The thread to discuss the Grand Debacle that is Australian Politics at the moment.
Let’s insist that our politicians and commentators use accurate terms
- The Carbon Free Market is a Carbon Forced Market.
- “Carbon” is carbon dioxide.
- Pollution is something proven to damage people or the environment. Where is the evidence?
- Carbon credits are not a commodity they are a fiat currency, and a form of tax payment.
Finally, the voters get to pick.
Dear Voters:
When you pick up that piece of paper on September 7th, don’t think about what the Labor Party is promising. Instead, please remember what they have inflicted on us over the last 6 years. Do you want more of the same? Me either.
We would like our country back, please.
Cheers,
Speedy
441
Alas Speedy, it is a fact that 50% of the Australian population are of below average intelligence, and they vote.
Rudd is desperately trying to secure the moron vote. All they have to do is promise more handouts and they’ll have the moron vote all sewn up.
I overheard someone the other day say they were going to vote for Rudd because he gave them $900 last time. I politely asked if he knew where the $900 came from and he responded “From the government.. Der??”. These are the people that decide the future of our country. Scary really.
390
Heywood
It’s not so bad that they’re below average intelligence, it’s that they are poorly educated. If they could understand that government money is not “free”, then maybe they would start piecing the jigsaw together.
Alas, the teaching profession and the media have been flooded with individuals who have no understanding of the real-world economics.
Tempting as it may be, I prefer it if idiots still get their vote – I’d just be happier if the idiots understood the consequences of their action beyond the limited scope of their somewhat diminished concentration span.
Cheers,
Speedy
280
No Speedy, its the educated who vote Green. See my comment below.
62
Ignorance is not a crime and education is no guarantee to against ignorance.
The ignorant are just as entitled to their vote as everyone else. Ignoramouses should be kept out of Government, but how would you measure that ? Politics does seem to attract the ignorant.
20
I have an interesting observation to share:
The more educated I become, the more I realise just how ignorant I am.
50
Rareke:
You’ve paraphrased Socrates paradox:
“The wisdom of Socrates is only limited by the understanding of his own ignorance”
Or words similar to that effect. The other end of the spectrum is the conceited academic – let’s call him Tim Flannery – who just runs off self-confirming bias.
Cheers,
Speedy
40
Or a little educashun is a dangerous thing, but being given authority exceeding ones competence is far more so.
20
“Educated” ? in not classical science studies? Or more policy/ideology based brainwashing studies?
10
Ace
Educated eh? Do the alarmists have blog sites like this where open debate is encouraged (or even permitted), where the actual science (you know, stuff with physical EVIDENCE) is promulgated?
Sites like De Smog Blog and “Skeptical Science” exist to push the party creed, not to dissemble the truth.
Cheers,
Speedy.
30
Heywood
One solution to the ‘moron’ problem is that everyone should have two votes.
However, you lose of these votes if you are a net cash recipient of government cash funds – there would have to be some exceptions, like the police, armed forces, doctors and nurses etc. However, the government bureaucrats, the welfare addicts, and the ‘climate scientists’ would definitely lose one vote.
Unfortunately, those who actually pay for government are always discriminated against, while those who draw succour from it are given undue influence.
This type of voting system should mean you would get a Labor Party in power, perhaps once every generation. That would be just often enough to demonstrate to the electorate their ingrained incompetence and deceit.
115
Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747-1813)
150
Errrh, no.
It would piss off 85% of Age Pensioners, who paid taxes all their lives and who are not self-funded retirees, and are the fastest growing voting bloc in the country.
It would therefore ensure you got a Labor Party in power (since they would promise to rescind it) until the last of the baby boomers die off – about a generation.
40
Heywood…I think youve inverted things, its the less intelligent who are less easily lead by “intellectual” arguments about “the environment”. I mean this seriously. Dont believe me, Orwell said it first, though his “proles” were less defined by intelligence than education. Our only hope, concluded Winston Smith, is the intractable nature of the Proles.
This is undoubtedly true. Less self-consciously “intelligent” people are more concerned by immediate and tangible things, like their electricit bill. It takes “intelligence” to worry about a half degree rise in temperature. It takes a full blown “intellectual” to becom the kind of [snip crass] that wants to starve humanity of 90% of their electricity consumption.
Trust me, its the “intelligent” people who are easily manipulated. Dont take my word for it, refer to James Randi. He has long pointed out how the simplest conjurors can fool the most highly qualified observers.
90
Its been a great 5 years.
They successfully negotiated us through the global financial crisis and today our economy has grown in world standing (14th to 12th), one of the few with a AAA rating from ALL 3 major rating agencies, has one of the lowest unemployment rates, low interest rates (with still room to move) and one of the lowest debt to gdp ratios in the developed world. They have also given pensioners a real increase, put in a sensible parental leave scheme (not the libs rich persons one), started to transition us away from fossil fuels to renewables with a carbon tax that will also encourage new industries and jobs in one of the fastest growing industries. This will make us more energy independent and protect the planet for ourselves and our grankids from climate shocks already occurring. They have made sure that super profits from our resources give us a better return and increased infrastructure and computers in schools and increased educational information. They are building a technological infrastructure that will make sure we benefit from future developments and stay ahead of the curve. They overcompensated the lower income and disadvantaged and have an ambitious plan to tackle the homeless issue and disabilities. Far from shying away from the big issues they have had an ambitious reform plan and instigated many policies to transition us into a bright future when the globe moves out of its troubles. Instead they could have done the liberal thing and hunckered in hording money and let small business collapse, increased unemployment etc. We were lucky labor was in charge. The refugee situation would have been resolved a long time ago with a regional solution that put people at the end of the queue and rewarded those at the front for their patience. Instead the libs have blocked that solution for political purposes as they do with the carbon tax preferring to be focused on their own power at the expense of Australia and people. Think deeply about the alternative, 70 billion dollar black hole from the libs and a total overturning of everything causing much uncertainty and confusion or a steady as she goes approach for a party that is doing a good job with a minority parliament.
Future wise Labor brought in the Disability scheme and the better schools program. I notice now that the libs are tentatively agreeing with everything labor is doing as they have finally realised they have no policies and so are tacking themselves onto Labors.
889
Yes Michael, we really believe Labor and all their wonderful schemes…..
281
Hook, line and sinker.
A walking talking breathing example of the moron I described above.
445
Not clear on what you mean – was anything he wrote actually incorrect?
Less government spending than Howard, less tax, and a better-performing economy than virtually every other country in the world.
What was it you were saying about “morons”?
857
Actually, pretty-much EVERY claim made, is incorrect.
If I actually thought it would make the slightest bit of difference to you or the other moron, I’d address the issues line by line.
However, since it won’t, there is little point in bothering.
404
Don’t reply to Michael for his sake, but please do reply for the silent fence sitters.
And inspire the sympathetic onlookers to pick up your wisdom and spread it on.
181
Ah Vince fresh from the Drum and meandering Michael with you. Every word Michael wrote is a lie, especially about the ‘refugee’ problem which did not exist until Rudd operating under his only motive, self-aggrandisement, scrapped Howard’s pacific solution.
Rudd is a shadow, an ego with no will or conviction other than being in the public eye.
Rudd’s reaction to the GFC exemplifies the witlessness and incompetence of him, his government and his policies. As noted here Australia did not have to spend a cent against the GFC because China was combating the GFC by investing Fixed Asset Investments to the tune of almost $600 billion. To do that it required coal and during the GFC Australia’s coal exports doubled and the price for coal trebled.
Instead of spending $21 BILLION in $900 gifts which most people used to pay down credit cards, buy shoes or piss up the wall with no lasting infrastructure benefit all Rudd had to do was count the dollars as the coal went to China. He didn’t count the dollars he spent them.
Everything Rudd and the wretched Gillard have down has become a mess; from the BER to the Pink Batts to the NBN; they are incompetent beyond hope.
It is testimony to the great advantages and strengths of Australia that we are not worse off than a 1/4 TRILLION debt with no infrastructure to show for it.
And this is the point that the stooges and rats of the ALP and the loons of the Greens don’t comprehend; which is how much better Australia would have been without Rudd and Gillard.
375
I reckon the Ruddashians are just an election vehicle for the ALP. They know that using the populist they internally hate the guts of is the only way to gain power.
Then they can just flip the leader and carry on with their class warfare agenda.
I think Contempt is the word that spring to mind
202
I hope we never find out if you’re correct Madjak. But I suspect you are.
Cheers,
Speedy
70
Australian GDP (2012 est.): $986.7bn (19th in world). Real annual growth (2012 est.): 3.6%, up from (2011 est.): 2.4% (94th in world). GDP per capita (2012 est.): $43,300 (20th in world).
Taken in combination, Australia is hardly out-performing other countries, and in fact has declining growth.
It guess it depends on how virtual your virtuality is.
70
You have to remember Labor in Australia and Labour in the (UK) are dominated by the union barons, the power obsessed, eople you would never to trust to run a business and young idealists.
Hence the incompetence and government by whim.
90
Micheal, you really are a gullible fool.
174
Hey michael,
If your mob are going to take credit for the disability care scheme, would you care to explain how it is forcing over 300,000 australian taxpayers to contribute to the scheme when they will always be actively discriminated against being covered by the scheme.
Would you care also to explain why it’s called an insurance scheme when for the > 300,000 taxpayers mentioend above woud consider it to be yet another labour party extortion racket?
181
The scheme certainly cannot be called “insurance” by any honest person. It is nothing similar to insurance.
It could possibly be called “forced charity” although, there’s a complex philosophical argument over whether charity at the barrel of a gun is in fact charitable. Let’s skip that part before we get too far off topic.
Probably “wealth transfer” is the most accurate description.
241
“Wealth Transfer” – you mean kindof like communism, right?
240
No, more like a mugger in a dark alley.
130
Michael,
You have just written the possibly biggest load of BS in the recorded history of political critical evaluation.
You also, not coincidentally, fervently believe in CAGW in spite of there existing no tangible evidence of high climate sensitivity. Should there have ever been any doubt that skeptics were correct in failing to be convinced of the validity of conclusions drawn by climate scentists and alarmists, you have just dispelled any doubt in just one post. It can be clearly seen from the above that you are delusional, not just in the sene of a mindless barracker for a side, but actually the complete tin foil hat, bat-shit crazy kind of delusional. Seek help!
255
381
Here’s a followup, reinforcing the point:
http://barnabyisright.com/2013/08/03/5-years-and-alp-admits-economy-has-not-recovered-3-more-wont-help/
110
How could a Government fail to steer Quarry Oz fail through an economic crisis?
We survived despite the current administration’s “best efforts”.
20
Very concise, Tel. Plus let’s not forget Rudd’s given his stamp of approval to what I’m now calling Cypress Lite – a tax taken directly from your bank accounts.
Never mind it’s only 0.05% now, because once this line has been crossed they can ramp up the theft rate later.
And you can bet Mr Goldman Sachs and his pet Rabbit will say NOTHING about this and will DO NOTHING to stop it or repeal it when in government.
90
I see no reason to assume Abbott is a GS man. In fact, I think one of the main sources of Abbott discontentment portrayed in the media is GS-induced spruiking for “their man”, Malcolm Turnbull (in addition of course to fear mongering from leftists on the other side based mainly on religious anti-Catholic hatred and prejudice). The link there to Malcolm is anything but covert, while Abbott you’ll notice is often given a trashing on Goldman owned Ch9, through subtle comments from Lisa Wilkinson and her fellow Labor-lites. I up thumbed your very true comment about the thin end of the Cypriot wedge however. You are spot on. If it stays it will prove that Abbott has been brought to heel and forced to compromise his ideology, rather than that he is necessarily complicit in it. Only time will tell.
50
I think the confusing part is founded in the way conservatives in this country call themselves Liberals.
The confusion then spills over to the Turnbull issue because Malcolm is very much Liberal, to the extent that he would be more at home in the ALP.
I see Tony as a conservative, either afraid to surf on principles, or reined in by the power that exists in GS, and other foreign influence Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations. These forces act behind the scenes and have far more influence than most people give them credit.
Personally I tend to regard Turnbull as a treacherous untrustworthy mole. I don’t trust him. He’s like Rudd with a brain.
110
Yes, admittedly I’m operating off stereotype and cynicism when making that comment. Without inside sources or a better political nous for modelling the motivations and methods of the players I don’t know how to be any more accurate. This is mainly due to a lack of interest, as I would rather know how to be creative and technically build useful things than analyse politics. All you
oldieselder statesmen can analyse all day and probably do a better job of it 🙂 , so am happy to learn insights from MV, yourself, and others here.I guess I’m just saying that birds of a feather not only flock together but will adopt the feathers of others for the benefits of flocking.
30
These are the same ratings agencies now claiming in court that investors should not view these ratings as reliable for investing purposes? The same ratings agencies that rated companies and dodgy derivatives as AAA which led directly to the troubles of the GFC?
Yeah, thought so … those agencies…
171
Even feral lefty John Quiggin agrees that AAA ratings are bulldust…
http://johnquiggin.com/2013/07/30/doublethink-on-triple-a/comment-page-1/
80
FFS Michael, you are posting something factual here? The Grumpy True Disbelivers are hardly what you’d call swing voters they made up their “minds” straight after they lost the last election. taint for turning now. They just hope the last three years of dummy spit at the ALP are coming to an end and they can dummy spit at the Libs for a while.
424
Catamon, do you like cheese and biscuits?
50
Yonniestone,
I’m afraid Catmongst will have to eat something else.
Kevin Rudd of the ALP has shut these two Australian businesses though his economic mismanagement.
1. Cheese & Dairy Hines Farm, near Warrnambool in Victoria, has been placed into receivership by the Commonwealth Bank.
2. The 23-year-old Australian gourmet biscuit producer Byron Bay Cookies has been placed into voluntary administration.
Along with some 1,000 other ones in July 2013 alone.
Maybe imported ones will do? 🙂
191
Sorry I was trying to be helpful, you see when someone breaks into a psychotic rant you can calm them down by being nice and changing the subject, it was my best effort online whereas if there in person I would have gladly slapped them in the face.
