans to harness media power via the “super wealthy” in Australia, Gina Rineheart’s recent share takeover in Fairfax Media, and the holy grail of fair and balanced reporting that is apparently Fox News…
PS: Gina could really just be the tip of the iceberg. Thirty six hours ago fellow billionaire mining magnate and the Liberal Party’s biggest donor, Clive Palmer, flippantly said that he loved the idea of following Rinehart’s lead, telling Lateline:
“That looks attractive, Fairfax, doesn’t it? Fairfax looks very exciting. You could have an east-west play with Fairfax. Gina should come from the west and buy 15 per cent and we could buy 30 per cent from the eastern side of Australia and really get the place humming again.” (GetUp)
NM: Let’s Catch The Flying Fish Of Prosperity
By Ben Pobjie
What is Abbott’s vision? Well, to a certain extent asking that question sullies the whole concept, but if we must, we must.
First let us look at the title of his speech, “My Plan For A Stronger Economy And A Stronger Australia”. Wow. I have to catch my breath just reading that. I mean, for a start, the word “my”. He leaves you in no doubt it’s “his” plan. He’s not hiding behind bureaucrats or modelling or mysterious gypsies: this plan is all him, and he will stand by it. You have to admire that sort of courage.
…
First he pointed out how the Gillard “government” has caused debt levels to spiral to the point that every man, woman and child owes $6000. Now that should cut through. Maybe you’re happy with your kids being harassed by debt collectors, but I’m not. Well played Tony. Then he elaborated exactly how he would fix this problem: namely, to build a stronger economy. Perhaps you’re sensing a theme here — a BRILLIANT THEME.
…
So there is the Abbott plan, beautiful in its simplicity, ingenious in its construction, and inspirational in its conception: stop doing bad things, do better things instead, spend less money except on things that we should spend more money on, and a rock-solid guarantee that in all likelihood the government will make some pretty good decisions at some point.
10:20 PM
Wall Street Journal: Climate Science Rebuttal
Check With Climate Scientists for Views on Climate
Do you consult your dentist about your heart condition? In science, as in any area, reputations are based on knowledge and expertise in a field and on published, peer-reviewed work. If you need surgery, you want a highly experienced expert in the field who has done a large number of the proposed operations.
You published “No Need to Panic About Global Warming” (op-ed, Jan. 27) on climate change by the climate-science equivalent of dentists practicing cardiology. While accomplished in their own fields, most of these authors have no expertise in climate science. The few authors who have such expertise are known to have extreme views that are out of step with nearly every other climate expert. This happens in nearly every field of science. For example, there is a retrovirus expert who does not accept that HIV causes AIDS. And it is instructive to recall that a few scientists continued to state that smoking did not cause cancer, long after that was settled science.
Climate experts know that the long-term warming trend has not abated in the past decade. In fact, it was the warmest decade on record. Observations show unequivocally that our planet is getting hotter. And computer models have recently shown that during periods when there is a smaller increase of surface temperatures, warming is occurring elsewhere in the climate system, typically in the deep ocean. Such periods are a relatively common climate phenomenon, are consistent with our physical understanding of how the climate system works, and certainly do not invalidate our understanding of human-induced warming or the models used to simulate that warming.
Thus, climate experts also know what one of us, Kevin Trenberth, actually meant by the out-of-context, misrepresented quote used in the op-ed. Mr. Trenberth was lamenting the inadequacy of observing systems to fully monitor warming trends in the deep ocean and other aspects of the short-term variations that always occur, together with the long-term human-induced warming trend.
The National Academy of Sciences of the U.S. (set up by President Abraham Lincoln to advise on scientific issues), as well as major national academies of science around the world and every other authoritative body of scientists active in climate research have stated that the science is clear: The world is heating up and humans are primarily responsible. Impacts are already apparent and will increase. Reducing future impacts will require significant reductions in emissions of heat-trapping gases.
