Comments by "Granny Annie" (@grannyannie2948) on "Australia’s energy policy creates ‘economic pain’ for ‘no environmental gain’" video.

I fear climate policies much more than climate change.
17
I have been arguing for decades that climate changes every 1000 years. Lately I've come across Patrick Moore who began Greenpeace and certainly cares about the environment, but makes the same argument.
4
True
4
Wasn't the day after tomorrow a movie about nuclear war ?
3
And the UN. Both should be ignored.
3
@tassied12 So you believe everything you read or see.
2
@rattusfinkus Just like the hole in the ozone layer did (not). Which terrestrial plants don't depend on carbon dioxide? The more carbon dioxide available, the less plants need to open the pores on their leaves to acquire it. Meaning they retain more moisture and require less water. We are already seeing the greening of previously arid regions.
2
I fear climate policies more than climate change
2
 @DanielSMatthews I'd move there.
2
@rattusfinkus If you knew your history you'd agree. For five thousand years we have been going through thousand year cycles of climatic changes. We are currently warmer than 1700AD, but cooler than 1000AD. Which is exactly as we should be. Less and less people are starving. With the exception of a couple of African countries populations have plummeted even in developing countries. Indeed depopulation, resulting in the end of globalisation is an immediate threat. It will also result in the come back of coal as that is the only fuel evenly distributed around the world. Nor is carbon dioxide a bad thing. It allows plants to breathe more easily. When a plant breathes it opens the pores of its leaves. The more it needs to open its pores the more water it expells and the more water it requires to survive. So increases in carbon dioxide means that arid and even desert regions can become green. Which in turn balances the climate. Natural disasters cause much less deaths and injuries than previously because of better technology and mass communication. Whilst global interests seek to make money from ridiculous measures to impoverish the western world, with no logical explanation. How will digetal identities and fifteen minute cities improve humanity ? And how will depopulation pan out ? And who gets to live in an eight hour pod crunching on cockroaches ? King Charles has repeatedly claimed to the globolists who want it all for themselves, that he feels some humans living in an 18th century subsistence farm, would actually enhance the landscape experience for the super wealthy who plan this rubbish. But most disagree. I'm banking on him. I'd rather be an independent subsistence farmer, then part of their game. If you can't see that every falsehood produced is to enrich multinational companies to the detriment of any independent worker or business owner, you are actually more evil than the Nazis. They atleast tried national control. You believe in unelected global control. Enjoy your pod and cockroach protein shakes and your forced sterilization for the good of large corporations. If you think climate change policies are left winged you are uneducated. Or a useful idiot. It's the most far right policy to ever exist. Your entire life will depend on your value to capitalism.
2
@tassied12 And the people of the UK are experiencing hardship due to climate policies, including but not limited to, being unable to afford to eat or heat their homes. Is that what you want for Australians? Like Germany they will probably return to coal soon. The political will for climate change is shrinking, Australia is as usual a bit behind.
2
PS The Netherlands also voted against climate policies in their recent election. The US does not agree to global policies and nor does India, China or Africa. So you can argue science until you are blue in the face. Most people have concluded it's not important. So you would be better accepting reality.
2
@tassied12 You are naive if you think any of this is independent of geopolitics. Germany recently had a referendum on net zero/ and climate policies. 82% of Germans voted against. As I say people don't like being cold and hungry, or impoverished because of the cost of food or energy. When Australians discover the reality of climate policies, no doubt they too will reject it. We currently have war in eastern Europe disrupting trade. War is constantly predicted for China. Will any country put climate policies ahead of war ? Another consequence of major wars is the disruption of global trade. Especially any problems with China and Chinese manufacturing. How will other countries like it if they have no mobile phones, computers, TVs, or white goods? Will they demand a huge increase in national or atleast regional manufacturing? And how will this be powered? You don't think Chinese manufacturing is powered by renewables.
2
@tassied12 Smoke and mirrors. It's the capitalist commerce in carbon credits. Dream on.
2
@tassied12 There are whole books written on the subject. You say I should expand my reading, I say you should get up to date. The problem with climate policies is people really don't like being hungry. And they really really, don't like freezing to death.
2
@tassied12 That's only because the UK has nuclear energy. Go there, they're everywhere.
2
@rattusfinkus Like climate change, the ozone problem was exaggerated, unlike climate it's solution was not Malthusian.
2
@tassied12 They could drastically reduce emissions tomorrow if they stopped immigration. Back in the 70s when there was only about ten million people we grew most of our food on our quarter acre blocks. I suggest you read my lengthy comment above.