To help them. 😉
90
As long as its accompanied by a good Chardonnay. 🙂
Ahhh… the reaction of a frightened political illiterate. Mummy may revoke your computer rights and send you off to bed without your teddy if you spak like that Yonnie? XX
417
Political illiterate?
This coming from you and your ilk, all you fools seem to do here is get shot down in flames scientifically and then try to back it up with left wing drivel perpetuated in what passes for a University nowadays.
What an existence you lead, really just take off those blinkered green colored glasses and have a peek at reality if you dare, problem is there’ll be no more limelight soon for the green freak show, no more money, no more hiding behind socialist governments.
Feeling a bit frightened Oedipus?
121
You have cheese, with chardonnay?
Good grief. You should not mix milk products with a “buttery” wine.
You need a good pinot gris, or a riesling, to go with cheese.
Hmmm, thinking of which, it is about that time …
40
Ah… after a period in remission the fur-brained one gets stuck into the Nepeta cataria again.
64
Cat,
How on earth could this government have done a worse job? In 5 or 6 years, could they have had 4 different unelected Prime Ministers, instead of two? Could they have had more infighting, more destabilizing, more factional animosity than the Hatfields versus the McCoys, and more political backstabbing than the Borgias could have cobbled together? More resignations for “family reasons” from government ministers who supposedly represented the cream of what Labor had to offer? Could they have gotten even deeper into debt ($500billion anyone?), could they have made our borders anymore insecure ( a problem they deliberately caused killing more than a thousand people lured by hubris -actively creating a calamity where none existed)? Could they have killed more roof insulation installers than the 4 they are responsible for? Blown any more manufacturing jobs out of the water? Done more damage to the car industry, damaged more small business confidence, trashed the reputations of more government departments through wildly inaccurate forecasts making them a laughing stock (treasury springs to mind)? Made up any more schemes on the back of a beer coaster oblivious to such trivial considerations as consequences and repercussions?
Yep, Cat, they’ve done a great job, in a parallel universe where the laws of physics, not to mention economics, don’t apply.
225
Good to see you have the script from Lib HQ Winston. But dont they want more of the three word slogans peppered through it??
420
Unlike Rudd’s farce of a speech.. ALL slogan, or Abbott, Abbott, Abbott.
Poor guy is acting like he’s in opposition and is totally fixated on Mr Abbott.
Mr Abbott soooo has his number 🙂
93
Catamonsgt:
Try to keep up, Mr. Kevin Rudd of the ALP has just released his own slogan:
Funny – it’s a BIG 3 WORD slogan.
I’ve gotta Zip — OOPS another 3 words?
Who’d you trust? — OOPS another 3 words?
3 new 457’s? — OOPS another 3 words.
You’re a clown Catamongst. 🙂
132
Let’s count how many times KRudd says “three word slogan” …….. DOH !! 😉
71
The difference between you and me, Cat, is that if the Libs had just delivered 6 years of dysfunctional and incompetent government, with policy on the run without consultation, and with massive blow outs due to an orgy of spending on nothing worthwhile, I would be baying for their blood with equal enthusiasm and vigor as I am now, and would place my vote elsewhere. I certainly think 6 years is long enough to decide whether someone is capable of governing, and if they are not then they need to go no matter which side they are on.
You, OTOH, vote for Labor, in spite of any personal denials to the contrary, and defend them come what may. You know that they have been absolutely pathetic, completely unprofessional in their governance and that they are rapidly spiraling the country into an economic abyss, but you still don’t change your voting preference and so share culpability with the drongoes you champion. Quality of governance is obviously not important to you, so long as they are a left leaning party in power in your eyes that’s all that matters. Just how bad do they have to be for you to apply the killrust and take the welfare of the nation into account? Do you really think another 3 years of failure is what the country needs right now?
172
You know, I never realised it before, but Aussie politics is a bit like watching American football, when you don’t know the rules.
The two teams line up, the whistle blows, there is an almighty punch up, a ball gets thrown down field and may make some ground, or maybe not, and every-so-often, one team will get across the touchline, and bring on a specialist kicker to attempt a shot at goal, and then they go off again.
Kevin Rudd is Labours specialist kicker. They bring him on to kick a goal, and then send him off again, only to bring him back when they want another kick made.
30
Rereke,
The analogy runs deeper than you think, since Labor have already sacked their own Quarterback twice, and knocked themselves out throwing multile intercept passes and fumbling repeatedly. Not a Heisman trophy winner among them.
40
Catamon Of course I respect your right to your opinions even though they do seem based on the views of the Fairfax press and undergraduate leaflets. But perhaps even you and others of your ilk such as Michael, cannot dispute the inept way the ALP government introduce and implement policy. Recall the pink batts fiasco. The mining tax with its exemptions that mean miners will pay very little. The East Timor solution which didn’t eventuate. Rudd’s walking away from the “greatest moral challenge of our time”.. Gillard’s “no carbon tax in a government I lead”. Rudd’s scrapping of Howard’s “Pacific Solution” in 2008 only for it to be embraced 5 years later by both Rudd and Gillard. The Malaysian solution that was ruled illegal by the High Court. The just announced FBT policy announcement made with no consultation or discussion with the motor industry which claims it will have a significant negative impact, The BER which was implemented after the GFC had abated and which gave the large building companies significant windfalls in the form of payments to management rather than to the small builders it was supposed to help. The NDIS which has yet to announce who will be included and who excluded. The “Gonski” policy which does little to address the appallingly low academic standard of many who enrol in university training programs. Hawke and Keating put policies out for weeks of discussion and carefully considered how best to introduce and implement their policies. You only have to look at how Rudd, only a few days ago, introduced the changes to FBT to see how little has been learned.
61
Rupert would be proud of you Ian. 🙂 I take it you are referring to the program that actually reduced the rate of fires associated with home insulation installations which the more credulous among the population have been conditioned to see as a failure?
Yup, the framework is there but it needs extending so that Gina screams more. they could have done better.
Malaysian one was better policy, and PNG may be better from the perspective of discouraging people from dangerous boats.
Yup, and she didn’t. We got an ETS with a fixed price period. Try again, Rupert is getting less happy with you. 🙁
And where in the constitution is there any requirement for the Government to consult on tax matters??
Fine program, and most importantly, followed through. Of course there are economic illiterates out there who think it should have been cut, but some less partisan people actually see the value of an announced program like this being completed.
Fine program, and pretty much everybody has signed up now. 🙂 Poor Tones. 🙁
Again good policy and far beyond what the alternative (LoL) is capable of conceiving.
Ian, this election will be like all the others and come down to a binary solution. Makes you vote and take your choice. If we as a nation are stupid enough to vote in a mob with no vision and the demonstrated incompetence seen in the last 6 years of opposition, fine, we get the government you deserve. XX
116
Catamon,
Your desperation is showing.
So co-opting East Timor into an ill conceived knee jerk plan to accept refugees for which they had no infrastructure, and importantly without even consulting them (in a mark of utter disrespect) is good policy? Surely you jest. Then trading off accepting 4 times as many refugees as we sent to Malaysia on a limited number deal that would have been exhausted in a few weeks, was a good idea?
BER- did you know that one of our local schools had a half built school library which it tore down so it could have one paid for under BER? Does that sound like money well spent to you?
GONSKI- Labor are not even following the recommendations of the report anyway, but even if they did for argument’s sake -for this $5 billion p.a investment, do you honestly think that will make the slightest difference to academic outcomes? The answer is a resounding no, it will not for the very reason that the whole idea of national curriculum is flawed, based on lowest common denominator, non-competitive approach to academic outcomes- thinking typical of Labor ideology, coupled with a lack of discipline in schools making teachers ability to engage students impossible, and an over-emphasis of UNESCO inspired PC learning of the Kumbaya variety. Australia will remain at the bottom of the intellectual trough, propped up by the smart and highly industrious Chinese and Indian students who have had their initial education elsewhere where they value and respect their teachers and learning. A plan is only “good policy” if it actually works and improves outcomes, which it won’t.
NDIS- this scheme should be a cause for optimism on my part, having a severely disabled autistic son as I do. Unfortunately, with 2.2 million “disabled” people in Australia (a number increasing exponentially with each passing year as more people endeavour to categorise themselves as disabled so as to not be forced to contribute to society at large), the prospect for enormous waste and little in the way of positive outcomes for those most in need is already a fait accompli. Every man and his dog will have his hand (or paw) held aloft to get a piece of that pie, which will become yet another drain on the public purse for a dilute benefit at best. Once again we will see a veritable cottage industry of spongers, hangers on, “care providers”, etc. all hoping to exploit a weak-minded and profligate government scheme ripe for rorting.
Your excuses for Gillard’s carbon tax promise, the mining tax debacle (all pain and no gain), the pink batts fiasco and the needless damage caused by FBT changes shows you are utterly unable to admit any error or even concede any misstep even though this is flagrantly obvious to everyone else. You are fooling no one but yourself.
70
Catamongst,
Did you say this:
For how long? Until the 10th September this year Catamongst, then it shuts.
Why? Indonesia is on the boarder of PNG and they seem to know more about PNG politics than Mr BoB Carr. Why did Mr. Scared Kevin 07 September run to the GG. Well there’s a vote of no confidence planned against Mr. O’Neil on that date (10/09/2013) by the opposition and looks very likely to get up with public opinion by the PNG Nationals behind it. (and the UPNG, Police, Nurses etc etc).
Seems the date was important Catamongst, because Rudd knows his PNG solution will be finished in 36 days from now. And the word is out in Indonesia, that’s why the boats have increased and will then be stopped by the Liberals.
Bye Bye Kevin.
50
Catamongst:
You say:
Here is the truth about Rudd and his killing HIP (Home Insulation Program).
1. Rueben Barnes, 16, Matthew Fuller, 25, and Mitchell Sweeney, 22, died while installing insulation in Queensland. Marcus Wilson, 19, was killed doing similar work in Sydney.
2. Rudd is responsible for more than 220 house fires.
3. Rudd is responsible for more than 1000 potentially electrified roofs.
4. Rudd is responsible for 240,000 dangerous or sub-standard insulation jobs.
5. Rudd is responsible for a cost blow out of $1 billion more than the original budget of $2.45bn.
6. Rudd is responsible for 1,000 jobs lost (as before the scheme about 5000 people had been employed in the industry and now it is less than 4,000).
7. Rudd totally ignored warnings even from Garret.
8. Rudd pursued this without regard to proper safety measures in order to gain popularity.
Catamongst, You too are responsible for these boys deaths, by claiming this scheme was a success by Rudd. Peter Garrett’s new book is going to be a beauty on this, and Rudd may even be looking at WHS criminal charges once published. I wonder if the Midnight Oil will take the bribe (from some UK employment agency) and not print the facts?
Gotta leave the HIP and ZIP. This Rudd mate of yours Catamongst, is a killer of people.
41
Dave, have you got plenty of tissues handy? Sounds like you need them to wipe the froth off the screen regularly.
Although you have got the Ltd New / Lib HQ script down pretty well and delivered it with passion. Rupert will have extra good o in the bowl for you tonight i’m sure. XX
01
“The refugee situation would have been resolved a long time ago ”
ummm.. It was resolved a long time ago… then Rudd un-resolved it !!
Which foot have you got in your mouth this time ??
193
Time for a reality check Michael !
The main problem with Labor is that they don’t give a rats about business prosperity and fiscal control. The new Labor way is to come up with more costly social “moral crusades”, even when we can least afford them, solely for their re-election purposes. And, by increasing taxes on business and now vastly reducing the income tax for middle-low paid workers (via dubious Carbon Compensation), they have created a situation where the PAYE tax take doesn’t even cover the welfare spend. In a real sense we have ended up going down the ‘Greek Path’ where a revenue starved government is borrowing endless billions, not for infrastructure, but for social consumption and senseless green scheme funding. And, despite the dire budget siuation they want to spend even more billions on welfare for NDIS (Go figure..?).
Sorry Michael, but courtesy of your beloved party, we are now at a tipping point of being economically screwed beyond repair. Business and jobs are moving offshore and unemployment is rising due to costly and restrictive union re-regulation and enforced extreme energy prices. Further, we now have a budget which can never be balanced without a massive and systemic restructure of the taxation system.
The only positive for Labor (and YOU) is that our likely economic collapse will create a vast welfare dependant population and Labor will probably remain in power for years.
214
Come now Michael, you can’t REALLY be serious??!!
As noted in other comments here, almost every single one of your “points” is either completely wrong, OR, is a totally subjective ‘spin’ on the actual truth. Please don’t try to bullshit people with ideological claptrap and herd-mentality bleating!
193
Michael would be a little more entertaining if he could produce good propaganda. Good propaganda has some subtleness to it, it sneaks up on you, and catches you nodding in agreement.
But he just makes a series of statements, about what was intended (whether they occurred or not, and whether they were successful or not), as if he was ticking off a shopping list.
It is easy for the reader to go, “Nope”, “Nah”, “You’re joking”, and so on. Net sum – no benefit.
But if he was to show how people were much better off, following two terms of a Labour Government, then he might achieve something.
But perhaps I am being unfair. It is a big ask to tell people they are better off, when they know damn well that they are not. After all, propaganda must have at least a grain of truth.
40
A real live one.
20
Brainwashed much Michael?
40
You forget your “TIC”
00
My reply to Kevin’s latest “It’s on” spam mail …
Kevin,
You are a narcissist, a liar and a incompetent public servant. You can be sure that everyone I know and I will be not voting Labor any time soon.
Go back to the rock you crawled out from under and see if you can find salvation up your own [snip crass].
Welcome to political oblivion …
50
Well, that would be a “don’t know” vote, would it?
30
Question…
Was any one of these outcomes a direct result of Government policy or was it a case of some previous policy or initiative following through? i.e. they were just in the right place at the right time. Could any of these successes be attributed to external events in play at the time or to the unique position of Australia in the world economy i.e. could the same result have been achieved by a government comprised of chimpanzees?
It is instructive to note that the world economy did not emerge from the Great Depression by the implementation of the New Deal. In fact the New Deal probably prolonged the Depression. It was in fact free market policies that existed prior. The wrong people get the credit for the recovery.
30
Idiot.
11
Hi Michael-did you see last week the treasury forecast that European carbon trading credits would more than quadruple over the next four years? That translates as a real annual return of 41%. This is the sort of crap we get from the ALP and the “independent” office of the Treasury. If you actually believe this “forecast” I suggest you borrow as much money as you can and invest everything in European carbon trading credits. I further suggest we should ask treasury to invest their own pension funds likewise. The problem is,-they want to invest my money in these Ponzi schemes
30
Henry Ergas has a slightly different view on our much vaunted credit rating and our survival of the GFC.
10
The last 6 years speedy? I would say that infliction on our country occurs every time they’re in grabbermint.. 😉
30
This is the letter we’ve been waiting for:
http://static.liberal.org.au.s3.amazonaws.com/13-08-05%20Signed%20Carbon%20Tax%20Letters%20-%20TA.pdf?utm_source=Liberal+Party+E-news&utm_campaign=542b17500f-Our+plan+to+abolish+the+carbon+tax&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_51af948dc8-542b17500f-57597957
Roll on September 7.
40
So now the real distortion of truth kicks in from the worst and most destructive government in our history.
231
9 minutes after the Press Conference started and I have an e-mail from the Labor Party asking for donations. I am tempted to reply that I have been giving for 6 years, but I don’t think they are listening. Why they think I would donate to them leaves me wondering WTF.
The next 5 weeks are going to induce nausea if I watch television.
220
Yeah, I liked that one. “Cmon, chuck in five bucks”. Even if I still had $5, what on earth possesses Kev that he thinks I’ll give it to him? He’s had enough of mine already.
20
The new secret Labor word for tax – “donation”.
20
I left Australia seven years ago and was astonished to hear that Australians had voted in a Labor government. I found it truly unbelievable when Australia had enjoyed such strong growth and prosperity under the Coalition. I thought “Boy, I won’t be going home very soon!” as I had grown up under the awful trashing that previous Labor governments had inflicted upon Australia. I have watched daily from here as Australia has suffered more of the same and in fact even worse.
I don’t know what it is with Australian voters, however my prediction is that they will again fall under the guile of Kevin Rudd and his cronies and we’ll have at least two terms of more of the same.
The whole Kim Beazley/Kevin Rudd/Julia Gillard/Kevin Rudd thing has been just one big carefully planned and orchestrated show that almost everybody has fallen for. Australians just love a snowy haired boy, don’t they?
130
BS can you still vote?
If you can Heeellllp!
People need to view Australia as you have, by stepping back and looking from the outside, but they won’t.
111
I never obtained citizenship as Australia has only recognised dual citizenship recently – I wanted to keep my European passport as that gives me a lot of freedom to travel and live almost anywhere I want.
Australian voters always fall for a handout, not realising that they themselves are who pay for it in the first place. This will happen again.
170
We don’t get a lot of choices. Remember John Howard was a war monger who got us into Iraq and Afghanistan, and spent half his time whipping up fear with, “The terrorists are coming, the terrorists are coming,” then depriving Australians of their rights and liberty.
He did a good job of the economy, and he didn’t run us into debt. I’ll give him credit where it is due.
112
That was Costello keeping the little turd in line. Howard was the best Labor PM in Australia’s history. The little shit was no friend of liberty.
512
The terrorists are here … you’ve not been watching ?
40
http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/screenhunter_243-aug-05-13-09.jpg?w=640
20
What rights and liberty Tel?
As Streetcred points out, you clearly have not been watching if you think Australia has not had to deal with terrorists.
00
If you march down the street protesting…….um i dunno……..the cost of a packet of ciggy’s without permission you will be arrested under the terrorism laws. Our freedoms have been taken away under the guise of “The global war of terror” but dont get me started.
10
So you think that needing permission takes away your right to protest? I think not.
20
So what happens when i dont get permission or if do get it but i cannot protest where i want? For example if i want to protest against the federal government but am refused to protest in Canberra but are allowed to in a side street in Yass? Do i consider myself free?
If i exercise my right in a democracy and not vote on Sep 7 do i have to pay the fine? If i refuse to pay the are they legally allowed to add interest charges?
10
You won’t be refused to protest in Canberra. The laws are enforced within reason and for good reasons.
Voting in Australia has been compulsory since the year dot, so it cannot be said that Howard took away the right not to vote.
20
i dont want to get into a protracted argument here BS but name me one country apart from Oz where you do not have the right to vote?
10
We are talking about “John Howard was”, so to me its offtopic, however I think the general Australian attitude is that once you are grown up you have responsibilities, with one of those being taking an interest in your country and its government. If you think nobody is worth voting for, then you can always run yourself.
00
Many Australians vote informally. Nobody has ever tried to take away that right. The Electoral Commission does not hunt you down for it.
10
Afternoon All.
If the ABC was Relevant.
(The Statesman Speaks.)
[Scene: A nondescript and shabby studio at the taxpayer-funded ABC.]
Bryan: Prime Minister, you’ve called the election for September 7th; what have you got to offer the voting public?
John: Well, Bryan, there’s a huge number of many and varied reasons, but the most important of them is that I’m not Tony Abbott.
Bryan: No, Tony Abbott is the Leader of the Opposition.
John: And that’s just the way I like it. I’m the Prime Minister, and he’s not. My name is Kevin Rudd. [Gazing into the middle distance, Churchillian stance.] Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister… I like that too.
Bryan: But that might change on September 8th?
John: No chance Bryan. For starters, my name is KEVIN RUDD.
Bryan: And so?
John: And so my name is not Tony Abbott.
Bryan: What’s wrong with Tony Abbott?
John: Tony Abbott would never make it as Prime Minister.
Bryan: Why not?
John: He’s too negative. Everything this government has done, he’s been nothing but negative about it.
Bryan: For example?
John: Asylum seekers. Squealed like a stuck pig when we opened up the country’s borders.
Bryan: Shameful. Anything else?
John: Carbon Tax. Tony Abbott said it would achieve nothing but generate higher prices and unemployment.
Bryan: And was he right?
John: That’s not the point Bryan – he was extremely negative. Can’t you see the trend here?
Bryan: Perhaps something else to jog my memory…
John: Plenty. The Pink Batts Scheme, the Cash for Clunkers Scheme, the Citizen’s Assembly, Grocery Watch, the Mining Tax, the Super Tax, the deficit we had to have (all 5 of them), the National Broad Band, anything to do with Peter Slipper or Craig Thompson, the disappearing Private Health rebate, the 10 billion dollar Green Fund Initiative – I ask you Bryan, how many esamples do you need! The man’s always so negative..
John: I wonder why.
330
best one yet
10
Carbon is burnt to create carbon dioxide. So you are trying to reduce the amount of carbon being burnt. I don’t care which one you use but to make this an issue just shows how weak any actual argument is.
from Wikipedia:
Pollution is the introduction of contaminants into a natural environment that causes instability, disorder, harm or discomfort to the ecosystem
CO2 has caused instability as seen by the inability of the planet to absorb half the excess from man since the industrial revolution. As a harmless gas it is still a greenhouse gas that reduces energy loss. It is causing discomfort to the ecosystem in the form of warming which increases droughts and floods and is also causing acidification to the oceans which is putting a strain on coral and shellfish and will have other flow on effects.
Therefore mans burning is an introduced contaminant, that has caused instability, disorder and harm.
Consider the ‘it is not pollution’ argument thoroughly debunked!
147
Funny, I can’t find Carbon Dioxide on the government’s National Pollutant Inventory at all. Obviously the Australian government don’t consider it a pollutant, but Michael and Wikipedia do, so it must be right.
310
You obviously have trouble with comprehension. Read the definition above again. The pollutant inventory would be more focussed on identifying specific harmful substances that you might need to protect yourself against. The list is not all inclusive. CO2 is not specifically harmful by direct exposure but on the strength of its effect excess amounts are having in the atmosphere. Read the above response again and try reallllyyy hard to understand and you may get it.
036
No [snip]
It is you with the comprehension problem.
For a substance that “caused instability, disorder and harm”, according to OUR GOVERNMENT it doesn’t even rate in the top 93 priority substances.
261
Name calling is unnecessary, it amazes me how people here cannot just put forward a rational argument politely. Oh well the decline of standards I suppose as can be seen in our youth.
Again, CO2 is not a substance which is specifically a danger immediately to the immediate environment or health of nearby individuals, also if it is CO2 that is already part of the carbon cycle then it is not adding to the problem. It is a pollutant in the sense of new fossilised CO2 from the burning of carbon getting into the atmosphere and being added to the global carbon cycle. This new CO2 will have an effect on the greenhouse effect measured in hundreds to thousands of years making the current system unstable in the ways measured above. For instance for the last million years it has cycled from 180-290ppm but is now 400ppm. Do you get it yet? I can’t think of a simpler way to put it.
232
Michael, putting aside that the above statement is wrong, may I ask you how much benefit it would have been to the planet if atmospheric Co2 had instead cycled DOWN to 100ppm?
211
At 180 or less.. most plant life would become extinct, and the only place you could grow anything would have been in a real greenhouse, (not the pretend atmospheric one)
143
You are the one who said you were happy to be called a [snip crass]. I am just obliging. 🙂
150
I think i worked it out Heywood, the little [snip] is an ex [snip] government employee from the [snip] dept of [snip] climate [snip] change and does [snip] all all day on account of being [snip] retrenched and now he sits in the [snip] pool for 12 [snip] months getting [snip] paid to do [snip] all. All the time he gets re [snip] trained so he can be [snip] employeed in some other [snip] dead end labor [snip] government job licking [snip] stamps or some such.
With any [snip] luck he wont get a [snip] job within the 12 [snip] months and then he can be [snip] turfed out on his [snip] ear.
20
Lol @ Crakar, but you forgot [snip] and [snip].
What about [snip], [snip] or [snip]?
Up to you. I don’t give a [snip]…
😉
20
I can explain, some of it was redacted for security reasons.
30
Michael, if the shoe fits.. kick your own backside with it. CO2 is an extremely important part of why you exist [Snip].
163
I think he must be heavily into yoga..
Has both feet in his mouth !!
93
Everything you say is either a lie, wrong or an exaggeration. For example the residency time of ACO2 or indeed any CO2 is not measured in centuries as Gösta Pettersson shows.
153
So Michael, that must be the reason behind the 17 year pause.
Ocean acidification? Hardly. If the globe’s warming, the sea would outgas CO2, as it’s doing now and can never become acidic. It also constantly brushes against alkaline rocks. The vast majority of atmospheric CO2 is from Nature, responding to a more active Sun in the past 200 years.
But you’ll paint yourself out of that corner by saying things have changed since 1800, without being able to link a specific mechanism properly, considering natural variation is 99.8% of the noise.
I bet you lie yourself to sleep, counting Rudd “sheep” jumping fences.
30
It displaces oxygen. In an enclosed environment, it can cause death by asphyxiation.
For example, submarines need to use “scrubbers” to take the carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Where these have failed, the crew slowly died, and the submarine sank.
Some cot deaths are attributed to carbon dioxide being trapped in bassinets with washable (i.e. plastic) linings.
The audience in a cinema in East Germany died of carbon dioxide asphyxiation when the air conditioning failed (or was turned off).
You are right, if you consider CO2 in an open atmosphere, but you were wrong in the way you expressed it.
00
CO2 is about on par with water vapour as a pollutant. ie IT ISN’T
It is TOTALLY HARMLESS at any atmospheric concentration that will ever possible be reached, and is in fact, a highly BENEFICIAL and ESSENTIAL atmospheric constituent.
214
CO2 that absorbs IR energy, and then transports that energy into the upper atmosphere where it can be reradiated.
As such, CO2 is necessary to keep the lower atmosphere cooler than it would otherwise be. It is the earth’s thermostat.
10
Again you demonstrate how little you know.
51
Actually, the problem was lack of oxygen. The lungs need a certain ratio of oxygen to CO2 to function properly.
When a massive CO2 burst like that happens, it deprives the immediate air of oxygen because the CO2 sinks to the bottom if the air is cool and stable.
The same can happen under an adiabatic inversion, the wrong ratio of CO2 to oxygen, cows have been known to fall over.
But the circumstances are quite rare.
21
Hi Michael! Do you know what percentage of our atmosphere is CO2? Approx 400ppm. So if you were to take 10,000 ping pong balls, paint 400 blue, and paint 4 balls yellow, and put them all in your neighbours swimming pool-you wouldn’t have one, I take it- that would be a pretty good representation of our atmosphere. The Blue ones are 02, the yellow ones are the evil co2, and the rest are nitrogen. And you are terrified of those 4 little yellow balls.
10
So Michael, tell us all when you are going to stop “polluting”?
Thing is this Michael: you are a hypocrite. In a past thread you stated essentially that were you to reduce your own carbon footprint it wouldn’t make a difference… this is your justification for continuing.
C’mon, show to all of use how you are able to live on the planned 90% reduction in CO2 emissions, or better still, following your own philosophy, reduce it to ZERO.
130
If he reduces it to zero he’ll cease to exist…
30
[Shush] I think that was Backslider’s point …
20
Notice all how Michael will not address this, even though his main point was that CO2 is a pollutant?
60
You have zero evidence of instability, not to mention the cause.
You have zero evidence of disorder. Zero evidence of harm, and zero evidence of discomfort. last time I asked it, the ecosystem responded that it was indeed very comfortable, and as a result is less prone to hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, bush fires, and high temperatures in comparison to previous periods. The ecosystem said that it would be just fine if the knit-your-own-muesli mob would just mind their own business for a change.
