Climate change

[JonThm]

'Climate change' = nuclear power = toxic death

[JonThm]

the wordl has bee ncoolnig from 2005, so how old is this video?

[JonThm]

With only 0.00037% in the air above cities, man has nothing to do with the weather. God and the sun have!

[rdtrip]

You have no idea, why don't you leave this to people who know a little something about chemistry. Although the concentration is not high the molecules absorb light then re emit it back as heat. Without it we would die however humans put too much in the atmosphere. Not to mention methane which is around 70 times worse!

[thruglow]

Very nice to see you on Youtube Lindsay, and indeed on Lateline, and/or 7.30 Report! Best Wishes :-)

[ThenNever]

On climate change. There is a problem in getting owners of rental properties to make there properties more green. Because they outlay the capital cost but the tenet gets the power bill saving. It could be a good idea to offer energy audits for landlords and an ongoing rebate if they improved the energy efficiency of the property.

[bobbuick]

Lindsey please explain these points on climate change and its effect when - heat increases evaporation - more clouds - more shadow under clouds - more rain also cooling.

Are you not spreading global swindle?

[AddyGoose]

You are an ignorant fool bobbuik. You have little to no understanding of weather patterns. Next time you ask a question like this, don't answer it yourself before you understand what you're talking about. Maybe you should do a little research.

[bobbuick]

You wrote "You are an ignorant fool bobbuik"

You cannot even get my name right and have the arrogance to call me a fool.

Your's is a standard reply from those who have limited expression and less understanding.

[AddyGoose]

There is no climate change debate.

I refuse to have one. If you're too stupid to see what is right in front of your face, go buy a house on the coast. See you in the hills in 50 years. Wanker.

[Cyrius01]

time to up the production values!

[JohnHoward2OO7]

At least I shot my vid in my rad office, dude. What up Lindsay, bro?

[Cyrius01]

hahahahah good one :-)

[tubeuser71]

John Howard values money more than a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. He values an economy over a community. He does not support difference or tolerance. Australia needs a leader who DOES believe in a better way, in a fresh approach, a leader who values minorities, cultural diversity and community. A leader who understands that job security and safety in the workplace build a strong, safe, open and more generous community.

[EDGARPICO]

look at linsay tanners head its creepy and nice touch on the 'sans tie' oh 'he's so casual'

tanner youre just a labor hack

and cronie no better than howard

union lap dog

and melbourne hack

go get stuffed you 'munsters' looking bag of crap

bracks has turned this state (victoria) to shit

[tubeuser71]

Thanks for replying to my post. I am a husband and a father. I have no political or union affiliations, i simply want to live in a better world. I understand that the Liberal Govt are paying liberal party members to post comments on you tube to try and sway people to vote for them. Are you a liberal party member? I can't believe you would vote for someone based on how they look. You scare me.

[EDGARPICO]

tubewanker71

i wrote "no better than howard"

how can i be a liberal if i wrote that

u fu*king imbecile

[EDGARPICO]

linsay tanner still has a creepy head

[tubeuser71]

can you email me a photo of your head?

[EDGARPICO]

why are you a fag?

[tubeuser71]

You continue to shock me. You swear instead of argue, you threaten people and you judge people on how they look. I hope you find peace, tolerance and love. All the best.

[EDGARPICO]

you are gay

[Liquidicespace]

What's wrong with gay people, EDGARPICO. They made good music!!! tone it down mate!

[Odysseus0001]

Good work Mr Tanner. You've been too quiet lately -- we need to hear your sensible and moderate voice more.

[goolengook20]

Well at least we can comment on Tanner. Try to post a comment at the Environment Miniester Turbulls You Tube clip and you can't, so much for Howard government desire to "hear the people".

[southswin]

Well said Lindsay. Howard is a climate change sceptic. The iraq war is a debacle and there are no children to throw overboard so he paying lip service to the environment. Too little too late.

[debaldyone]

Lindsay Tanner we would love to see you on myspace too!

[carsonal]

Its good to see you here Lindsay.

But get ready for some harsh posts, but none as bad as over in Howards vid.

[fjeffrey10]

It might seem to some people as though a 4-6 degree difference in the average temperature in Australia wouldn't make such a big difference but not only would it cause much more erosion but much stronger storms and just make it be way to hot for people to relax on the beach there. Especially because there's a huge ozone hole right on top of them already. Putting more CO2 in the atmosphere is just going to make it worse then anyone can imagine.

