Dear Tony Abbott

two small electronic kit components

image credit: futurlec.com

This is what carbon dioxide detectors look like before a technician puts them into a nice portable case with a meter attached. You can order one online for less than US$20. The same website also has a range of other detectors designed to detect different invisible, odourless gases.

I would have thought that you might have stopped digging now on this gobsmacking line you’ve been running about how vewy, vewy difficult it is for anybody to detect an invisible, odourless gas, but not only are you still insisting that CO2 is weightless, you keep on implying that it cannot be detected. Doesn’t anybody in the Liberal Party know how to use a search engine? Because finding these sold online took me all of 2 minutes.

Of course, carbon dioxide is also not the only carbon emission that will be being regulated under the new carbon pricing scheme, another fact of which you are no doubt well aware but are choosing to simply ignore in favour of simplistic misrepresentation.

Your contempt for the voters of this nation is outrageous.



Categories: culture wars, education, environment, media, parties and factions, technology

Tags: , , ,

5 replies

  1. Hahaha WIN. No gold stars for you Abbott; conservatism proves yet again that its force is through ignorance. Very effective tactic.

  2. The “Liberal” party is not exactly the “evidence based science” party.
    I still want to sue them for false advertising. Liberal. HAH.

  3. Okay, casting my mind back to about year 8 chemistry class (so this was back in 1984, back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth), I can remember learning that CO2 was a colourless, odourless and tasteless gas (COT) which was heavier than air and which was present in our atmosphere in moderate amounts. I can remember learning that “air” is a mixture of gases, primarily gaseous nitrogen (N2) and oxygen (O2) and that the gas which is most abundant in the atmospheric mix was actually N2, coming in at about 25%. O2 was about another 20%.
    Double checking this now (because I know my memory has gotten rather rusty over the years), I discover that I was extremely wrong about the approximate percentage of gaseous nitrogen – it’s actually about 78%. O2 is closer to 21%, followed by water vapour (H2O) at anywhere between 1 – 5%, then Argon (Ar), a “noble gas”, at about 1%, followed by CO2 at approximately 0.03% of the atmosphere.
    (Info from <a href="http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryfaqs/f/aircomposition.htmhttp://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryfaqs/f/aircomposition.htm</a&gt;.)
    Double-checking my science there took approximately three to five seconds, the majority of which time was spent opening a new tab for the google search and coming up with the search terms. Then another 1 – 2s actually reading to check my percentages. Hardly a huge expenditure of time, but it stops me looking (as much of) a fool on Teh Intarwebs.

  4. The “weightless” quote also amazes me, I suppose he was trying to say as it is a gas it is weightless, just sort of floats about up there causing no-one any harm.
    Carbon Dioxide happens to be a gas at room temperature. Cool it and you get dry ice which is course is neither “weightless’ nor a gas.
    Dihydrogen monoxide happens to be a liquid at room temperature but becomes a “weightless” gas when heated (steam).
    I was entertained when Mike Quigley took the reporting of the NBN “Hacking” to task in such a way as to make the media look foolish. All he needed to do was present the facts. Although a little technical, it needed to be done and showed how the media has “dumbed down” issues.
    Would be nice to see a climate scientist take the same confrontational approach to the media on climate science.

  5. Someone point a CO2 fire extinguisher at his head and pull the trigger. Or lock him in a sealed room for several days breathing his own hot air. Let’s see if he still believes that it is impossible to detect an odourless and invisible gas – after he passes out and is woken up again of course. I know we’re not supposed to have religious tests for politicians, but maybe we need a “[redacted] test” to weed out those who failed primary school level chemistry.

%d bloggers like this: