News
Pam Blamey writes: How would possibly maybe well maybe well the media blueprint an even bigger job of reporting on “climate change”, you set a ask to? Well for a commence the media would possibly maybe well maybe well stop using Tony Abbott’s don’t-difficulty-the-horses euphemism of “climate change” and yelp to it what it is: global warming. And don’t stride riddles — spell it out! So normally I gather myself muttering, “Now what’s that supposed to mean?”
I counsel extraordinary of us, similar to tertiary-educated grandmothers cherish me, can’t gather the money for the paywalls of a pair of data outlets’ subscriptions that don’t give us what we need anyway, but rather cope with us cherish mushrooms — fed on manure and stored in the shaded.
Climate journalists would possibly maybe well maybe well blueprint better by interviewing credible and depended on climate scientists, cherish James Hansen, Hans Joachim “John” Schellnhuber, Professor Leslie Hughes, Graeme Pearman and Dr Joëlle Gergis, or NGOs and of us supporting communities on the ground, similar to First International locations peoples, who’re already struggling the impacts of world warming. Reflective, story stories from climate activists in thoroughly different states and territories wouldn’t hotfoot off target either; how theatrical or dreadful blueprint protests absorb to be to ranking any consideration from the media, let by myself the executive?
Reporters would possibly maybe well maybe well also declare us what the executive would possibly maybe well maybe well moreover no longer ever ranking around to telling us — how snide it is and how to put together for the worst. Take note the worn pronouncing, “forewarned is forearmed”?
And of route, while doing all the above, the media should always compare, title and declare the heinous fork-tongued misinformation and disinformation spun by the innocuous-sounding institutes and heart of attention on tanks of the Atlas Community, which don’t need us to know the truth about global warming, let by myself what we can blueprint about it.
Rosemary Jacob writes: I’m 88. I’m penning this in air conditioning, which costs me nothing as I rob pleasure in NT executive assistance with electrical energy costs for older residents AND I even absorb photo voltaic panels on my roof, again with executive assistance with aquire costs.
I even absorb paid no electrical energy costs since the photo voltaic power turned into as soon as installed in early 2016.
Why are of us allowed to manufacture dwellings without installing ranking admission to to renewable energy?
All originate-air automobile parking ought to be under roofs covered with photo voltaic panels and backed up by storage batteries. In rural areas, wind know-how ought to be installed wherever that you simply would possibly maybe moreover imagine. And why — provided that we are surrounded by tidal waters — are we no longer using tidal power?
We ought to be researching the persevering with pattern of ALL kinds of renewable energy as well as stringently reducing the ridiculous overuse of plastic.
I grew up in England for the length of World War II and so am in actuality familiar with recycling, yet I now are residing in a throwaway economic system!
We blueprint no longer need to manufacture faster automobiles but we DO need to stop using fossil fuels.
The largest advise is of us’s refusal to accept change, and we need an emergency declaration of war on human-triggered climate change.
The scientists cannot be ignored to any extent further!
Kerry Grant writes: Maybe we no longer read articles, regardless of how principal they are or what they would possibly maybe well maybe well moreover indicate, because we all in actuality feel we are shedding the war … there is too great noise from naysayers and big enterprise. Plus politicians don’t’ stand up for what’s simply appropriate, preferring to factual mouth platitudes.
Julia Bovard writes: Inviting to read your itemizing of Tony Abbott’s announcements about climate change. Who’s ceaselessly listening and why? There is a entire sector devoted to disparaging climate change. Abbott is factual one person, the Murdoch media another supply. Does this mean that any of them essentially know the leisure? No. Why then blueprint the media war to point to climate denial? It’s some distance no longer science factual thought.
It’s indubitably no longer great comfort to of us and wildlife caught up in the horrific fires and in actuality serious flooding which has fair these days underlined the insurmountable facts of climate change and ambiance destruction.
I am hoping the Liberals blueprint no longer commence to scuttle out Abbott, as they blueprint John Howard, to illustrate the steadiness of their beliefs.