2
@rattusfinkus I agree regarding actual pollutants. But carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, it's plant food.
1
@tassied12 Nor do I. I have recently read Peter Zeihan, and listened to hours of Patrick Moore and Bjorn Lomburg on the subject.
1
@rattusfinkus So you have no evidence to discredit it's benifit to plants. Carbon dioxide does not cause warming, warming causes carbon dioxide. And now you admit it's a program. Like any cult member you cannot cope with alternative opinions.
1
@rattusfinkus Plants need carbon dioxide, just like you need oxygen. Not some plants sometimes. And in turn plants produce oxygen. Grade two science. Scientists don't all agree. And they all recognise that whilst some regions might suffer, others will benifit. You are so indoctrinated you can't even admit that the greening of arid regions, which is already happening, is a good thing.
1
@tassied12 I believe Patrick Moore does have a background in science, he also founded Greenpeace and is a genuine environmentalist. Not only are many climate policies antihuman, they are also bad for the environment. I would have more respect if they were building dams and creating hydro plants. Zeihan writes on geography and geopolitics. And this field is very relevant to wind and solar, as well as other sources of fuel. One problem is that a) batteries involve children working in dangerous conditions, and slave labour, and B) there are limits to the resources needed to build them. Globally batteries have on average three minutes of electricity storage. Covid showed the danger of narrowing the field of experts, and depending on computer models, whilst ignoring the input of social workers, doctors and broader scientific input. I object to climate policies because they are filled with ideological dogma, and they all seek to harm people, and advance China and India at the cost of the west. You cannot recognise that adding 900 000 people to our population this year will further increase emissions. So I regard your opinions as indoctrination into an ideology, with no ability to think independently.
1
@tassied12 On the contrary, having lost access to Russian gas they have reopened mothballed coal powered electricity plants and coal mines. There are books on the subject, and it's widely reported. Renewables don't work in Germany at all. They have very little sun or wind. This winter they had to open public warming centres to prevent people freezing to death. You might think there is support for climate policies, but when the people get cold and hungry they change their minds and what they vote for, look at the Netherlands.
1
@tassied12 I live rurally. The harvest was fine, kids from the regional University and tafe, worked over the summer. It was a win win for them, the farmers chartered busses to bring them daily.
1
@tassied12 The Netherlands voted recently for a government that would take them out of the EU climate agreements. The US has not signed up to half of what we have. And China and India have until 2050, to do what we are expected to do by 2030. The trouble with climate policies are they are antihuman. What good is the environment if humans cannot enjoy it? On a different state I have been discussing the fall of the Roman Empire. There are many similarities to today. Welfare had increased beyond the famous bread and circus, to include all the necessities of life. The barbarians were already in the city as economic migrants. Their name refers to their heavily accented Latin. Their labour was so cheap that people freed their slaves. The free slaves then qualified for welfare. Inflation soared and the currency was debased. Spiritually there was a new cult, quite similar to climate fears, it was Christianity. At that time Christians believed judgement day was just about to happen. Educated people took vows of celibacy, even within marriage, and refused to bring children into the world. If you think climate is a concern, then the collapse of western civilization, which I have heard many, many climate cultists demand, is of greater concern. Civilizational collapse is not good for the environment. I believe we may both be in different bubbles. We have been exchanging comments for some time. Never once have you said anything positive for humanity.
1
@tassied12 In actual fact the things that the poorest people need most are better infant and and maternity care, clean drinking water etc. One thing that could be done at almost no cost would be to introduce a way of registering titles, are problem in most African countries, and on a more sophisticated level in India due to politicians forgiving debts to banks in exchange for votes. There is zero incentive to improve your house, perhaps a rain water tank, or a stove to cook on instead of wood or dung. Nor is there any incentive to invest in improved farming practices. After all your house and farm can be taken away at any time by a corrupt government official, a powerful neighbour or a change of government, and you have no way of proving what happened. I'm sure politicians from the Philippines whine at the UN for money for climate change. But the Filipinos I know never mention it as a concern, for them.
1
@rattusfinkus First tell me how climate policies help humanity and why a greener world is a bad thing. And give proof that the earth is as warm as a thousand years ago.
1
@rattusfinkus Answer my questions first. I'm happy to answer query then.
1
@fronttowardenemy9994 It would have effects. It would prevent the global control of multinationals, and the agreements they make at Davos.
1
Climate changes in 1000 year cycles, we can see this for the past thousand years. Every about this is politics disguised as religion
1