Not only does CO2 NOT cause warming, there is no warming. Only an idiot would suggest that the CO2 from anthropogenic sources is significant. The coral reefs are identical to the coral reefs that early explorers saw, and the Polar Bears are so happy they could just shit. The only visible result of 400 ppm CO2 is a greener world with bigger crops. You are wet behind the ears.
190
Listed loads of times. Just look at the key indicators for starters from NASA, there are also links for causes and effects.
If that does not make sense to you then let me know and I will produce my list.
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators/
Also some more useful information for you…
Carbon Cycle
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/page5.php
The Greenhouse Effect Explanation
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/climate/greenhouse_effect_gases.html
—————
Summary of the science
“This statement provides a brief overview of how and why global climate has changed over the past century and will continue to change in the future. It is based on the peer-reviewed scientific literature and is consistent with the vast weight of current scientific understanding.”
http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2012climatechange.html
032
Michael [snip] links to the NASA climate indicator page prepared by Hansen before he left; one of the hokey graphs on the NASA page shows Antarctic ice mass decreasing since 2002. This is wrong.
201
Michael, you’ve written 420 comments here. Surely you realize that most skeptics accept the greenhouse effect? Links to articles about the basic greenhouse effect are mindless. Links to articles with lists of changes which could be due to any form of warming are also pointless. We are way beyond this. Haven’t we already gone through this circle before, are you a different “Michael” using the same email address, or are you just repeating a meme hoping to wear out the patience of the audience, and draw out angry replies?
By now, you ought to be very aware that skeptics are still asking for evidence that the models are correct with their assumptions of positive feedback and that warming will be as dire as the models predict rather than a mere half-a-nice-degree.
We need an honest conversation, which means you need to acknowledge where this community is at, and stop posting strawman comments.
181
Hello Jo. Talking of half-a-nice-degree; after a long cold spring here in the UK we have had a few weeks of proper summer. Today, in the ‘Daily Telegraph’, is a heart-warming little piece about what a good fruit crop we are getting this year.One of the benefits of a little warming, eh?!
10
Jo, only just been pointed to this post. Considering that a lot of your readers do deny the greenhouse effect, the carbon cycle, and that warming is occurring I think it is only appropriate that I point those readers to the actual science on these subjects. According to the peer reviewed BEST temp series based on an analysis of over 1 billion records we are talking about over 1.5 degrees since industrialisation and 0.9 in the past 50 years. Also small changes globally translate into huge changes regionally. That can clearly be seen by there only being about 6 degrees c difference between an ice age and now.
Also it is not a case of models, that is a strawman argument, the science is based on the basic physics of the greenhouse effect and the carbon cycle, data, experiments and observation, of which I post plenty of evidence. The importance of models are overemphasised here, when most scientists understand that they are merely projection under certain scenarios to aid in planning and are not meant to be be the be all and end all of the science. Facts are that the fingerprints are all occurring, the consequences predicted for AGW are all occurring, but that natural variations will ensure that things are not as smooth as projected.
01
Global warming seems somewhat missing over the last 15 years, despite a rise in CO2. Nor does there seem to be much correlation between temperature and CO2 level since the Industrial Revolution.
IF CO2 causes warming then the rise in ocean temperature will reduce the solubility of CO2, so acidification won’t occur.
IF CO2 doesn’t cause warming, then more CO2 will dissolve but the oceans WON’T become acid because carbonic acid is a very weak acid. There is also the buffering action of the calcium and magnesium ions.
The White Cliffs of Dover are the remains of carbonate skeletons of microscopic organisms and were laid down in the Cretaceous when CO2 varied between 700 and 960 ppm. There is also the well known growth boosting effect on plants of higher CO2 concentrations, which might have helped in that case.
I don’t think you need stay awake at night worrying about carbon dioxide,
210
Cherry picking. Starting on a strong el nino year and ending on 2 back to back la ninas. Fact is that the last 2 la nina years were the hottest la nina affect years on the record (2011 and 2012) and that the 2001 to 2010 decade was the hottest decade on every continent. Unfortunately logic and reason are missing from that response that ignores natural factors.
“A decade is the minimum possible timeframe for meaningful assessments of climate change,” said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud. “WMO’s report shows that global warming was significant from 1971 to 2010 and that the decadal rate of increase between 1991-2000 and 2001-2010 was unprecedented. Rising concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are changing our climate, with far reaching implications for our environment and our oceans, which are absorbing both carbon dioxide and heat.”
“Natural climate variability, caused in part by interactions between our atmosphere and oceans – as evidenced by El Niño and La Niña events – means that some years are cooler than others. On an annual basis, the global temperature curve is not a smooth one. On a long-term basis the underlying trend is clearly in an upward direction, more so in recent times” said Mr Jarraud.
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_976_en.html
There are 2 sides to that equation, the addition of CO2 into the atmosphere is having a push factor into the oceans, eventually the warming might overwhelm the push factor and then we will really be in trouble, as that has been absorbing nearly half of the CO2 for us, as can be seen in increased acidification/less alkilinity of 30%.
The absorbing effect of rocks on carbon dioxide is very slow and won’t be much help to us for a long time, the plant issue is more complicated than you present with climatic and absorption and nutrient issues in different plants. Recent evidence shows that the loss in crops due to extreme weather will overwhelm any benefits.
229
I’ve said it before, Michael, but I’ll say it again. You really, really, really don’t have a clue, do you?
Might I suggest you look up Hendry’s Law (yes, it is on Wikipedia so you should have no trouble finding it) and figure out just what magnitude of partial pressures you are contemplating, to cause this alleged “push factor”.
—-
MV: I assume that’s Henry’s Law you meant to type.
233
Yeah – not sure where the “d” popped in from – unless maybe when dealing with Michael I develop an overwhelming mind picture of the word “[snip – crass]”.
81
That’s just plain mean. You have introduced facts to counter Michael’s argument. What’s he supposed to do now? (His handlers may not have provided a script for that)
He needs to take a scuba course. The first time I found application on the gas laws was when I did a scuba course.
20
Wrong at point 1 here.
134
Gibberish.
134
If the last 15 years is cherry-picking, is not concentrating on the 1975 to 2000 period similarly cherry-picking? There was a similar increase in temperatures from 1910 to 1940, that cannot be explained human factors. The post-war economic boom of 1945 to 1973 (with the massive increase in CO2 emissions) had no global temperature rise. 1973 was a turning point, with global growth slumping. It only really picked up in the late 1990s. All-in-all, in so far as emissions have an effect on temperature, it seems to be very much a secondary and trivial one. Even more trivial given similar fluctuations in temperature in the past in the medieval, Roman and Bronze Age periods.
Micheal, before you say that people are wrong or cherry-picking you first need to establish that you have the position of truth, based on the broader perspective. As you later go on to state hypotheses as facts, you first need to establish that authority. Otherwise, you are just confirming to the majority that global warmists are clueless dogmatists.
210
I pointed out to Michael in another thread that the period from 1935 to 1975 shows cooling, even providing some nice graphs from Woodfortrees. He also accused me of “cherry picking”… that’s a period of forty years mind you, and claimed that I used the “wrong data set”. I then challenged him to choose the data set and show contrary. He could not.
This period is particularly significant in that CO2 emissions really ramped up…. with no corresponding warming.
70
Ergo, we can postulate that there is no causative effect, one with the other.
30
Exactly! 40 years is definitely statistically significant, no matter who you wish to argue with (except for Michael).
20
Michael has also posted, numerous times, an assertion that The Industrial Revolution pulled the Earth’s climate out of the LIA (it wasn’t natural warming at all). I have asked him numerous times for his peer reviewed science in support of this guff, but to no avail.
Michael makes things up as he sees fit. He posts numerous links to scientific papers which in fact do not support his assertions. As we can see now, in desperation he quotes Wikipedia of all things (hey ANYBODY can edit Wikipedia!).
70
Gees these people say some STUPID stuff in the aim of making things “scary”
eg “2001 to 2010 decade was the hottest decade ….”
So what ! when you climb a hill. the top is always higher than the surrounding valleys.. then you go back down into a valley. ITS NATURAL.
eg “increased acidification/less alkilinity of 30%…. ” (that’s alkalinity btw)
NO. acidity/alkalinity is measured in pH, not in percentage. The reported change, (by rabid CO2 haters) of a few random points around the world is a barely measurable 0.1 pH.
If you are going to use the percentage number, then at least say that there needs to be a further increase of some 1500% to even reach neutral, non-alkaline conditions.
134
Andy, I think the acidity thing is a modelling result, not actual measurement. Some one on WUWT a few weeks ago thoroughly debunked the possibility of ocean acidification from extra CO2. He showed the increase would be barely measurable.
100
Chuckle, and here I was thinking that they would actually go out and measure something !!
Me.. bad !! 🙂
60
ps, unlike the paid AGW apologists, I don’t bother keeping a whole heaps of links.
You can tell the paid ones.. they are the ones that have links to ever little piece of climate propaganda, in a list provided by their bosses.
60
We’re just antagonising a troll.
Waste of time.
Ignore it.
00
“Cherry picking.”
NO, You start NOW, and count back how long there has been ZERO WARMING in the instrumental record. That would be some 15-18 years in most realistic temperature data.
And if you “un-adjust” HadCrud and Giss, you get a peak around 1930-1940 which was similar to current temperatures.
So let’s say 70 odd years of no average warming.
Or we could go back to the Medieval Warm Period, and the Roman Warm Period , and the even further back to the Holocene optimum, and show that the Earth is in a LONG-TERM COOLING trend, and we should be very, very thankful to be living in such pleasantly warm times.
194
QUOTE: Michael
August 4, 2013 at 6:05 pm ·
“Cherry picking. Starting on a strong el nino year and ending on 2 back to back la ninas.”
.
If you are asked the question ‘For how low long has there been no warming?’, you start at the present and work back to the point where warming ended.
So how is that a clever choice of start and end points? A “cherry pick?”
It’s just what the data tells us.
.
QUOTE “… on 2 back to back la ninas.”
Would that be the “la ninas” the experts never saw coming?
January 4, 2008
This drought may never break. “Perhaps we should call it our new climate,” said the Bureau of Meteorology’s head of climate analysis, David Jones.
*~ (APRIL 27, 2012- Australia officially drought-free)
February 17, 2009
David Jones, the head of the bureau’s National Climate Centre, said there was some risk of a worsening El Nino event this year, but it was more likely to arrive in 2010 or 2011.
JUNE 24, 2010
La Nina to drop buckets on Australia
2011- Images from Queensland Floods.
February 28, 2012
Torrential downpours cause flash flooding
March 2nd, 2012
BoM summer outlooks – hopeless again
.
120
Well Michael, you also accused me of cherry picking when I pointed out the cooling trend between 1935 and 1975, which even the graphs you posted clearly show.
Michael posted the graphs here, yet after I pointed out they show the aforementioned cooling trend, they disappeared online.
Looks like Michael is somehow connected with Berkeley.
What is your explanation for that cooling Michael?….. and the now missing graph?
70
Michael, even the British Met Office and Pachuri from the IPPC have admitted there has been no warming for 16 years. I always thought that ten years with no warming would be enough to convince any rational human. How many years of no warming ,in spite of increasing CO2 levels ,will convince you that the models are wrong? 30 years? 50 years Never?
20
Well, I showed him 40 years and he just called that cherry picking also. Perhaps we could show him high CO2 levels during an ice age?…. he would still ignore it… ignoramuses do that.
10
This idiot is trying to ban fire. Good luck with that.
50
“CO2 has caused instability..”
No it hasn’t, Michael.
You have not one shred of evidence, not one supported hypothesis to show for this.
Here’s some homework for you, Michael:
What evidence does not support your wild assertion?
Answer pronto, please.
80
Michael says @ #6:
whereupon he shows how incredibly little he knows about the subject! For example, I burn carbon to keep warm. Sometimes I burn carbon to cook food. I have NEVER “burnt carbon” to create carbon dioxide. Not once, never ever ever.
50
So why have you not taken steps to reduce your personal emissions to zero? If you feel so strongly about this, lead by example. (We’ll make sure you don’t emit any harmful substances after you have achieved zero emissions)
30
It is not warming.
31
Thank you for noticing.
10
I must admit BS I have this nasty feeling that the gullible public will put K Rudd and labor back in again, dare I say we should have a IQ test to set the level for voting? Just how bad must government be in Australia before people wake up !!!!
50
Australia does have an IQ test for voting – it is called an election.
10
Why AAD?. Because you and Wikipedia says so??
I guess then that whenever you open your mouth you are polluting the atmosphere?
170
You should be demanding peer reviewed science that explicitly states that CO2 is a pollutant.
100
Probably, but I don’t hide behind peer review like some others.I take all sources on their merits.
There are plenty of amateurs out there with good ideas, and I wouldn’t exclude them simply because they don’t conform to my style of presentation.
That is more the realm of arrogant warmists.
70
So in other words you put opinion above science if it conforms to your confirmation bias. Arrogant is thinking that you know enough to make a rational scientific conclusion just by thinking about it. This was how science was done in Aristotles time before the scientific method. You just thought about it and if it sounded right to you then it was right. These days we use actual science, experiments, observation and data.
127
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts” – Richard Feynman
h/t Steve Goddard.
110
With suitable adjustments applied to create the appearance of warming.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/07/12/ushcn-busted-their-adjustments-are-much-larger-than-they-advertise/
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/ncdc-sets-a-new-data-tampering-record-in-march/
140
Sometimes the adjusted data, needs additional adjustment to keep the past getting colder, so the future can get warmer. Now that’s real science.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/06/02/mann-made-global-warming-finally-proven/
130
Really Michael? Please show us all the science and experiments (experiments in particular), observation and data that confirm your CAGW hypotheses.
You deny known scientific laws such as Henry’s law (pointed out to you numerous times), geological research which positively confirms a world wide MWP and LIA and you deny the data which shows a cooling trend between 1935 and 1975 and more…. what “science” in fact are you talking about Michael?