Research shows that more than 97% of scientists actively publishing in the field agree that climate change is real and human caused. It would be an act of recklessness for any political leader to disregard the weight of evidence and ignore the enormous risks that climate change clearly poses. In addition, there is very clear evidence that investing in the transition to a low-carbon economy will not only allow the world to avoid the worst risks of climate change, but could also drive decades of economic growth. Just what the doctor ordered.
Who wants to get a pizza?
omfg this is literally so accurate
- the world: hey man we've got some really serious problems like global warming and mass economic failure and riots and genocide and aids and cancer and your healthcare system is shit so maybe we should get to work
- US government: sit down I have to stop people from sharing things online
- US government: also pizza is vegetables
A more-detailed explanation of ACTA
WATCH THIS. Just watch.
WATCH.
THIS IS LAST ENEMY.
This is V for Vendetta, this is EVERY big brother horror story, every dark future written by any author, imagined by any artist… and it’s happening now.
Sorry to flood your dashes but we need to get educated, get signing and get awareness… Wiki and Reddit and everyone need to do for Acta what we did for Sopa.
I would be really happy if people from all around the world would react to this like SOPA. I mean, I protested against SOPA even though I’m in the UK and so it technically wouldn’t affect me. So, I would be overjoyed if ACTA would stir up the same reaction as the SOPA and PIPA.
Watch and spread the word. ACTA is scary as fuck.
Oh my god.
Basically every popular website will be affected. Tumblr would become useless… and perhaps Facebook too… and so many others.
They might as well delete the internet as a whole.
We have to fight.
Sign every single petition, tell all of your friends and family. Do everything you can to stop this misleading organistion.
oh fuck no.
oh my fuck
this is like 1984 all over again
Above is the conclusion of Nancy Southern’s article for Triple Pundit, ‘Why are people so immune to change?’ Southern is the chair of the organizational systems program at San Francisco’s Saybrook University and a regular contributor to ‘Rethinking Complexity’.
(Photo credit: National Geographic)
Dolphins play with anything in their environment, even our trash.
Thankfully, this guy was able to free himself after he disappeared. I found the bag, floating in the water, 15 minutes later. This could have ended very differently.Dr. Jay’s Note: About 7 years ago, I was surfing at a local SoCal beach & had a minor wipe-out. I had my eyes shut while the wave tossed me around under the surface of the water (I wear contacts). As I continued to churn with the force of the wave a plastic bag hit me in the face & wrapped around my head. Even though I was able to surface & remove the bag within a few seconds, it still gave me a good spook.
Needless to say, when I returned home that day I immediately got online & joined the Surfrider Foundation. My family & I have been members & supporters of Surfrider & other organizations that clean & protect our beaches & oceans ever since.
Please be mindful & reduce your plastic usage.
Building Forward: "Vertical Street" to be built in Melbourne, Australia
A multi-use tower unlike any other is in the beginning stages of development in Melbourne, Australia. Upon completion, the building will have five separate communal gardens, each capable of housing trees over thirty feet tall, an industry first.
The building will boast more than just flashy…
1:04 PM
Crikey: Can lawyers save the planet?
I find this so fascinating!
Pioneering conservationist Aldo Leopold broached the subject in his influential 1949 book A Sand County Almanac, arguing that extending our idea of community to include animals, plants and the land itself could break humankind’s tyranny over the environment.
Christopher Stone expanded on that premise in his 1972 article “Should trees have standing?”, arguing that natural objects, such as trees, forests and streams, should be appointed guardians to represent them in court.
“In parliament or in a public platform you can say anything you like …The reason science is taken more seriously in a legal system is what you say is subject to cross examination and you’re required to produce your evidence,” Lowe told Crikey.
It’s a view echoed by other environmentalists. Executive chairman of carbon offset company Cool nrg, Nic Frances, said the percentage of Australians wanting action on climate change had fallen in the last couple of years, and the political debate about the issue had deteriorated. “So the only place that we may be able to resort to is the courts. Because science within the courts still has meaning.”
Frances has even sought legal advice on whether it is possible to sue industry groups and vested interests for “telling lies” about the carbon tax. “Can you sue these people for crimes against humanity?” asks Frances.
As the political process fails to curb carbon emissions or halt encroaching development, we may see more bold legal moves to protect the environment. One thing’s for sure: all those jokes about lawyers being in it for the money will need to be revised.
6:07 PM
Big change or a lot of hot air?
Fantastic article, which seems to have mastered the art of explaining the carbon tax, the politics of business and parties that surrounds it, with a good dose of moral argument thrown in. Best thing is, it does so very clearly, with comparisons and examples that help take some of the complexity out of explaining seemingly dry financial schemes like this.
Definitely worth a read, especially if you’re still curious as to what impact this scheme will have as it gears up for implementation next year.
(Richard Denniss)
Australia is now one of the wealthiest countries in the world living at the wealthiest point in world history. In turn, our greenhouse gas emissions are among the highest in the world. If we, as a nation, believe that we cannot afford to do more to tackle climate change then it is virtually inconceivable that anyone else in the world could either.
The problem is, the climate scientists assure us that we cannot afford not to drastically reduce our emissions.
Someone is completely wrong, and I don’t think it is the climate scientists.
Philips unveiled a few different concepts that examines sustainability in the home. Microbial Home makes use of household waste and Larder prolongs the life of fresh produce and enables the user to grow and store vegetables.
The Bio-Digester Island is moveable kitchen island that serves not only as a food-prep station, but doubles as the home’s energy hub. The cutting board surface directly adjoins a vegetable waste grinder, which in turn feeds into a “digester” that uses bacteria to break down organic waste. The resultant methane gas is used to power the gas range, heat household water, and run the overhead lights.
The Larder is both the dining room table and an indoor garden, meant to supplant a refrigerator by providing a no-electricity-required evaporative cooler in the center of the table, whose cooling action is paradoxically powered by heat from the methane digester mentioned above. Overhead, fresh vegetables are grown in varieties that depend on what the local climate will allow.
The Urban Beehive aims to restore the declining bee population for the benefit of both the planet and individual homeowners. The glass structure contains a lattice within for bees to construct their honeycombs. Once established, they pollinate the local environment—starting with the adjoining flowerpot—while providing fresh honey for the homes’ inhabitants.
Forbes: 'The Australian Carbon Tax: Finally, Someone Gets it Right!'
The Australian Carbon Tax: Finally, Someone Gets it Right!
7 comments, 0 called-out + Comment now Tim Worstall
Hurrah, finally someone has managed to get a carbon tax to beat climate change right. Yes, it’s the Australians, with their new carbon tax that have got it right. The important point is this one:
The tax-free threshold for wage and salary earners to rise from A$6,000 a year to A$18,200 from July 1, 2012, and to A$19,400 from July 1, 2015.
Having written an entire book on just this subject of course I’m cheering this move.
The economics of this is just right. OK, well, if you think that climate change isn’t happening, we’re not causing it and that we shouldn’t do anything about it, sure, you’ll not be all that impressed. However, if you do think that all of those three things are true then this is the first such tax that has got things right.
We’ve an externality, something that is external to the market prices that we use to make decisions. The answer to this is to internalise the whatever it is into market prices. This means a Pigou Tax and that’s just what the carbon tax is.
Good, so we’re correct there. However, there’s no reason at all that fighting climate change means a higher level of taxes in general. Sure, we might want higher (or even lower) total taxes for all sorts of other reasons but fighting climate change isn’t one of them. So, we’ve got this extra money coming in because we’re taxing carbon emissions: but we don’t want to raise the general level of taxation. So, of course, we should lower some other tax.
Which is exactly what Australia has done. And they’ve lowered the best tax to lower: income tax on the incomes of the poor. So, now we’re taxing bads (emissions) and lowering taxes on goods (the incomes of poor people).
All of which is just excellent and what most economists have been saying everyone should be doing for the past decade or more. The problem this reveals of course is that only one country has in fact done what economists have been recommending.
*The other problem is that even our own politicians can’t get this relatively easy political sell across. But at least it’s through! (Unless the devil really does respond to Tony’s ‘pledge in blood’ to repeal it, but that seems unlikely)
