Change.ie - some comments

Author
Message
AthenaLevel 6Joined: 25 Jul 2005Posts: 256Location: In the Acropolis...I mean the metropolis
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:00 pm Post subject: Carbon footprint

If you're concerned about damage to the environment check out this website: http://www.change.ie/_________________When I admire the wonders of a sunset or the beauty of the moon, my soul expands in the worship of the creator. Gandhi
Back to top

Skeptic Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 12:46 pm Post subject: Re: Carbon footprint

Athena wrote:
If you're concerned about damage to the environment check out this website: http://www.change.ie/It all hype. Total and utter nonsense, don't be suckered by it.
Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 1:54 pm Post subject: Re: Carbon footprint

Skeptic wrote:
Athena wrote:
If you're concerned about damage to the environment check out this website: http://www.change.ie/It all hype. Total and utter nonsense, don't be suckered by it.Everyone is entitled to their own opinion

A. Geologist Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 2:08 pm Post subject: Re: Carbon foolprint

There is no proven link between man generated CO2 emissions and climate change. I am sick of this nonsense and Frank McDonald ( History and Politics degree) in The Irish Tripe. The most significant greenhouse gas is Water (H20) two thirds of the planet is covered by it. Change.ie site is very carefully worded and does not actually say that there is a link between man's activity and global warming, unlike the TV ad last night which was factually wrong.
Skeptic wrote:
Athena wrote:
If you're concerned about damage to the environment check out this website: http://www.change.ie/It all hype. Total and utter nonsense, don't be suckered by it.
Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 2:17 pm Post subject: Re: Carbon footprint

That is an interesting one - do you have an entitlement to believe fiction is fact ? - probably yes - but you have no entitlement to mislead people, especially stupid and ignorant people.
Anonymous wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
Athena wrote:
If you're concerned about damage to the environment check out this website: http://www.change.ie/It all hype. Total and utter nonsense, don't be suckered by it.Everyone is entitled to their own opinion
Skeptic Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:12 pm Post subject: Re: Carbon footprint

Anonymous wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
Athena wrote:
If you're concerned about damage to the environment check out this website: http://www.change.ie/It all hype. Total and utter nonsense, don't be suckered by it.Everyone is entitled to their own opinion Indeed, but they still shouldn't believe the total rubbish espoused by the self righteous greenies. Carbon footprint my ar*e. Change the world, change the bulbs!!! It's laughable. But the thing is, even MORE damage might result from it all.
Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:21 pm Post subject:

A. Geologist you are quite simply wrong. There is now a worldwide consensus of scientists who agree that climate change is affected by mankinds occupation of this planet. The burning of fossil fuels since Victorian times has put so much co2 into the atmosphere that it has depleted the ozone layer, the overall increase in temperature causes the atmosphere over the oceans retain more and more moisture hence the increase in the severity and number of storms in recent years. The measurable increase in UV rays is also killing the plankton in the sea which provides much of the earths oxygen. As you know the atmosphere is a very thin shell around the earth this was created by the gradual and incremental growth of green vegetation and for most of the time we have had a breathable athmosphere the earth was almost totally covered in forest. Mankind has depleted almost all of the earth's forests in the last 500 years in geological terms this is less than a millisecond. Without a way of replenshing the earths oxygen the CO2 and other pollutants will just continue to build up. There may still be other reasons why climate change is occuring, sun activity etc, but to dismiss the argument in such a facile way, proves that you are no geologist and thats for sure.

A. Geologist Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject:

Just rang the guy in change.ie, ah jaysus felt sorry for the eijit. He hadn't a clue, he thought science was all about having a good argument and persuading people, facts were there alright but they wern't as important as debate. I complained that the ad last night was misleading as it said that there is a direct link between climate change and mans activity which is wrong.

ApuLevel 7Joined: 29 Aug 2006Posts: 411Location: Kwik-E-Mart
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject:

An interesting topic that many argue over. There are a few simple facts that must be considered when we talk about "Global Warming" 1. Earth is still experiencing an Ice Age, an Ice age is defined as a period in which ice is permanently on the planets surface. Ice ages make up for approx 10% of the planets history. 2. Global warming is a natural process as a result of an increase in the surface temp of the planet as a result of the increase in carbon emissions. Historically these carbon emissions where a result of massive volcanic activity on a global scale or the eruption of a Super Volcano. This occures approx every 100,000 years. 3. Many people may not know that every 20,000 years or so the Earth's axis wobbles slightly, it is currently at 6.5 degrees. Many experts believe that our planet has been going through such a wobble over the last several thousand years and is now beginning to settle again. A result of this wobble is a sudden ice age, such as that experienced in the northern hemesphere about 10,000 years ago which is still occuring to date. We are now emerging from this ice age and the planets temperature is realigning itself to its normal temperature (i.e. one where there is no or little ice at either pole.) I belive that this is the most probable scenario. Global Warming as it is called is being made out to be a monster that we have created but it is in fact a well documented planetary process. Humans evolved during the last ice age to become the primary intelligence on this planet. I believe that we are intelligent enough to realise what is happening but stupid enough not to understand why it is happening. I think the main reason why scientists fear global temperature adjustments becuase it may result in the extinction of humans._________________I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.
Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:56 pm Post subject:

Ooh Apu you know you're stuff. Interesting reading there. Are you interested in tectonic activity etc.?

Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:10 pm Post subject:

APU what you say is correct, however you have to factor in the effect that man's terraforming of the planet has had in the last 15,000 years. It took millions of years to deposit the coal, oil and gas on the earth and we have released all of its stored CO2 in the last 200 years. There are lots of reasons for climate change including the activity of our star the sun but our waste of resources and poisoning of our own athmosphere is exacerbating things in the short term. If we go on the way we are we will have to develop a new breed of human who can tolerate burning UV and breath CO2 and eat insects, regardless of the temperature of the planet.
A. Geologist Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject: Re:

Guest may I be so bold as to ask what your credentials are? Thinking people always question consensus. Sometimes consensus is right, sometimes it is wrong, sometimes we don't know whether it is right or wrong. I am saying that we don't know whether consensus is right or wrong in the case of the proposed link between global warming and mans activity, because is not proven. To say it is a fact is wrong, that is not saying there is no link, I am saying there is no proven link and I am not wrong when I say this. I have read all the IPCC reports on climate change, they refer vaguely to a likelyhood. Perhaps you could give me a source that proves the link.
Anonymous wrote:
A. Geologist you are quite simply wrong. There is now a worldwide consensus of scientists who agree that climate change is affected by mankinds occupation of this planet. The burning of fossil fuels since Victorian times has put so much co2 into the atmosphere that it has depleted the ozone layer, the overall increase in temperature causes the atmosphere over the oceans retain more and more moisture hence the increase in the severity and number of storms in recent years. The measurable increase in UV rays is also killing the plankton in the sea which provides much of the earths oxygen. As you know the atmosphere is a very thin shell around the earth this was created by the gradual and incremental growth of green vegetation and for most of the time we have had a breathable athmosphere the earth was almost totally covered in forest. Mankind has depleted almost all of the earth's forests in the last 500 years in geological terms this is less than a millisecond. Without a way of replenshing the earths oxygen the CO2 and other pollutants will just continue to build up. There may still be other reasons why climate change is occuring, sun activity etc, but to dismiss the argument in such a facile way, proves that you are no geologist and thats for sure.
Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:23 pm Post subject:

Heres some simple stuff for starters. http://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/proof-of-climate-change-unequivocal
Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject:

If you have read the IPCC reports Im surprised that you use the term 'vaguely' to refer to thier unequivical findings. As for my credentials I am not a climatologist but I take an interest in my surroundings and have a scientific education. What are your credentials?

ApuLevel 7Joined: 29 Aug 2006Posts: 411Location: Kwik-E-Mart
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: Re:

Anonymous wrote:
Ooh Apu you know you're stuff. Interesting reading there. Are you interested in tectonic activity etc.?Being honest i'd say yes. I was seriously considering doing Geology, Meteorology and such after my leaving cert but i'm horrific at languages so i didn't choose one for the lc and couldn't go to university. Its more of a interest i suppose. but maybe......... before y'all go jumpin the gun i'd just like to point out that i'm no tree hugger._________________I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.

Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject:

Global warming and impending doom is great for reinforsing the fear factor in humanity.. used to be terrorism.. axis of evil and all that and now its climate change. In the seventies there was 20years of oil left... now there no shortage of the stuff except greed pushin up the prices. The hole in the Ozone layer fixed itself a Keep them fearful! and why well thats the real question that should be asked
Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:58 pm Post subject: Re:

Apu wrote:
before y'all go jumpin the gun i'd just like to point out that i'm no tree hugger.Don't worry, no-one was assuming anything! I am a bit of a tectonic geek myself. My heart fluttered when you mentioned super volcano. Aren't the photo's of the lightening clouds over the Patagonian volcano incredible?

A. Geologist Guest
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 5:41 pm Post subject: Re:

There is no need to be surprised when I used the word "vaguely" because the IPCC findings are not unequivocal. I am a geologist, who has studied climatology and the history of climate change and the causes , as well as the other scientific disciplines necessary to qualify as a geologist.
Anonymous wrote:
If you have read the IPCC reports Im surprised that you use the term 'vaguely' to refer to thier unequivical findings. As for my credentials I am not a climatologist but I take an interest in my surroundings and have a scientific education. What are your credentials?

Skeptic Guest
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:24 am Post subject: Re:

Anonymous wrote:
A. Geologist you are quite simply wrong. There is now a worldwide consensus of scientists who agree that climate change is affected by mankinds occupation of this planet. The burning of fossil fuels since Victorian times has put so much co2 into the atmosphere that it has depleted the ozone layer, the overall increase in temperature causes the atmosphere over the oceans retain more and more moisture hence the increase in the severity and number of storms in recent years. The measurable increase in UV rays is also killing the plankton in the sea which provides much of the earths oxygen. As you know the atmosphere is a very thin shell around the earth this was created by the gradual and incremental growth of green vegetation and for most of the time we have had a breathable athmosphere the earth was almost totally covered in forest. Mankind has depleted almost all of the earth's forests in the last 500 years in geological terms this is less than a millisecond. Without a way of replenshing the earths oxygen the CO2 and other pollutants will just continue to build up. There may still be other reasons why climate change is occuring, sun activity etc, but to dismiss the argument in such a facile way, proves that you are no geologist and thats for sure.Wrong. Despite INCREASED co2 emissions, latest nasa data shows the world has COOLED in the last 2 years. Bet none of those ''consensused'' scientists will give up their valuable research grants to highlight this! The Sun is the cause of global warming and cooling, always has been and always will be.

ApuLevel 7Joined: 29 Aug 2006Posts: 411Location: Kwik-E-Mart
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:32 am Post subject: Re:

Anonymous wrote:
Apu wrote:
before y'all go jumpin the gun i'd just like to point out that i'm no tree hugger.Don't worry, no-one was assuming anything! I am a bit of a tectonic geek myself. My heart fluttered when you mentioned super volcano. Aren't the photo's of the lightening clouds over the Patagonian volcano incredible?Eh you've got me there. Any links?_________________I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute of it.

Luas in Terenure - why not put it in a tunnel.

I read the report - oh my god (OMG) what a dogs dinner. If it wasn't so serious it would be funny. The report divides the Christchurch to Dundrum line into sections at the end of each section there is paragraph entitled Solution, makes an attempt to describe how little difficulties will be overcome in the construction. There are 6 compulsory purchase order (CPO) solutions involving about 70 houses and business directly. Anybody who has been on the receiving end of a CPO knows all about Irish injustice. This is how it works - first a report is issued - the word is out low and behold no one wants to buy or rent your property ( so all the people East of a line from Christchurch to Rathfarnham are stuck) five or six years later the work on the line begins, this work will take up to 4 years you may be lucky and get your CPO in a year or two or you might have to wait three or four years. It is very hard to take an interest in a property if you know it is coming down in a few years of course there is compensation this is very small.

This Luas report is more a Luasish report, cars will be sharing the track in parts, sort of like the old tram system which was ripped up by that philistine Todd Andrews. The Luasish will now have the pleasure of sharing the traffic jams with the cars and the taxis.

Now getting back to the solutions, more specifically the traffic solutions during construction and after construction. Oh those underpaid corpo clerks from Cablas are going have some fun sticking it into the southsiders. This fun has already started "Jaysus lads lets run the feckin Luas up the bleedin gardens in Brighton Road". This will progress to "lets hem all them posh mustards Eaton Square and Rathdown did dat and de other, dose mercs will be feckin useless in a one way on left turn no right turn no reverse traffic treatment".

I remember a representative from Harcourt Street traders association nearly in tears on the TV when the street was closed for over a year laying down a couple of hundred metres of track.
Lots of businesses went under where the Luas went on the road.

I don't buy the "we can't afford to tunnel" argument, they can afford it in Spain China and India (Calcutta), it is not because of cheap labour, tunnelling companies use the same people and equipment all over the world. Ireland is one of the richest countries on the planet. I have looked at tunnelling prices in other countries we can afford it. In fact short term and long term we can't afford not to go underground.

Cricket in Rathmines

Cricket season starts again on Sunday 4th May. Last year was the highlight of my cricket career, my team won the "Plate" ( came second) in the family fun day in Leinster. I will always treasure my trophy ( a spiral bound bratz notebook) . Click below to see me in action.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/irishcricket/1252059491/

Dublin Underground

As the first budding independent politician to mention the phrase Dublin Underground in election literature I was very interested in Frank McDonald's piece in The Irish Times on 26th April. Very informative, and despite the strong peppering of bias I was able to complete the read. But sorry Frank 100k of Luas line is not a practical proposition. Reading stuff like this I always wonder at the author's credentials, looked up wiki, degree in in history and politics from UCD. Pity he didn't go to Trinity and take the geography freshman course on the history of Dublin, there he would have learnt about the evolution of parks in Dublin and that they are in a continous state of change. Saint Stephens Green had a ridgid formal layout in Gerogean times. Forty years ago local kids from York Street used to play football there. It is only recently that is has taken its parkland type layout. After the initial works, the subway footprint will be no bigger than the Tone instalation.

There is no real benefit in preserving everything exactly as it was 50, 100 or 150 years ago, things have to be adapted so we can live with them. New things can also have a certain beauty or attraction otherwise Frank wouldn't be living in Temple Bar ( wiki again). I love how beautiful old buildings in Italy contain shops and eateries and are incorporated into daily lives, the Irish tendancy to keep monuments aloof and separate is regretable.

Economic advisors and commentators - who should you listen to

Dan, David, Brian, Shane, Eddie.

Well you have to look at a few criteria before you can bestow celeb status. No one said it would be pretty so they are all in with a chance on that level. Next thing you have to look at is how much they are exposed to market forces themselves, Brian a full time public servant, Shane is a part time public servant, David's and Eddie's RTE money comes from the public purse, Dan is alone here works full time in a real job. They all worked in financial institutions, Dan still does, all the rest have minor or no role in financial institutions. They all like publicity but Eddie, David and Shane need publicity to stay afloat. Dan and Brian don't. They all have at least some basic training in economics.



The crucial thing is who has access to the most up to date data ? Who can make an informed comment ? Hint: 40% of financial transactions are recorded in The Bank of Ireland. If you have access on day to day data on 40% of all business and professional lodgements and loans in Ireland, my bet is that Dan is fully informed. Brian is worth listening to on employment issues. The rest have entertainment value.

How much could your house value fall by ?

Hard landing, soft landing, 10% fall or 50% fall, you are probably sick of all this economic gobbledygook. There are three parameters that determine house prices, rental value, interest rate and sentiment. To calculate the minimum value of your house, first find out how much you would get for renting it out for a year ( say €2,000 per month or €24,000 p.a.). Now find out how much you could borrow where the yearly interest would equate to the rental value. In this case €24,000 would pay the interest on €480,000 at 5%.

The difference between the calculated value and the market value is determined by sentiment. Sentiment for investors is mainly driven by the expected rise in value over time. Investors were prepared to pay stamp duty and other buying costs on the basis that that this money would be recouped over time, and also that that buying and selling costs are deductible against capital gains tax. Any long term appreciation is only subject to a maximum capital gains tax of 20%.

Sentiment for home owners is mainly driven by status in society, stability in family life not being at the beck and call of the evil landlord. There are other sentimental reasons for paying over the odds for a home.

So what are the rules of falling house prices. Rule one house price reduction is slow and sticky, no one wants to believe that they are losing thousands of euro per week. Rule two the bigger they are the harder they fall, who is going to pay €8,000 per month rent for a €2,000,000 house? More expensive houses lose a bigger proportion of their value.

Who wins ? People moving up the value chain, more specifically those who have sold and are prepared rent for a year as house prices drop.

Who loses ? Those who have bought houses in the past two years. Those who are renting. And last but not least the parasitic auctioneers.

www.shayconway.org

Review of Senate Election - Part 1

This years general election was my first attempt at getting a Trinity seat in the Seanad. I considered trying in 2002 but decided not to as the three incumbents were fairly active. In the intervening years I got no literature from Mary Henry and I had heard that David Norris had retired from his lecturing job in Trinity and had moved to Cyprus, so it looked like a vacancy was coming up. As it happened Mary decided not to run again, so who was going to replace her another doctor, a scientist who new about climate change and earth science (me), or another woman?

Given that all politics is local I decided to write to all my neighbours ( or more specifically those with Terenure in their address) and asked for support. I was fairly shocked when I one of the recipients ( someone I knew vaguely) started to snub me. I not sure what the complaint was, my discovery of a less than grand address, misconstruing my letter seeking support as a begging letter, or maybe my letter arrived at a bad personal time. Most people greeted the news with delight. One neighbour suffering from the Bolton Street Complex was masquerading as a Trinity graduate and the only time he spent in Trinity was picking up a DU building degree.

After introducing to my neighbours I wrote to a sample of 3,000 electors and introduced myself. I followed these letters up with a call to try and find out what the issues that concerned them were. I only had one negative response ( a relative of a well known Nazi), I now regret not giving her an earful. I had a very enjoyable conversation with Professor Luce who was the Dean of Science when I was a Junior Freshman Natural Science student. He made me aware that my academic prowess was being badmouthed by other contenders and that he was impressed by my approach to the campaign. The Luce family was one of the first victims of drug violence in Dublin, Professor Luce's brother was savagely murdered in his home by an intruder in the late seventies.

http://www.shayconway.org/