Australia's carbon (dioxide) tax

A.A. Alfie said:
This is a thread on Australia's (useless) carbon dioxide tax, not Australia's AA Alfie. If you wish to start a thread on me I will probably assist with contributions - please pm me when you get it up and running. :)
Click to expand...

got any evidence that the carbon tax is useless?
 
A.A. Alfie said:
This is a thread on Australia's (useless) carbon dioxide tax, not Australia's AA Alfie. If you wish to start a thread on me I will probably assist with contributions - please pm me when you get it up and running. :)
Click to expand...

You have this tendency to spin a simple question about standards of evidence for your bulky claim and potential hypocrisy in your conduct into some conspiratorial interrogation of your political beliefs. It's you who keeps making this about you, not me.

Your argument is marinating in unsupported claims and it's about time you breath life into them rather than spit them out and have them fizzle.

Also, the internet buzzword, "troll", does not mean what you think it means.
 
lionking said:
Classic. You expose your (mysogenist?) hatred of our PM and you then berate someone for making reference to her. Textbook hypocrisy.

Anyway, we can look forward to nearly 18 months of the Gillard government impementing an anti-pollution policy. While Abbott sits on the sidelines appealing to Alan Jones and his pathetic supporters.
Click to expand...

You have an erroneous question mark in there.
 
It's a bloody carbon tax.
Not carbon dioxide tax.
The idea is to try and limit the production of carbon from fossil fuel burning.
Once the carbon is emitted it mixes with O2 and becomes CO2.
The tax is trying to limit the production of carbon.
The denier conservatives Alan Jones, Andrew Bolt et al continue to bleat about the CO2 tax which is not right.
Sure the CO2 is the problem but the tax is trying to limit the emission of carbon before it becomes CO2.
 
wombatwal said:
It's a bloody carbon tax.
Not carbon dioxide tax.
The idea is to try and limit the production of carbon from fossil fuel burning.
Once the carbon is emitted it mixes with O2 and becomes CO2.
The tax is trying to limit the production of carbon.

Sure the CO2 is the problem but the tax is trying to limit the emission of carbon before it becomes CO2.
Click to expand...

Got it. Global warming is caused by carbon, not carbon dioxide. :rolleyes:

Evidence of these claims please. It contradicts almost everything I understand from both sides of the argument.

wombatwal said:
Pray tell Alfie, how she is a "World Famous Liar"?
Click to expand...

The Malaysians know it, Europe knows it, Indonesians know it, New Zealanders and more (and for a variety of reasons). I think world famous sits comfortably enough.
 
A.A. Alfie said:
Got it. Global warming is caused by carbon, not carbon dioxide. :rolleyes:

Evidence of these claims please. It contradicts almost everything I understand from both sides of the argument.



The Malaysians know it, Europe knows it, Indonesians know it, New Zealanders and more (and for a variety of reasons). I think world famous sits comfortably enough.
Click to expand...
I said this Alfie.
Sure the CO2 is the problem but the tax is trying to limit the emission of carbon before it becomes CO2.
Click to expand...
Please don't misrepresent what I said, I did not say that global warming is caused by carbon. No wonder people get annoyed with you.
Carbon dioxide is the greenhouse gas that raises global temperatures.
Bloody hell this is hard!
Carbon is the element that is emitted from the burning of fossil fuels. The tax is all about limiting this carbon emission.
Now if the tax is also there to grow trees which of course takes in the carbon dioxide well it can also be called a carbon dioxide tax.
So if this is the case it can be called a carbon tax and a carbon dioxide tax.
Now, the "World Famous Liar" quote of yours.
If you are talking about the "There will be no carbon tax under a government that I lead" that Julia Gillard said before the 2010 election well, we have previously gone over this when you called her Juliar. You actually agreed with me that it was not a lie.
Maybe she has said something else to have that liar tag. Could you please show me the evidence of this lie. Saying other countries know this is not evidence.
If you have good evidence we could possibly agree with this liar tag.
What's it all about
hang on, I feel a song coming on
 
Not implementing a political commitment is not a lie. Saying something you know is not true is a lie. Gillard couldn't have done anything else, apart from simply not forming government, which Alfie and others would clearly have preferred.

The irrational rage about the temerity of this woman forming a government by doing a deal nobody else could have, is a sight to behold.
 
A.A. Alfie said:
wombatwal said:
It's a bloody carbon tax.
Not carbon dioxide tax.
The idea is to try and limit the production of carbon from fossil fuel burning.
Once the carbon is emitted it mixes with O2 and becomes CO2.
The tax is trying to limit the production of carbon.

Sure the CO2 is the problem but the tax is trying to limit the emission of carbon before it becomes CO2.
Click to expand...


Got it. Global warming is caused by carbon, not carbon dioxide. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Well, no. Apparently you don't get it at all.

Global warming is caused by carbon dioxide and carbon dioxide is, quite obviously, a product of carbon combining with oxygen.

Just as wombatwal said.

It's quite mystifying that you're unable to grasp that reducing the emission of carbon will result in a direct reduction in the amount of carbon dioxide.

Are you able to explain what you think would be the result of reducing the emission of carbon on the amount of carbon dioxide?


A.A. Alfie said:
Evidence of these claims please. It contradicts almost everything I understand from both sides of the argument.
Click to expand...


Your understanding of things is hardly the criterion by which a requirement for evidence is determined.


A.A. Alfie said:
wombatwal said:
Pray tell Alfie, how she is a "World Famous Liar"?
Click to expand...


The Malaysians know it, Europe knows it, Indonesians know it, New Zealanders and more (and for a variety of reasons). I think world famous sits comfortably enough.
Click to expand...


I look forward to you coming up with some nice hand-wavy rhetoric in order to avoid presenting the sources you used to gain your insight into the knowledge of these millions and millions of people.
 
With regard to the liar tag I was not in fact referring to the "there will be no carbon tax" pledge. We have done that one to death and I have conceded on a number of occasions that it may not have been lie in the strictest sense. In fact, her commitment and reversal on this issue would hardly make her world famous in terms of her deceptions.

Think instead of (say) East Timor, her statement that she had talked to their president about a processing centre for asylum seekers. An abject lie - and in the international forum. I reckon that qualifies.
Or Andrew Wilkie and her promise to him on poker machines, hardly international I agree but...

World famous? No doubt you will disagree however there are many countries that are already familiar with her ability to play fast and loose with the truth.
 
In the meantime, my questions to some of her other lies claims (post 8) remain unanswered.

Can anyone help me with those?
 
Priceless. In a thread about the carbon price you call Gillard a liar. Now you are saying this allegation has nothing to do with the carbon price. So you are off topic in your own thread.

Keep 'em coming. Great comedy.
 
A.A. Alfie said:
Think instead of (say) East Timor, her statement that she had talked to their president about a processing centre for asylum seekers. An abject lie - and in the international forum. I reckon that qualifies.
Click to expand...
Sorry Alfie but I cannot recall faithfully that is what she said.
Have you got a link that she said that and that she in fact did not meet/talk to the President.
I agree with LK, a big derail of your own thread.
We must keep with the topic.
 
How does one "emit carbon"? I have forgotten some of my chemistry degree but seem to remember it being solid in its elemental state.

"Emissions" invariably refers to carbon dioxide. The price on emissions (referred to as "carbon price") is per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted, not per tonne of carbon.

"Carbon tax" and "carbon emission" is just a shorthand.
 
Francesca R said:
How does one "emit carbon"? I have forgotten some of my chemistry degree but seem to remember it being solid in its elemental state.

"Emissions" invariably refers to carbon dioxide. The price on emissions (referred to as "carbon price") is per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted, not per tonne of carbon.

"Carbon tax" and "carbon emission" is just a shorthand.
Click to expand...

Except in the world inhabited by the listeners of Alan Jones where that shorthand is evidence of a lie.
 
Francesca R said:
How does one "emit carbon"? I have forgotten some of my chemistry degree but seem to remember it being solid in its elemental state.

"Emissions" invariably refers to carbon dioxide. The price on emissions (referred to as "carbon price") is per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted, not per tonne of carbon.

"Carbon tax" and "carbon emission" is just a shorthand.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom