Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[suffolkowner]

The environment is important yes and we should and must do what we can to clean up harmful gases which, contrary to popular belief does not include CO2. By now everyone has read that the forecast devastating increase in carbon levels isn't going to happen so why are we still going ahead with our self-imposed immolation of our economy yes Carney I am referring to your ridiculous requirement for a carbon capture facility and the continued taxes on a natural gas in our atmosphere. Here is what the Science Affairs correspondent for Time Mag. Brien Walsh has to say about his stance over the last decade in the wake of the demise of RCP8.5. “Those numbers shaped a decade and a half of climate journalism, including a lot of my own when I covered climate change at Time magazine. I didn’t always know — and didn’t always communicate — that the scenario behind the most apocalyptic, attention-getting findings was largely an attempt to imagine how bad things could get, not a true forecast. But I wasn’t alone. RCP 8.5 was a frequent background presence in climate journalism.”

RCP/SSP 8.5 was just a high emissions scenario, its been pretty much disregarded for the last 10 yrs or so as we havent followed that emissions pathway and no one ever thought we were going to

 

[Jarnhamar]

So, still the same government?

Guilbeault could quit caucus as soon as this week, government sources tell CTV News

Former environment and climate change minister Steven Guilbeault is considering resigning from the Liberal Party caucus over his concerns about climate policy, four sources in the federal government tell CTV News.

www.ctvnews.ca

Announcing announcements.

 

[dapaterson]

Announcing announcements.

The concept of a plan.

 

[suffolkowner]

If a flat earther is one who believes in natural processes and that true science is based upon proving itself wrong I plead guilty and I thank you for the complement. That is why every statement out of science is prefaced with the word theory.

theory is the highest standard of explanation in science, a well substantiated explanation of the natural world based on a large body of repeatedly confirmed facts, observations, and experiments.

 

[Lumber]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/canada-germany-lng-deal-9.7212863

Something something nothing achieved just negotiations and promises something something...

 

[YZT580]

RCP/SSP 8.5 was just a high emissions scenario, its been pretty much disregarded for the last 10 yrs or so as we havent followed that emissions pathway and no one ever thought we were going to

you think so, perhaps in science but certainly not in the news. Scientists didn't contradict the news either; they were too busy soliciting for grants. It was advertised as a truism to all of our children or grandchildren as they were growing up. Ask them. Britain was advocating for a 5 degree increase by 2100 and that was just within the last few months. Hurricanes were going to get stronger and more frequent (they didn't), the drought was more severe although we still haven't come close to the dirty thirties. Snow was going to vanish and I am still hoping for that one as I shoveled more last year than in the preceding 10. Its called weather and it is always changing. Start with the medieval cold period and look back because they were growing potatoes in Greenland then. It was warmer then then now. We have based our planning on a lie; it was not just a high emissions scenario it was THE high emissions future and it was unavoidable unless you sent $5.00 to the Al Gore retirement fund. the definition of Theory from Webster's should give you pause in your thinking. I will highlight where it differs from yours. If it walks like a duck....
"An organized body of ideas as to the truth of something, usually derived from the study of a number of facts relating to it but sometimes entirely a result of exercising speculative imagination. knowledge of a science or art derived from such study and speculation . Have you followed the ARGO experiment and reports? There has been no noticeable changes either positive or negative in any of the 3 oceans being observed. Water temperatures take a long time to change but ARGO been floating for 15 years or more so it should be showing an increase if the doom and gloom theories were correct. Much of the global flooding has simply been water returning to where it was previously. People built on a flood plane and guess what, they got flooded. This is true in Britain and B.C.

 

[suffolkowner]

you think so, perhaps in science but certainly not in the news. Scientists didn't contradict the news either; they were too busy soliciting for grants. It was advertised as a truism to all of our children or grandchildren as they were growing up. Ask them. Britain was advocating for a 5 degree increase by 2100 and that was just within the last few months. Hurricanes were going to get stronger and more frequent (they didn't), the drought was more severe although we still haven't come close to the dirty thirties. Snow was going to vanish and I am still hoping for that one as I shoveled more last year than in the preceding 10. Its called weather and it is always changing. Start with the medieval cold period and look back because they were growing potatoes in Greenland then. It was warmer then then now. We have based our planning on a lie; it was not just a high emissions scenario it was THE high emissions future and it was unavoidable unless you sent $5.00 to the Al Gore retirement fund. the definition of Theory from Webster's should give you pause in your thinking. I will highlight where it differs from yours. If it walks like a duck....
"An organized body of ideas as to the truth of something, usually derived from the study of a number of facts relating to it but sometimes entirely a result of exercising speculative imagination. knowledge of a science or art derived from such study and speculation . Have you followed the ARGO experiment and reports? There has been no noticeable changes either positive or negative in any of the 3 oceans being observed. Water temperatures take a long time to change but ARGO been floating for 15 years or more so it should be showing an increase if the doom and gloom theories were correct. Much of the global flooding has simply been water returning to where it was previously. People built on a flood plane and guess what, they got flooded. This is true in Britain and B.C.

