Remember how we were told people everywhere are “waking up to the threat of climate change”? Welcome to 2014. In Charles Krauthammers words “The National Weather Service has upgraded the election from tropical storm to tsunami, especially the results of the governorships. If you look at the bluest states in the country, Maryland, Illinois, Massachusetts, all gone Republican.”
Australians may have missed what happened this week in the US (especially if they only watch the ABC). Climate Change is over as a voting issue. Will Australian Opposition Leader, Bill Shorten, get the message? Just last month he pledged to put carbon trading on the next election agenda (again). The conservatives across the nation must be cheering.
In the US, Tom Steyer threw $74 million into a campaign to convince voters to be very afraid and vote out the Republicans. Nearly all of Steyers favourite candidates failed. It was no accidental issue. The NextGen Climate Action Super Pac took Steyers money, and spent it all (and more) to push President Obama’s green agenda, specifically targeting coal “for extinction”. The Republicans supported energy of all kinds from coal to oil, fracked gas, and more pipelines.
This was the “biggest investment the environmental community has ever made in politics”, and yet it failed dismally:
[Washington Post] The spending plans are laid out in a document, acquired by The Post, that summarizes the activities of five top green groups — the Environmental Defense Action Fund, Steyer’s NextGen Climate, the NRDC Action Fund, the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), and the Sierra Club — and has been circulated internally among them. Asked about the document, which is dated October 17, LCV president Gene Karpinski commented, “this is by far the biggest investment that the environmental community has ever made in politics.” Karpinski said that LCV will spend over $25 million this year, compared with $5 million in the 2010 election cycle and $15 million in 2012.
Little Green Machine (Wall St Journal, paywalled)
In Kentucky Mitch McConnell made opposition to the “war on coal” the centerpiece of his campaign. He won what was expected to be a close election by 15 points. Coal-supporting Shelley Moore Capito became the first GOP Senator in 55 years from West Virginia, where voters also ended the 38-year career of Democratic Rep. Nick Rahall, who couldn’t separate himself from Mr. Obama’s energy policies.
Nearly every one of Mr. Steyer’s favored candidates—in Colorado, Iowa, Florida, Wisconsin and Maine—lost. New Hampshire’s Jeanne Shaheen won, but Scott Brown had her playing defense for supporting a cap-and-trade carbon tax. A recent Gallup poll found that climate change ranked last among 16 issues that voters cared about in the midterms.
It was about “the climate” according to the Washington Free Beacon:
Environmentalists, and Steyer in particular, stated their intention early in the 2014 election cycle to make climate change a “wedge issue” that could win tight contests for Democrats in purple states.
“It is very difficult to find an issue that voters place lower on the list than climate change,” according to Republican pollster Whit Ayres.
NextGen Climate Action, one of the election cycle’s most active and well-funded Super PACs, spent more than $5.5 million in the race, nearly 15 percent of all outside spending on Udall’s behalf.
The group had 68 staffers working in the state.
Imagine having 68 staffers in one state for an environmental campaign and still losing?
Has “the climate” reached the tipping point where it turns off more voters than it gains?
In exit polls 27% of Republicans think it’s a serious issue (and might be tempted to vote Democrat), but only 15% of Democrat voters are skeptical. Graph from New York Times. Have the Democrats “wedged” themselves?
Exit Polls showing the partisan divide on climate change | NY Times
Most voters rank the issue last so they aren’t going to change their vote. The Republicans who think climate change is a problem are not shifting to vote Democrat. But the Democrats who are skeptical may have already moved the other way. (I’d like to see some historic comparisons, have these proportions changed?).
For the record Steyer was involved in some way in 7 gubernatorial races losing four and winning three. In the three winning seats the Democrat candidates were already ahead in the polls before Steyers campaign began.
What does it mean for US climate policies?
Brad Plumer, on Vox, says: The biggest loser in this election is the climate” . Obama is going around the congress with EPA regulations anyway. But there are now more conservative governors who may refuse to implement the EPA plans.
In the short term, the election’s impact might seem negligible. After all, the action in Washington over the next few years will center on the Environmental Protection Agency, which is crafting rules to cut carbon-dioxide emissions from US power plants. These rules don’t need congressional approval (they’re being done under the existing Clean Air Act), and President Obama is expected to veto any attempts by Congress to block them. (Conservative governors refusing to implement the EPA’s plan may be the bigger pitfall here.)
But congressional indifference is a huge problem for future climate policy.
h/t Des Moore
The ‘worst’ we can hope for, is that the Republicans (those who are not ‘RINO’s) will manage to hog-tie any and all climate legislation for the next two years, if not 6 years. The best we Will hope for, is that by the time democrats manage to take over again, it will be a) Very obvious the climate is not doing what they claimed it would, and / or b) a lot more people will be at least somewhat better educated on the subject.
190
This is very encouraging. Perhaps all is not lost yet.
171
The level of scientific insanity that is coming from this pseudoscience is typified by this recent paper: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014GL061456/abstract
‘Using ocean model hindcasts and reanalyses we show that heat uptake between the 1990s and 2000s increased by 0.7 ± 0.3Wm−2’
Yup, sheer lunacy: instead of removing the phoney ‘back radiation’ and 40% increase of energy over reality which causes the imaginary atmospheric and ocean warming, they have hindcast to get as a fitting parameter the presumed extra heat transport into the oceans to offset the phoney extra atmospheric heat.
This is the SCIENTIFIC MADHOUSE, populated by WEAPONS’-GRADE SCIENCE MORONS.
40
And not a moment too soon.
Most people in the English-speaking parts of the world missed Putin’s speech at the Valdai conference in Sochi a few days ago, and, chances are, those of you who have heard of the speech didn’t get a chance to read it, and missed its importance.
Regardless of what you think or don’t think of Putin (like the sun and the moon, he does not exist for you to cultivate an opinion) this is probably the most important political speech since Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech of March 5, 1946.
In this speech, Putin abruptly changed the rules of the game. Previously, the game of international politics was played as follows:
http://tgrule.com/2014/11/06/where-russia-stands-and-what-it-stands-for/
100
I guess I’ve understood the game better than most then. I see no U.S. interest in Ukraine and would stay out of the whole thing. What strategic interest do we have there? None! It’s a local issue.
But this is a key thing.
Now if the United States could reach that position a lot of our troubles would disappear in a flash (like worrying about UKraine).
PS: Obama never has been a match for Putin, not even a close competitor.
90
Here is a another related piece:
While Americans Mull Over the Election, Other Countries Prepare for War.
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2014/11/07/While-Americans-Mull-Over-Election-Others-Prepare-War
10
In my conversations with various friends etc in Europe, most are of the opinion that the USA is a failed power, and any assurances or alliances with the USA are worthless.
They consider NATO to be useless, USA to be worse than useless, and that they are entirely on their own.
Most of them see Europe to be in the identical situation that they were in 1939.
Accordingly, they are all preparing for war.
We live in interesting times, and we can trace these times to the election of Obama.
50
The USA has been written off as a failed power before. Remember Jimmy Carter? We’ll be back. Leading with cannabinoid medicine which can reduce medical costs by anywhere from 1/4 to 3/4s.
Think of what that will do for budgets i the developed world. It means about a $1 trillion a year savings in the US alone when fully developed.
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/74-million-spent-pushing-climate-change-but-us-voters-saw-through-the-scare/#comment-1612836
50
It just goes to prove that the warmists have only been able to scare some of the people some of the time!
160
Naturally quoting from Abe Lincoln’s famous one liner. I like Einstein’s famous quote too when discussing the CAGW myth – “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe”.
180
Sheeple become people when they are shaken awake by the grasping fingers lodged deep in their pockets. It is refreshing to witness a wind of change in the US, despite the effort of the MSM here and there to avoid reporting reality.
130
Now the Republicans have to pull off the rest of the act, governing. Winning will turn out to have been the easy part.
60
A “war on coal” in West Virginia? How nutty can anyone be? In the Great Smokey Mountains and the Blue Ridge Mountains, coal is the backbone of the economy, or was. These towns were built on coal. Wisconsin and Maine though, that means a major shift, although the turnout was very poor.
However in Australia, Labor cannot back down. The problem is that they are dependent on Green preferences. Of the 53 seats won at the last Federal election on first preferences, only 8 were Labor. So they have to do what the Greens say and the Greens love that power out of all proportion to their following.
No one on the Left really cares about coal or CO2 or trees or global warming or climate. It is all about power and posturing and Israel and money. Worse, the Labor party, owned and controlled by the Unions under the ALP Constitution, have a real problem with plummeting Union membership after the President of the ALP was jailed for $20Million in theft of members money and the former Prime Minister named in the Royal Commission as taking cash from extortionate activities of her married boyfriend which she enabled.
No in Australia, Labor will continue to spout nonsense about coal and wind and solar. They have no choice because individual Labor members do not have the courage to stand on their own feet and dare the Greens to preference conservatives. As for the Senate, even former PM Paul Keating called them unrepresentative swill, where a state as small as Tasmania with 500,000 people and South Australia with 1 million have equal vote with Liberal states Victoria and NSW and Queensland with 20 million between them.
190
Alleged… the commissioner has not made a finding of fact in the case of Gillard – YET! She may still go down in Victoria for allegedly making a false document.
50
Sure. Then the DPP can use his discretion and not prosecute even so and even if he did, might not secure a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
If everyone enjoying the proceeds of Union extortion were prosecuted, the courts would overflow. The point is that Union membership is collapsing and Union funds with it. That’s a lot of $600 a year. At 12% membership outside the public service, Unions have had their day with a mere $1Bn in cash each year and cannot fund council, state and Federal elections and wages, apart from slush funds to keep union leaders in their overpaid jobs. Without those funds, it is harder to get people to vote for a discredited, Union controlled Labor party where preselection is decided by the Union excutive, not by the Labor Party members.
That is why the Greens are so important to Labor. It’s not about Global Warming. It’s about windmills, the Don Quixote vote.
100
But don’t forget that the unions control the all industry super funds… hmmmm… in the USA when that happened the unions were controlled by the… anyone game to even think it?
30
A subtlety of the Republican’s campaigns was making sure global warming was an issue. Not for them, but their opponents.
Pointman
220
Absolutely true, Pointman.
10
Jo,
Should be $74 million. The moral vanity crowd, who are busily denuding themselves of cash, are not that rich – thank heavens.
—-
My brain knew it was an “m”. I don’t know what my fingers were thinking. Perhaps I’ve just typed “b-illion” too many times. Thanks – Jo
50
An issue for the Left is never “over”. Consider gay marriage as an example. Or firearms. Or national health care. Or …
It’s just that it’s down, for the moment, awaiting better “messaging”. They really do believe in recycling. Sort of like termites – you may defeat one batch but there’s more on the way.