70
He is following Werner Heisenberg, in the Platonic tradition where the smallest entities of matter are not physical objects, but merely ideas. The only problems are that he doesn’t have the math to discuss the concepts intelligibly and unambiguously, and his ideas already follow the Uncertainty Principle, because he hasn’t got a clue what he is talking about.
20
What part of the definition don’t you understand? Also you might like to inform yourself of the carbon cycle. Fossil fuel carbon is new carbon to the cycle that was sequestered away naturally millions of years ago to give us the planet and climate 7 billion people were able to thrive upon. Now in a mere 100 or so years we have taken the atmosphere back over a million years to a time that was not as habitable as it is now. Newsflash, breathing is carbon that is part of the natural cycle that was already here. If you actually understood how it works we could have a more intelligent discussion.
“Pollution is the introduction of contaminants into a natural environment that causes instability, disorder, harm or discomfort to the ecosystem”
227
I’m not interested in your opinion, or a Wikipedia definition which can be edited by pretty much anyone.
162
Feel free to point to a definition source of your own.
017
I’m not the one making the claim [SNIP]
—–
No more crass language please. – Jo
70
Heywood
Don’t worry about this drongo. The subject is election, virtues or otherwise of present government.
So of course, this turkey would like to change the subject.
Cheers,
Speedy
150
Apologies Jo.
40
I made the claim, I explained it, I proved it. You did not accept it so I was giving you the opportunity to show how it is wrong, but like usual posters here think abuse and name calling constitutes a valid and reasoned debate.
—————–
Posters here will be snipped if they resort to namecalling and insults they can’t substantiate. Sorry they weren’t snipped sooner. – Jo
321
What exactly have you proved Micheal?.
120
Maybe you could explain this for me Michael. In the context of AGW, the Null Hypothesis is that changes in global temperature are dominated by unspecified natural causes other than the human emission of CO2, such that any contribution of human CO2 emissions to changes in global temperature are too small to be worth the costs of mitigating human CO2 emissions by political means. The Null Hypothesis is formulated that way precisely because the issue to be decided isn’t whether human emissions of CO2 have any effect at all on temperature, but whether the effect (if any) is large enough to justify political action. Whether there’s any effect at all is a valid scientific question, but it’s not the point of the political controversy.
Skeptics (all scientists are skeptics, by definition) have no need to prove what causes nature to do whatever it does naturally. Some AGW skeptics do prefer other specific hypotheses which are not the Null Hypothesis (e.g., the Sun is the principal driver to terrestrial temperature,) and those hypotheses do require proof. But most skeptics make no such claims.
What should skeptics be required to prove? Their only common claim is that there is no valid proof of AGW. Valid proof must withstand criticism in general, and valid proof must especially withstand the criticism that it fails to show at least a 3 sigma probability that AGW fits the evidence better than the Null Hypothesis does.
Note that the claim that ‘there is no evidence for AGW’ is a negative claim, and a negative cannot be proved, only falsified (as is true of any scientific hypothesis, by the way.) AGW believers should be able to easily disprove it, if it’s false. But that’s properly and necessarily their burden, not that of the skeptics.
AGW believers would falsify the skeptics’ claim by demonstrating that valid proof of AGW does in fact exist. The only responsibility of the skeptics would be to show why any such claimed proof isn’t valid–or to accept the evidence of the AGW believers as valid, and admit that the claim that no valid proof exists has been falsified.
Of course, most of those reading this are neither scientists nor climatologists. But others are, and they should already have published one or more peer-reviewed papers which show, step by step and point by point–quantitatively, not qualitatively–that there is at least a 3 sigma probability that AGW fits the evidence better than the Null Hypothesis does. So if you are an AGW believer, go find those peer-reviewed scientific papers. That should be easy to do, shouldn’t it?
Shouldn’t it?
So why can’t you find any such papers?
You can’t find any because the observed warming is fully consistent with the Null Hypothesis. Which means there is not at least a 3-sigma difference between the probability that the Null Hypothesis explains the evidence and the probability that AGW does so. Which means the observed warming is not evidence of AGW.
Were there to be cooling of sufficient magnitude for a sufficiently long period of time, that would falsify AGW. Pinning down “sufficient magnitude” and “sufficiently long” requires a full, scientifically and mathematically rigorous quantitative analysis. An AGW believer would of course demand to see that formal analysis in a peer-reviewed scientific paper before accepting any claim that AGW has been falsified. So you will of course understand that we skeptics must do the same before accepting the claim that AGW should be accepted as sufficiently proven to be worth the costs of mitigation–which are extremely expensive, and not just in terms of money.
But if warming is not evidence for AGW, then there is no evidence for AGW (by “AGW,” we mean the hypothesis that there is positive feedback in the climate system due to human emissions of CO2 large enough to be worth mitigating.) And the only “evidence” the IPCC even claims to have (for AGW as we’ve defined it) is that their computer models predict significant positive feedback due to increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
It’s true that the greenhouse gas effect equations predict a very slight warming due to CO2–but those same equations require that the amount of warming decreases logarithmically as CO2 concentrations increase. And those same equations show that the current CO2 concentrations are well into the region where even doubling atmospheric concentrations of CO2 would have very little effect.
The IPCC climate models assume that the slight warming predicted by the greenhouse gas effect equations will be drastically amplified by synergistic affects. It is that latter assumption (drastic amplification of the slight warming produced by the greenhouse gas effect) for which there is no proof, and which is absolutely required in order to make the warming any sort of problem.
The IPCC climate models have been “curve fitted” so as to correspond with past temperature history. Any statistician will tell you that such “curve fitted” models cannot be validly used as proof of anything, nor to make valid predictions of the future. And in fact, the future predictions of the models have been invalidated by reality repeatedly.
http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/FoS_ScienticProof&falsi.pdf
254
Well said Michael.
Quick note to all that reply – This is a DIFFERENT Michael, it isn’t AAD.
100
Indeed. I am happy to provide my address full name and location to the mods if there’s any trouble distinguishing between the two Michaels.
60
Just change your name to “Michael with the big grin”
As opposed to “Michael [snip too crass]
60
I’m glad thats cleared up, I thought for a minute there someone was taking the michael!.
50
“climate models have been “curve fitted” so as to correspond with past temperature history”
And lets not forget that that temperature record has been “adjusted” to give a trend that is artificially high. This “created” trend will carry through to any projection their models make.
This means that the models WILL ALWAYS greatly over-estimate the future.
The ONLY way their models can EVER hope to be even close to making accurate projections is for them to admit that the HadCRud and Giss records are manifestly fraudulent.
72
No, Heywood, Ceetee and Andy,
This is the very same Michael, who has just proved his ability to cut and paste from an article supposedly refuting the paper by Professor Tim Ball to which he provides a link.
Now, if he would be prepared to explain what it all means, in his own words, THEN I might be impressed.
He could start with this:
However, given that Michael has not addressed my queries at 6.1.1.1.1, or 6.4.1.1 in this thread, nor, in fact, addressed any of my questions in ANY thread, I’m not going to hold my breath.
.
Michael is a high school student, drive-by troll.
Best ignored.
10
This Michael (aka Michael P) is not the same and has been commenting here for two years.
70
I would go further than that Michael. Models are only a tool to help scientists predict where they should look for things. They are never proof of anything, since statistics is NOT science.
20
Perhaps the mods could give AAD a more appropriate avatar so that nobody can be inadvertently mistaken.
10
Michael,
See if you can answer any of these questions …
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2013/08/02/why-would-anyone-believe-a-single-word-coming-out-of-their-mouth/
40
Sportsbet
ALP $3.50
LNP $1.30
Hung Parliament $6.50
Not hung Parliament $1.07
50
The only way to fix this mess is get Rudd and his ilk back in. That is the only way the midset will change and people will learn they HAVE TO LOOK AFTER THEMSELVES and/or ENABLE THAT TO HAPPEN.
All politicians do is pander to influential interest/pressure/fashion groups in marginal areas. This is leading us to indentity groups/collectives of one sort or another.
These collectives will clash at some point, a winner declared, by some sort of force, and we’re on our way to totalitarianism.
This is how all collectives/identity groups evolve and dissintergrate.
The only, and I mean THE ONLY way to fix this is to have it over and done with as soon as possible so people can see that the state is the last thing they need, and the only way their live can and will improve is take control themselves.
Untill this happens we will always be on the treadmill and the only way off is some sort of totalitarian authoritarianism.
Don’t forget, and this probably applies more to the USA than here, but it still applies. Hitler was voted in by the people!!!!!!
Tony Abott isn’t going to be able to do squat with the collective infection of the public service!
Get Rudd back in, and get this crap over and done with!
28
From a comment on another blog:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work, because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation!
200
Rod,
I think you’re trying to rephrase what George Bernard Shaw said many years ago.
“A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the suppor of Paul.”
Yes, I know. Shaw was a Fabian.
60
“Hitler was voted in by the people” is a popular fallacy suggesting the Nazis had more than 50% of the vote. Without going to a reputable source for the exact figures my memory suggests they got around 30% of the vote and then manoeuvred themselves into power.
70
I don’t doubt that, David, but it does illustrate that a democracy can vote that 1 + 1 = 3. Which, incidently, the USA is doing at the moment. Unless the population has a strong and sound understanding of the responsibility to protect the values that built the society they inhabit, it’s doomed.
Rod’s comment at 10.1 should be and isn’t taught, essay’d about, discussed by any students! We’re doomed!
00
Nick, I feel your pain but it has to be pointed out that Hitler only achieved power in 1933 when the Nationalist Party voted to support him. The Nationalists soon found out how bad a move that was because not long after, Mr. Schicklgruber (sorry, Hitler) dissolved all other political parties, abolished the position of President and declared himself “Fuehrer”.
40
Jo says,
..and here I was, thinking that after years of supposedly “researching” the issue, Jo knew what she was talking about.
The term used is “carbon” for a very good reason of chemistry.
420
Vince, I think you need to explain that because frankly that’s a dopey post. What’s a “good reason of chemistry”??. As to Jo’s post, I think you completely misunderstood her intended point, the clue is in the bolding.
140
Dopey clot !!
Jo was referring to the “Carbon” Tax… “A price on Carbon”
It is NOT a price on carbon, otherwise the coal miners would have to pay the tax on all coal exported to INDUSTRIAL countries.
It is a “Carbon Dioxide equivalence” tax.
And it, with the help of the RET and other Green agendas, is killing Australia’s industrial prosperity, and taking the rest of us down with it.
93
Vince, you have to understand that the Grumpy True Disbelivers have a divine right to create and apply whatever definition they like to any term used or coined by anybody on any matter and in any context. And to change such as and when it suits to maintain the Tribal Groupenthunk. This is their reality and they have a right to be happy in it. 🙂
614
.
Meanwhile, it continues to get cooler, eh, Cat.
Life can be a bitch when the climate gods refuse to cooperate.
70
Well my love, it is winter. 🙂
46
.
Not in the NH it’s not.
I note seasonal record COLD temps in the Arctic Circle (the alleged canary of global warming), the UK, most of Europe, Greenland, Iceland, Russia, Eurasia, the Scandinavian countries, Canada, the NW, NE and East coastal states of the USA, and Alaska.
And things are not much better down here in the SH either.
So where is the “global warming” hiding this season, Cat?
Under a rock in Chile?
92
Interesting viewpoint Catamon.
The warmists on the other hand like to take “Atmospheric carbon emissions” to mean “CO2 emissions” and from there calculate how much CO2 has been emitted into the atmosphere.
Are you able to tell what is wrong with that?
They also like to take things like “how much oil has been produced” and from that also calculate “CO2 emissions”.
Are you able to tell what is wrong with that?
00
Vince, I’ve added quotes to “carbon”. I can see why you would say that – it was ambiguous. My post is improved. Cheers.
40
Be careful what you wish for. The global financial collapse that is in the cards, IMHO sooner rather than later, will be the end game.
Financial collapses lead to some very agitated people, and this is called a WAR.
Very quickly it will become totalitarian authoritarianism and it will take about 500 years for the oppressed to rise up, if it happens at all.
Why? Because that is the way things work. Every thousand years or so it gets warm, and a civilisation usurps power and authority over everyone. i.e. Egyption Old Kingdom, Greece during the Minoan, the Roman Empire, and the Vikings. Every time it is followed by feudalism and oppression until people have the guts to rise up.
90
Rod,
You are quite correct in that global war is on the cards. In fact the present situation is eerily reminiscent of the early part of the 20th century in many respects. WW3 has probably already started, just at the entree stage by proxy in Syria and Libya as first step to planned wider conflict. However, I actually think the financial collapse will not be an abrupt collapse as such, instead being in slow and progressive stages, to maximize the damage to the common people, punctuated with shocks along the way, and a series of “haircuts”, first on depositors, then on super funds and pension entitlements which will be systematically looted and devalued, then in confiscating precious metals, until finally a stock market collapse of unprecedented proportions.
We are already seeing gold prices artificially suppressed by GS and JPM and the like, prompted by the Germans asking to repatriate their physical gold. There’s not a free market in any shape or form world wide that bears any resemblance to reality now in anything, whether it be a commodity or otherwise. All is completely disconnected from the true merit or market value of the commodity traded, or the companies or the economies involved.
Unfortunately, this will not end well, and I fully expect those outspoken enough to point all this out will be targeted or silenced. We are about to find out just how clever and resourceful we’ve become as a society, and I think we are all in for a pretty rude awakening.
120
And we are ripe for invasion from the north, unless of course we just let them in, or even escort them.
Where’s Sir Francis Drake when you need him !!
72
I would really like to have a serious chin wag about his with you Winston.
I agree the slow drawn out torturous scenario you describe is a real possibility.
If we disagree, it is because I think the “slow and progressive stages, to maximize the damage to the common people, punctuated with shocks along the way, and a series of “haircuts”, first on depositors, then on super funds and pension entitlements” is already well under way. We only disagree on the timing of the complete and utter collapse. As readers of this blog, we both realise the futility in predicting outcomes in a chaotic system, so I should never have mentioned a time frame. Please accept it as an opinion rather than a prediction. In that vain, it is necessary for personal planning to assess the most probable outcome.
20
Rod & Winston I was recently browsing this subject and came across http://faculty.washington.edu/modelski/LCGPeolss.htm this is interesting enough but your suggestion of even longer political cycles is something else to research.
Thank you for your insights.
00
Well said Winston.
00
The Construction Industry:
July was the 37th straight month this industry has decreased
Decreased in all areas:
1. Housing
2. Apartments
3. Commercial
4. Engineering
Today 40% of the cost a a new home is taken up by Government Taxes, levies, fees and charges up from under 28% in 2007 (Kevin). Red & Green Tape has destroyed the industry. Steel, cement, and general building products etc all have increased since the introduction of the CO2 Tax by over 28% in the last 12 months.
Something must change to get this industry back on track.
150
Construction? Don’t worry, we’ll all soon be living in yurts, since the aimed for 90% reduction in CO2 emissions will preclude any possibility of concrete.
20
What do you expect with compulsory voting in this country?
The only thing it achieves is forcing people with no idea or opinion to vote anyway and if given a choice they’ll mostly pick the camp tat gives them entitlements.
Besides, what kind of democracy are we to force people to vote?
20
Oh yeah, I forgot, compulsory voting, what a fcking idiotic idea.
00
The only compulsory component is enrolment, not voting. Once you have enrolled you can do what you like with your ballot paper.
10
Apart from the global financial crisis having a vast effect on the economy I notice that housing prices are still very high, considering that my son is currently looking for a house. Demand for homes is still high.
017
All of this carpet bombing from
a moronsomeone who still actually believes Renewable power works, something it patently cannot do.Ah Michael, you just don’t get it do you?
Tony.
162
There Tony, fixed it for you.
By the way, I wrote a reply to you re the little “exchange” regarding “ill-informed, outright lies” on the previous thread.
40
No Michael,
House Approvals are down again:
House Sales down:
Perth has 22,941 properties on the market, 13,257 total houses, 1,054 are new homes, 168 house auctions and 229 open houses this weekend. Try the internet for listing you’ll pick up a few bargain repossessions as a result of this Rudd/Gillard government.
80
The price of building a house has been pushed up substantially by the CO2 tax and RET.
Many of the things required for building construction require a large amount of energy.
All the construction industry is suffering because of this.
Add that to the green tape of trying to get new housing developments off the ground, and you have a recipe for continued lack of new building construction and therefore continued high prices.
93
Indeed a vacuous individual … house price are the lowest in a decade and more … there is little demand because the public doesn’t trust the government; a thing called sovereign risk and another called incompetent fiscal management.
The true problem that your son has, and all due respect to him, is that he doesn’t earn enough money to by that waterfront home on 1200m2 … he should aim at the market segment that is affordable to him.
I normally charge a fee for professional advice but in this case it would be unfair.
10
bybuy10
OMG he has reproduced!!!!!!!…………….idiocracy anyone??????
50
A primary indicator of a weak, or weakening, economy is LOW interest rates. House prices in Aus are artificially propped up. When the real crash comes, which is inevitable, better not have a fat mortgage hanging around your neck.
10
on the other hand high interest rates shows an abundance of money next stop inflation shows a poor economy best to end the reserve banking structure where every dollar is loaned at interest thereby making any debt impossible to pay off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
20
So, uhmmm, just a quick question.
It’s the same question I asked at the last election. The answer I was given was a lie. I am hoping that this time, the party proletariat could show some basic human decency and provide an honest answer this time.
So here goes.
“If the Ruddashians win this next election, who will be the Prime Minister at the next election? How long will it be before the unions put their communist sympathisers back in?”
Will the ALP supporters please provide an admission that they use the populist they don’t like internally as a mere vehicle specifically for them to gain power?
Will they at least apologise for the sheer arrogant disgust and contempt the last 5 years in particular has been shown to the taxpayers of Australia?
90
God, here it is 6.30PM Sunday night, barely 4 hours after the announcement.
I’m sick of it already.
No good using the TV nuker to change channels during the ads, cos they’ll be on that channel too.
Roll on Sept 7.
Tony.
120
Just put on some nice music..
and turn the TV off for the next few weeks. 🙂
30
Yes, but at least the little Sun King turd is in caretaker mode at last
50
Manufacturing in Australia now a basket case.
Australia’s productivity dropped 4% last year (this year estimated 5%) and is the biggest drop of all 19 developed nations in the ranking. We are now down to last place.
Once south east Queensland had a large manufacturing base, but now unemployment in these areas are reaching over 25%, with the disappearance of these industries. Power prices have increased because of RET & CO2 Tax in a six year period from 8 cents kw to 28 cents kw. These are the prices small industries are forced to pay.
Australia has to stop the
RuddRot130
I really hope that the Liberals can be persuaded to get rid of the RET, and their rather stupid direct action plan.
Bring the price of energy back down to a sensible amount, and see if we can somehow re-start actually producing things of our own.
Save all that CO2 sending raw materials to China and buying goods back in. 😉
60
Yes AndyG55
Amazing ever since Rudd came in, we can now ship iron & coal to China and buy back their steel cheaper, than making it here. Power (RET + CO2 tax), labour and government regulations just makes it all too hard now.
70
AndyG55:
I hope so too. My local LNP member and senator agree, but seem to be avoiding saying so in public.
There’s always a chance the Libs will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They’ve done it before.
I remember the event because the dog kept going to the door growling. After a while, we realised it was in response to hearing phrases like “If [Hewson/Keating] gets in …”. She didn’t know what either of these creatures were, but they weren’t getting into our place if she had anything to do with it.
“There is much to be learned from beasts”. [Dracula 1992]
If there is a hung parliament, can we at least hope no one will sign another contract with the devil?
50
Andy, that’s never going to happen. It simply is too expensive to make stuff here anymore. Soon, nothing will be made here and when that happens we also lose all the skills needed in a modern economy.
20
Well well, Bulldust and Crakar, it seems Rudd is happy to take Abbott with him to the G20 during the 3 days before the election so that the LNP doesn’t get any “unfair” home turf campaigning advantage, and Rudd would appear to be one of the few who “gives a shit” about Yom Kippur. Those were my reasons for predicting the Sep 7 date. A successful prediction, it seems.
50
Andrew I don’t think Rudd “gives a shit” about Yom Kippur as the only atonement he want’s if for us poor suckers to apologise for the nasty [but true] things we say about him and recognise his celestial magnificence and divine right.
50
Unlike Flannery I am happy to admit I got that prediction wrong BTW. I suspect Rudd was pushed very hard indeed by fellow MPs to go early.
50
I heard later on the news updates tonight that Kevin4Kevin was quoted as saying he “gave up a date with the G20 to have a date with the Australian people”.
I then felt a bit sick. :S
So perhaps the unthinkable has occurred, he’s going to drop the chance to rub shoulders with his new co-workers and instead concentrate on grabbing the last-minute swinging votes. Hard to believe he would miss out on G2O, I don’t think any of us saw that one coming.
That crafty Kev, just when you think you’ve got him figured out… he becomes unpredictable.
20
That man annoys me no end. He was on ABC News today bleating on about how great it is that so many more people have in stalled a solar power system that will repay itself in 9-10 years, but last only 20. He also mentioned the CSIRO are developing new battery technology to enable storage of solar power. I lost interest, as he has no idea about the physics of CO2 and IR spectroscopy, he has no idea about alternative power generation. He even suggested that this new technology will provide “emissions free” power 24hrs per day! I put the TV on mute at that point.
20
I can’t see Abbott going, so I doubt Rudd will.
10
Rudd leads on insolvencies:
Small business insolvencies have reached record levels with the number of companies placed into external administration up to June 2013 (approx 2,655 per 3 months) at the highest levels since the Kevin 07 was elected. ALP – the economic vandals.
The rise of insolvencies has been unrelenting and his anti-business/ industry/ manufacturing /construction policies and have resulted in complete chaos in each area.
The RET and CO2 has played a huge part in this, along with all the added (over 40% of total house cost) taxes, fees etc.
Rudd is the killer of industry and small business.
80
Good point. It’ll be an uphill struggle , all the way, but reclaiming the language from lying politicians, bureaucrats & would be social manipulators has to be worth it.
I think ‘Fixed’ wouldn’t be too strong for that ‘F’ word.
70
Would carbon trading be the first Fiat currency created entirely for the purpose of taxation ?
80
Rudd Reckons you need three septic tanks to replace one Scotsman?
So 3 Yanks are needed for Rudd, where Julia only had one Scotsman.
Or is this a reflection of Rudds importance (even shaving).
Australians don’t need any imports, we just want honest politicians.
(Yeh, I know, impossible)
I think the ALP has lost the plot completely in regard to the nature of Australians.
60
Are these guys on 457 visas too?
No Aussie is slimy enough for Rudd, he has to bring in Obama’s sewerage.
71
The only thing Free about a Carbon Market is the freefalls that follow each government intervention.
Carbon Credits are just a Tax with lipstick, and about as popular.
90
Don’t miss JoNova’s pre-emptive election broadcast on Carbon Trading that preceeded the Election announcement by just a few hours..
Just time for Kevin to get his keks on and knock up the GG on a Sunday morning to make it official.
Listen
http://www.2gb.com/article/ets-more-black-market-green-economy#
or
Download
http://webstore.2gb.com/audio/overnight-with-michael-mclaren/201308/04-ets–more-black-market-than-gree.mp3
130
Indeed. One of the best broadcasts I’ve ever heard and Jo deserves congratulations for it. BTW I’m the other Michael.
140
Thanks Joe V. for posting this, I had no idea Jo was on.
I just had a chance to listen and bloody fantastic to hear it was.
Jo when are you appearing on The Bolt Report?
30
I’d no idea either Yonnie. Imagine my surprise
at hearing “.. and after the News we have JoNova coming up at 5…”
She does hide her light under a bushel that one. Great for her global audience though – 5 am, being daytime in the States & early evening in Europe.
We could use some catalogue of appearances, even after the event to pick up the recordings from . It is so much easier to listen to stuff in this multi-media age, than to read or even to watch, whilst doing other stuff, like working, studying, sporting or operating machinery.
I wonder would Jo consider a sidebar for recent appearances, if that wouldn’t seem too immodest ?
20
I, for one, am getting sick and tired of this idiotic meme that somehow Krudd and Swine “saved” us from the GFC.
You don’t “save” anything by borrowing a few hundred billion and pissing it up against the wall with nothing to show for it.
They keep repeating this malarkey often enough, and they might find some bogan that believes it.
It appears that this Michael is the bogan I’m talking about.
120
It worked for Tony Bliar, with his Chancer Gordon Brown taking credit for saving the World (yes his Freudian slip was showing) at the GFC
110
Joe…No it didnt, Brown lost resoundingly to a bunch of even worse [snip crass].
Thats democracy, a choice of [snip crass].
10
It is true Brown went onto lose the election , as Prime Minister.
That was following a decade of continuous Socialist excess generally and his perceived lack of charisma, following Bliar.
He is still credited with acting decisively in the GFC of 2008 while leaders dithered, and protecting savers from the collapse of Iceland.
00
Gentucky Fried Chicken…eh.
20
Labor is firmly of the belief that if they repeat big lies often enough people will start believing them. Things they never mention in conjunction with the Swan GFC saviour meme:
1) China drove our mining boom which is one of the main factors that kept us afloat.
2) The lucky timing of the 2007 income tax cuts provided a lot more disposable household income, thereby driving consumption. This is now being clawed back by bracket creep and people are spending more cautiously … well durrrr
There was a mob in the 1930s that also relied on big lies and propaganda to maintain their grip on power… and audaciously King Kev called Tony a climate change ‘denier’ just minutes into the election cycle.
40
The Carbon market here in Europe is of course one big Connie…King Coal is dead, long live the king!…
http://fenbeagleblog.wordpress.com/
100
Some wisdom. 🙂
23
.
So tell me Cat, after all this time and effort establishing yourself as a primary [snip crass], are you suddenly trying to take a leaf out of the KRudd’s new playbook and portray yourself as a likeable person?
Sorry Cat, but having spent more than two years firmly establishing yourself as a major supporter of mass-murder, it’s a bit late to try and play the “best chums” card.
Trust me, it’s not going to work for the KRudd, and it’s not going to work for you.
112
Its not difficult MV, i am. 🙂
Are you off your meds again sweetheart??
15
Isn’t that only at that funny bar you frequent.
20
[Isn’t that only at that funny bar you frequent.]
Brings back memories. Haven’t been to a “funny bar” as you say since my high school days scamming for drinks. 🙂
11
If you looked good in a dress and grew up in Geelong i think we may have met before 🙂
40
oh come on cat that was worth a reply……surely (just trying to be nice you should try it sometime)
20
Well since its you Crackchild. 🙂
doG no! Even i cant lay claim to looking good in a dress. Besides, it’s a mans world out here in the West. XXX
00
Catamon,
So you were not the one to scam me for a drink? Oh well if you are ever in Adelaide i will buy you one.
Cheers
20
This classic chaser will cheer you up
Why I voted Greens
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5f2RMc4e5s
70
I LOVE THAT!
10
Dear Jo, you might be interested in how Thomson Reuters is framing the debate. Here is a link to CBC here in Canada:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/08/04/australia-election-called-rudd.html
Thomson Reuters is a a vehement propagandist of the green agenda, carbon pricing agenda here in Canada. CBC is the taxpayer funded media and employs David Suzuki in spite of this environmentalist political endorsements that are supposed to put him in a breach of contract.
Hilarious to read in the Thomson Reuters stuff: not a word on carbon tax, markets nor Labor regional elections losses, just a wonderful endorsement of Rudd…
40
The CBC is cast from exactly the same mould as the ABC (Australia) and BBC from the sound of it. Hardly surprising really.
20
Ah listen to yourselves discuss with Michael – what a mob of old angry white males. What spite and vitriole. Youth and anyone with a moderate viewpoint reading your diatribe has just used your comments to record a Labor victory. Your message is angry, redneck and ugly. I’d vote for Rudd just to piss you off.
Anti-AGW and anti-carbon tax is just part of the far right redneck meme. Regardless of any facts.
Ponder the few that will change their vote because they simply believe that leader will make their lives better. Why because they “like” them. They don’t really care about policy. It’s all about perception. http://wikisum.com/w/Popkin:_The_reasoning_voter
Face it who’d come here to learn anything when you have self-appointed camped-out perimeter guards like Memory-Fault. “establishing yourself as a primary arsehole” golly… aren’t we all angry.
Fancy indulging his rabid antics – where’s the higher moral ground moderation?
————————–
[REPLY: “Michael” has posted 420 comments on this blog in the last two months, and the crowd are, no doubt, bored of repeating the same responses. The mood will seem unnecessarily angry to a newcomer to this thread. I snipped the crass comments when I saw them, and wish I could have done it sooner. There was fewer moderators available this weekend than usual (moderators are volunteers). Normally that wouldn’t matter. I ask commenters not to reply to Michael if they get angry (which may be exactly what he wants), but to stick to the style of Tel, who has posted useful constructive replies. – Jo]
210
Wow. You know what they say about assumptions don’t you?
You see the problem is that when you are so far to the left, everything else seems far right.
60
Hey, I resemble those remarks!
20
Which bit? The old angry white male or the far right redneck?
Or both? ?? 😉
20
Nice! A new post from a sexist, ageist, racist. Just what the Dr. ordered.
50
Mark D,
You are from the USA, can you confirm all red necks are from the far right?
Cheers
30
No, they are from:
Alabama ++++
Alaska ++++
Arizona ++
Arkansas ++
California *
Colorado + *
Connecticut *
Delaware *
Florida +
Georgia +
Hawaii *
Idaho +++
Illinois + (except Chicago *)
Indiana +
Iowa +
Kansas +
Kentucky +
Louisiana +
Maine +
Maryland *
Massachusetts *
Michigan ++
Minnesota + *
Mississippi +
Missouri +
Montana ++++
Nebraska ++++
Nevada ++
New Hampshire *
New Jersey *
New Mexico +
New York*
North Carolina +
North Dakota +++
Ohio +
Oklahoma +++
Oregon +++
Pennsylvania +
Rhode Island *
South Carolina +
South Dakota ++++
Tennessee ++++
Texas ++++++
Utah +++++
Vermont + *
Virginia +
Washington + *
West Virginia +
Wisconsin ++
Wyoming +++++
KEY:
* = rednecks in decline or never existed
+ = reliably redneck
++ = Extremely redneck
Hope that helps.
80
Mark D,
Looks like they are from the far right, the far left and everywhere in the middle.
I am a little surpised with Maryland can check your figures for me on that one? By the way did you use the NASCAR metric for your results? Or distance from the equator (hotter weather makes your neck redder methodology)
Cheers
20
Crakar24, my completely scientific method is based on a mix of several observations:
-Distance from a city with more than 500,000 population (farther = more red)
–
-Number of ranches and farms (more = more redneck)
–
-Southern accent (guaranteed redneck)
–
-Per capita horse population ratio greater than 1:1 (very red)
–
-Anywhere there is petroleum, mining, or mineral extraction (very red)
–
-Anywhere logging and wood products manufacturing are done (very red)
–
-States where Gun and Ammo sales spending exceed grocery spending (very red)
–
-Popularity of NASCAR is correlated with redneckedness
–
-Inverted correlation with population number of non medical Dr’s
–
And yes this was completely my opinion 🙂 I picked on California (for sport) when I know that the northern and rural areas can be pretty redneck and this is also true for upstate New York, and a few others. Maryland was a guess but proximity to Washington DC is the primary reason.
The political voting habits of a redneck are related to union membership. However, they are almost NEVER Green, almost always believe in God and you can trust a redneck to give you the shirt off his back if you need it. This being directly opposite of the Leftist TAKING the shirt off your back. Finally, it is my experience that a strong majority of rednecks did not vote for Obama.
So you can see why someone would find it difficult understanding the political leanings of a redneck.
50
Far more complicated than i ever imagined thanks.
10
Come on, Mark, “rednecks” would howl if you lump Jimmy Carter in with them
10
OK Brian, but what about his brother Billy?
Then I could also argue that Jimmy was changed by DC brainwashing.
But you are right to pick on my choice of “guaranteed”. Not very scientific of me.
00
No, it was the Democrat party that did it to him. After LBJ Democrats wouldn’t support anybody that wasn’t flaming pink/scarlet/crimson and liberal.
20
I’d dispute you putting texas at the top there – can black and hispanic people be redneck?
00
Why not?
10
It’s amusing that “progressives” publicly despise anything that could possibly be interpreted as “racist” and give themselves license to call “sceptics” anything they please.
Here are some of my favourites:
– Murderers
– Child abusers
– Holocaust …
– “Science” …
Anyway it seems to be a method to release their pent-up contempt for anybody unlike themselves.
10
Spite and vitriol, however you decide to spell it is generally the response to an agent provocateur like Michael. I don’t condone abusive ad hominems but I would suggest to you that constant distortions of factual content to completely up end reality is inclined to provoke anger. Michael, IMO, intends to provoke that anger. He has no interest in actually addressing any points of contention, but merely to spout propaganda. Even were I a Labor voter, as I once was in my early adult life in the Hawke and Keating era, I would be disappointed by the Rudd/Gillard years and the litany of failure they have left behind. Whatever faults they may have had, H & K generally conducted themselves as adults, were consultative at least to some extent, and carefully instigated their policy changes in a remotely competent way with a mind to consequences.
The current government on the other hand has caused havoc on our economy, has burdened our children and grandchildren with massive and unnecessary debt during a boom period in our terms of trade and a rampant Chinese economy, frittered away on frivolous vote buying and popularity motivated schemes which have been without exception poorly thought out, poorly implemented, massively underestimated in cost and terribly destructive to our budgetary bottom line.
For the edification of the oblivious intelligentsia, this country is actually on its knees as we speak. We are in the exact position Ireland was in 5 years ago, and we will soon know exactly why we should be angry about such irresponsible behaviour by our elected officials who have long since forgotten the meaning of responsible governance. You can attempt to defend the indefensible if you like, but alternate reality does not cut it here.
122
err….except for NOT being a cold and soggy little resource poor island and being in the other hemisphere that is.
Oh….and not having had a recession…
But we do have a lot of Irish around now!!!
You really are a twat Winston. 🙁
02
Oh FFS Winston. Thats what here is all about.
12
Let me guess, a minor ‘psychology’ or self-help student from a TAFE college ?
20
Your not Naoimi Oreske posting under an alias are you?
The weak and dismissive theory that everyone who disagrees with climate nonsense is an “old angry white male” has been substantially covered on these forums, do a search before you rehash previously covered myths.
Cheers
30
“I’d vote for Rudd just to piss you off.”
And you accuse US of being ugly!!!!!.. another far left loony hypocrite. !!!
32
He/she/it has an clear appreciation for how much a single vote is worth.
10
And are you related to KRudd?
An angry spiteful vitriol-laden post telling everyone not to be angry and spiteful..
yeah.. that’ll work !
bozo the clown lives again.
32
Right, so I take it that you are far left, pro abortion, anti gun, pro-AGW etc. etc. etc.
So, tell us all exactly WHEN you are going to disconnect yourself from the durdy coal electricity grid, stop driving a car or travelling by any means that depends on non-renewable energy, stop using anything produced with petro chemicals, anything mined, anything produced by modern farming methods which rely on petrochemicals (that includes fertilizer) etc. etc. etc.
You have an at least 90% reduction in CO2 emissions to abide by, so we’ll still let you breathe.
WHEN????
You won’t, will you? HYPOCRITE!!!
50
No one discusses with Michael as like you he is a dogmatic, scientifically and politically immature pisswit.
30
Well guys (over 50 angry white males), Jo and I’m sure a small tail of “others” – thanks for a robust response to a bit of a try-on drive-by sledge – albeit not too far off the mark. So perhaps the far right and/or rednecks ? or do you think still not accurate.
But don’t verbal me ? far left – probably not but perhaps to you lot Mrs Thatcher was a moderate. Pro-abortion – well not flippantly so. Anti-gun – well challenging in the fine print.
But I reckon over 50 angry white males wouldn’t be too far wrong. Retired or retiring, wife sick of you, can’t be stuffed playing bowls – well why not take on the world’s science bodies with Jo?
[snip – crass – baiting]
As for the excellent ream out on my disgraceful hypocrisy and running the air-con flat out and dropping hackies in my 6 litre Chevy (but only once on Sundays in controlled circumstances and carbon offset) I agree. However my personal failing doesn’t mean that AGW is not a problem.
Logic is that the swingers (votes not …) probably aren’t tuned into water vapour feedbacks and troposphere hotty-spots or MWPs (by the way Jo stuffed up on the cows – check mla.com.au – a bazzilion cows and sheep in Australia that have been put there by human managers all belching methane from inefficient digestion – of course improving the digestion efficiency will improve pasture utilisation and weight gain while reducing methane emissions – but let’s not digress).
I reckon most of you are angry white males (I’ll retract redneck even though you probably look somewhat like rednecks with red bits)and you are very angry and your message isn’t getting through.
Me – I just don’t trust you – but I don’t trust BoM, CSIRO or the IPCC either. Anyway gotta fly – have to do a drive by on Deltoid.
01
Logic is that voters might not be into hot spots, but smart readers have smart friends, and before you know it smart editors are printing not-so-dumb articles and the smart money is fleeing from carbon markets. Funny how the world works.
Meanwhile anonymous commenters do drive by scorn telling us our message isn’t getting through…
And cows? What luck, the big-government plan to bovine-the-weather might not be a complete waste of time and money. Congratulations. It’s still a stupid way to run the country.
00
‘Democracy’ Is no more than a choice of ‘Dictators’.
30
The choice is what makes the difference. Don’t then blame the Dictator.
Do we deserve the Governments we choose ?
20
I dont want to be pissing on your bonfire Ozzers but that Obama…worst president EVVA…worst five years in American history, not excluding Pearl Harbour…but maybe excluding Viet Nam I guess (well, 55,000 deadis hard to top) …BUTUTUTUT …he was re-elected.
I dont know what your lot did to Ozzland but it no way means they wont get back in.
50
I guess I should just remind people, whilst you may feel a bit jadd with this voting crap…I literally do not believe in Democracy. If I can offer no replacment thats no argumnt for it. If eating hamburgrs and mustard is propsed as a cure for athletes foot I do NOT have to be able to offer an actual cure for athletes foot in order to validly obsrve that hamburgers and mustard are not a valid cure. I do not need to have an alternative to democracy in order to denounce democracy.
Maybe I am a monarchist. I just know that the best societies xisted under a wise and human tyranny. Now do I really believe that or am I being contentious? No I mean, Im really asking you to tell me, cos I dont know!
20
…excuse me but Im not filling in the missing “e’s” either.
10
Look up “sortition”, Ace.
00
Thabnks, I didnt know that term. The lesson of Greek governance I have retaind over the years is that those cities who were directly affected by decisions were excluded from the decision making process because they were presumed otherwise to decide only on their own interest. That always seemed to me to be both directly counter to contemporary received assumption and most sensible.
That sortition scheme was also parodied by Kurt Vonnegut in Harrison Bergeron, in which the president was selected by lottery and had no real power to change anything domestically but could (if I recall correct) wage wars if he wished (or has my recollection been corrupted by someone who used to keep saying Geroge W Bussh was like someone “president for the month”).
Theres another way of deterring [SNIP crass] from seeking office. That is to make it appeal only as a civic duty and at personal cost. For example the Venetian Doge was selected by his peers with no option but to accept if selected and then becam in ffect a prisoner, nver allowd to leave the city. at least thats what I read in a book on the Rennaissance som decades ago. It always appealed to me. Make leadership lik bcoming a monk (including a commitment to chastity and a solitary life undrguard). This would deter th liks of most of our present “leaders” and their aspirant ilk. However, whilst it would disempower crep[s like Al Gore, it might suit geniuine hair shirt co Fascists to the ground.
I wonder though. Arent Greens generally of the do as I say not as I do persuasion.
20
Then there is Despotism tempered by Dynamite, as described by W.S. Gilbert. Attractive though the system sounds, Gilbert does point out that it depends on the judgement of the Wise Men whether the Public Exploder acts or not.
In the meantime, we have to decide whether or not to replace the current bunch of half-wits, drunks, and unemployables with another bunch of half-wits, drunks, and unemployables.
10
Ive just been to google earth to see if theres a a Tahrir Square in Canberra.
There aint.
Youre stuffed.
But look at the bright side. Careful what you wish for. In UK we have the Tories in office. Thatchers children are the most Eco-rascist greens probably on the entire planet. Lord up is ass spoon in mouth Zak Goldsmith is the very paradigm of the GBB (Green Billionaire Bastard) that makes Al Gore look like a charity worker.
20
September 7th………
CLEAN UP AUSTRALIA DAY !
Time to take out the rubbish.
32
OT,
Just when we thought we had ventured beyond the event horizon the omni potent force of CO2 shows us just how powerful it really is……..is there anything CO2 cannot do?
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
30
Some nice even handed, well researched reporting in this little gem. Not the slightest hint of alarmism here.
http://www.vice.com/read/climate-change-is-the-real-fiscal-cliff-and-were-doomed
10
Of course the warmists do not take into account hydrothermal vents when they jump up and down about arctic sea ice….
00
On the topic of “carbon = CO2” the “dangerous pollutant” I had to giggle while standing in the local IGA that they had behind the counter, bottles of the dangerous pollutant in compressed form that were allegedly designed for making soft drinks!! WHY oh WHY do we allow our kids to be exposed to this dangerous pollutant!
51
A sly copy of KRudd’s latest election ad dropped into my inbox … cutting edge stuff !
20
“Let’s insist that our politicians and commentators use accurate terms”
Don’t be silly, Jo. How could we practise politics if we could not corrupt language and logic? (The two go together. This is why I am so pernickety about correct usage.)
The Rectification of Names is a Confucian principle, and one of the purposes of that principle is conceptual clarity, because we cannot have moral order in the midst of intellectual disorder.
But if we have moral and intellectual order, what will our politicians do for a living?
10
Names are supposed to be evocative. Take the name of something good and apply it to a turd and its a while before folks realise its just a turd.
10
Sorry that this is off topic, but I just had to come in and comment on this.
I’ve just listened to the 11AM news, and they had
that absolute moronProfessor Flannery speaking in one of their clips.He was waffling on about how rooftop solar has knocked a huge dent in the electricity market, the inference being that it was making it difficult for those filthy rotten gouging bathplugs of money grubbing coal fired power plant operators to make huge profits from gouging poor humble electricity consumers, and that consumers were taking it into their own hands by installing rooftop solar panels, and getting their own back on them.
That mindless moron. He has absolutely no bloody idea.
Let me quote what he said so I can capitalise and bold the relevant point.
The average panel installation comes in at just over the minimum number of panels because they are the ones that are the cheapest, hence the most affordable, and the most sold. That is 6 panels or 1.5KW in total. So, one million at 1.5KW is 1.5GW, or 1500MW, so Tim, you f[self snip] fool, you must be choosing some pretty small LARGE scale coal fired power plants, because LARGE scale is 2000MW+, and your 1500MW does not equate to TWO large scale plants.
However, I’ll give them some leeway here and calculate the total on an average of 2.5KW, way, way over the current average.
So one million units at 2.5KW comes in at 2.5GW or 2500MW, a little less than Bayswater. (Tim, that’s ONE large scale coal fired power plant)
So then, the total output from this grand total of 2.5GW, and that’s ALL the power consumed by the residences and ALL the power fed back to the grid, comes in at 2800GWH.
Man that’s a lot. (sarc off)
That same amount of power is supplied by Bayswater (not with all 4 plants running all the time, but just on their average year round operation) every ….. 62 days.
Now, by any stretch of the absolute wildest imagination, that is nowhere near the OUTPUT of TWO large scale coal fired power plants.
Just how can we call this absolute idiot out.
It’s no good my just saying it here.
This is manipulation on the large scale.
MemoryVault, I take your point in not referring to this as a lie, but this is just manipulation on a huge scale. It started out as a lie, by someone who knew, and was then repeated by someone totally clueless, so that it then has the supposed authenticity of being the truth that people will then further repeat, not knowing that it started out as a lie.
Tim you are an absolute charlatan:
Tony.
101
Here you go Tony
http://climatecommission.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/Australias-Future-Solar-Energy-Report.pdf
20
I dont think anyone could ever accuse Tim of worrying about accuracy or facts when making an emotive plea to the stupid. Lets face it, hes been approximately 180° off on more or less everything he has said for the better part of 20 years. If you google “Flannery Quotes” there is no immediate list of his quotes, just lots of links to his incorrect quotes/predictions.
A cynical man would simply label him a dangerous and deluded liar, but Im not cynical so I will just assume hes “passionate” about his chosen topic and that on the odd occasion his passion gets ahead of his research and referencing when he talks in public.
60
Oh, and Michael, I know you’re reading this, even if you don’t have the cojones to come in and reply.
Michael, well he’s the person who comes in and bombs all these Threads with meaningless crap and hundreds of likewise meaningless links.
I left a comment, and he fell right in, literally, and even after a week, had failed to even bother to check what I was on about. He expects us to follow and read each and every one of his moronic links but can’t even bother to check anything we reply with. Then, after actually finding out what I was on about, and he still hasn’t even bothered to check, he told me how unfair, and in fact untruthful, to compare the OUTPUT of rooftop solar power with the OUTPUT from coal fired power, in the case of Michael’s inanity, Bayswater, and Michael, it’s not the suburb of Perth we were referring to.
How untruthful it was of me to compare rooftop solar with OUTPUT of a coal fired power plant.
Well Michael, here’s one of the gods you bow down before as you follow your CO2 religion, and here he is comparing rooftop solar power to the OUTPUT from coal fired power plants.
You must be so disappointed ….. and then, on top of that, he can’t even get it right.
You just don’t get it do you?
Tony.
51
Jump on him.
He has his own article across at The Conversation.
I jumped on it all right.
Wonder how long that comment of mine will last before being ripped down. Get there quick to see it.
Link to article
Tony.
40
Nicely done Tony. You put the maths in plain english (must be even I understood it).
Its an interesting phenomena with Tim though. I mean if you go on the pure form of his prediction and the outcomes. It would be the scientific equivalent of Newton letting go of an apple and predicting it will fly up into the air and disappear, yet when Tim gets it totally wrong time after time after time, his credibility and influence increases…. work that one out!
30
Thanks Tony, heard Tim embellishing solar this morning and was hoping you’d jump on him.
10
TonyfromOz –
here’s the Full Flannery from ABC AM today. Radio Nat did an election piece & followed with a CATHOLIC Scottish Bishop apologising for sex abuse (which MSM outside UK have not bothered to report)which always comes across as an attack on Abbott rather than real concern, & then followed with Flannery. knew u’d be upset if u heard it:
(AUDIO, NO TRANSCRIPT AS YET)Solar power revolution underway in Australia’s mortgage belt
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2013/s3817893.htm
10
Pretty fitting story for Tim to follow on from really.
00
.
Given that The Climate Commission is nothing more than a fully taxpayer-funded platform for the current grubbermint’s “environemntal policies”, and given that Flim-Flammery is nothing more than a paid tout for those grubbermint policies, and an election has been called . . .
When are the “Opposition” going to call foul on such flagrant propaganda-based, taxpayer-funded electioneering, or at least start demanding their “equal time”?
.
Sorry, I forgot. They support all the same BS.
10
This bit from The Australian indicates there is a bit of difference between the ALP and the Coalition on this aspect of “climate”*:
The Australian
Abbott demands green bank stops work
August 05, 2013 2:24PM
“TONY Abbott has written to the chair of Labor’s $10 billion green investment bank to request it suspend its operations during the election campaign.
The opposition leader has vowed to abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation as a matter of priority if elected on September 7.
In a letter to CEFC chair Jillian Broadbent, Mr Abbott on Monday reiterated the coalition’s policy in regards to the corporation.
“As you are aware, the coalition does not support the CEFC or the expenditure of $10 billion of borrowed money on projects which the private sector has deemed too risky to invest in,” Mr Abbott wrote.
“As is normal practice under caretaker provisions, I request that the CEFC (as a Commonwealth authority) immediately ceases to assess or make any further approvals or payments.”
If elected, the coalition on day one would suspend the CEFC and prepare legislation to shut it down permanently.”
* Sour puss Milne on ABC24 this morning said “Abbott denies climate…” and in the same interview claimed some sort of solidarity with Rudd on “climate”. So there it is from an alarmist.
Perhaps as PM Abbott with have the courage of his convictions and dump the Coalition’s own crazy “climate” scheme.
70
So Christine has backflipped on her backflip ? Is that a front flip then or just a double somersault with a half twist ?
”By choosing the big miners the Labor government is no longer honouring our agreement to work together to promote transparent and accountable government, the public interest or to address climate change,”
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/laborgreens-alliance-dead-says-milne-20130219-2eoqz.html#ixzz2b4XEaRne
20
Sometimes it’s what the Libs don’t say that speaks volumes.
I can’t remember where I got it but soon after the Clean Energy Future public consultation period was finished the Liberals put out their own “Dissenting Report of Coalition Members and Senators”.
When I search for the letter sequence “scien” it gets only three matches, two of which are quotes from pro-tax adherents during the committee interviews that have no bearing on the scientific basis of CAGW, leaving only this tangential reference to science by the so-called “dissenting” members:
According to Mr Rabbit today, the carbon tax will be first thing to go under Coalition government, but there has been no mention of any “thorough inquiry” into either the CEFC / carbon pricing or its pseudoscience underpinnings.
So a limited period boondoggle of “Direct Action” which fails to solve a non-existent problem is still their policy. But no mention of using climate science funding to uncover the non-reality of CAGW – which is a scare campaign bigger than anything the Libs or ALP have ever independently concocted.
It’s all very consistent with your view, MV. The Libs were happy to question the response to man-made global warming with shallow manufactured “dissent”, but they show no signs of substantive dissent from the IPCC hockey stick vapour feedback fantasy.
~ ~ ~
The only problem for conspiracy theorists now is… when the carbon price is gone and the Direct Action Green Army is busy boondoggling at great cost to the taxpayer but NO PROFIT to the banksters, how are we going to maintain the hypothesis that the Libs are GS assets propping up CAGW for private bank manipulation of the global economy? Either the theory itself is false or the scrapping of the C tax represents a temporary setback in an ongoing plan.
The latter will be difficult to believe if CO2 pricing collapses in other countries similarly to the ill-fated CCX.
10
http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/politics/australian-federal-politics
says it all
00
jo –
i’d be happy if all politicians who mention IPCC’S claims about MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING, used the words MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING & not “climate change”, which has occurred throughout the globe’s history…& mention the acknowledged 17-year PAUSE in the rise of temperatures which IPCC did not predict.
20
Is he called the sun king in light of his parallels with King Louis the XIV
00
Yep
Narcissistic delusions of grandeur buttressed by spending other people’s money with both recklessness and complete refusal to accept accountability
In short, a monstrous, empty ego
20
Very important facts for all intending (responsible) voters!!! …
As many of us know, the Australian Greens campaign strategy broadly covers these four main “pressure points”. These are …
• Caring for the country’s/planet’s flora and fauna;
• Ensuring the two main parties have an ‘un-biased’ ‘honest broker’ in the Senate;
• Being a ‘warm & fuzzy’ alternative to the two major parties; &
• Caring for those less fortunate than us – i.e. those that live in developing countries. There are many eg’s. of this, but the best ones are …
I. Immediately increasing our foreign aid budget to .7% of GDP.;
II. Fully supporting the UN’s. $100 billion a year green “Slush Funds for developing countries; &
III. Immediately increasing Australia’s annual refugee intake from 23 000 to 30 000.
Clearly once you have a quick look at the below half a dozen tenets of Greens behaviour in the last 12 months or so, you may wish to seriously re-consider ever voting for the Greens again!!! …
• Al Gore starts adopting Amway/Cult tactics when recruiting 1500 acolytes/spruikers. By Anthony Watts, wattsupwitthat.com, 2/8/13;
• Indoctrination of teenagers at German Schools: All men are bad & “cause climate change”!! Ines Weller, a Bremen professor, claims “men produce more CO2 as they eat more meat, have bigger cars, and are less receptive to major life-style change in the interests of public good!” Claims backed up by physicist Gotelind Alber. (I am a Jew & think its safe to say that Joseph Goebbels would be very proud of his latest impersonaters.) By Pierre Gosselin, notrickszone.com, 23/7/13;
• “Academic and journalistic research over the past five years shows the key role of Nazi figures in the (German Green’s) founding and development.” By Benjamin Weinthal, Jerusalem Post, 7/7/13;
• The World Bank decrees that no longer will it loan money to developing countries for coal power stations (exc. in “rare circumstances”). Some people less charitable than myself may refer to this as a ‘darned good impersonation of the often mis-quoted Marie Antoinette’! … (“Let them eat cake!”) By Valerie Volcovici, http://www.reuters.com, 26/6/13;
• MARK THIS DAY IN YOUR DIARY !! … “THE DAY THE GREENS SAY THEY WANT ALL YOUR SUPER. !!” Prof. Hans Schelln-huber, Dir. of Potsdam Instit. for Climate Impact Research & Chair. of anti-democratic WBGU. (German Advisory Council on Global Change) says in report to Germany’s Environ. Minister, Peter Altmaier, “(Green) energy only becomes viable (& only over mid-term) if there’s a state-ordered mass-scale plunder of the world’s private retirement accounts.” By Pierre Gosselin, notrickszone.com, 6/9/12; &
• Victorian (Royal Commission in 2009) & Canberra (McLeod Inquiry in 2003) bushfire inquiries clearly state property and life losses would not have been so great if “more emphasis had been given controlled burning as a fuel-reduction strategy”. This is of course totally contrary to Green’s long-stated views against these kinds of policies and practices.
Now, more than anytime in a generation, is a time to vote with the head and not with the heart!!
Please ensure when you cast your vote, that you ensure the ‘non-conservation’ of the Australian Greens!!
This will most likely be the most important thing you’ll do for the whole of 2013!!
Most sincerely yours,
reformed warmist of Logan
30
I said 2 or more years ago and I stand by it… The Greens are on the same political trajectory as the Democrats, long build up, burst of power and attention during one Parliament, then fizzle out to nearly nothing. My prediction is they will lose almost all seats, Id say they will retain a maximum of 3 seats in the upper house and nothing in the lower house.
10
What sorrow it is to stand upon the hill overlooking the trenches and survey legions of snippitude where once were warriors.
30
http://www.india2australia.com/dumb-and-dull-candidates-making-australian-election-a-farce/
00
I have been called stupid once or twice so just to be clear
1, KRudd abandons the tax and moves to an ETS under the banner of saving the battlers a few bucks
2, creates massive hole in budget
3, dismantles FBT on cars in a vain attempt to patch hole among other things
4, puts a car industry already on its knees to the sword
5, make election promise to donate 200 million to dead car industry
Is that about right? Am i the only one that sees the stupidity of these policies or am i having a stupid moment?
40
Australia still has elections? How quaint. I thought labor had put the UN in charge.
00
Sean,
Technically we still have elections, we go through the process even though our vote is manipulated as we have a choice between two parties (preferential voting) and they are almost identicle and we still get fined if we dont vote, we might as well drop the charade and bring in diebold machines just like the Americans.
The UN is only in charge of our economy and finances they have no power beyond that as yet.
00