I dont remember anyone talking about RCP/SSP 8.5 in that manner. Whats funny is that the new high emissions scenario crosses 8.5 only 20 years later

 

[HavokFour]

Here comes another by-election.

Guilbeault to resign as an MP over Carney government’s climate policies

Former environment and climate change minister Steven Guilbeault will resign as a member of Parliament, CTV News has learned.

www.ctvnews.ca

Steven Guilbeault announces he will resign his seat this summer, remain as Liberal MP until then

Prime Minister Mark Carney thanked Steven Guilbeault for his contributions to government.

nationalpost.com

Archive

 

[ytz]

Even if this were true, and I'm not going to spend time digging around settled science, but even if it were true, these two things highlighted are not the same thing.

Even if climate scientists were presenting the worst case scenario, it does not mean CO2 isn't harmful.

We do Op Lentus every year now. And there's still people saying it's all a hoax. Oh well.....

Good riddance, he was always an outlier, even if he was in the Green party. I think the environment is obviously hugely important, but he was far too dogmatic and ignored practical realities. They can eliminate all ICEs tomorrow, and the solutions will still completely rely on petrochemicals, so oil will keep flowing.

It's always sucked that we got these activists types on the environment side instead of the people who saw it as an economic opportunity. We should have built a massive supply chain for batteries right from the minerals, which in turn would have led to more EVs and more drone production in Canada. We could have pushed High Speed Rail and transit projects earlier. We should have built HVDC corridors across the country. Etc. Instead activists like Guilbault get their shot at power and can't get past the fight from their activist days. And in the end when people don't associate environmental policy complimenting economics and quality of life improvements, they get turfed and the policies get reversed.

 

[QV]

We do Op Lentus every year now. And there's still people saying it's all a hoax. Oh well.....

Piss poor land use planning and shoddy forestry management does not make a climate crisis.

I was reading the other day that a temperature record was beat from over 80 years ago... by 0.6 degrees.... so effectively practically the same temp was reached as was reached over 80 years ago. It's a cycle.

 

[Altair]

We do Op Lentus every year now. And there's still people saying it's all a hoax. Oh well.....

Those who dont believe in climate change could have every scientist, all the evidence, irrefutable proof thrust at them and they won't ever change their minds.

I've stopped arguing about it. Those who believe in it i will talk to them about it, those who dont, peace on them.

 

[HavokFour]

Another long awaited thing to watch for next week.

Carney announces refreshed national AI strategy will be released next week​

The strategy is expected to detail Ottawa's plans for the rapidly evolving technology. In its spring economic update, the federal government shared the six pillars that will underpin the national strategy:

• Protecting Canadians and safeguarding our democracy.
• Empowering Canadians
• Powering AI adoption for shared prosperity.
• Building the Canadian sovereign AI foundation.
• Scaling Canadian champions.
• Building trusted partnerships and global alliances.

The descriptions of the pillars also mention "giving access to AI training and education for all Canadians," and "modern privacy and online safety laws, strong national AI safety capabilities, and secure government systems."

 

[Jarnhamar]

Those who dont believe in climate change could have every scientist, all the evidence, irrefutable proof thrust at them and they won't ever change their minds.

There's two sub-classes of people that seem lumped in with non-believers.

1. Non-believers akin to people who think the world is flat; and

2. People who know the climate is changing with humans contributing to it but don't think cities will be under water in a couple decades unless we give the government and science organizations blank checks to do and spend whatever they want.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Piss poor land use planning and shoddy forestry management does not make a climate crisis.

I was reading the other day that a temperature record was beat from over 80 years ago... by 0.6 degrees.... so effectively practically the same temp was reached as was reached over 80 years ago. It's a cycle.

A much better indicator of the global impact of extreme weather changes is the ocean temperature. Normal cyclical things like el Nino drive the weather across the planet for that year, but this is something that is more directly related to things like more extreme tornados and other storms.