130
cedarhill, they might never admit it is over. But the thing politicans want far more than “climate control” is to win. I think the big mistake of the Australian Labor Party was to believe that Kevin Rudd won because of “climate change”. He would have won anyway. They misread the polls – the care factor has never been that strong even when 60% of the population thought it mattered.
When the Labor Party realize it is working against the thing they care about the most they will quietly drop it while keeping on saying they were correct all along.
271
Don’t underestimate the “elite” politicians on the Left. They don’t really believe in any of the ideals around the environment but they do believe in the power they can exert because of it. Most of the “termites” are useful idiots but the Progressive power brokers guiding them have no qualms about continuing to use anything that gets them more control over people. The only thing they believe is that they are the only ones smart enough to make decisions for mankind and we should cede all authority to their oligarchy. They don’t “believe” in anything except their own, selfish image of how they think the world should be… that’s why they’re dangerous.
200
A more cogent argument that does not require an appeal to any perceived quality if the left is just one of logic.
When “climate” was an election issue and voters voted for “action” on it, that did not mean that climate skepticism was over as an election issue. The end of something is not predicated on its current popularity. This blog article is just a pronouncement which, even if it ends up correct, is simply based on hope not history or data.
14
Yes, what is your concise point Gee?
10
“and voters voted for “action” on it”
ummm gee.. there has never been any election where people voted for “action” on it.
When Gillard won, both major parties went to the election promising no carbon tax.
50
ps.. I strongly suspect that had she not come out with that lie just before the election…
.. the Liberals would have won.
40
Goodo so according to you Jo’s article is not recognising that the electorate has not changed and the recent results mean nothing wrt to change in voter opinion on climate change. I don’t agree and I am certain from what is written above neither does jo
00
Goodo so according to you Jo’s article is not recognising that the electorate has not changed and the recent results mean nothing wrt to change in voter opinion on climate change. I don’t agree and I am certain from what is written above neither does jo
00
HA, Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
10
How cost effective is Renewable Energy [RE] in Oz circa late 2014? Bill Shorten have you noticed that the price of oil is currently hovering around US$80/barrel? The world is awash with oil & also gas. The price differential between fossil fuels & RE must be of the order of 5 times with the latter being obscenely more expensive for base load energy generation per kilowatt hour. But Bill will still push for RE and a CT/ETS in Oz even though it is abundantly clear, even to blind Freddie, that there is no connection between rising “Carbon Emissions” and “Global Warming”. Most voters are aware by now that AGW is a myth. Judging by the Republicans dominant display in the early November USA Half Senate Elections, you would think Billy Boy would now back off with his stand on a CT/ETS in Oz – if he doesn’t then expect an easy 2nd Term win for the Abbott Govt in the 2016 Federal Election.
100
From a fellow geo to another geo (I assume that from your name).
Do not understimate the stupidity of the Australian voter. They voted Howard after the best ever performance of the Oz economy. Why? because psycho Kevin offered them exactly what little Johnny did + 10%
90
What I see here is The Boy Who Cried Wolf effect. At the beginning, the ordinary people had no understanding whatsoever of what it all meant, and it was easy to believe the scare campaign with seemingly so much evidence, but now, they have heard Wolf so many times, they are becoming inured to it all, and in reality would tend to just come over with a glazed expression when it’s mentioned, hoping that whoever is talking about it would just shut up, but they are too polite to tell them to shut up, so they’re, in effect, just tuning out.
Take for example where King Geo mentions this:
This whole RET beat up would be finished at a stroke if someone actually explained it to the people.
How easy is it to bandy around the figure of 41,000GWH, and note here how they’ve quite literally crapped in their own nest. They can’t use Nameplate as they’ve specifically quoted actual power delivered.
Have you ever heard anyone tell you what the current total is, and just what is needed to get it up to that figure of 41,000GWH.
Current total generation has dropped and is now around 210 to 215TWH, so that 41,000GWH (or 41TWH) is around 20% of all power generation, hoped to come from renewable sources.
The current total for all renewables is around 9% of that overall total, which is 19.5TWH, or 19,500GWH. Two thirds of that is Hydro.
So, now we see that to get it up to that hoped for 41,000GWH, we need 21,500GWH of NEW renewable power.
There’s going to be no new Hydro. Rooftop Solar is just about tapped out now that the totally outrageous up front subsidy gift and the equally outrageous FIT have been wound back, Commercial Solar, well, with that at around 0.1%, it’s inconsequential anyway.
So, in effect, that means it will all have to come from Wind Power.
Working back from that figure of 21,500GWH, then that means a Nameplate of 8,200MW.
The current total for ALL wind is 3,400MW, so whatever we already have, then we need NEW wind of the current total multiplied by 2.4
So, keeping in mind that all of this has to be actually delivered by 2020, six years from now, and with a six to ten year lead time from thought bubble to delivery, than all of that NEW wind needs to be on the drawing board right now ….. which it aint!
So, what is 8200MW of Nameplate when it comes to Wind Power?
A large scale monster wind plant is 200 wind towers averaging 2.5MW each or 500MW. A plant of that size will cost $2 Billion+ in today’s dollars.
So that’s 17 NEW monster wind plants between now and 2020, or three new plants a year for every year until 2020, and then they’ll need to keep going anyway, because all those older plants will now be clapped out.
3 new plants a year, or $6 Billion in new renewable money each year for the next 6 years, or around $35 Billion.
So, where you see and hear this ephemeral total of 41,000MW, don’t worry about it. They will never make it, and in fact, they were never going to make it anyway.
It’s all just blah blah blah, spoken by people who have no idea what it means and reported by an ABC not even willing to check what it really means.
They can argue all they like. They were never going to make it ever.
You can only cry Wolf so many times, and then people just ignore it.
Tony.
360
But will they try to spend the money anyway? Nothing dies harder than a bad idea.
130
Tony, I think you might be interested in this latest development…….LMAO!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/07/world-largest-solar-plant-applying-for-federal-grant-to-pay-off-its-federal/
60
Let’s look at a few, unmm, inconvenient truths about this err, wonderful CSP (solar thermal) plant, the supposed way of the future to supply base load power, the wettest of dreams for every greens paroxysms of delight. (/sarc)
This is an absolute classic case of over-reach.
Six and a half years ago, when I started all this, I found a (peer reviewed) paper on the future of Concentrating Solar Power. (CSP)
Current technology at that time was that plants of this nature could drive at best a 50MW generator for perhaps 4 hours a day, averaged across a whole year, although even that was a bit of a stretch, as they found that even that was proving problematic.
This paper said that within 2 years (and that was 2010) they were confident that they could drive a 250MW generator, and within 5 years (and that was 2013) they could not only drive a 500MW generator, there was the distinct possibility that they could achieve the hoped for 24 hour operation.
The main problem here is the enormous weight of the rotor in that generator, that weight having to be driven at 3000RPM, and think about that, 50 full rotations ever second, every snap of your fingers.
They had to reflect the Sun’s heat to a focal point, where they had a compound, heat that compound to a molten state, enough to boil water to steam, and then pressurise that steam enough to drive a turbine which in turn drives the Generator, which produces the electricity.
250MW by 2008, been and gone, and 500MW by 2013, also been and gone.
Here we have Ivanpah now with three 125MW generators, and they still cannot drive them.
Siemens spent hundreds of millions designing a special turbine most suited for this solar application only, and they still cannot get it to turn over at the required rate of four to five hours a day, let alone for 24 hours.
The idea of these CSP plants is that the Sun alone makes the heat enough for the WHOLE process.
Here you have Ivanpah now applying for approval to use more Natural Gas.
Why you may ask.
Well you see, the Sun cannot achieve the task for the whole process.
They have an auxilliary drive for the generator, and this is a classic Natural Gas fired turbine which spins the generator up and keeps it going until the Solar aspect actually CAN keep the process going.
Those NG turbines are now running for anything up to 4 to 6 hours a day some of the time, just to keep the plant generating the electricity it has ….. PROMISED to deliver.
Even then, for the full 8 Months of operation, this plant has delivered only 254GWH of power from all three units.
That works out to a Capacity Factor of, umm, wait for it, 11.4%, which equates to 2 hours and 44 minutes a day averaged across that full 8 Months.
So, let’s see then. If the President implements a tax on CO2 emissions, (fat chance that happening) this this all singing all dancing way of the future solar plant will be subject to the Tax as well, for all the CO2 emitted from the NG component of its operation.
As I have always said, it’s the weight of the rotor inside the generator that is absolutely critical in all this. If you cannot turn that over, then you get zero output. You can spend billions on new tech turbines, but if they cannot make a 125MW generator turn over using this process, then the date for a 250MW generator is long into the future, and a 500MW generator is still a dream, and read very closely here, because they will NEVER achieve 24/7/265 power delivery from a 500MW generator. Even now, the closest they have to that is a 20MW generator and it only achieved 24 hour operation for 25 or so days in Mid Summer, and has to shut down during the three months of Winter.
CSP supplying Base Load Power. Don’t make me laugh.
Tony.
140
And then there are the birds, the little flying dinosaurs I feed on my birdfeeder in the back yard, the herons, ducks and geese in the pond near my house The hawks, eagles and, yes, buzzards, I watch soaring. And then there are the birds, who the greenies wish to destroy. Maybe we should destroy the greenies. Maybe, maybe, maybe, wouldn’t it be wonderbar. How anyone can advocate any policy or contraption which destroys birds, spreaders of joy in the whole world. Think of Japan and their reverence for their dwindling storks. Think of the almost extinct Whooping Crane being chopped up in a windmill. Think of Obama issuing an executive order allowing wind farms to kill 30 Bald eagles, our national bird, each and every year for the next thirty year. How do these cretins sleep. They must drug themselves. I hope it’s a strong drug.
I have never been to Australia, unfortunately, but if I ever come I will spend a lot, a lot of time birdwatching. What little I know about Australian birds intrigues me. I hope the greenies leave some left when, if, I get there.
30
Stan:
If you want to come and see our birds, you better get a move on.
On my property, I have a collection of resident birds. In fact, I just came in from my deck where I fed some of my daily “regulars”. These “regulars” consist of around 20 Lorrikeets; eighteen Crimson Rosellas; six King Parrots; two Butcher Birds; six Kookaburras and three Japanese Banded Doves.
I used to have two Wedge Tailed Eagles nesting in the nature reserve adjacent to my property. But the Local EPA shot them both because they were apparently eating some of the local wildlife.
There are plans to build a wind farm within earshot of my property, so I expect that the birdchoppers will soon be reducing the number of my regulars; but, of course, they will be doing that in an environmentally friendly way.
In addition, a couple of years ago the government issued a decree encouraging the chopping down of trees; ostensibly to mitigate the fire hazard. The impact on wildlife habitat is considered inconsequential.
Of course, they also ignored the fact that the real fire hazard is not from the trees, but it is from the accumulated undergrowth and consequent fuel loading. Naturally, this hazard has developed as a consequence of the fact that it has long been banned to burn or otherwise remove this hazard, in order “to protect the environment, and reduce the carbon emissions”.
The effect of this is that when a fire does break out, it is catastrophic and destroys all the “environment” and wildlife in its path. Including the birds.
But hey, it’s for the children. Or something.
In other words, thanks to the idiots we elect, and the greenies that have all the political power, both “the environment” and all the wildlife within it, are pretty well screwed.
So, get your shoes on, and come see the birds before the idiot greenies kill them all off.
20
Speaking as yet another geo – Commonly, oil companies plan ahead with the assumption that they can get roughly $80/bbl (at least thats the current price point). Lower than that, and further investment/development isn’t profitable (enough) for them. If the price sits at about $85, production will scale back, new developments might get delayed a bit, but the big players won’t be seriously out of pocket. I might work in the oil industry, but I still find it disturbing that deepwater operations cost roughly $1 million a day, just to drill a hole in the ground – admittedly a curvy and long hole, and it’s drilled with some pretty remarkable technology, but still, a hole is a hole… but it does indeed let me fly in helicopters, visit strange countries, and keep food on my table, and my bills paid, and said holes also provide rocks to look at too, so it isn’t all bad!
What is truly obscene though, is the amount of money poured into election campaigns, especially when countries like the US claim to be free and democratic, and laughably, how ‘any american can become president’ (with associated fine print)… I’m not particularly pro, or anti-US, I just think that there’s an ever-widening gap between what our career politicians want (for themselves), and what most ‘normal’ people with half a brain want from our politicians, regardless of which party they belong to.
101
“but it does indeed let me fly in helicopters” – James don’t you love those chopper flights to the rig and return wondering if and when you will need to put your HUET training into action – I personally have done 100’s of flights and it seems some more are coming next year. Yes offshore rigs cost ~ US$1 million a day to operate but when you are chasing multi TCF gas fields e.g. our NWS, then it pays dividends, not like those RE Power Plants proposed by the ALP & Greens whose economic viability is dire, as well detailed by Tony on many occasions, including his latest entry today at 1.00am, 8 Nov.
60
I know, I know… it’s just that even after 10-ish years of hearing insanely large amounts of money being talked about, I continue to be amazed on some level. it’s not a judgement or lament, just that I still see 1 million dollars as a considerable sum of money, be it spent daily or otherwise…
40
to the geo love circle.
Working in this industry for the last 25 years I have been involved in the dozens of wells. Most recently in Phoenix South-1 oil discovery, the most important Australian oil discovery in the last 25 years. This will bring phenomenal amount of money into government coffers to allow greens to exist so they can travel by planes and helicopters to fight fossil industry that they hate so much.
Money also brings best people into the industry and they don,t come from the government. The quality of geology that comes from organisations like GA (geoscience Australia) or CSIRO is often poor now. The excellent early work of exploration in the 70-80-ties has been steadily declining and now only a shadow of once proud scientific machine exists with unchanged voracious budgetary appetite and often hostile attitude toward us.
50
It was puzzling that the Australian went front page on the closeness of room sized fusion even in the next year with the developments of Lockheed Martin?
If anyone truly believed near free infinite energy was so close, why is anyone talking about wind and water and sunshine? You would also have to wonder what $1Bn a day on preventing something which is not happening could do for fusion or Thorium or recycling metals like Aluminum rather than burning irreplaceable carbon fuels. So it is all just an attack on Western society by failed communists dressed up in Green. Watermelons. Communists like Lee Rhiannon and Adam Bandt and Julia Gillard with the support of an indulged and unaccountable and irresponsible ABC which votes 60% Green and really think it is all about trees.
181
I lived the nightmare of communism for the first 20 years of my life. When I asked a self-confessed watermelon about failed communism of the last century, she said that “this time we will do this right”. When I revealed that I lived in that paradise that she wanted to recreate and improve suddenly she quieten and started rigorously retracting her statements. Now this person avoids me like was the 666.
Obviously she does not want any advise from an experienced paradise dweller.
330
Where did you live Dariusz?
30
Poland Gdansk, the birth of Solidarity. Was in the shipyards during those heady days of August 1980. Seen communism crack for the first time. Instead of them crushing us with tanks like they did in December 1970 they only circled with helicopters above us waiting to struck. And struck they did on 13th of December 1981. Just before that date I escaped Poland but my friends ended in jail usually for 2 years.
My work started in 1977 when I was only 17. Instead of partying I spent my next 3 years in basements printing leaflets, throwing them in the crowds, chased by police etc. Not one person from my family knew what I was doing. During that time when confronted people thought that I was crazy that I will change nothing, more importantly that I endanger their however impoverished life. I learned that the majority of people preferred stability and bread than freedom. 3 years later when I came out my farther, who was a communist, was upset not because I was putting myself in danger but just like the rest of the people I was putting him in danger. But this is another story.
I value not just freedom and my sensitivity to freedom creep loss but more importantly individuality and ability for independent thinking. I often find myself alone seeing stupidity feets deep. But sadly this is not new to me. Australian never really had to fight for freedom despite the usual retoric and hence the general public takes it for granted. The freedom loss is real in Australia and this is based on experience of the person that grew up never having it. Now just like when I was 17 old I am often derided for being oversensitive and a cold war relique.
The oasis of reason that you project remainds me of my basement days. It was a pleasure to meet personally.
Dariusz Jablonski
240
Dariusz,
thank you!
It’s people like you who most appreciate the similarity between your time and the time we find ourselves in now.
Tony.
120
An interesting account, Dariusz. I am the same age as you and have never suffered the loss of freedom under communism. I am of Russian heritage, my grandparents fled Russia days before the revolution so I’m lucky.
Australians don’t see that their freedom and liberties are being taken away, bit by bit by both sides of politics. One day they will wake to this but I fear it will be too late.
80
Dariusz, a very moving post. You are so right and you can see what most people do not. I hope you never have to live with such a loss of freedom again but I fear you are correct about our freedoms in the ‘West’ being eroded. It’s what have heard called ‘salami slicing’ and I am well aware of it in the EU . I come from England and we contributed the Magna Carta to the world. Our appalling ‘leaders’ are choosing to ignore the hard won rights of the charter.
90
Dariusoz, we too have age in common. So interesting to hear your story. Being of Polish heritage myself (two generations back) makes your story even more touching.
70
1,000,000,000 thumbs up.
20
There is nothing the Left run faster from than facts.
130
“The general populace has got terminally fed up of end of the world scares and is quite simply no longer listening to the propaganda. They’re by this stage indifferent and indeed the only time they occasionally focus on it, is to have a giggle at a particularly outrageous piece of “research” churned out by some conehead in academia. Abandoning the ongoing effort to turn it up way past past amp 11, for toning it down, means they wont hear you at all.
As far as they’re concerned, it’s already well past the talk to the hand stage…”
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/of-squirrels-and-men/
Pointman
200
Yes.
10
It will not cease to be an issue whilever public funding of the alarmists continues.
120
Politicians ultimately control the funding of climate alarmists. When politicians realise that the voters no longer care about climate change, the funding of climate alarmists will dry up. That is why the alarmists are so noisy lately: they are desperate to keep the money flowing.
170
Indeed they do. But which politicians? How much money has the politician Al Gore already made out of Australia’s confusion since he dropped by?
40
I am sure that Turnbull won’t listen and I’m not sure that Abbott will.
110
I sent a letter to my member to suggest that the $3B they earmarked for climate change should get spent on flood defenses for country towns and cyclone defenses / shelters in the north. In short the climate beaurocracy should get refocused on defensive strategies for both warming and cooling since that’s what it’s going to do. In winter it’ll be cold, and in summer it’ll be hot. In a land of drought and flooding rains one is never too far away from the next change in the weather.
130
Far too much common sense for most politicians to exercise (unless they have stock in earth-moving industries or construction,) but I do like the way you think.
40
I can’t remember the details exactly, as it was a few years ago, but in Coober Pedy, there was (is) a wind turbine or 2, which are supposed to generate electricity for the town, but it was rarely in operation, not so much due to lack of wind, but more because (allegedly) a politician at some level, made a profit via some legal, yet ethically murky way when diesel generators were used instead.
Then there’s the case where, in South Australia a few property developers quite openly funded the local council election campaigns for a few people, who naturally, being a local council election, did well, and ended up on the council, where they, again, quite openly did whatever the property developers told them. A corruption enquiry was held (at great expense, obviously), but the State government then said that the results of the enquiry were not of any interest or value to the public, and refused to release any of it… You don’t have to be morally bankrupt to be a Labor politician in South Australia, but it most certainly helps…
50
“should get spent on flood defences”
I hope you mean DAMS ! 🙂
A few big dams in the north of Australia would protect the towns and agriculture you could then built there.
70
As long as governments build flood and cyclone defences using money imported from safe areas there will never be any commonsense over where people choose to live.
40
You have no idea do you? There is a reason human settlements are on flood plains. It simply because that’s where the foodand water is. We didn’t always have trucks and aeroplanes, and pipelines you know!
Given where the settlements are, flood defences (dams and levies, should have been built long ago but being Australia, governments never seem to get around to it. Given there is 3 Billion dollars earmarked for climate, I vote we use it to fix this situation. That may mean, for the gnomes benefit, that some settlements get moved.
30
Of course Abbott realises that while Global Warming will slowly die in credibility, it remains a political issue for some and you cannot run a government from opposition.
His Direct Action policy seems the same nonsense on the surface, but while cauched in the same carbon saving nonsense, it is wedge politics which could also do wonders for the Australian environment which will remain a big political issue. It has big implications in funding necessary water management, dams, hydro, recycling, drying brown coal, greening the countryside and real conservation while opening the door to more practical energy developments like nuclear. Alternatively to appear to do absolutely nothing when the Green vote is 14% and is particularly strong in aspirational youth is to give a free kick to the opposition. A bit like his paid parental leave scheme, while a big expense on the surface, it would be a genuine social advance at no net cost, like paid leave in general. He actually does have a degree in Economics as well as degrees Law and Politics and is perpetually underestimated by the opposition, the public and even people on his own side of politics.
210
Finally…someone here gets the strategy!
80
The 14% don’t matter. They are either hate driven extremists who want a far Left agenda; or obsessive, single-issue environmentalists who are unable to understand broader, more complex issues; or juveniles whose politics is a simple fashion accessory, to be displayed like plumage in order to enhance one’s social status and attract a breeding partner.
Direct Action is just more of our money splashed against the wall. More to the point, it is not even winning the ‘hearts and minds’ battle, not while the ABC and other leftist media are relentlessly hammering their ‘end is nigh’ message.
50
Hate filled extremists? No a lot of the 14% are simply young and caring people who reject the Labor vs Liberal politics of their parents. The vote is particularly high in middle class suburbs. There has always been a third party in Australian politics, outside the Lib/National party coalition.
These people are often soft idealists and the Green party seems on the surface to be the party of caring about humanity, the environment. The Green hatred for Jews and Israel for example is cauched in support for poor disenfranchised Palestinians, as if Palestine was a homogeneous country and without mention of the huge success of Jordan or that Israel was a creation of the UN.
Then you get the group who believe in the power of pyramids and unicorns and bits of quartz, the Druids who worship trees. There are also the young parents who have an unrealistic dreamy view of the future and the Greens always talk about your children and your children’s children, as if they care. Perhaps the last group are the non science arts and entertainment people and the religious, the priests and nuns and good people who see both sides of politics as brutal and really want to help the poor boat people, about whom Sarah Hansen Young in particular clearly cares nothing. “Accidents happen”.
Over this you have the hard core ex communist party people you mention, people who want power and manipulate these soft, aspirational targets. To ignore 14% of the people is to commit electoral suicide. $2.5Billion (Over 4 years) is not too much to spend, if it is done wisely. I love the fact that people talk totals, not yearly, also a bit of blatant manipulation, this time by the Government.
140
I don’t think you have seen what can happen when you put a unicorn and a piece of quartz inside a pyramid…
80
Baby quartz unicorns?
50
You can probably buy these. Made in China. You know the stores, purple curtains and joss sticks to hide the marijuana aroma.
30
Why would you need to hide the aroma if it is legal?
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/74-million-spent-pushing-climate-change-but-us-voters-saw-through-the-scare/#comment-1612836
00
Remember the birds, please remember the birds.
10
Climate change is not the Left’s agenda; hatred of fossil fuel is.
Even though it will not be an election issue, it is plainly evident that conservatives are too stupid to hold onto power, so after the next change of government we’ll end up with yet another carbon dioxide tax, along with all the other poison that comes with leftist governments.
Through stupidity, cowardice and incompetence, the Victorian government is on its way out after one term. Through stupidity, cowardice and incompetence, the NSW government is squandering its huge mandate, but will probably scrape through for one more term – just one. Through stupidity, cowardice, incompetence and lack of imagination, the Howard government squandered 11 years (including several years WITH CONTROL OF THE SENATE) and then poisoned the Liberal brand with industrial relations laws that crapped on voters. Through stupidity, cowardice, incompetence and lack of imagination, the Abbott government is crapping on voters instead of undoing the harm the Left have done to our country.
There is no hope. The Left always win.
22
People are pretty well fed up with both sides of politics. I’ve been watching the growth of a new political movement that ticks most of my boxes.
The Australian Liberty Alliance.
I don’t believe this party will be a flash in the pan. The Liberal Party has over 80,000 members. Thus far ALA has over 140,000 members and will launch next year.
The Liberals have lost my vote because of their appeasement to a minority on the 18C issue.
70
It’s my opinion (i.e., not backed by any hard facts that I have bothered to research) that the Greens got a big jump in support when the Democrats imploded… presumably because people didn’t want to vote Labor or Liberal, and the Greens were there…
30
Scraper, you are wrong and I am wrong. When I was browsing – but not reading – the page you linked to (so I am not offering any comment on your agenda), my first thought was that it was yet another wasted effort that will be suffocated by the leftist media and starved for lack of funding. And then the solution occurred to me! There is a way to influence politics without have access to the mass media or having the wealth to buy influence.
So, there is still hope for a return to a civil society. More to come at a later date.
20
Barry, a third force in politics (done right) is sorely needed in Australia to break the duopoly. I am not a member of any political party and my agenda is lobbying for the development of the north. Over the years I’ve had discussions with all parties as ongoing development requires multilateral support.
An emerging party that has a membership, almost twice the Liberal Party should not be dismissed. The exponential growth in membership confirms my theory that people are disillusioned with the two party system. The left have the Greens but what has the right got? Nothing of worthwhile, in my opinion.
Your points concerning the media influence and funding are valid but these obstacles can be overcome…especial the media. Don’t do predictions so I have a hunch that in eighteen months or so a TV network and a newspaper chain will swing away from the left and if the momentum continues, funding will be in place.
It is interesting that the ALA originated in WA. Join the dots.
10
Barry:
sadly, and very depressingly, I agree with everything you have said.
We are screwed.
10
Barry said:
Australia, as we know it, is terminal anyway. We are fast reaching the stage where all we are capable of doing is digging dirt with overseas owned companies, equipment from overseas and sometimes even with workers from overseas. The difference between the Left and Right is that the Left would gleefully shut off the life support.
Barry said that the Left always win. It’s because they do most of the controlling, regardless of who is in government. They control the universities, the public schools, the public service, the public media, commercial TV, the unions, the judiciary and the arts. As with the politicians, the conservatives in these areas are too timid to take them on and will just roll over.
Scaper said people are fed up with both sides of politics. But ‘both sides’ are the left and right. I think most of would settle for a resolved right side, which still leaves left and right but with a broader bandwidth. It would be nice if a credible new party could provide this option. Nowadays ‘middle’ in politics just means Left Lite.
20
Most people are born into poverty and I am constantly amazed that the right can win at all.
Barry I would say the opposite to what you suggest. The reason why the right wins is because the left is so bad that people keep on bouncing to the right. However, deep down inside they are not of the right leaning persuasion. The right is about individuality and growing up. Most people don,t pass the 5th grade in life lessons in my opinion and hence their political alliance is to who gives me more money party. Liberals are almost always in the impossible situation trying fix the mess first and appease the money sluts at the same time with shrinking budgets. The left have no such drivers as they never grew up. Borrow and spent now tantrums without the thought of future reminds me of my 5 year old son in the shopping centres. 7 years later despite his autistic disability he far surpassed 75% of the normal population in economic education.
40
The right is about individuality and growing up.
Except when it comes to prohibition. If you check out that other Prohibition in the US (1920 to 1933) the right was making nearly the exact same arguments.
10
‘Big lesson for Australia from US voters. Climate change is over as an election issue.’ And as astonishing poll is released to reveal 99% of turkeys to for Christmas! The World League For Logical Thinking, ask do these bird brains know what they are voting for? They suspect not was the answer.
025
Please rephrase that in English, BA4!
150
Please do not hide from the maim problem and offer some valid scientific data to support your position, like I can!
—
Evidence? You mean like a potholer video? – Jo
013
Does he know English?
40
And use much less ethanol…….
70
I suspect he may drink methanol rather than ethanol. !
60
‘I suspect he may drink methanol rather than ethanol. !’ ha, so you have no valid scientific comments to add and then again you are only seeing about 75% of the posts I send in! I wonder who is doing the editing and WHY? Is it because their puppet masters wouldn’t like the message, so lets shoot the messenger instead!
I’m hold a mirror up to your faces, do you like what you are seeing?
————-
BA: Go ahead — publish all your “censored” comments on a website. See how much attention you can get! You put up inane comments here with no content, get inane responses, then pretend you had a scientific debate and won? Sometimes BA I do you a favour and don’t post your most stupid arguments. – Jo
013
“I’m hold a mirror up to your faces, ”
All I see is a brown square.
btw.. what variety of pigeon English are you using ???
20
Darn, wish there was a up-thumb for moderator and Jo comments !! 🙂
70
There is, see below.
00
1,000 thumbs up for Jo.
10
“And as astonishing poll is released to reveal 99% of turkeys to for Christmas!”
Is that title of Michael Manns new book?
60
It is sad that BA4 can’t get full time employment, but how many Village Idiots do we need?
40
Bla^4, if you are so sure that Armadeddon approacheth, but
tithingtaxes can save us, why don’t you and others like you offer to pay more taxes? You can start my not claiming any deductions (or dole). You can do further penance by keeping a log and paying a suitable amount to some green eco cause every time you drive your car or (especially) catch a plane. Just say only a third of the population believes you, surely paying three times as much for carbon indulgences is worth it for the sake of your grandchildren. Isn’t it? I am guessing you would anticipate that the figure is much higher than a third, which should make it easier.By hey, mea culpa, here I go assuming. You and your friends are probably already doing that for us and for humanity. What guys.
20
I’m by no means sure it’s over as an election issue. I think the backlash is just beginning and an anti-windmill, anti-solar sentiment may rise up and become an increasingly important future issue due to the long term built in high cost promises that have been made and because of grid unreliability. Stopping the nonsense growing is not enough if we are still forced to pay uneconomic power bills for 25 years to subsidise what’s already been done.
110
The advocates for the green scam will argue sanctity of contract. Yet they have advocated unilateral abrogation of contracts of all kinds, including national and state constitutions. That, all in the name of saving the (fill in the blank). All prior agreements are to be sacrificed in the name of their *sacred* goals. Governments have gone along with the green scam because it aggrandizes Government power, size, stolen wealth, and reach into private affairs without any limits beyond what they can get away with. That is simply the nature of unrestrained Government.
A liberty once lost almost always takes the shedding of blood of both patriots and despots before it can be regained. Even then, regaining it is rare. With better ideas in the people, we might have a chance of redress for lost liberty without the violence. Without those better ideas in the people, the hope of putting better people in the Government is all but empty.
A tradition of patriotism, family, and apple pie is not nearly enough. Especially considering the reliance We the People had upon that tradition. That reliance has resulted our liberty being reduced to a shadow of what it was over a century ago. We gave up those liberties for a promise of security and a free lunch. We are no longer secure and our lunch is getting more and more costly.
The starting point for those better ideas was expressed a long time ago.
The challenge is in implementation and maintenance of these foundational ideas. It is going to take a lot more good ideas based upon that foundation being in a lot more of We the People before we are up to the challenge of regaining our lost liberties.
90
One of the problems could, arguably, be sheeted back the success of the Bill of Rights. It created a Democracy of free citizens, where each could prosper according to his or her own ability, within the law.
Many had the ability to prosper, whilst a great many more did not. Those who did prosper tended to congregate, as like minded people will do. This society also constructed an educational infrastructure, where their offspring could acquire the skills and social connections required to preserve the society for future generations.
Unfortunately, the vision, drive, and determination that marked the prosperous founding fathers, are not genetic, and cannot be taught.
So we now find fourth and fifth generation Americans with a surfeit of time and money, and above all, boredom.
Some take the opportunity to play the Great Game, and enter political life. Whilst others, feeling guilt regarding their privilege, choose to get embroiled in causes, “for the betterment of mankind”. It is this latter group who appear to be funding much of the Climate Scare industry, whilst their contemporaries in politics, subvert the idea to provide a bargaining chip, in pursuing their own goals.
What we plebeians observe, is merely the external manifestations of the boredom that arises, when you have it all, and no real idea of what you are supposed to do with it.
110
If you’re try to say we’ve become too successful for our own good, then you’re right.
20
Roy, I’d say that it isn’t being “successful” It’s that we have grown too comfortable for our own good. We are no longer cold enough, hungry enough or bruised enough. We gain wisdom in regularly resolving the aforementioned problems. Without them, without the sense of them, without reflecting on the history of our forebears and what they did to resolve those problems, we simply risk failure from inexperience. The result will be what Lionell forecasts.
50
In my defense I can only say this, lack of success certainly does not bring comfort whereas success does. But of course, you’re correct about too comfortable.
00
I suggest those less able to prosper, do rather better when those able to achieve are left free to achieve and keep the results of their achievement. Especially compared to prior eras were accumulated wealth was not earned but taken by force by those who did not earn it.
A king in the middle ages would be seriously envious of the typical low level working person’s life style almost any place in the modern developed world. TVs, Cars, Computers, Cell phones, well stocked stores of all types, comfortable furniture, mass produced clothing, climate controlled living spaces, refrigerators, washing machines, hot and cold running water, medical care based upon science and not witchcraft … the list is almost endless.
Have you ever seen a 14th century castle? It is only slightly better than living in a cave. That only because one doesn’t have to share it with bears or wolves or fight them off to gain access.
We are in the process of returning to that era. We don’t yet have roving bands of thugs pillaging, raping, and burning. Unfortunately, we have governments doing those things under color of law and calling it “social and climate justice”.
60
I grew up amongst such castles and love them.
Contrary to a popular believe these we’re providing stability and security. Death by violence was relatively rare and tax was far less than now. We want to think that we live in the best times blinded by our gadgets etc.
Whilst no proponent of going back to the medieval times, the history is not as savage is a lot of us may think. Look at Pompeii which I visited 2 years ago. The ancients lived in bigger houses (that applies to slave quarters too) than most of us now with running water and fast food outlets. They were far more educated than most of us and yet we often refer to them as barbarians. I refer to them as ancient yuppies without electricity.
There is almost nothing different to what was happening 2000 years ago when the Pax Romana was established with the world divided into Rome and the barbarians. Any difference now? When you can,t go safely 80% of countries. Yes I forgot I can,t go to large swaths of Perth where I live and this is achieved with higher tax than in Rome.
I would leave historical judgement to the future cave dwellers which times are better, slavery, medieval or watermelon phase? Don,t even mention 20th century wars that almost destroyed civilisation.
40
Unfortunately the Declaration of Independence didn’t make it into the Constitution so nowhere in our founding principles can you find a right to life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness. Indeed, life has become very cheap, being sacrificed daily for the simple convenience of the mother and the irony is that the Supreme Court found a right to privacy in that same Constitution, a right that does not exist in the Constitution and hid their Roe v Wade decision behind it. A nation that kills its unborn children, calling it contraception, will do anything it wants to do — and will ultimately fall for lack of any principles at all.
Let us hope there is some semblance of a real awakening to our problems in this election.
30
I agree that the Declaration of Independence was not well translated into the Constitution. That was not the purpose of the Constitution. Its purpose was to define the limited powers and scope of action of the Federal Government. It was not construed to be a limitation on We the People. For a better part of 200 years it did a rather good job.
However, a right is not granted by a constitution, a law, or any authority. The fundamental individual right are derived from the fact that for a man to live he must have the liberty to think, learn, choose, and act to sustain his life. The actions must be in pursuit of a successful and fulfilling life as determined by his own purpose. He must not be a means to others ends nor others a means to his ends except by mutual free choice and voluntary exchange of values. To that end, he must be free to keep the products of his efforts.
Even more fundamental than the above, man has no automatic knowledge of fact or effective thought process. He must choose to focus his mind, he must choose upon what and how to think, he must choose how and when to act. He must also choose his values as standards by which to judge his actions and their consequences. If he has no liberty, he can do none of these things in support of his own life.
Ultimately, the fundamental choice for man is to live or die. To die, he needs to do nothing and he soon will. To live means to choose well all those things listed above.
30
And it still does the job it was intended to do. There was no need for the Constitution to define every right the citizen has because it specifically leaves all rights not granted to the federal government to the states or to the people. We went off the rails when we decided that the courts should make explicit rights where no such right exists in black-letter law, when we pushed off onto the courts the job of resolving issues that state legislatures were too cowardly to resolve by legislation, when…, when… The list could get long.
I understand what your point is quite well. But I’m arguing that our trouble is from our unwillingness to govern ourselves. In other words, we are not willing to be disciplined enough personally so that the Constitution and our laws actually work. Instead we demand explicit rights to this that and the other thing without any intent to have any responsibility to go along with those rights. And it doesn’t work. It’s never worked. And it never will.
20
Great compilation. AGW is dying a very slow death. Mark my words even guys like Romm will become silent skeptics with time. In 2 years time AGW will be a complete non-issue everywhere (like Y2K2).
20
Y2K was very real, and it was definitely an issue, and the only reason that civilisation did not collapse, was because people like me worked long hours, for enormous salaries, to ensure that it did not.
Given the outcome, it was obviously worth every cent.
Life is easy, when you don’t have a null hypothesis. 😉
100
Shows you what actually doing constructive work on a problem can do, doesn’t it? And let’s not forget — you need an actual problem to work on or all you get is wasted money and a lot of trouble you didn’t previously have.
50
But at the same time there was both alarmism and profiteering very similar to that associated with AGW. While I agree with your assessment of Y2K, I think its still a reasonable analogy for the more shrill elements of AGW today.
30
It was typed with my tongue firmly in my cheek.
00
Let’s see: “Do you think climate change, also known as global warming, is a serious problem?”
Democrats: 15% No, 83% Yes = 98% responding
Republicans: 83% No, 27% Yes = 110% responding
Is that how they won so many elections? 🙂
30
It is a feature of the voting machines — especially in Florida.
30
Damn statistics! Obviously not peer reviewed, perhaps?
03
Had you had been paying attention, you would know that this whole conversation was about some ‘odd’ graphs published in the media. Your cheap shot seems to have been aimed at your own foot.
30
foothoof.There fixed that for ya.
10
One of the biggest changes revealed in tuesday’s election results is the near-completion of the shift of white blue-collar voters from democrat to republican. Although personally conservative, they’ve been deluded since Franklin Roosevelt into voting for leftist, socially and morally degenerate democrats whose values are the polar opposite of their own on the grounds that democrats are the party of the “working man,” while republicans represent the rich. Virtually the only white manual workers still loyal to the democratic party are those in unions, who realize that their income depends directly on the democratic party’s control of government to extort higher and higher wages from private businesses. But union membership is only a shadow of what it once was. The rural county I live in has shifted from complete democrat to complete republican control of government in the last two decades. In Bill Clinton’s home state of Arkansas, once reliably democrat, republicans control nearly all government offices. The stereotypical good ol’ boy politician who went to church every sunday, worked with his hands, supported the military and opposed welfare, homosexuality and abortion yet nevertheless was a stalwart of the local democratic party is gone forever. These new republicans are far more likely than not to be strong supporters of robust American industrial power based on conventional coal, oil and gas and not worried in the slightest about global warming.
80
There’s nothing that will change minds any faster than being hurt badly in the purse by what you were promised would make you better off.
Couple that with failed promises everywhere and scandal after scandal… …even bronze statues finally woke up and voted.
40
The one thing Republicans are very weak on is cannabinoid medicine. There are denominations in the South that denounce it because the dangers from some people getting high are too great.
http://classicalvalues.com/2014/02/christians-oppose-healing-the-sick-on-moral-grounds/
10
A whole lot of things are state issues though. So the problem doesn’t even legitimately have a uniform solution all across the country. When you read the Constitution you don’t find any power of the Federal Government to regulate a whole lot of things they do regulate. But they sneak things in sideways, hiding them under their power to regulate interstate commerce. To some extent this is legitimate. But the marijuana issue is one for each state to decide for itself. The Federal Government can make it a crime to transport it into a state that prohibits it but really lacks the power to prohibit the stuff outright. And the same for other dangerous substances. But I don’t know of a single state that has not made heroin legal, for instance. They all prohibit it.
I have no personal knowledge as to whether cannabis has useful medicinal powers or not. But if it does then that needs to be proven by double blind clinical trials. If it withstands that then it needs to be regulated as are all medications with any possibility of doing harm if misused or misapplied because the danger of driving while “high” is very well documented. If there is a good useful purpose, then get it by prescription from a doctor in pill form and be responsible enough to know you can’t do certain things while under its influence, just as with opioid painkillers and other drugs that impair judgment or reflexes.
To simply accept the word of users isn’t sufficient in my mind to allow making the stuff legal. Remember, people lie to get what they want.
10
There aren’t going to be any human trials in the US until the Federal Government gets out of the way. But animal studies (every animal with a backbone has an endocannabinoid system – since some mollusk 600 million years ago) show the benefits conclusively.
And anecdotal evidence backs up the animal studies.
Endocannabinoids regulate the immune system.
Look up “NIH cannabis immune system” if you want some animal studies.
Note: the Federal government was paying for anti-cannabis research so later studies are generally better than earlier ones. The study bias is less with the discovery of the endocannabinoid system. (Sound familiar? Just like AGW.)
00
Why regulate a substance that has no known lethal dose? Other than for purity and assay? Aspirin kills about 1,000 people a year in the USA. It is over the counter. I’d say cannabis ought to be regulated similarly since you can’t overdose on it. It will not directly kill you. Beer can.
DEA Judge Francis Young said: “Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.”
http://www.ccguide.org/young88.php
What amuses me on this thread is that so many – totally ignorant of the subject – know it all. Very funny on a science blog. You are less in that camp than others.
In any case with legalization coming to America – unregulated medical use will be a side benefit. Just like orange juice.
00
I’ll take that as a complement. 🙂
I’m not an expert on the subject but it seems to me that the primary reason marijuana is used is to get high. If I object to use of alcohol to get high (and I do) then I ought to object to marijuana for the same reason. If it really has medical application then I’m all for getting that benefit to those who need it. But I need to be consistent about such things as a matter of personal policy. Should California make the stuff legal by vote of the people then I will have no complaint I can make.
00
I fervently hope that, Obama’s calculation, of a new emissions limitation and climate deal – ‘a son of’ – Kyoto II is finished, dead…………… as only a Norwegian blue could be.
Obummer, though he is steeped in the ways of dirty politics, learnt grovelling at the masters [Daley] feet in Chicago, will come up against a very hard Rep-Rock and have all his hopes dashed.
Mother of…..finally his great hope of a lasting legacy is buried with his fretful, lack lustre, divisive, endlessly confused and achingly timid presidency.
Crikey, maybe even the green loonies in Britain will have their guns spiked – UKIP are coming out onto the streets and the whole of Westminster shudders with the thunderous sound of Farage’s seven league Boots stalking them.
Then, Paris will be an empty hall, no Aussies, Pommies, Yanks, Japs, Russkies, Canucks – oh dear God: we beseech you please make it so.
120
“people everywhere are “waking up to the threat of climate change””
What is actually happening is that ..
..people everywhere are waking up to the threat of the climate change agenda
80
The problem with “The End of The World is Nigh” mantra of the green-alarmist-left is that every year needs to be the new hottest year evvva on record and here in Australia the Bush Fire Season needs to start earlier and be more catastrophic than the last.
There must be some sociopathic worm in the socialist brain to allow pleasure in the terrible volume of suffering they crave.
80
Hottest Year Ever UPDATE:
Cooler weather delays Eliminate Dengue trial in Stratford, Freshwater (Cairns FNQ)
“Mosquitoes obviously appreciate the warmer weather but it’s actually easier for us to establish bacteria when there’s less mosquitoes around but as it turned out this year was a little cooler than expected and it took a little longer to get the target number of mosquitoes in these areas.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-07/cooler-weather-delays-eliminate-dengue-trial-in/5874172
30
John the Baptist lost his head for that. Or perhaps Alice in wonderland is more appropriate?
10
That may be true but climate change isn’t over as an issue for Obama. Not by a long way. I expect him to go ahead as he pleases regardless of this election (he’s already said as much — let Republicans come to him, hat in hand and see if he likes what they propose). And EPA regulations have the force of law so governors will have no end of trouble bucking them.
The fat lady hasn’t sung yet.
Republicans are still too cowardly to directly confront Obama, even in spite a more confident and self assured demeanor from John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. It’s that fear of being accused of shutting down the government, don’tcha know?
We have only won the first of numerous battles that have to be won in the next two years. And governing is a lot harder than getting elected as I’m sure Tony Abbott is finding out. Fighting a lying, cheating bully who fights with brass knuckles when you need to remain honest is not going to be easy.
Myself, I would go after him by shutting off money for the EPA and a lot of other stuff and then let come what may. It’s time for the fight to begin. McConnell hinted at this but then he hedged his position by saying we’re not going to shut down the government. Unfortunately he tied both his hands behind his back by saying that. The budget is the only thing the Republicans can control because it doesn’t need Obama’s approval. He cannot veto it. And Republicans lack the necessary 2/3 majority in the Senate to override a veto.
30
Speaking of Obama, this made me laugh. As it is supposed to, obviously…
20
It was never possible to hold the Democrat majority’s feet to the skeptic fire. Time will tell if the Republican majority are also immune. Regardless, a skeptical lobbying process must start immediately else the issue dies with the last echos of post-election hurrahs and the usual and expected meaningless political promises.
40
The irrational right and their scientific ignorance, a scourge on the planet and a scourge on humanity!
221
Crazy horse tell us how you would mitigate your CAGW? This should be interesting and we’ll need all your FACTS clearly spelt out.
And please be the first to answer the Bolt question.
120
Oh please! the graph clearly indicates the HADCRUT4 trend and data in the legend! It puts the hiatus in long term perspective an interesting but irrelevant statistic. What’s the matter don’t like the evidence!
03
Oh we like evidence, well enough.
It is contrived and manufactured evidence that we dislike. This is especially true when the process of gathering and processing and homogenising and adjusting said evidence is unrepeatable by independent review.
Like the graphs you throw up on “woodfortrees”, for example. Pretty output, but no substance.
00
Perspective? Where is the glacial era? That would be some long term perspective.
But for a medium term perspective the solar/orbital/ocean oscillation guys are predicting cooling for the next 40 to 80 years. The models are still predicting a hot time. And I’m sure with the right model a very hot time is possible. Of course that is part of the attraction. Imagining the hot time. Reality often doesn’t match.
00
Irrational people are not known for sound decision making, regardless of their political persuasion, would you not agree?
It’s a sad indictment on your own narrow-minded political stance, that you always have to jump straight to ‘left’ vs ‘right’. I guess this is because you either lack the capability to think independently or objectively, or, is it because you have nothing of any real value to say?
120
You can vote LNP like I have, or you can access your science from the US Tea Party (and their associates in OZ: IPA; Galileo Movement) like you seem too. I agreed with John Howard and the LNP consensus on an ETS because it was based on evidential science. You obviously have no understanding of the actuality of AGW!
17
“actuality of AGW”
UHI, Land use, data adjustment for the cause..
Sure AGW exists. !!
But CO2 has absolutely nothing to do with it.
31
And you have no understanding of the actuality of an ETS, like how it works, what it does, and where the money is supposed to go.
I find it hard to believe that you haven’t actually researched it it to find out the real truth.
It just proves that you’re willing to believe only what you are told by your political string pullers.
Tony.
41
“I find it hard to believe that you haven’t actually researched it”
I don’t. !
31
The TEA Party is absolutely right about AGW and absolutely wrong about cannabis science.
I score one point for each side.
22
“an ETS because it was based on evidential science”
Absolute Rubbish !!!
There is NO science whatsoever that backs an ETS !!
CO2 has basically zero effect on atmospheric temperature.
all an ETS does is play into the hands of the green socialist alarmist control agenda.
A trading scheme on an invisible, totally beneficial plant life gas….
…… now that truly is STUPIDITY to the max.
31
And you know who will benefit financially, don’t you….
The grubby alarmist entrepreneurs, the unelected bureaucrats, and the world bankers.
The planet and normal humanity ….. not so much !!!
31
Within Europe, companies have been taken to task for fraudulent transactions, and tax evasion, in relation to the ETS, and a number of senior executives were incarcerated as a result.
The mechanisms of the ETS were not well thought out.
20
Still keeping that weather machine under wraps SF? Cmon… drag it out and save the world, you know you wanna!
90
SF ….you must have some ‘interesting’ herbs in your fodder!
40
Well the Right is not very friendly to cannabinoid science.
I post something from the American National Institute of Healh
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/74-million-spent-pushing-climate-change-but-us-voters-saw-through-the-scare/#comment-1612836
And got two down votes so far. So the Right has its own blind spot when it comes to science.
And what does the NIH have to say that is so obnoxious?
Further research and especially, clinical trials will further demonstrate the usefulness of medical cannabis. As legal barriers fall and scientific bias fades this will become more apparent.
BTW Americans voted for Republicans and cannabis. The very Republican state of Alaska legalized. Florida voted for a Republican Governor and medical cannabis got 57+% of the vote. More votes than the Governor got.
10
Pity they cherry-pick the science to believe. BTW how many republicans believe in biblical creation? Gotta laugh at such a pitiful non-sequiter.
17
Neither party is very scientific. It drives me nuts. Neither will look at the data when it opposes their faith. This is the absolute truth:
“Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out. Thus, Science advances one funeral at a time” Max Planck
I think being anti-cannabinoid medicine will hurt the right more.
Two reasons:
1. There is a LOT more money involved – think of reducing medical costs a $trillion a year in America alone.
2. Granny didn’t have to die of cancer. JR didn’t have to die from an inoperable brain tumor.
But time will tell.
20
Sorry, but there is no reliable evidence of cannabis doing anything except getting the nations youth high, cannabis is not some medical miracle waiting to happen. In fact cannabis users die a whole lot more than non users. At best it’s an ok analgesic.
20
Well try the following searches NIH = National Institutes of health. You might also want to study the body’s endocannabinoid system.
“NIH cannabis cancer”
“NIH cannabis diabetes”
“NIH cannabis Alzheimer’s”
“NIH cannabis neuroprotective”
“NIH cannabis aging”
“NIH cannabis cytokine”
“NIH cannabis multiple sclerosis”
I could go on. But what would be the point? Odds are you won’t look.
00
Funny thing. The Right treats cannabinoid science the way the left treats AGW.
Faith trumps evidence.
00
Another one you might want to look up “cannabis users live longer” and why not? It has anti-tumor properties.
“NIH cannabis tumor”
00
Don’t forget to spit out those cherry pips..
I heard they can give a donkey verbal diarrhea.
21
I didn’t realise you were far right. !
I knew you were scientifically ignorant, though.
That is something you have made abundantly clear to everyone.
And yes, the CAGW agenda is very much a scourge on the planet.
So glad you are finally starting to realise this fact, little miss Donkey Bot.
51
Don’t blame me for the “CATASTROPHIC” Oregon petition. Has Art Robertson got his paper published yet? Or was that compelling “evidence” torn up and discarded as all unscientific trash should be?
16
I blame you for nothing..
because you produce nothing.
Its who you are, a empty nothing. !!
Why are you wasting your time here??
All you do is highlight the monumental ignorance of the standard alarmista.
Surely you need to go paint your hooves or something ?
51
The Griss
At least SF emits some co2 so there is some goodness produced, but unfortunately this equates to a lot less than a pile of manure.
40
This is O/T but is something we should all be aware of.
Steve McIntyre has been pulling apart the huge PAGES 2013 2K study over the last couple of months.
It is now being revised by the authors thanks to Steve and his bloggers. But he has now started on the Gergis et al Australasia study and will I’m sure force heavy revisions or perhaps another Gergis retraction there as well. More to come.
http://climateaudit.org/2014/11/07/gergis-and-the-pages2k-regional-average/#more-20199
50
Am I misreading the last bar graph?
It shows 27% of Republican voters saying YES, 83% saying NO.
Which gives you total of … 110% ?
40
Its imperial % not metric.
60
Well, that clears it up for me because I thought it was kelvin %.
30
Just so long as it wasn’t kevin..
that would make no sense at all !!
10
!!!
10
The 110% Solution – a very good book by the late Mark McCormack, founder of IMG. I am 110% certain that Mark would have detested the ongoing CAGW bu……You see McCormack dealt with “real numbers” and managed many of those great sportsmen e.g. Jack Nicklaus. He helped create more wealth for these talented sport persons – he wasn’t in the business of squandering their prize money earnings, not like the “Warmists” are doing now “draining govt coffers globally ad nauseum” promoting CAGW for what in reality is zero benefit to mankind. Maybe someone write a book about the “Warmists” achievements e.g. “the 0% Solution”.
20
I’m having deja vue – I thought we discussed this at #18?
10
“Which gives you total of … 110% ?”
They counted heads. The New York Times reckons 10% of Republicans have two heads.
10
So essentially Gillard was right (this only happened because she didn’t know how she was right), when she said Australia needs to show leadership on climate. We have shown leadership by saying as a nation “AGW is probably BS but at worst its not worth worrying about” and just as Julia predicted, the world has heard us. We have given other nations the courage to stop being bed wetting panic merchants.
I think in America’s case its also good timing for the right. Obama, like Gillard and Rudd, promised a bunch of stuff they were never going to be able to deliver, then set about finding distractions such as climate boogeymen to throw people of the trail of their utter uselessness as leaders. A classic quote from American history that was never more pertinent than today.
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abraham Lincoln
100
Fools and their money are soon parted? (if only it was their money….)
30
The US is taking the lead on another issue: http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/74-million-spent-pushing-climate-change-but-us-voters-saw-through-the-scare/#comment-1612836
10
Could we soon be using co2 as a more efficient way of waterless fracking?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/07/waterless-fracking-promises-more-energy-less-trouble/
40
But cannabis is heating up as an election issue:
And it turns out that it is a counter to a deficiency disease. According to the NIH.
http://classicalvalues.com/2014/11/a-deficiency-disease/
From the NIH: Further research and especially, clinical trials will further demonstrate the usefulness of medical cannabis. As legal barriers fall and scientific bias fades this will become more apparent.
People with an endocannabinoid deficiency need plant analogs to boost their immune (and other) systems. Just as Vitamin C is required for a similar purpose. And plant extract (juice with pulp) vitamin C is more effective than the pills. I think we will find the same thing with cannabis.
42
The Cargo Cult of Doomsday Global Warming …
PREDICTION
The ‘Super El Niño’ Forecast Fadeout
By ANDREW C. REVKIN NOVEMBER 7, 2014
All those wind farms built, all those solar panels $old …
20
[…] Jo Nova. Australians may have missed what happened this week in the US (especially if they only watch the […]
00
The question ‘Do you think climate change, also known as global warming is a serious problem?’ is disingenuous as it hides the implications of answering the question in the affirmative. There is a cost to the scam.
Reword the question including the implications of accepting the implications of the AGW crisis and the forced expenditure on green scams and transfer of wealth to the developing countries.
1) Do you support a massive expenditures on wind farms, conversion of food to biofuel, and solar farms from our country?
Note it is a fact that massive expenditures on green scams has made almost no appreciable difference in the rise of atmospheric CO2 and has caused the tripling of the cost of energy in the countries where that policy is mandated. Note the amount of land required to grow food to convert to biofuel to replace transportation fuel would exceed the total amount of land currently allocated for human agricultural use. The food to biofuel scam will result in mass human starvation or the extinction of all other animal species on the planet if it expanded to replace all transportation fuel. Those allocating the food to biofuel policy have not done a back of the envelop calculation to attempt to quantify the ‘benefits’ and downside of the policy.
2) Do you support mandated world legal agreements that would commit our country to massive expenditures on green scams that do not work? Note the developing countries will be exempt from the mandated green scam expenditures that do not work. Note also that the legal agreements will commit our country to massive transfer of wealth to the developing countries.
Note also that our country has no surplus funds, so the green scams and fund transfer to developing countries will require cuts in public spending (education, health care, roads, bridges, and so on.) The cuts in public spending to finance the green scams will result in massive job loss and further deflation.
Alternative question:
Same as above 1 and 2, except there is now observational evidence the planet is cooling rather than a pause in warming, which provides unequivocal proof that the entire AGW theory was incorrect. The majority of the warming in the last 70 years was due to solar magnetic cycle changes. Cutting CO2 emissions will make no difference in climate ‘change’.
60
7 Nov: Reuters: Joe Brock: Exclusive: U.S. eyes China partnership on Africa power – sources
The proposal could include $5-$7 billion of commitments to improve electricity generation and transmission in several African countries, one source involved in the initiative said…
U.S. companies, including General Electric, have pledged around $14 billion for projects as part of his ambitious “Power Africa” program aimed at boosting electricity generation across the continent…
Large-scale hydropower dam projects also don’t meet with a U.S. focus on renewable energy.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry hinted this week that discussions during the APEC conference to conclude a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would involve energy agreements in other parts of the world…
“The TPP is not only a trade agreement but also a strategic opportunity for the United States and other Pacific nations to come together, to bind together,” Kerry said in a speech in Washington on Tuesday.
“Second, powering a clean energy revolution will help us address climate change while simultaneously jump-starting economies around the world,” Kerry added.
(Additional reporting by Matt Spetalnick and Jason Szep in Washington and Ben Blanchard in Beijing; Editing by Ed Cropley and Toby Chopra)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/07/us-usa-china-africa-exclusive-idUSKBN0IR1OK20141107
00
John Kerry claiming US CAGW policies will deliver economic growth to Africa, etc! meanwhile,
re Paul Ehrlich’s lecture at the University of Tasmania on Thursday:
6 Nov: AAP: Don’t strive for growth, expert warns Australia
Australia should abandon its agricultural ambitions as the effects of climate change worsen, a population expert has warned.
United States biologist Paul Ehrlich – famous for co-authoring controversial 1960s book The Population Bomb – has outlined a self-destructive cycle linked to increasing the size of the human race.
“The more people you have the more greenhouse gases you have,” Prof Ehrlich told AAP in Hobart on Thursday.
“And you have to remember that climate change is screwing agriculture.”…
The theory was particularly relevant in Australia where, despite a vast land mass, there was a comparatively small amount of good soil and an unstable climate, he said.
“(Australia) has desert soils and a desert climate.
“Australia is desperately concerned with becoming a commodities exporter when you should be thinking about becoming a resilient country and taking advantage of fantastic solar and other scientific opportunities.”
An outspoken advocate for birth control, Prof Ehrlich describes population growth as the “toxification of the planet”…
“Growth is the disease, not the cure … growth is the enemy,” he said…
https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/25450343/dont-strive-for-growth-expert-warns-aust/
VIDEO: Sustainable Population and Economy for Human Well-being
Presented by Paul Ehrlich and Dick Smith. Overpopulation and our growth-based economic system pose a serious threat to human well-being in many ways, and may be moving civilization towards collapse. Paul Ehrlich will show how further world population growth will be a major factor in spreading death and misery through increasing climate disruption, polluting the planet, impacting – and possibly destroying – human life-support systems, and increasing the risks of vast Ebola-type epidemics and wars (possibly nuclear) over declining resources. Dick Smith will argue that the hope for ever-growing economies in a finite world is a myth and that we cannot continue to accelerate our use of resources and energy without dire consequences…
Links
Sustainable Population and Economy for Human Well-being
http://www.events.utas.edu.au/2014/november/public-lecture-by-dick-smith
http://new.livestream.com/UniversityofTasmania/events/3505616
10
abc ran with Ehrlich:
6 Nov: ABC Breakfast: Population control critical to climate solution: Paul Ehrlich
Dr. Ehrlich says the solution to climate change is universal access to birth control, abortion on demand, and the end to what he calls ‘the disease’ of growth economics.
Paul Enrlich is currently in Australia to catch a glimpse of one of Australia’s rarest birds, the Orange Bellied Parrot…
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/population-control-critical-to-climate-solution-ehrlich/5870436
and abc’s “Life Matters”(?) ran with Ezekiel Emanuel, of whom Betsy McCaughey (chairman, Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths & former lieutenant governor of New York state), in a 2009 WSJ article called “Obama’s Health Rationer-in-Chief” wrote:
– Dr. Emanuel concedes that his plan appears to discriminate against older people, but he explains: “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination. . . . Treating 65 year olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not.” –
7 Nov: ABC Life Matters: Natasha Mitchell: Dying: when is it right to let nature take its course?
At age 57, bioethicist, breast oncologist and former health policy advisor to US president Barack Obama, Dr Ezekiel Emanuel, says that it’s all downhill from 75. And, that’s when he’ll let nature take its course: no screenings, medical intervention or treatments of any kind. He’ll even refuse the simple stuff, like flu shots and antibiotics. He’s written about this in a provocative piece for The Atlantic, Why I Hope to Die at 75…
Does he have a point? We’re spending more on healthcare than ever before—is it buying us time, rather than quality of life?
How far have you gone to remain alive? And, when do you decide to simply let nature take its course?
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/2014-11-07/5872170
00
Keeping people alive with cannabinoids is relatively cheap.
Cannabinoids reduce ErbB2-driven breast cancer progression through Akt inhibition
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2917429/
Anandamide inhibits adhesion and migration of breast cancer cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16343481
And that includes some (all?) cancers
20
Interesting debating question from my younger days: If you are high on a psychedelic drug, and died, how would you know?
20
So far the dead are not reporting in. I think that is a dereliction of duty caused by the drugs. 😉
20
You have to be kidding? Aspirin, reduces adhesion and migration, so does Vitamin D, garlic and DMSO from cabbages and capsaicin causes apoptosis as well…. in mice. There are about 50 billion chemicals that can do that, but somehow your favourite high will do it better? There are plenty of alternatives to THC even among canniboids. So will you be truly happy if your drug contains no THC? THC causes big problems in humans, it’s linked to schizophrenia and dementia in later life and causes violent behaviour in some people during withdrawal. These are not good characteristics for a medical trewtment.
30
Evidently you are unaware of the body’s endocannabinoid system. And in the USA you are being outvoted.
BTW THC is the plant analog of anandamide. If THC causes schizophrenia (it does not) so does anandamide.
Harvard: Marijuana Doesn’t Cause Schizophrenia
http://psychcentral.com/news/2013/12/10/harvard-marijuana-doesnt-cause-schizophrenia/63148.html
The right’s attitude towards cannabis mirrors the left’s attitude towards climate change. Misinformation lasts forever. And the facts never change minds.
Too funny.
But in America at least the votes are going against you on cannabis. My condolences.
00
BTW cannabis is a treatment for some schizophrenics.
“NIH cannabis treats schizophrenia”
also: Marijuana Compound Treats Schizophrenia with Few Side Effects: Clinical Trial
http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/30/marijuana-compound-treats-schizophrenia-with-few-side-effects-clinical-trial/
A compound found in marijuana can treat schizophrenia as effectively as antipsychotic medications, with far fewer side effects, according to a preliminary clinical trial.
00
Imagine if we had a press that would look up the track records of people like Paul Erlich and then report his many, many, many failed predictions, present that information along with this latest bit of alarmist drama, and then allow the viewer to make the very short final leap to the conclusion that this prediction will probably be wrong, too.
10
obviously, before Emanuel kills off the over-75s or Ehrlich culls billions, the CAGW crowd would like to get their hands on those Super/Pension/Retirement funds.
former Greens Party speaker, Andrew Simms, who has been counting down the 100-months-to-disaster CAGW scenario at the Guardian since 2008 (he is now down to 25 months – see second link below)makes some questionable claims on BBC this week:
13 mins 30 secs in:
AUDIO: 5 Nov: BBC World Business Report
Should you invest in your local wind farm? With renewable energy investment schemes ramping up, we ask Andrew Simms from the New Economics Foundation whether it’s a good idea…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p029nlz7
in the interview, Simms says research in Australia showed once people have a stake in wind farms, they stopped objecting to the noise(?) they don’t seem to notice it quite as much.
says no-one is talking about or complaining any more about the huge pylons dotting the UK – familiarity changes people’s opinions.(?)
also says third of the public in UK would happily invest in community energy given the chance. says in UK 75 billion pounds needs to be invested in low-carbon tech by 2020, assumption half is to come from community energy;
says good thing is…given lifespan of wind farms… they are ideal for certain kinds of investments…like ***PENSIONS. we’ll see a lot of financial innovation, new products coming on the market to make it easy for people to target their savings to make it easier to invest.
says as we’re still in the shadow of the GFC…but given the proven, tried and tested renewable technologies, safe is the new sexy, so renewables are a safe and secure home. (?)
all of Simms’ gloom & doom “100 month” articles can be linked to from the following:
3 Nov: Guardian: Andrew Simms: Like Daedalus, we should use our judgment to thrive within limits
Let’s kick the carbon habit and shift to benign sources before the civilisation wrecks its own life support systems
25 months and counting
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/03/we-have-one-chance-to-kick-the-carbon-habit
10
jo says “big lesson for Australia” – but it was not passed on by the ABC. Lateline, 7.30 Report, AM, World Today – none gave the actual details of the various votes, & most reports focused on Obama’s response and Hillary for 2016:
below, Fran Kelly’s top 5 stories of the week (how funny ABC would even think people wanted to know this? ah, the egos of ABC staff) makes no mention of the mid-term elections and ABC’s Breakfast program does not have a single story listed as being about them, tho perhaps they were mentioned in a Michelle Grattan segment or something!
7 Nov: ABC RN: Fran talks animal cruelty, Ebola and climate change
Fran Kelly shares her picks of the week—the big news you need to know about, entertaining stories and live music from the RN studios. This week she spoke to Jacqui Lambie and a nurse who has just emerged from Ebola quarantine, and hosted some of Australia’s best country musicians.
#4. Population control critical to climate solution
My number four pick this week was a big hit on social media: Gregg Borschmann’s interview with Paul Ehrlich. Ehrlich is an absolute pioneer in the population debate, he put it on the agenda in the ’60s with his book The Population Bomb. It was the start of the sustainability argument. He started the conversation in 1968 and now in 2014 he told us that it’s all about climate change…
#5. From little things big things grow
The other big event in Australia this week was the memorial service for Gough Whitlam, which was held at the Sydney Town Hall. The service itself was extraordinary. Some of the rhetoric and the tributes paid to Gough Whitlam were extraordinary blah blah…
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/fran-talks-animal-cruelty-ebola-and-climate-change/5873872
Fran’s Breakfast program did find space for:
6 Nov: ABC Breakfast: Time for environment accounting: Wentworth Group
The Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists says a new long term ‘equitable’ land tax should be introduced to fund programs to restore Australia’s environmental assets.
and
7 Nov: ABC Breakfast: Background Briefing: Clean Coal
Reporter: Paddy Manning, business editor at Crikey
plus the Ehrlich piece, of course.
10
As an Australian the thing I love about the US is the way country goes on about its business in spite of the political “leadership” it is saddled with.
The US is now a major exporter of gas and offers the Europeans an alternative to Russian gas supply and its threats to turn off the tap if it does not get what it wants. The US is about to overtake Saudi Arabia in production of oil from its shale oil fields not only providing energy self sufficiency but also freeing it from the political intriguing of corrupt middle eastern dictatorships.
All this achieved under the administration of a pro green president with, an up until now, friendly congress. Imagine what will happen with a pro development/business president, Republican or even Democrat, the US may be on the verge of an economic golden age to match the post war years of the 1950s. Great news for freedom loving people all over the world.
I also notice this morning that the Japanese are turning their nuclear reactors back on. Apparently the cost of importing fuel is putting a brake on economic recovery, who would have thought? Nothing like some economic reality to snap people out of their happy happy environmental delusion.
70
“The Republicans who think climate change is a problem are not shifting to vote Democrat. But the Democrats who are skeptical may have already moved the other way.”
Definitely.
But this??
“Climate change is over as an election issue.”
Not so much.
Voters will remember the arrogant ignorance &/or deception for decades to come (and history will remember for centuries if not millennia).
So I have to flatly and totally reject the frankly humorous notion of some activists in one of the more fanatical wings of the US Republican party that it’s a smart move to stir political activism to “neutralize” the climate “issue”.
That misguided philosophy stems from the blindness of tiresomely-chronic deep immersion without sufficient break to maintain healthier, broader perspective. Here I’m referring specifically to puppets on the ENSO yo-yo, who are yanked around by the master like clowns. In the longer term it’s a senseless approach to climate. Did it help in a recent election as a blind-leading-the-blind strategy? Perhaps, but it makes no real sense in the longer term broader perspective. It doesn’t even make any sense in the medium term.
Probably it’s not at all clear what I’m suggesting. So let me try to put it this way:
Let’s not be so quick to pronounce the climate dead.
It’s not dead. It will go on changing (you think “the pause” is going to last forever??) and human imagination about what climate’s doing is more wild than sensible.
Red meat climate ignorance/deception reminders will be attracting votes right-ward for decades to come, precisely because of how badly the left blew their credibility on the issue. The climate issue isn’t neutralized. On the contrary: It’s a battery all charged up for a decades-long power-cycle.
42
You are correct “the pause” will not last forever. Cooling is about to set in.
22
Something doesn’t make sense here. Someone please clarify. Are right-wingers eager to forgive and forget left-wing climate ignorance/deception? Has not long term reputation damage been done to the Democratic party and left-wing parties more generally (globally) by climate fantasy BS? So then how is the climate issue considered “neutralized”? Won’t it have a reputation legacy? There should easily be a long-term boost for the right-wing each time voters are reminded of left-wing climate ignorance/deception.
60
This is American politics. You forget all the animosity being generated by the anti-cannabinoid right. When people find out that granny didn’t have to die of cancer or that JRs inoperable brain tumor could have been cured the issues will at least cancel each other. Although the death a a relative will probaly have more weight because it is personal.
Right now it is all in flux. It will take more cooling and more information on cannabinoids for all this to shake out. Give it 4 to 6 years.
14
2/3 majority would have happened if stealth left-wingers had not been allowed to infiltrate and deliberately sabotage the right with their brain-dead “sun has no effect” campaign. Leadership review is needed. A sure big win was allowed to be sabotaged into a smaller win by compromised leadership. Toss them out before the next round — to not do so is to sacrifice the high ground and lose the moral advantage. The tide of public anger can turn hard and fast. I’ll never vote for any party allowing the darkness of “sun has no effect” campaigning, as that is a sure sign of intolerably malignant corruption.
10
if only CAGW was over for the MSM:
first, none other than abc’s Glover:
8 Nov: SMH: Richard Glover: Knot for the highly strung
Has humanity really outlived the need for knots? The Scouting movement thinks so. The British organisation this week announced that the ability to tie knots is no longer seen as an important Scouting skill, and will henceforth be replaced with activities such as “skateboarding” and “being a social worker”.
This is all very well but will the world survive once the ability to tie a knot disappears? This could be the biggest existential threat to humanity since global warming and Ebola…
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/knot-for-the-highly-strung-20141104-11glhq.html
second, note the headline & sub-heading…then read what’s in the text. and this is Scientific American???
7 Nov: Scientific American: Matt Smith: Cocaine Will Survive Global Warming
The humble coca shrub has survived decades of efforts to eradicate it and global warming will not pose a greater challenge than that…
But while scientists have raised alarms about the potential threats climate change may pose to other tropical commodities like chocolate and coffee, little effort has been spent exploring what an era of rising temperatures could mean for coca…
But at this point, there’s little that can be said authoritatively about how coca itself may fare. Helling, the retired USDA soil chemist, said that if climate change accomplished what decades of eradication efforts didn’t, “nobody would be shedding any tears.”…
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cocaine-will-survive-global-warming/
10
Jo,
I suggest that you do not let the “Left” know that fighting elections on climate change is a bad idea. Rather let them fight the next election on that issue too. They will be defeated then too. Good news all round.
30
There are rumblings that they may fight the next election on cannabis legalization – given the results of the last two elections and the Right’s tendency to do what it did in 1932. Support Prohibition.
Every year about a million Prohibitionists die off and the youth – overwhelmingly in favor of an end to Prohibition – come out for Presidential elections.
I’m so looking forward to 2016. Any anti-Prohibition candidate will get my support. R or D.
00
Politically neutralized??
Opposite happening here:
Union for federal scientists breaks neutrality, will campaign against Harper (November 8, 2014)
http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/union-for-federal-scientists-breaks-neutrality-will-campaign-against-harper-1.2093214
20
I would not make any firm decision as to what the Republicans would do if they win the next Federal election. Remember Gillard’s promise of no carbon tax? Western governments of all persuasions are hungry for more money more so now than ever before, and they will do anything possible to get it. That is a given.
20
100% agree. There’s a reason why they’ve converted to harsh enforcement of the “sun has NO effect” lukewarm narrative.
Naivety’s intolerable in leadership roles, so you just know its deception…
Fool me once — shame on you.
Fool me twice — shame on me….
Not impressed with the naivety…
20
[…] http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/74-million-spent-pushing-climate-change-but-us-voters-saw-through-t… […]
00
John Quiggin recently had a post on his blog “What can we do to persuade right-wingers to believe in climate change?”
I wrote in to say that if the believers stopped travelling by planes and used public transport instead of cars, that would help.
I got an amazing number of replies, all vitriolic, and all unable to understand why I would write such a thing. It’s hard to accept that they seriously could not understand the need to put their money where the mouth is. Especially when they are so dismissive of electricity bill increases and other hardships that everyone else has to face. You cannot argue with people like that.
But I suppose for most of them, climate change is their meal tickets so I guess we’ll keep hearing about it.
10
Am I missing something here? I think the way the polling data is charted is meaningless BS.
They don’t say what percentage of the entire group responded as being democrat or republican so, what if ALL of those asked were exclusively of one group or the other?
E.G. Say they were ALL republicans so 100% of those who said “yes” were republican and 100% of those who said “no” were republican. That says nothing about the percentage of yes versus no responses.
??
00
This conservative republican is certainly one of my favourites. With some more media training she could become the female version of Ronald Reagan, but better educated:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOUodSNyZtg
00
Thanks Jo for much useful information about, many things, but in this case aspects of the American election. Two comments:
1. It amazes me that so much political energy from politicians and voters alike is expended on the global warming issue – an issue which is technically and logically absurd and inconsequential.
HOWEVER, the political agenda associated with “global warming” is enormous yet does not enter into the debate.
2. On the other hand, mayhem, murder and destruction is rife in the world, caused largely by the US intervention in other countries, clearly at considerable cost to the American citizens, their lives, economy and freedoms.
Yet not a mention of this in selecting the sort of government they would like. Insignificant, it seems.
I find this to be really bizarre!
00