world

Thousands of Australian students skip school for mass climate protest

69 Comments
By Saeed Khan

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2018 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.


69 Comments
Login to comment

That's amazing, whatever the future holds these young people can handle it. Would be nice to see such determination from supposed world leaders. That's if they are left with a future of course. The legacy they are going to be left with is pretty bleak.

11 ( +14 / -3 )

"Our prime minister thinks we should be in school right now and maybe you should be,"

Yeah you should be. What do you know at 13? You might know a bit about climate change but no clue how the world works. Still, I guess if adults did their job you wouldn't need to be protesting. Better catch up on your school work hey.

"If we don't stop temperatures going over two degrees we won't have the Great barrier reef, Antarctica will melt and there will be no such thing as polar bears," 11-year-old Lucie Atkin-Bolton told the crowd. "My life will be so much more complicated than my parents' life, because of one simple thing: climate change."

All too late unfortunately. Even if the world meet the Paris agreements the result would still be more than 2c by some margin. There is going to have to be a lot of adaption and mitigation in the coming years while we should work towards avoiding the worst.

They also carried placards calling for the government to block the Adani mine project

Not sure how that project is going to be economically viable tbh and I think there is good chance it will fail.

1 ( +12 / -11 )

I'd say one day of missed school is worth a day engaging in civil duty. Some people go their whole lives not learning the value of that. Even if everything you say is true Matt I'd still put forward they should be immensely proud of themselves. The seed that was planted in this one day may grow into something that saves their generation. I wonder if we could say that about one day of national curriculum? Or maybe I'm as cynical as you sound after all.

17 ( +19 / -2 )

Still, I guess if adults did their job you wouldn't need to be protesting

Very true. I think the use of ‘need’ is suitable here.

These kids are also facing a barrage of fake news about climate change from idiot conspiracy sites to some gibbering bonehead claiming the whole thing is a hoax created by the Chinese.

I hope these kids have been taught the value of the scientific method and looking at scientific consensus rather than being force-fed.

The forces of anti-science stupidity including media outlets, politicians, the religious and the just plain ignorant is a threat to the planet.

Give ‘em hell kids.

9 ( +17 / -8 )

”What do you know at 13?”

Exactly. Go and clean your room before you think you have something to say on such a complex issue as climate change. Although their little hearts are in the right place, teaching kids to go out and picket before they even know what they’re talking about is an unfortunate sign of the times.

The idea that there are simple solutions for incredibly complex problems is more dangerous and damaging than we can imagine.

“I hate ScroMo more than I hate school!”

There’s a future leader for ya.

-10 ( +8 / -18 )

I'd say one day of missed school is worth a day engaging in civil duty. Some people go their whole lives not learning the value of that

At 13 though? Not sure about that. Surely we do not want to see this become the norm when in reality, kids, and they are kids, really should be in school. Climate change is a massive issue which is why I have support for what they are doing. They are not protesting gender pronouns thank god.

Even if everything you say is true Matt I'd still put forward they should be immensely proud of themselves.

Well, it does beat apathy for sure on what is a critical issue. It beat's Matt's apathy, I know that. Not sure about "proud". I can imagine a great deal of it is peer pressure driven, not necessarily a personal commitment.

The seed that was planted in this one day may grow into something that saves their generation. I wonder if we could say that about one day of national curriculum? Or maybe I'm as cynical as you sound after all.

The world will ween itself off fossil fuels. There is no doubt in my mind. The sheer volume of technologies coming on stream ensures that.

For me, the greater issue is biodiversity loss and extinction which, while impacted by climate change, is not primarily the result of it. What is the "technical solution" to less people and less eating for example?

I have a solution, it doesn't involve killing off a bunch of humans, but still, a lot of people aren't going to like it ;)

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

It's a shame that people belittle kids learning about civil protest, doing the right thing for the planet, and being global citizens.

This is something that used to be praised when I was young.