[73cosmicelf]

Co2 is number five green house gas, Water vapour number one! I say clouds cause climate change.  That and the hot air from Canberra. However less pollution in cities is good for health.

[Practicalpolitics]

How about Labor showing how serious it is about addressing climate change by protecting Tasmania's remaining stands of old growth forests, that are continuing to be destroyed under the Labor Lennon Government? If either of the major parties are truly serious about this issue, this should be one of the first steps that is taken.

[llllloooooo]

Oh one more thing. Wouldn't it be better to divert the BILLIONS of dollars that it will cost Australia to reduce greenhouse emmissions to providing better healthcare and education for Australians and even more importantly fresh drinking water for people overseas?

I think a true socialist (not that I'm a socialist) would be asking these questions instead of getting on a populist bandwagon.

[thruglow]

No - it's not a question of choosing one over another. The challenge is to address *both* issues. Wouldn't it be better to divert all of the money being spent on government advertising, the Iraq war, private schools, and divert that to other areas based on *need* - dare I say it - better public hospitals, more money for public education, and scientific research, to ensure we have an environment in which to maintain an economy. No environment = no economy...not the other way around!

[llllloooooo]

I only wish that labor would run on your campaign ideas thruglow. Please Lindsay, come out and tell us that Labor won't spend any money on advertising, defence or private schools.

I think you'll find that in countries with poor economic conditions they don't care about the environment because they're too poor to. In Australia we're rich enough to care about things like that. Lets hope we stay that way.

[thruglow]

llllloooooo - John Howard cares about the environment?! Is that why he hasn't ratified the Kyoto Protocol? Still waiting for more evidence on Global Warming is he?! Howard apparently knows better. $1 Million a day on blatant government advertising - oh yes, I see, it's all part of Howard's good, responsible economic management. Some would call it reckless spending by a tired old government desperate to stay in power...yawn...zzzzzzzzzzzz

[llllloooooo]

Let me give you an example of the Howard government caring about the environment. The Environment minister had put the strictest environmental conditions ever on the the new Gunns Pulp Mill in Tasmania. You support and applaud that pulp mill don't you Thruglow? Just like Peter Garrett does right?

Of course you don't, and neither does Peter Garrett. That's because the both of you care more about "perceptions of the environment" instead of people's livelyhoods and real environmental outcomes.

[thruglow]

The simple fact is that the environmental assessment failed to examine the impact of the mill on forests, and air quality. Fundamental considerations that should not be overlooked under any cirumstances. If elected to government, the ALP has vowed to look at the legislation in place that prevented a full and comprehensive environmental assessment. Real Environmental outcomes?! How is it possible to reach these if the *full* affect of the mill on the environment has *not* been examined?!

[llllloooooo]

So if the ALP in government found that there was a problem with the process then would they do the "right thing" and reverse the decision on the mill?

The attitude labor has taken on this mill is the perfect example of how they try to have their cake and eat it too.

The only major parties with unambiguous stances on this issue and most other issues are the greens and the coalition. I'd encourage people to pick one of them.

[thruglow]

llllloooooo - the decision by Bob Hawke to stop the Franklin Dam was made 1 year after approval had been given - so there is your example - it has been done before, and can be done again. I don't believe that we've heard the last on the proposed pulp mill.

[llllloooooo]

I sincerely hope that we haven't heard the last on the pulp mill! I hope the Greens and the Liberals pick up on the ambiguous position Labor seems to have adopted and run with it.

Anyway, I think that's the last contribution I'll make on this topic. No doubt we'll see each other in the comments of other videos. Cheers thruglow.

[JonThm]

There is ecology to be done: Global Warmnig is just science rubbish! CO2 supports your life! It deosn't affect the climate

[llllloooooo]

Hey Lindsay, what have YOU done to reduce your own CO2 emmisions by 50%? Stopped catching planes? Refuse to use an air conditioner? Stopped using electricity in your office?...I thought not.

I hate how people who bay about climate change won't be up front and tell Australians what *halving* CO2 emmisions will actually mean for their daily lives and their emplyoment prospects.

[grodscorp]

Good to see you using YouTube, Lindsay.