0.9 C increase in ocean temp doesn't sound like much, until you think about the volume of water we are talking about and how much energy that is. It's a macro change on the biggest single system on our planet, and enough that things like currents are starting to shift, which will completely break some countries but still massively impact all the coastal communities. Additionally all the absorbed CO2 is enough to change the acidity which impacts the whole macro ecosystem of the ocean by changing anchors in the food chain, migration patterns etc.

But sure, it's a cycle, and everything is just fine, and humanity isn't slowly marching it's way towards making the planet significantly less habitable for itself.

 

[YZT580]

We do Op Lentus every year now. And there's still people saying it's all a hoax. Oh well.....



It's always sucked that we got these activists types on the environment side instead of the people who saw it as an economic opportunity. We should have built a massive supply chain for batteries right from the minerals, which in turn would have led to more EVs and more drone production in Canada. We could have pushed High Speed Rail and transit projects earlier. We should have built HVDC corridors across the country. Etc. Instead activists like Guilbault get their shot at power and can't get past the fight from their activist days. And in the end when people don't associate environmental policy complimenting economics and quality of life improvements, they get turfed and the policies get reversed.

with what? All the money went into bird abattoirs.

 

[suffolkowner]

A much better indicator of the global impact of extreme weather changes is the ocean temperature. Normal cyclical things like el Nino drive the weather across the planet for that year, but this is something that is more directly related to things like more extreme tornados and other storms.

0.9 C increase in ocean temp doesn't sound like much, until you think about the volume of water we are talking about and how much energy that is. It's a macro change on the biggest single system on our planet, and enough that things like currents are starting to shift, which will completely break some countries but still massively impact all the coastal communities. Additionally all the absorbed CO2 is enough to change the acidity which impacts the whole macro ecosystem of the ocean by changing anchors in the food chain, migration patterns etc.

But sure, it's a cycle, and everything is just fine, and humanity isn't slowly marching it's way towards making the planet significantly less habitable for itself.

correct

 

[suffolkowner]

Piss poor land use planning and shoddy forestry management does not make a climate crisis.

I was reading the other day that a temperature record was beat from over 80 years ago... by 0.6 degrees.... so effectively practically the same temp was reached as was reached over 80 years ago. It's a cycle.

What cycle? Milankovitch cycles are for cooling not heating

There's two sub-classes of people that seem lumped in with non-believers.

1. Non-believers akin to people who think the world is flat; and

2. People who know the climate is changing with humans contributing to it but don't think cities will be under water in a couple decades unless we give the government and science organizations blank checks to do and spend whatever they want.

430ppm CO2 represents 17m +/- sea level rise and CO2eq is actually 560 and thus represents an even higher sea level rise, meanwhile we are not at net zero yet thus the ppm have not stabilised and therfore 17m doesnt represent the actual risk of SLR

 

[ArmyRick]

Mods, please re-open the climate change thread. this conversation belongs there.

 

[ytz]

Those who dont believe in climate change could have every scientist, all the evidence, irrefutable proof thrust at them and they won't ever change their minds.

I've stopped arguing about it. Those who believe in it i will talk to them about it, those who dont, peace on them.

I was at a military grad school in 2017 during Trump's first term (PG exchange). The prof was discussing climate change during a break. She was shocked to find out that it was an uncontroversial opinion that it was real. She said that wouldn't have been the case even 5 prior. Likewise, I haven't heard any colleague (CAF or PS) say this is a hoax in years. Maybe a decade. Sure, solutions are debatable. But the mere existence of it? Just not controversial. Institutions move forward one DWD at a time.

I'm sure I'll be old and out of touch to the kids in a few years too. Such is life.

On the politics of it, I'm just disappointed we missed some real economic opportunities.

 

[QV]

I was at a military grad school in 2017 during Trump's first term (PG exchange). The prof was discussing climate change during a break. She was shocked to find out that it was an uncontroversial opinion that it was real. She said that wouldn't have been the case even 5 prior. Likewise, I haven't heard any colleague (CAF or PS) say this is a hoax in years. Maybe a decade. Sure, solutions are debatable. But the mere existence of it? Just not controversial. Institutions move forward one DWD at a time.

I'm sure I'll be old and out of touch to the kids in a few years too. Such is life.

On the politics of it, I'm just disappointed we missed some real economic opportunities.

It's obviously exaggerated to meet ideological goals, like many things. Otherwise heads of state wouldn't be jet setting across the country for unnecessary events, such as photo ops. We've all seen the flight tracking apps showing loads of jets in the airspace spewing tons of jet exhaust. One of our recent champions of climate, PMJT, polluted more on one weekend surfing trip to Tofino than I will my entire existence. I'll believe human induced climate change is very serious when unnecessary air travel is significantly curtailed.