7 ( +17 / -10 )

Yes, why belittle them, 13, 33, 63. Change takes action. They are acting it's their future after all.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

Yeah you should be. What do you know at 13? You might know a bit about climate change but no clue how the world works. Still, I guess if adults did their job you wouldn't need to be protesting. Better catch up on your school work hey.

I can imagine a great deal of it is peer pressure driven, not necessarily a personal commitment.

Did you forget how you were at 13 ? They are not pressure driven...they are scared, because their future looks like a bunch of natural disastear one after another, with an animal kingdom consisting mainly of rats...

"Adults" are ruling the world for a while..and some "big" (Yuuuge?) countries show us clearly that their leaders care only about themselves, and not about what can happen after they are dead. Our politics are on very short term... saving the jobs of people for another 10 years... getting the system to run a bit longer.

It's time for big changes... children see it, 75 years old politicians don't. People in the middle have to chose which side they should get on... which one will you chose ?

8 ( +12 / -4 )

I choose youth, old men got us here and here is a pretty sad place. Hope youth around the world and anyone with a heartbeat start fighting for our planet and future. Wish I had a soap box right now.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

some politicians still think global warming is a pack of lies and its a load of rubbish that has been made up, so it highly commendable to keep on at these politicians that its not rubbish it is happening and ALL countries need to do more.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

At 13 though? Not sure about that. Surely we do not want to see this become the norm when in reality, kids, and they are kids, really should be in school. 

It was one day not a semester. Perspective.

My first experience with a walk-out was 11 years old. Most of the kids there were goofing off and didn't likely learn much. But I can tell you I did. I learned how powerful voices group together can be. How you can be heard when you join together even when you can barely do long division. I spent my late teens and early 20s volunteering and engaging in activism. I ended up playing a part in a court decision that led to the changing of a CRTC (Canadian broadcast standards body) regulation regarding censorship in relation to sexuality (a bit beyond gender pronouns) and language. They told us to stay in school that day too. And to be honest what we were protesting regarding education cutbacks; yeah, they happened anyway. Can't say I remember a single other thing that happened that week.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Did you forget how you were at 13 ? They are not pressure driven...they are scared, because their future looks like a bunch of natural disastear one after another, with an animal kingdom consisting mainly of rats...

Really? When I was 13 everything I did was to please my mates and my parents. I had little clue about the world at large. If I was getting decent grades at school that was enough as far as school was concerned.

Guess times have changed. In a way, it's sad that kids have to feel so much pressure at such a young age about an issue that is way beyond their control.

It was one day not a semester. Perspective.

Yeah, fair enough.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

The kids I saw speak on the ABC news today would put many adults to shame.

They expressed views that put the issue of climate change squarely in the sights, something many so called "learned" adults have failed to do.

And this nonsense about them "just being kids". Some people Obviously have never spent much time with young people.

These Kids are our tomorrow - more power to them.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Did you forget how you were at 13 ? They are not pressure driven...they are scared, because their future looks like a bunch of natural disastear one after another, with an animal kingdom consisting mainly of rats...

Come on most kids are followers and rarely resist peer pressure i.e they do/say what their mates do/say.

Look am fine with teens getting involved (we've all done it) but let's not kid ourselves most teens who took to the streets today know/understand and, more importantly, DO very little about climate change. How many of them ask their parents to consume/spend/waste less (including/especially FOR THEM), share, walk, use energy more wisely etc. 5-10%?

Let's hope today's some sort of 'climate change/anti consumerism awareness day' for quite a few (and their parents).

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

World leaders (and in particular those such as the current Aussie PM) should be ashamed that these kids need to demonstrate to have some chance of a secure future.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Can you imagin Japanese students doing this? Think the negative comments might be related to grumpy old man syndrome. I understand after all I used to walk for 40km in the snow to work in a mine for 20hrs then walk home and had to lick a paper bag clean as it was my bedding before getting a good beating. Young people now a days don't know how good they have it.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Children today are so much more mature than my generation was at that age. Look at what that 11-year-old said. When I was 11, all I was interested in was eating junk food, watching my favorite TV shows and playing sports. I knew nothing about social issues. I'd love to compare these Aussie kids with a group of similar Japanese kids. I wonder what the Japanese girls would be more interested in talking about - the environment, the prime minister's policies...or Hello Kitty.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Humans can survive in any environment, from the Arctic ice like the Eskimos to the arid desert like the Arabs. And they did not have any high tech. No need to be so pessimestic.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

"Thousands of Australian students skipped school Friday"

That's the best day to skip school. But being as how these students spent the day protesting government policy on how to deal with climate change which is going to happen no matter what humans do, they for sure didn't learn nearly as much as Ferris Bueller, Cameron and Sloane did on their day off from school.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

This was organised by teachers ---many of the children were of primary school age and were led by their teachers. If the teachers want to demonstrate then do it by themselves not using the children as a front. Returning home from the demo on public transport the teachers were escorting them just like an excursion.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Any teacher who took their kids protesting today probably gave them a lesson they will actually remember into adulthood, instead of keeping them stuck in a desk all day.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Well then, Stranger, let's have all the teachers take their students out to protests every day!

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Guess times have changed. In a way, it's sad that kids have to feel so much pressure at such a young age about an issue that is way beyond their control.

They'll be of voting age in half a decade or so. Should they wait until then to give a ff about how the leaders of their countries are wrecking the world?

Times have changed, yes - children are incredibly well informed, and are motivated to act to prevent or stop what they now know is wrong. I wish I had had that kind of education. Being ignorant of your environment and your future isn't something to boast about.

When I was 13 everything I did was to please my mates and my parents. I had little clue about the world at large. If I was getting decent grades at school that was enough as far as school was concerned.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Question:

How do we know that recent rises in global temperatures are not just part of cycles of global cooling and warming over millenia?

While I'm open to the possibility of global warming it seems difficult to prove unless we know what temperatures were in the distant past, which we don't.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Times have changed, yes - children are incredibly well informed, and are motivated to act to prevent or stop what they now know is wrong. I wish I had had that kind of education. Being ignorant of your environment and your future isn't something to boast about.

They are children and teenagers. They can't prevent or stop anything. Certainly not directly. They can influence a tiny pocket of civilization that contributes 1% to climate change. That's what they can do.

Being ignorant of your environment and your future isn't something to boast about.

Yeah, guess I had something called a "childhood" in which I wasn't expected to take on issues effecting the entire planet like climate change. I should feel guilty for having a childhood should I?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Australia is one of the most coal, oil, and natural gas reliant nations in the world. This is due to government policy. Although they have finally started to develop renewable energy, coal is still used for well over half of their energy needs. Meanwhile, here in California, with a population almost twice that of Australia's, we get less than 1% of our energy from coal. The difference is due to state government policy. We currently produce about half of all the solar power made in the whole USA, and over 80% of the geothermal energy produced in the USA. When the young people of Australia come of voting age, they may be able to effect significant change in their country.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Back in the 80s the kids of my generation were growing up the the shadow of nuclear war. None took the day off school to go and protest that. I guess the leftie teachers didn't want to make the USSR look like a villain. And nuclear war would have been far worse for the environment and everything else than climate change. We're talking instant annihilation followed by fallout. Powerful enough to suck the paint off your house and give your family a permanent orange afro (with apologies to Spies Like Us).

But climate change, natural or otherwise, is a gradual and unpredictable process - how many of the models have actually been accurate? How much are humans contributing to it? What level of atmospheric CO2 is harmful to the environment? What are the other drivers of climate change, and to what levels do they contribute (eg solar output, volcanic activity, changes in the Earth's magnetic field etc)? The science is by no means settled.

Don't get me wrong - there's nothing wrong with finding better ways to do things, such as producing cleaner energy at every step of the manufacturing, use and disposal stage. There are plenty of smart people around who are working hard to develop these as we speak, but it takes time and usually a lot of money. But in a remarkably short space of time, humans have gone from burning wood for fuel to refining fossil fuels to extracting enormous amounts of energy from the nuclei of uranium atoms, and may even be able to produce baseload power from solar, geothermal and wind power. One day. Baseload power keeps society humming along night and day, keeps people alive in hospitals, runs water purification plants and myriad other essential and useful functions. It runs on coal, oil, gas and nuclear energy. Renewables aren't even close to replacing these energy sources, and no amount of taxation or good vibes is going to change that for the foreseeable future due to the variable nature of convertible wind and solar energy. People who want to shut down fossil-fuel and nuclear energy haven't been able to come up with a viable answer to this problem as yet. Not the sane ones, anyway.

What bemuses me about these protests is that the kids are far too easily influenced at that age, and as eloquent as some of them sound, they're mainly repeating slogans and talking points they've been preached in class and on social media. The Left are very good at slogans, but not particularly good at solutions even when they're spending vast amounts of other people's money clutching at straws.

If these kids are serious about conserving resources and "stopping climate change" if that were even possible, maybe these kids should be writing to their climate change heroes at the UN or in the entertainment business, encouraging them to use modern technology to hold conferences and publicity events over the internet instead of burning all that evil jet fuel flying across the world to lecture us mere mortals. Or target big polluters like China. Forget ScoMo. He can't even govern his party room.

What the article doesn't mention is how many kids stayed at school. Just about all of them, in fact. Maybe some of the ones who chose to stay will crack the code that make renewables reliable.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Indian mining firm Adani vowed to go ahead with a massive and controversial coal mine.

Per capita CO2 emissions in India are 1.58 tons. Even if they quadruple the amount of Australian coal they import and burn, they still wouldn't be anywhere close to the 15+ tons produced by the average American, Canadian or Australian. The personal automobile is far more damaging to the environment than coal power plants.

Australia is one of the most coal, oil, and natural gas reliant nations in the world. 

Australia's domestic consumption of coal is quite small when compared to the enormous amount they export to other countries. Japan is the biggest importer of Australian steam coal used for electricity production.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Australia is one of the most coal, oil, and natural gas reliant nations in the world. This is due to government policy. 

No.

Its due to an abundance of coal, that up until recently, was the cheapest forms of centralized energy generation available. Of course natural gas is going nowhere in Australia's energy mix. We are a massive exporter now, in fact, perhaps the largest soon, much of it going where? Japan of course.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/australia-natural-gas-exports-growth-2019-2018-1

The calculus has changed in the last 10 years for large solar farms and the process of converting to solar from centralized coal has well and truly started. It takes time.

Although they have finally started to develop renewable energy, coal is still used for well over half of their energy needs.  Meanwhile, here in California, with a population almost twice that of Australia's, we get less than 1% of our energy from coal. 

California is a fraction of the size of Australia and has a population density far exceeding Australia's sparse population spread out over a vast area, not much less than the entire United States.

Comparing apples and oranges.

The difference is due to state government policy.

The difference is due to economic realities....up until recently, which is why new solar farms are announced regularly. We will get there, but we won't get there as fast as California. Not even close. We do not have the capacity to do so. We don't have the manpower to replace the entire coal generation system overnight, nor the skills nor in many cases, will it be economical to do so and given that electricity prices in this country are already sky high, there will be little political will to push higher prices onto consumers in area's where that would be needed to make it viable.

Those sky high prices btw aren't due to coal generation necessarily, they are due to the grid which apparently costs a fortune to maintain. Large solar farms feed their juice into that same grid, so the cost benefits of solar as a generation source are offset somewhat from the costs of maintaining the grid.

We currently produce about half of all the solar power made in the whole USA, and over 80% of the geothermal energy produced in the USA. When the young people of Australia come of voting age, they may be able to effect significant change in their country.

Voting won't make any difference. It will come down to the economics. Fortunately the economics are titling towards renewable's, solar in particular, but also hydro and wind where it makes sense. If renewables were as expensive as they were 20 years ago, we would still be on coal and trapped in it until another on-par alternative came along.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Question:

How do we know that recent rises in global temperatures are not just part of cycles of global cooling and warming over millenia? 

While I'm open to the possibility of global warming it seems difficult to prove unless we know what temperatures were in the distant past, which we don't.

I guess to find out, you’d have to spend time studying the earth, and looking for indications of what temperatures were like, and indications of how fast they changed. Then you would need thousands of other people to do the same thing, sharing and validating or invalidating theories amongst each other, based on evidence found. Finally, you’d need to clear out millions of morons who are too stupid to realize they are morons by doubting the people who dedicate their lives to this stuff, because of some ridiculous belief in a political ideology. Then you would finally know that the current changes in climate are man made.

.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

@Strangerland: have you considered the possibility that the "man made Climate Change" narrative might be a hoax ? And that all these well meaning people trying to care for the planet have in fact been duped and that Big business and money interests have hijacked their cause ?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@Strangerland: have you considered the possibility that the "man made Climate Change" narrative might be a hoax ?

Not a serious consideration for two reasons:

climate change denial has clearly been an American right-wing ideology from the start (yes, I know other countries have since had the moronity bleed in) The people who do to school for years, and spend their lives studying this stuff, putting it through peer review, are in nearly complete agreement about it being real.
0 ( +1 / -1 )

“Can you imagin Japanese students doing this? “

As if. They wouldn’t have the guts to do such. They’d miss their classes & after school activities. A big no-no..... Just another brick in the wall.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Strangerland:

indications of what temperatures were like, and indications of how fast they changed

I am aware that the global warming theory is based on indications that may very well indicate solid facts. However what is lacking are solid facts. Can anyone produce a chart or data with the actual temperatures of millenniums past?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

If it's hoax, its been going on an awful long time.

People were looking to climate change as far back as the 60's and 70's, even further

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Yeah, guess I had something called a "childhood" in which I wasn't expected to take on issues effecting the entire planet like climate change. I should feel guilty for having a childhood should I?

Guilty? That's up to you.

Critics of these protesters think nothing of trying to talk down to these young people, put them in their place for being informed in a way that they themselves weren't or aren't. "Go do your homework" indeed...

(They have.)

...as though being ignorant at any age is a good thing, and being aware is an unnecessary weight that children should avoid for as long as possible. This is untrue. Children have always had worries - this is nothing new - but what they also have now is a voice that they know how to use, and this is a very good thing.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I remember that in the 70's we were warned about a coming ice age.

https://www.forbes.com/2009/12/03/climate-science-gore-intelligent-technology-sutton.html

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

I remember that in the 70's we were warned about a coming ice age.

That was not a scientific consensus. Nowhere near it in fact. It is dug up by imbecilic anti-science groups who are a threat to our planet.

Everyone is allowed a political opinion. When people allow their political opinions to dismiss the findings of science, we are in serious trouble.

It is a tragedy that many of these anti-science forces are concentrated on the right of the most powerful country in the world, a group encompassing people who think the world is 6,000 years old, people rode dinosaurs, and whose leader says the whole thing is a hoax created by the Chinese.

This is terrifying.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Does anyone know of any scientist who can produce it data showing actual temperatures of millenniums past?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

sigh. Hyper partisanship idelology at its worst. You people have no shame.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

@Concerned citizen

A quick google search showed many results. Here’s the first I found from the Guardian:

“Scientists today measure the Earth's surface temperature using thermometers at weather stations and on ships and buoys all over the world. Such thermometer records cover a large fraction of the globe going back to the mid-19th century, allowing scientists to determine a global average temperature trend for the last 160 years. 

Before that time not many thermometer records are available, so scientists use indirect temperature measurements, supported by anecdotal evidence recorded by diarists, and the few thermometer records that do exist. Scientists must rely solely on indirect methods to look back further than recorded human history.

Indirect ways of assessing past temperatures, using so-called temperature proxies, take measurements of responses to past temperature change that are preserved in natural archives such as ice, rocks and fossils.

For example, ice sheets form as snow builds up, with each year's snowfall preserved as a single, visible layer. There are measurable chemical differences in snow formed at different temperatures, so ice cores provide a record of polar temperature going back around 250,000 years for Greenland and 800,000 years for Antarctica. 

Yearly banding is also found in fossilised coralsand lake sediment deposits, and each band has a specific chemistry that reflects the temperature when it formed. Growth rings in tree trunks can be wider or thinner depending on the climate at the time of growth, so fossilised trees can reveal the length of growing seasons. And fossilised or frozen pollen grains allow scientists to determine what plants were growing in the past, which can give us a good idea of the climate at the time.

Marine sediment cores provide temperature records spanning millions of years. They contain the fossilised shells of tiny marine creatures that preserve a chemical record of the sea temperature when they lived.

To make their temperature reconstructions as accurate as possible scientists have calibrated each proxy by testing how it changes in response to changing temperature. However, the further back in time we look, the more sparse the proxy temperature records become. Therefore the most reliable way to work out past temperatures is to combine different proxies – and to use data from many locations to screen out local temperature fluctuations.”

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Jimizo:

To quote your article...

Scientists must rely solely on indirect methods to look back further than recorded human history.

So it looks like there is not yet direct solid data to prove global temperatures of millenniums past.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

There is scientific consensus.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

What's truly sad is the children bleating on cue after being indoctrinated in what passes for education recently.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

It would be great to couple the signs and slogans with a call for no air conditioning in schools for the day/week/month. Then call on businesses to do the same, government office to do the same..etc. Maybe add on a boycott of buying anything that is not veggie food, or not riding any transportation, other meaningful changes that are necessary if we are to reverse emissions. Heck, maybe it would catch on in the US, China, and the other large polluting countries.

It would maybe show that it is not just up to "world leaders" to make this change happen. The people are the cause of climate change, not a handful of leaders juggling real ramifications to decisions on the drastic changes necessary to meet the scientific consensus.

Why wait for others to do it? You can cut carbon out of your lifestyle drastically on your own. If you have already and are protesting for others to do so then good on you.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Australians should contact organizations such as the U. S. Green Building Council, and the Leadership in Energy Efficient Design to see what the U. S. is doing to combat climate change.  Recycling and conservation are two important measures.  https://new.usgbc.org/education

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The only thing worse than anthropomorphic animals is kids that think they are adults because they saw something on TV.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Hilarious! I would be impressed if they skipped school to demand that they live in caves and to have their electronics taken away from them. They are demanding change while knowing full well that they will not have to sacrifice anything. It's the poor and destitute around that world that will pay the price for their day off from school. Until new energy sources become cost efficient we are all better off adapting to the environment as humans have always done in the past. Either that or go all in on nuclear power. Adapt and the poor can achieve some decent standard of living. Politicized scientists and Leftist authoritarians are over-hyping the idea of man made global warming for their own nefarious purposes. They certainly don't have the welfare of the human race in mind.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Good for the young people!!.. Not like the stupid old conservative dinosaurs..

0 ( +2 / -2 )

At this point I can only conclude that belief in global warming is like religion

Anti-climate change is a political ideology, based in which political party one believes in, rather than any basis in fact. Scientists who study climate, and spend their entire lives doing so, are in agreement it's real, based on facts, peer review, and reproducable science.

One of those things is like a religion alright, and the zealots who follow that religion are just as deluded and moronic as any cultist.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Those wanting an insight into where renewables are at in Australia can check this site and this very recent article on Australia's emissions. Interesting reading.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/renewables-hit-new-record-but-overall-emissions-canter-in-wrong-direction-70327/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The law of gravity, the laws of thermodynamics etc are natural laws that are universally acknowledged without exception because they are observable beyond a shadow of a doubt. 

While present day global warming is observable it is not possible to observe or measure distant past temperatures for comparison. Nor is it possible to predict with certainty that the present warming will continue. Thus it cannot be considered an incontrovertible fact. But rather it must be believed and therefore has sceptics, unlike the law of gravity. 

Here's a list of scientists on both sides of the issue:

https://thebestschools.org/features/top-climate-change-scientists/

Here are some dissenters:

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/02/13/why-weather-forecasters-question-climate-science/h93iEPs3YSwxPLJ58gWCxJ/amp.html

I'm not convinced either way. 

Let every individual make up thier own mind and respectful debate continue.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

So laughable these kids wouldn't know anything about Climate Change except the brainwashing agenda pushed onto them by their left wing teachers. Australian kids are falling behind in global standards because of poor quality teaching and now the teachers allow them to take a day off to protest about something they have no idea about.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Sorry guys, but given the choice on deciding which makes more sense as to being reality, a political ideology loses out over peer-reviewed science every time.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Sorry, but your pet ideological causes shouldn't be turned into excuses to skip class, or exams, or work, or whatever else you're looking to get out of.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Scientists who study climate, and spend their entire lives doing so, are in agreement it's real, based on facts, peer review, and reproducable science.

First of all, no, not all of them are. Remember that famous letter that was signed by all those scientists attesting to the reality of man-made climate change? It turns out that most of them were scientists in fields other than climatology.

Plus, in many scientific fields -- and climate study is no different -- it's pretty common practice to come up with research results that one wants.

Why? Follow the money. There's only so much funding out there, and a lot of competing interests trying to get it. How can climate researchers continue to get the sweet funding they get? By coming up with "findings" that exaggerate the nature of the problem.

Also, it's my understanding that most of these alarmist climate-change findings are based on computer models. Call me ignorant or call me skeptical, whichever you prefer, but it seems to me that whatever one is studying, computer models can be easily manipulated to (again) produce "findings" that are guaranteed to keep your funding coming in.

Do we have environmental problems? Of course we do. But the idea that human beings are causing climate change on a global scale is, to put it mildly, very hard to swallow.

Not when volcanic eruptions and other natural phenomena have been wreaking havoc on the environment for millions of years, and yet the Earth is still here.

Short of full-scale thermonuclear war, we cannot possibly destroy this planet.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Scientists who study climate, and spend their entire lives doing so, are in agreement it's real

Of course they are. The minute they say that it's not real, they can kiss their funding goodbye. Follow the money.

While we certainly have environmental problems, they are localized ones. Even the worst environmental disasters that involved human technology and activity -- like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima -- were largely localized in terms of the damage they caused.

And volcanic eruptions, along with other entirely natural phenomena, have been laying a beating on the earth's environment for millions of years -- long before evil human beings began building smokestacks, turbine engines, aerosol cans, and SUVs.

Yet the earth is still here.

This is weather, folks. It's WEATHER. The far left is so unhinged that they've even lost the concept of weather. It changes. It goes through warming and cooling patterns. And we have little if anything to do with it.

So let's stop with this "scientists say so" idea. Scientists are human beings and thus are not perfect. Scientists have been wrong -- colossally wrong! -- on MANY things throughout human history.

And did I mention how they have a demonstrated history of exaggerating, if not simply faking, the nature of the problems they study so as to keep their funding going? Oh yeah, I did.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

And still post just try to convince us that we should be leave their political ideology over scientists who dedicate their lives to studying this.

When are you guys going to realize not only that we are going to suddenly believe this entirely illogical stance but that we’re just going to get sick of listening to you guys trying to spread it?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Hakman:

Also, it's my understanding that most of these alarmist climate-change findings are based on computer models. 

Very good point. Scientists cannot magically go back in time to measure historical temperatures so they make educated guesses which may or may not be true.

I would say that the based on observable facts global warming is an unproven theory.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

There is a disconnect at work here.

It is fairly ironic that children protesting a mining company don’t seem to realize that everything in Australia is dependent on extractive industries and also explain why most things cost three times as much as they do in Japan.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Thousands of Australian students skipped school Friday to join nationwide protests demanding government action on climate change.

Primary and secondary students rallied in state capitals and rural areas across the country, in defiance of Prime Minister Scott Morrison who earlier said kids should stay in the classroom.

Skipping school sounds like fun. I wonder how many "thousands" of these primary, and secondary, school students actually skipped school at their teachers behest? One? Two?

In 2017 there were 3,849,225 students enrolled in schools across Australia, represen ting an increase of 50,999 (1.3%) on the previous year's figure.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4221.0main+features22017

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's utterly cheering to see the kids get involved with issues that will affect them in their own lifetime and those that come after them.

The lie that the younger generation don't care is exposed yet again. Great and one in the eye for those who portray kids as stupid/spoilt/lazy and so on.

Meanwhile, the older and entrenched generation continue to doubt documented scientific fact. Unless it comes to life-saving medicines/technology/machines/transport/automation etc.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

School is about becoming the leaders of tomorrow, not obeying the rules, following stupid dress codes and being a 'good loyal working dog'. I'm glad to see this activism. The 'adults' LIE + DENY to the kids all the time. Some 'leaders' have no maturity at all! Bring it on, kiddies! And tell 'PM' Scott Morrison + Donald Douchebag Trump and the others to shut up, because they ain't doing their jobs!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Hakman

This is weather, folks. It's WEATHER. The far left is so unhinged that they've even lost the concept of weather. It changes. It goes through warming and cooling patterns. And we have little if anything to do with it.

It's not WEATHER. It's CLIMATE. There is a big difference. And if you look at the trend over the last 10 years, it is going up.

And if you look at the main driver of increased global temperatures: CO2, it is going up. The science is very clear and unambiguous. We need to lower CO2 emissions if we want to stop catastrophe from happening. And we need to do it now.

Concerned Citizen

While present day global warming is observable it is not possible to observe or measure distant past temperatures for comparison.

Yes, it is. It is possible.

Nor is it possible to predict with certainty that the present warming will continue. Thus it cannot be considered an incontrovertible fact.

Actually it is. Because we know what is causing the temperature rise (CO2) we can accurately predict that warming will continue if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increases. That is incontrovertible fact.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

And still posters are trying to convince us that their political ideological religion makes more sense than logic and science.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

starpunk - School is about becoming the leaders of tomorrow, not obeying the rules, following stupid dress codes and being a 'good loyal working dog'.

In that case, why bother sending kids to these schools of rules, with their stupid dress codes, and dog training sessions? It's probably better that teachers drag their students to political rallies which promote the teacher's personal agendas. The hiring of new teachers will have to be more closely monitored, of course. I wonder if parental input will still be required in your new educational environment? No need to learn math when you have access to calculators. No need to learn geography when you have access to Google, and Yahoo maps. And no taxes will have to be spent heating, or cooling, those old, useless, school buildings.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Strangerland - And still posters are trying to convince us that their political ideological religion makes more sense than logic and science.

Ah, I think you have that backwards. It's your side who is trying to convince others that your view of global warming is best/correct. Since your side is the one trying to change the status quo, it's up to your side to convince more people that your side is guessing/predicting correctly.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

2020hindsights - Actually it is. Because we know what is causing the temperature rise (CO2) we can accurately predict that warming will continue if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increases. That is incontrovertible fact.

Yikes! The only cause of global warming is (CO2)? Really? Maybe that's why your side is having difficulty convincing more people to join the ban CO2 bandwagon.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites