The alarmist case is so strong they will Not Discuss It.
Right now, the world is going to hell and expert scientists need to convince the doubting masses that they face a dire threat. They have rock solid evidence. Do they:
- Patiently answer questions with graphs and data. or
- Shout “fire” and ask for 89 trillion dollars, then tar those who disagree as pedophile-nazi-loving-idiots, throw a tanty and refuse to answer questions.
Obviously, expert scientists make mistakes.
Michael Bastasch | The Daily Caller
Climate Alarmists refuse to debate skeptics: “We are no longer willing to lend our credibility to debates over whether or not climate change is real. It is real. We need to act now or the consequences will be catastrophic,” reads the letter signed by 60 self-described “campaigners.”
Beware — balanced articles can kill people, cause floods! Run, Run…
From the letter:
In the interests of “balance”, the media often feels the need to include those who outright deny the reality of human-triggered climate change.
Balance implies equal weight. But this then creates a false equivalence between an overwhelming scientific consensus and a lobby, heavily funded by vested interests, that exists simply to sow doubt to serve those interests.
The readers of newspapers and viewers of news are too stupid to see that climate scientists are the smartest people in the room.
———–
Running chicken from debate, while declaring that the debate is over, must be the oldest trick in the grade-school Handbook for Con Artists. What’s really amazing is the cowards at The Guardian (BBC, ABC, CBC etc) can’t see it.
Hat tip to Marc Morano who has flown to debates to find his debater has run chicken.
In another instance, Hollywood producer James Cameron cancelled a debate with Climate Depot publisher Marc Morano in 2010, Morano told The Daily Caller News Foundation in 2014.
“In 2010, I was set to debate Hollywood producer James Cameron after weeks of negotiations, only to have the debate cancelled at the last moment when my plane landed in Colorado for the debate,” said Morano, a prominent global warming skeptic.
But it was the smartest thing Cameron could do at that point (apart from becoming a skeptic). Morano would have rolled him.
See the Daily Caller link for more.
“The debate is over and done”,
Shout the warmists, though never begun,
When, like chickens they ran,
Before it began,
In case skeptics might mention the sun.
470
Well, it looks like Merkel is debating things: https://mailchi.mp/9cd30d8312ad/angela-merkel-rejects-new-climate-targets?e=55d9b9d46e
180
Has Merkel seen the light?!
GeoffW
40
No just the first glimmer of the dawn.
30
That’s because Merkel knows all their huge investment in RE is a total WAFTAM that has not reduced their CO2 one bit.
And so she knows they will be
to meet the existing 🙂 🙂
50
We need to change the terms of the debate to simplify the opportunities for the anti-scientists to manipulate their data to “prove” warming.
We need to get THEM to prove THEIR hypothesis that the tiny amount of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere, about 16ppm of 400ppm CO2 is able to cause the warming claimed or indeed any at all.
Why isn’t the pro-science side pushing this point?
132
Why isn’t the pro-science side pushing this point?
Simple answer censorship by the MSM and most other outlets. You can push as hard as you like but unless your word gets out to the people you get nowhere,
Just look at the response of the Aus Banning Co, when do any pro-science speakers get time to say anything?
140
“We are no longer willing to lend our credibility to debates over whether or not climate change is real.”
But, this is not even what the debate is about. The debate is about the size of the effect CO2 has on the climate, and definitely not about whether or not the climate changes.
390
How and where did they earn any credibility?
260
In their own minds.
70
“We are no longer willing to
lendreveal ourcredibilitygullibility to debates over whether or not climate change is real.”Fixed.
310
It’s not even so much about the size of the impact of CO2 on the climate, but by how much our best efforts to reduce emissions will actually reduce temperatures (if indeed temps are rising because of those emissions).
We will put ourselves through unbearable pain to achieve no measurable gain. That is insanity.
400
‘The debate is about the size of the effect CO2 has on the climate …’
Its a sensitive issue, do you believe CO2 has an effect on climate?
130
No.
60
The hiatus makes a mockery of the models, no global warming in 19 years is an indication that the science has been falsified, but the zealots don’t care.
Yesterday I asked an alarmist whether lightning would become more prevalent in a warmer world?
He said he didn’t know and “i’ll leave that up to the 97% of climate scientists to work out.”
70
The Guardian’s post, little though they recognise it, brings public debate around full circle. In 1933, the National Socialist Party was elected to power in Germany. They immediately took control of all debate and all discussion. Josef Goebbels was their “Minister of Information“, a euphemism for State Propaganda. If you attempted to argue against the State Line, or attempt to contradict it in any shape or form, you were declared “An Enemy of the State”. By 1937, http://www.thirdreichruins.com/buchenwald.htm (some photos are disturbing) Buchenwald and its sister concentration camps had been completed for such “deviants” and all declared “Enemies of the State” were rounded up and literally rail-roaded in.
I have to wonder what the Guardian had to say back in those dark days. Whatever they said then, what they have just published is despicable and dishonourable. They dishonour all our fallen from WW2 who fought against all facets of that disgusting creed and paid with their lives. The staff of the Guardian should be covered with shame and ignominy. They have chosen to throw what little credibility they might have possessed to the four winds by their declaration, becoming purely Purveyors of Propaganda, “Disciples of Goebbels.”.
How dare they resurrect this facet of such totalitarianism. It’s Inexcusable and I will not excuse them.
For me, they have ceased to exist.
150
s
Re “I have to wonder what the Guardian had to say back in those dark days. ”
You might get an answer if you posed that question over at Tony Heller’s site
https://realclimatescience.com/
He seems to be very good at retrieving old newspaper items
10
More Guardian
“Delingpole: #FakeNews Guardian Issues Fatwa on Climate ‘Deniers’ ”
https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/08/28/shut-up-climate-deniers-explains-the-guardian/
30
Absolutely ZERO!
31
That’s it.
The big question is this: why are no scientists, ie chemists and physicists prepared to speak out.
KK
30
I wouldn’t say zero, but I can say with absolute certainty that the actual effect is less than the lower limit presumed by the IPCC, below which, even the IPCC will acknowledge that there’s no cause for alarm. In fact, this was the origin of the lower limit in the first place as the IPCC required the effect of incremental CO2 to be alarming enough in order to justify their existence and support for the UNFCCC, even in the ‘worst case’ of a low ECS.
30
Hi CO2.
Not sure?
We can’t rely very much on any of the science from the IPCCCCC.
The IPCCCCC guidelines seem to ignore basic ideal gas behaviour and are therefore flawed.
This is in addition to the fact that Human Origin CO2 is quantitatively irrelevant.
Basically CO2 is not a heat trapping or heat holding gas.
It exists in the presence of the other atmospheric gases where conduction rules.
I can’t see our CO2 making the air hotter.
If only Will J was here to comment.
KK
00
The IPCC doesn’t do science, it only selects the science that supports its agenda. Yes, the IPCC is no authority on science and its ‘guidelines’ for selecting science are horribly biased. However; first principles are appropriate and they tell me that yes, CO2 is a GHG and yes, incremental CO2 will have a finite effect on the surface temperature, but in no way shape or form is the effect large enough to be obsessing about to the extent of destroying economies. If anything the slight warming is between benign and beneficial and the increased CO2 is definitely beneficial to the biosphere.
When people claim that there’s no effect, it weakens the skeptical case. The fact that incremental CO2 has a finite effect on the surface temperature is immutable and undeniable. Failing to recognize this is what gives the alarmists ammunition for calling skeptics deniers.
20
Hi CO2,
Your last paragraph is an opinion, and I respect your intent there.
The problem is that it is scientifically wrong and we need to be promoting correct science rather than forming our comments into good debating strategies.
David Maddison recently linked to an article that showed that at ground level, of the two mechanisms available to remove heat from the ground, radiative transfer was irrelevant and the work was done by conduction.
Additionally, the UNIPCCC models theorise that somehow heat is trapped in the atmosphere by CO2.
This is a complete nonsense.
As Will J. once said: the only part played by CO2 in the atmosphere is at high altitude where it offloads the energy brought up by convection out into deep space.
Regards
Keith
00
In the half sane world of yesteryear, a refusal to debate would have been a dead giveaway that the side that refused to debate had no case, period! Imagine trying to pull such a puerile stunt in a court of law, even today.
On this point alone, the alarmists should be called out, loudly and often!
20
I recently had the opportunity to debate a friend of a friend that was an alarmist. The fact that he was a friend of a friend allowed me not to be concerned about what he thought about me as a person. He basically followed the alarmist bible and used all of the standard replies. I was of course very well prepared and schooled him, though I bet he didn’t think so. He called me a science denier, but he didn’t even know what ECS was. Many of his arguments ignored basic economics and basic logic.
They are past the “settled” science and are concerned with action and blame. They don’t debate science because to them it is “settled”.
370
Ignorance about science is no excuse for taking an incorrect position based on demonstrably broken science. Any one who is this ignorant about the first principles that the climate system must conform to has no possibility of arriving at a relevant conclusion.
I’ve had such discussions as well, and the more persistent they are in their position, the quicker their scientific understanding bottoms out when I try to explain how and why they’re so incredibly wrong.
180
I admire your tenacity. On the grounds of “never trying to argue with an idiot”, I’m afraid I’ve given up.
The ‘bible’ reference says it all – it’s a religion for these people & nothing will sway them. They are more afraid of being charged with heresy or apostasy than they are of actually understanding anything. It’s only a matter of time before they start shouting ‘Olly are you at the bar?’ & blowing things up – with low carbon explosive devices, of course.
151
To be reasonable, er, fair, RS, ECS is a fairly esoteric acronym that even I as a seasoned AGW sceptic had a problem with (nothing to do with age-related memory problems 🙁 ). So I looked it up, and found a list. Oh dear.
200
🙂
40
Quite!
40
A lot of people who are CAGW skeptics today started out as accepting the “Settled Science” argument until they looked into the science themselves and realized how shaky the “Settled Science” actual is and I sometimes wonder if people who refuse to debate the “Settled Science” are really afraid that someone will say something in a debate that will make them realize that the Science is not as Settled as they thought and that would shatter their world view leaving them in a state of permanent cognitive dissonance.
260
Absolutely. I used this reasoning, scientists say all the global warming from all causes today amounts to about 33 degrees above theoretical black body temperature) and we are at about 85% of saturation in CO2 energy band, How much global warming is left to happen. 15/85 × 33 = 5.8deg if we had a 100% CO2 atmosphere we would still not be at 100%. It takes 13 doublings to reach 1 atm CO2 pressure. Will Steffan was claiming at the Ipswich climate conversation that we would see up to 6 degrees warming by 2100 when CO2 was forecasted to be about 580 PPM at current rate. So from first principles CO2 could add no more than 5.8 deg EVER – even for a completely CO2 atmosphere yet the climate commission was claiming more than this for a rise of just 1.45 times, half a doubling.
Further those same scientists that put earths temperature 33 degrees above black body only ascribe 10 degrees of it to global warming, this takes that absolute max warming EVER number down to about 1.8 deg hotter for a 100% CO2 atmosphere. 6 degrees from climate commission for a change of half a doubling VS 1.7 degrees from first principles using temp above blackbody and saturation for a change of 13 doublings. This simple calculation was when I called BS on climate change theory.
Put another way, the scientists claim that the current 85% of saturation for CO2 causes 10 degrees of warming, but somehow the next 15% will cause UP TO 65 degrees. How dissonant is that.
Until they can reconcile these two things I’m out…
170
The 33 deg above is total garbage. Total misunderstanding of how to use the Seffan Boltmann equation. THe atmosphere is NOT a black body. Space itself has no temperature. The atmosphere’s temperature is goverened by the gas laws, the barometric equation, compression due to gravity, and adiabatic heat transfer due to water phases, and thermal conduction from heat transfer.
30
I know that, but back then I just took their own science and then calculated the warming for the boundary condition (100% saturation) to cross check the prediction. I also used another test (warming from LIA) to current and T = k ln(C/Co) to calculate k assuming that all temp rise from 1850 was 50% due to CO2 (per IPCC) I can then calculate T for a doubling using C/Co = 2 a d the value of k determined from history to compare with climate commission and both methods return a very similar result, that CO2 warming can be no more than about 0.5 deg per doubling.
Since then I’ve tried a few other methods and pretty much always get a limit of 0.5 deg C per doubling. For example if you take the supposed 3.7 watts per square meter for a doubling and then calculate the point of violation of the law of conservation of energy where the imposed 3.7 watts to the surface equals 3.7 watts of surface emission using SB equation you find out the temperature rise of the surface at 15C that yields 3.7 watts psm radiation outgoing is around 0.5 Deg C. The IPCCs 3.3 deg for a doubling yields almost 16 watts extra emission, so you have to wonder where the extra 12 watts psm comes from?
Remember that this is a boundary test, it estimates using historical data what the sensitivity was to historical CO2 rises so I could broadly test whether the CC numbers were plausible, it assumes CO2 warming is true and determines what the worst case can be, in all likelihood the real effect is much less than this worst case boundary test.
This simple math showed me using their own numbers that the climate commission view was completely inconsistent with history and that the CC was arguing that future climate sensitivity was going to become suddenly 10 times what it has historically been. That was totally implausible to me.
The math doesn’t lie and it converted me to a sceptical viewpoint immediately.
01
It seems to me that most people cannot distinguish- or discern between “pollution” and CO2. Pictures or Thermal power stations backdropped by a setting sun does the masses in every time.
100
Yeap.
My view is that Leftist are people that ‘need’ to be in charge. Their mind set is that ‘they’ know best and believe things would be better if only everyone thought and acted the same way.
If they want/need to be in charge for selfish power or because they honestly believe they are doing it for The Greater Good is open to discussion, but the core point is they believe they are in the right.
Rightie by comparison rarely feel the need to be in charge. Motivation comes from bettering the people they care about which paradoxically makes them both more and less selfish. They wont Greater Good at the expense of those they care about, but can be very compassionate about towards those who have fallen on hard times.
(those who have embraced hard times? Different story. We digress.)
A Rightie doesn’t feel the need to be ‘right’, they feel the need to be doing what is best. They are open to change if they can see the benefit and are willing to look at the other sides point of view in order to keep their options open. This is the ‘Conservative Advantage’.
Lefties need to be right. Admitting they are wrong would imply everything they believe in (aka ‘Everything would be better if only *I* was in charge’) is also wrong. To admit to error is to admit their entire world view is also at fault.
So yes, your view that they deliberately avoid debate is probably completely valid.
51
Science is not about consensus, but arguments and prove of theories.
This part: “Balance implies equal weight. But this then creates a false equivalence between an overwhelming scientific consensus and a lobby, heavily funded by vested interests, that exists simply to sow doubt to serve those interests.”
There are always two sides and i just ask, who is most funded by vested interests?
250
Correct. Science is about evidence based theories, arguments and explanations. The climate change/global warming “consensus” has no evidence based science and in fact the available evidence contradicts their so called consensus view. Scientists as a whole IMHO have proven to be a dishonourable. That includes all those who are sceptical but have chosen to remain silent.
170
I do find it amusing that they justify not debating using an utter falsehood.
I cannot work out whether people actually believe this “vested interest” nonsense or just use it to lie to the majority of the public who are not heavily involved in the issue?
30
I would like to point out that when two opposing points of view can never reach a peaceful resolution it always leads to conflict, anyone that thinks the people that have gained so much wealth and power from this climate ruse are going to cede their position so easily is delusional.
261
I agree. That’s why I tend to believe they will win in the end because they are so evil minded they will not give up and are more prepared to use violence than the good side. It could be turned around fairly easily though if only what I believe is the vast majority of scientists who happen to be sceptical started to speak up. Shame on them for remaining silent. They are just as much to blame by still remaining silent.
141
Don’t dismiss the strength of patriots when organized and rallied, ask a few old Japanese, German, Italians what the allies were like as enemy’s.
30
If you are right then that probably means a civil war. That will be part of the crash and burn scenario.
11
Right from the start, the Alarmists framed a binary debate – agree with us and do as we say, or the world dies. They allowed no room for compromise or sensible debate.
20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JwIq8NnjAw
Chinese Military Training for US Airstrikes
How much CO2 will this release!
30
I’m more worried about the Russian simulated tests on destroying the US with their new EMP weapons. Also the combined Russian-Chinese efforts to develop new weapons, such as AI controlled supersonic planes delivering new generation smart nuclear missiles, unmanned AI subs, particle beam weapons and the like.
50
“” AI controlled Supersonic planes carrying smart nuclear weapons””
?? Havent those been around since the ’60s in the form on intercontinental Balistic Missiles. ?
Its never the weapon that is the danger, you need to worry about who is behind the Big Red Button !
40
What’s new is the missiles themselves are supersonic. At the moment it will be impossible to stop them.
10
ICBM are supersonic
..mach18 – mach 20 !!
..thats why they called it “minuteman”
30
Yes but the ones that Russia has developed are much smaller and so can be launched from a plane or perhaps even a drone much closer to its target and still be classed as city killers. What bothers me is how much weaponry do they all need? They have enough to destroy either side hundreds of times over.
20
How much does the U.S spend on its military compared to Russia?
10
Not so important how much they spend as how well they spend it and what their results are. I’m not sure what the relative strengths are for their long range bombers, fighter aircraft, subs, land missiles, etc. I suspect though their mobile land missiles are superior. Combined with China though they would be a very formidable force. Of course who knows what secret weapons each has developed.
20
After going through the “Cold War” and DEr Atomwaffen, I hope diplomacy works. There is much invidious behaviour which manifests in trhis type of brinkmanship. I certainly don’t blame Russia totally in this as there are elements in the US promote confrontation.One such person died the other day.
40
All sides are to be blamed. No one is innocent.
20
Be clear, we are not talking about the 99.9999% chaotic “natural” perturbation that is defined as ‘climate variability’. I think many of you may be missing something here? People seem to overlook the obvious instead of challenging the definition itself.
Alarmists have defined climate change (UNFCCC is quite clear about what constitutes ‘climate change’), which is predicated on direct and indirect anthropogenic influence on atmospheric composition and land usage. Consequently it is unfalsifiable and settled by definition until not a single human being is left on the face of Gaia. Alarmists ideologues and their scientivist and political allies appear entirely justified to refuse to debate an unfalsifiable definition they adhere to, which is of course why it was handily defined in that manner.
As they are unable to identify the signal from the noise, the definition should be debunked as an ideological weapon and discarded from science.
240
In other words it is the Church of Climatology where the believers have to follow the orthodoxy and all non believers are heretics. This explains their position.
180
The climate change/global warming alarmists are all not about science. It’s all about ideologies backed up by fake science and fake news. It has been working very well to convince the masses to follow the alarmists, and it’s still working to some extent overseas but more so here. The reason I say that is because hundreds of coal fired pwoer stations are being built all over the world many of which will be using our coal. This proves the rest of the world and it’s masses are not so convinced any more about climate change/global warming because if they were they would be tearing down everything to stop those plants being built. Yet here in Australia we are yet to catch on with the rest of the world and its masses. This is something Morrison must educate the people here about. He has to do it and do it convincingly otherwise it’s all over for this nation very quickly when Shorten becomes PM very soon.
70
Climate change, n., 1. A state bestowed by God upon the ignorant as a reward for their credulity; or on the wicked for their destitution of conscience, concupiscence, conspicuous consumption, lack of guilt about the size of their carbon footprint, etc. 2. The alleged cause of any natural or unnatural phenomenon for which no other cause is known, esp. one that is or will be bad for someone somewhere; syn., Devil, dangerous anthropogenic global warming, etc. 3. Logic: an argument by default of the form: “we do not know what is causing the climate to change, therefore it must be our fault.” 4. Mythology: Gaia’s ugly sister. 5. Science: a change in the climate identified by measurable changes in its properties that persist for at least three decades, assuming certain datasets are accurate, their minders honest and they describe a reality; e.g.: Big Ice Age, Little Ice Age, Roman Warm Period, Gore Hot Period, Trump Cool Period, etc. 6. Politics: a rationale devised to justify wealth redistribution from developed to developing countries, often described as repayment of climate debt. 7. Climate-craft: the chief deity, worshipped by many disciples; a cult that claims any change in the climate or weather is due primarily to increased anthropogenic carbon dioxide rather than natural causes, such as internal variability. 8. Horse racing: a bay mare sired by Clap Trap out of the dam, Monsoon Mischief; won the 2015 Paris Summit by a nose from Miss Model, Hot Stuff and Fickle Folly, an international race that attracted many mug punters and provocateurs. 9. A bogeyman for frightening children and adults. 10. A deliberately vague expression that can mean whatever you want it to mean, if anything. See ice age, internal variability, Paris.
Reference: The Devil’s Dictionary of Climate Change – Wicked ways to amuse your friends and upset your enemies (2018)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/06/21/friday-funny-the-devils-dictionary-of-climate-change/
20
Doubleplusgood+97% ±0.0016
No.8 – it’s a bleeding horse race, Bob!
#9 and #10 say it all. A dictionary to add to all my others.
10
This is why it’s imperative for the new PM to lay down the law to silence the vocal minority before it’s too late and our nation crashes and burns. Even if the whole world crashes and burns for whatever reason (most likely cause will be a financial crash) at least we should be around to see it happen and not crash and burn on our own well before the rest of the word does. You get my drift? So Morrison please PLEASE for the sake of this nation cement the right policies on energy, immigration, water and food over the next 10 days before parliament resumes, and then go hell for leather selling the message not only to the public but also to the ALP so they might even turn around and they become bipartisan issues. If you can do that things will turn around and this nation will become great again!
I see the water issue is being dealt with properly for once with several dams being proposed in the NT. If we can turn the NT into a food bowl, food exports will become a major export industry for us proving extra billions per year of income. I know not many people have noticed yet but soon there will be a massive food shortage around the world and prices will sky-rocket. Here is a perfect opportunity to help the world and generate a lot of income in the process. This issue alone is far more real than any so called man-made global warming. Not only that it’s something we can do to change the situation for the better; we will never be able to change the climate no matter what we do. Becoming a food bowl for the world can and will change the world, and do so for the better saving millions of lives. Tell that to the so called environmentalists who all they are interested in reality is to let people die in the millions.
Hmmm. I think I will write a letter along these lines to the PM. This is serious. I’m too old to care for myself but I want my kids to enjoy a good future, not some crash and burn scenario thanks to the mindless fools like Turnbull, Shorten and many others on the left in both major parties.
150
Also note that I was almost crying writing this post as I am afraid for the future of my kids and others. I plead with everyone to write to your elected representatives and push similar messages. We need to save Australia. I personally think we will fail due to a large group of evil minded people within our own nation but I for one will not go down without a fight.
90
My take was to write to them not so much about the science because their eyes will glaze over, but the EVIL inherent in their solution – the evil in grannies having to choose between dying of cold or dying of hunger right now, so their great grandchildren can theoretically have a climate 0.000001 degrees cooler.
90
I take your point and agree. Reality of facts bites hard while the science of theories puts people to sleep.
30
Peter S
Re “This is why it’s imperative for the new PM to lay down the law to silence the vocal minority before it’s too late and our nation crashes and burns.”
“MORRISON HAS JUST 11 DAYS TO SAVE THE LIBERALS”
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/morrison-has-just-11-days-to-save-the-liberals/news-story/2e00961e2ca0aa8e80aee1a44402eaf4
Looking rather “own goal-ish” atm
40
He is so correct. Let’s wait and see before we past judgement on him. It’s not a long time to wait. I’m especially eager to see Taylor’s policy on energy and how he deals with it in parliament. It will be make or break time for the LNP and the nation. Hmmm. I can smell the smoke already from the coming crash and burn. I sincerely do hope I’m mistaken.
50
‘I sincerely do hope I’m mistaken.’
** chuckle **
You are getting yourself into a knot, may I suggest we seriously organise a scientific blue team.
I have three names for starters, all Australian, who do you suggest?
20
I was thinking about something along those lines. Let me get a few things in order first and then I’ll see. I’m getting prepared for the likely crash and burn to survive the best way I can. In any war situation the first thing to prepare for is your defences and plan B then your attack forces before going for the strike. The US learned that one at Pearl Harbour.
40
If the election is a Liberal rout then the Nats might walk away from the Coalition.
‘If our Coalition cousins can’t get their act together and stop the political warfare, then I think The Nationals need to re-think how the whole Coalition works. Time will tell.’
Andrew Gee MP (Nat)
20
PeterS:
As a spectator from the US, I hope Australia can avoid a crash and burn because to paraphrase Jo’s words, I would truly hate to see “A perfectly good civilization go to waste” because the fallout from such an occurrence would be very bad for the people of Australia and also for the rest of the world.
80
I welcome your support and thank you. However, I suspect we’ve already gone too far to turn back. It will require a crash and burn to wake people up from their ignorance, laziness and/or false teachings from the MSM, educators and politicians of the left (who happen to be in both major political parties). We do have a very small window of opportunity at least to try and turn things around if Morrison is up to the challenge. I doubt though he understands the gravity of the situation because like all politicians they are too busy kissing babies so to speak to be concerned about reality.
70
PeterS: “I doubt though he understands the gravity of the situation because like all politicians they are too busy kissing babies so to speak to be concerned about reality.”
The one thing you can generally count on politicians to understand is the need to get reelected, and from what I am hearing on this blog and others, if doesn’t take this opportunity he won’t be. We’ll just have to hope that self-preservation is enough motivation for him to do the correct thing.
40
Agree. I don’t think we have long to wait to see which way he and the rest of the LNP will go.
30
Maurice Newman is an intellectual who thinks the Liberal Party has definitely moved left.
‘Robert Menzies would correctly consider today’s Liberal Party left wing, as recent events bear out.’ Oz
30
It looks as if a completely new party with a solid ‘save Australia’ agenda is required that also includes engineers and real scientists as potential MPs.
That is the only way to remove the rot that is in the political system at the moment.
50
The new dams and irrigation areas should be underway by now as they were first proposed from opposition by the Abbott Coalition.
When in government they overturned Labor’s wild rivers legislation that banned development of northern rivers.
90
Odd how the ALP+Greens are so hyped-up about saving the planet from non-existent global warming, which we literally can’t do a single thing about even if it were real no matter how many trillions of dollars we spend. To me at least it proves the left are either literally insane or pure evil.
90
”
A new study has found that strong global climate action would cause far more hunger and food insecurity than climate change itself:https://t.co/3t61iShgYy pic.twitter.com/Vgj1KuRkhp
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) August 28, 2018
It’s not a bug. It’s a feature. ”
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2018/08/29/y2kyoto-state-of-anorexia-envirosa/
In comments
“Remember Kate’s statement “The left is always one murder away from utopia.” “
140
Dennis the game is about to kick off.
‘The PM has been handed a scientific blueprint to transform northern Australia into the nation’s “next great food bowl”. Oz
60
When the plan was first announced it was revealed that the CSIRO had identified a land area about the same area as Western Europe, just add water. The land starts from the Ord River WA through the NT and into QLD.
The WA Ord River Irrigation Area is impressive as is the Ord River Dam and catchment area.
Let’s hope that this nation building infrastructure project now proceeds quickly.
80
Just wait for the howls of protest from the green brigade who will fore see many forms of peril for tiny rare frogs etc etc !!
70
We’ll get around those objections by showing the benefits of infrastructure spending.
For example, if Ord water was piped to the Murray Darling Basin and not just for the Darling River, then drought would become a thing of the past.
Like the branches on a tree, spread out over the whole MDB to any small holdings who want to tap in
40
Frogs are so very much more important than mere human beings. /sarc….who’d a thunk it?
20
And Aboriginal land rights!!!!
00
Sand,rock termite mounds,old salt lakes,barren and boring and desolate. Time for some terra-forming.
30
‘The big bucks plan to return even more water to the ailing Murray river system has major shortcomings, which could see it fail, a new report warns.’ Oz
The Ord pipeline would drought proof the MDB.
10
Six dams are required for this plan. Under the political regime that currently exists in Australia it would be barely possible to get one dam built, if that.
50
China will do it in no time once we have begged them to come over to bail us out.
20
Ignoring the law of unintended consequences, we could say yes to the Belt and Road and all our problems would be solved.
10
PeterS,
In earlier years I spent a lot of time visiting the NT after 1960 and on government policies as president or VP of the NT Chamber of Mines for 6 years.
Dreams of a NT food bowl are old and led to experiments like rice at Humpty Doo and the Ord River scheme for irrigation. Mango plantations have succeeded.
The dreams will come true some time in the future when Indonesian population pressures lead to invasion of agreement. If big fans are built and large power sources provided, that might happen sooner.
The debate is not helped by comments from people who do not know about the past, or by some confused egotists like Flannery. Geoff
70
I think a letter to the PM, copied to other suitable people, would be a very good idea Peter S.
30
Consensus climate scientists Refusing to debate has been a spectacularly ineffective strategy. Climate change concern has steadily dropped over the last 10 years and even Democrats in the US have sense to know votes are lost pushing the climate agenda. Why in heavens name do the people on this blog want the alarmist tactics to change??
40
We don’t give a damn about them. We give a damn about what the LNP will do about it to save Australia from them.
80
Sean the problem on the ground is that ordinary well meaning folk have been brainwashed into thinking the science is settled. This has distorted the whole political system and we have no time to waste, its time for a debate in the MSM before the next election, because the science is not settled.
100
Agree. Morrison has to recognise that and put up the biggest fight any politician had to perform for a very long time. That also means he can’t hold back even if it ends up placing Turnbull in a bad light together with Rudd and Gillard as to the extent they have stuffed up the nation. Whether Morrison has the guts to do so only time will tell. What he needs to understand is if he doesn’t go on the attack, Shorten becomes PM and we are stuffed well and truly, and so will be the LNP. If that happens I really hope the LNP is permanently destroyed to allow a fresh new party to be born out of the ashes. I’m sick and tired of the LNP acting as though it’s a coalition of two parties at opposite ends of the politician spectrum.
60
It has been their failed tactic for years.
Here is the Goracle in 2007:
“I think that the news media has a responsibility not to fall into the trap of these ideological opponents of taking action, and say on the one hand most scientists say the earth is round, but on the other hand a few say that it is flat, so we’re gonna give equal time to these … (interviewer interrupts) …
@5.23 secs: BBC, Hardtalk with Al Gore & Dr Pachauri
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS_jvYTEhkQ
70
“What’s really amazing is the cowards at The Guardian (BBC, ABC, CBC etc) can’t see it.”
Of course they can. It’s the side, not the facts. There has never been a science debate on man made Global Warming. It’s fantasy science and they know it.
The other politically left passion is AntiFA and its friends. This is an extreme left violent fascist/socialist organization which assaults conservatives and Jews for simply speaking publicly and presents themselves as freedom fighters against tyranny? The world has not seen the like since the Mussolini’s Black shirts or Hitler’s Brown shirts. Hitler’s Fascists were the National Socialist Party, but who knows that?
It’s been 80 years since the brownshirts and universities and schools are now forbidden to teach European history, allegedly white man’s imperialist patriachal misogynist history. So it starts again.
In Victoria, Lauren Southern’s promoter refusing to pay the $150,000 fine (since reduced to $67,000 for a first offence) for daring to speak publicly, ostensibly for police protection from violent AntiFA and friends. There was a time when the police charged violent people for assault and freedom of speech was presumed. Now a very left government charges you protection money for speaking.
This is a world wide phenomenon. You wonder if, as in the prelude to WW2, the communists are also the hated rivals of the AntiFA organizations?
Climate change, imperialism, whiteness, #metoo and the evils of Captain Cook, Robert E Lee, Christopher Columbus, Lord Nelson, Cecil Rhodes. So how is that Zimbabwe experiment going now? South Africa is going the same way. It’s not Climate Change which is destroying these countries.
All brought to you by the long march through the institutions by the extreme left and now reaching into our primary schools, tearing down our beliefs and institutions and our science. Even gender is a fantasy and now Germaine Greer of “the Female Eunuch” fame is a hated conservative with offensive views on women’s rights.
Of course they know it’s all a lie. It’s the side that matters, the pack, the tribe, the shirt colour. Black.
210
I feel it goes beyond that. The left are pure evil or completely insane.
100
After WW1 good people wanted to prevent WW2. So the League of Nations was born. After WW2 the United Nations. A league of little countries, 75% of which are military dictatorships.
Then the Common Market, a huge trading group. Then the European Community a travel and currency group and now the European Union, a political union which is forming its own army. Dominated by France and Germany, the EU is not planning domination. Of course.
Obviously these transnational groups are tasked with the elimination of National governments, the pulling down of borders, the sharing of wealth and the elimination of the ruling classes and distinctions on race or religion. Unfortunately they were also the agendas of Napoleon, Hitler and Stalin and Tojo. So they are anti Christian, anti white and anti democracy and anti borders.
Now with a mountain of money and an army of bureaucrats and a new philosophy of intellectual supremacy, with the exception of Japan, we see these groups once more trying to control everyone.
There is no man made Climate Change as created by the UN’s IPCC. #metoo is fantasy pushed by the very exploiters who created the casting couch. Hollywood is shocked. Saddiq Khan’s freedom from racial profiling in London has seen the murder rate exceed New York. South Africa is now copying Rhodesia and legalizing the seizure of farms owned by white people, another violent apartheid.
Conspiracy? No. This is all brought to your by the tens of thousands of highly paid professionals in the UN and EU who are doing their jobs. Destroying imperialism, white domination and Christianity and borders and prosperity. And Israel.
To prevent Climate Change and make a better world. Unbelievable.
210
All good TdeF, the new PM handed his new Cabinet Ministers an Australia Flag lapel pin after the swearing in ceremony at Government House, Canberra.
He said that he wears the pin to remind himself about who he works for.
A friend asked me why the PM needs a reminder.
140
I don’t think that Scott Morrison needs a reminder, it’s more a reminder from him to his ministers.
Subtle, but hopefully effective.
30
Yes it’s no accident that the left are attacking not only the West but everything is used to stand for (I emphasise used to) including Christianity (not the religion but the original teachings) and instead standing up for and protecting religions, including many so called Christian denominations that have the same goal to destroy the West and allow a much larger false religion to step in and take over the world.
50
Or both.
30
In Melbourne the communist Darebin council wants to rename Batman park after an obscure ab*riginal, to destroy the name of the founder of Melbourne.
My question is why? In the one month this year, attacks on Captain Cook, Robert E. Lee, Lord Nelson, Christopher Columbus and more. Across the world. Now tell me this is not an organized attack on Western history and societies and values.
‘April 23 2017
On Friday’s Real Time on HBO, far left comedian Bill Maher hyperbolically likened Syrian dictator Bashar Assad gassing people to death with chemical weapons to the United States “gassing them” “slower with CO2” as he fretted over global warming.’
Useful idiots.
130
Take a deep breath Bill, hold, hold, hold …….
50
Australia: coldest morning for 60-years
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/australia-struggles-through-one-of-the-coldest-mornings-of-the-year/news-story/c31b5e20a5fe01d3840acc640466ed60
110
BoM, May 31, 2018: Winter is coming, and it’s looking mighty mild
https://theconversation.com/winter-is-coming-and-its-looking-mighty-mild-97466
“However, when these major drivers (the ENSO and IOD) are neutral, other factors can have a greater influence on Australian rainfall and temperature patterns.
> For instance, forecast warmer-than-usual temperatures in the Tasman Sea and the associated lower-than-normal air pressure this winter is likely to contribute to a weakening of westerly winds over southern Australia that would normally draw cold fronts up from the Southern Ocean.” <
01 June 2018:
"Winter has finally arrived in Australia, with a record breaking cold start to the season for parts of the country."
Winter off to a freezing start for parts of Australia
https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/06/01/07/49/australia-weather-melbourne-sydney-brisbane-winter-forecast
40
No, no, no.
The ABC News website tells us that last night was the hottest August night EVVVAAAHHHHH!
Never mind the little fact that that is just not true.
30
Science has never been about “consensus”. Those who think it is fail to understand the scientific method. Here is an excellent short letter on the topic:
http://lakelandtimes55.1upprelaunch.com/main.asp?SectionID=11&SubSectionID=11&ArticleID=20332
And remember what Einstein said.
Einstein was shown a German newspaper that claimed “One hundred German physicists claim Einsteins theory of relativity is wrong.” Einsteins reply was, “If I were wrong, it would only take one.”
71
David Maddison:
But did the 100 ever debate? Did they ever retract?
10
Did they ever reach a conclusion?
20
When I was at Uni a very long time ago I did a Physicist assignment on the scientific method. I still recall it so well since the Professor took me aside and made the comment it was very well done, so much so he gave me bonus marks. The odd thing is I documented in detail the true scientific method the way it was always described. Yet today it’s all forgotten and ignored. Now the scientific method is shunned and sometimes even derided. It saddens me because I used to believe in science and wanted to make a career out of it, which did not eventuate. Now looking at the way things are done today in science I’m glad I didn’t venture into a career in science but at the same time still feel sad as real science to me is still very exciting and interesting. Climate scientists in general have tarnished the reputation of science so badly I doubt it will recover any time soon.
141
Oddly, everything about global warming theory has been shown to be wrong or implausible (see my simple boundary test up thread) or inconsistent with measurement eg positive feedback requires outgoing long wave to decrease with warming but in fact outgoing longwave has increased with warming invalidating the positive feedback idea. So-called scientific papers related to AGW routinely ignore the law of conservation of energy ascribing effects like the melting of west Antarctica to AGW an effect costing 30-50 watts per square meter magically being ascribed to the very theoretical 0.6Watts per square metre warming effect of AGW. Then they pretend they can melt the ice AND have the warming that melted the ice simultaneously!
It has been so thoroughly debunked that I’m amazed science hasn’t moved on. I have, cAGW as they describe it IS impossible.
131
Worse than that the rest of the world have moved on and building hundreds of coal fired power stations (and a few nuclear power stations to boot). Australia is effectively acting on its own to save the planet from a non-existent problem. I will stop here before I blow a fuse even thinking about all this.
80
Here is a prediction i sincerely hope is wrong..
The New Energy Minister , Angus Taylor, …who is reported by those that know him as a smart and sensible guy…..is going to outline his plans for energy policy later this morning.
However , dispite the optomism of a “new start” situation, i predict it will be another political cop out with a lot of fiddleing with the consumer price promise, empty threats of “action “. against energy suppliers, etcetc etc….
All we will actually get is another wordy reworking of previous ineffictive policies in an attempt to survive through to the next election.
I do hope i have misjudged this , but……
120
Angus says he’s not sceptical about climate science, so you’re probably on the money Chad.
20
Chad so far it looks like you are right. I’m not really surprised. It appears Morrison is just all talk and nothing else, and some cases doublespeak. Still we should give him and Taylor the full 10 days before parliament resumes to make sure. We’ve been through several years of BS from Turnbull so waiting 10 days to find out if we are going to continue that way won’t make any difference. If it’s the case it’s all talk and no action then last week was pointless and may the LNP die and be buried for good. I’m sick and tired of fakes. At least we know where Labor stands and are open, which is probably why the business community prefers them. Better to deal with a known problem than a fake that speaks with fork tongue.
10
The problem is always energy they claim there is a 0.6Watt per square meter difference between incoming and outgoing energy and that is retained as heat. But given the earths average insolation is 340 Watts per square meter. 0.6Watt per square metre change represents a change of only 0.17% yet they claim that this causes (IPCC) 5% extra rain (evaporation), superstorms, more intense cyclones, ice melt of far more than 0.17%. I’ve seen papers claiming up to 20% more rain (requiring 20% more evaporation, requiring 20% more energy/power)
Moreover the dullards are happy to claim that ALL these energy consuming macro effects are being caused by the SAME meagre 0.17% increase in power input and that despite this energy being used up by these effects, the cause (warming) can magically still be there.
The violations of the law of conservation of energy couldn’t be more stark, yet somehow we still have educated people, scientists no less, believing this cruft.
90
When I chat with the sort of people who believe in signing international agreements on climate, opposing domestic coal, regulating and taxing domestic industry on the basis of “emissions” etc etc I find they are very interested in political parties and personalities.
However these same people are not interested in climate change, know little of climate change…and even appear not to believe in climate change.
As a hitch-hiking youth in Greece in the early 1970s I drove past Thermopylae and looked north toward the Gulf of Malis for some kind of “pass”. It did not occur to me to look the other way to the hills, nor did I realise that where we were driving was once the fringe of the sea where the armies of Persia were massed.
But eventually it dawned on me…
Climate change!
50
The Maniototo Basin in Central Otago, upland southern South Island used to be a semi-tropical inland swamp-lake with crocs and turtles and palms… today it’s a freezing peneplain with snow-dusted tops (and gold mining relics leftover from the 1800s)… something changed all right. And yet when our continent, Zealandia, was warmer and more lush way back when, it was physically closer to Antarctica and the South Pole than it is today. Many climates, many changes, long may we run.
60
That’s interesting about South Island.
The Sahara was quite a moist place till about 5600 BC, the rough dating given for the end to the Holocene Optimum. But that doesn’t mean northern parts of Africa were as barren (despite green pockets and adaptation) as now.
I find most people don’t realise how recent these radically different climates were, and how fast the changes come. The worst of glaciation was only twenty thousand years ago, severe cold ruled a mere thirteen thousand years ago. Huge geological changes like the flooding of Bass Strait and Doggerland were more recent still. The catastrophe of the Storegga Slides, when warming conditions collapsed a huge chunk of coastal Norway, occurred around 6225–6170 BC, when there were plenty of modern humans to be affected.
I guess I should wonder why this sort of thing isn’t taught or disseminated. Sadly, I don’t wonder.
80
The story is written in the land: I’ve hiked up water-carved canyons in QLD’s Carnarvon Gorge, swum in Sumatra’s Lake Toba (the ex-BIG BOOM volcano), overnighted on Egypt’s Mt Sinai marvelling at the perfect volcanic cone next to it, cycled the streets of Amsterdam and couldn’t wait to get back up above sea level again, and I’ve sat atop mountain peaks in the South Island considering the possibility it was giant tsunamis which carved the land (as well as glaciers) leaving erratic / foreign boulders precariously balanced in the most novel, unusual, often earthquake-rattled, inspiring places. What’s the old adage: the only constant in life is change.
10
29 Aug: The Australia Institute: Wentworth: Liberal primary vote crashes, climate action message clear
The Australia Institute commissioned ReachTEL to poll the federal seat of Wentworth (886 respondents) on the evening of 27th August.
Key Findings:
•Liberal Party primary vote crashes to 39.6%, compared to 2016 election 62.3% primary vote (-22.7%)…
•Majority of voters (62.5%) think Australia should move to 100% renewable energy within the next 5-10 years
•Majority of voters (66.6%) think the national Energy Guarantee should include an emissions reduction target
•Majority of voters (68.6%) think new Prime Minister Scott Morrison will do less to tackle climate change than Malcolm Turnbull
•Voters unimpressed with Scott Morrison’s lump of coal antics, majority (50.9%) say it made them less likely to vote Liberal next election
“Malcolm Turnbull had a huge personal vote and is enormously popular in the electorate. These figures show the new Liberal candidate faces a major challenge to retain the seat for the government,” said Ben Oquist, executive director of The Australia Institute.
“The task is made all the more difficult because this poll shows the government is out of touch with the people of Wentworth on climate issues. The electorate backs renewables over coal hands down…
“Wentworth voters want a National Energy Guarantee with an emissions reduction target, and they want renewables sooner.
“Australia needs an integrated climate and energy policy to have a secure investment environment. This will ultimately bring power prices down, increase reliability, and drive down pollution.
“Equating emission reductions with higher prices gets both the politics and economics wrong. These poll results show that the community understands action on climate change is in Australia’s national interest.”
LINKS
http://www.tai.org.au/content/wentworth-liberal-primary-vote-crashes-climate-action-message-clear
28 Aug: TWEET: Richie Merzian/The Australia Institute:
Australia
A massive 23% swing against the Liberal Party in #Wentworth following the dumping of both #PMTurnbull and #climatepolicy. @TheAusInstitute polling shows the by-election is an open race and renewables and ambitious targets are both popular issues in the electorate
LINK TO SKY NEWS TWEET (KIERAN GILBERT INTERVIEW WITH RICHIE MERZIAN/TAI)
1 REPLY: FutureIsNotThePast: One of the best educated, highest income electorates in Australia.
Think of their vote as a measure of despair.
Like the capitulation of the S&P bulls in March 2009.
https://twitter.com/RichieMerzian/status/1034619083143045120
Gilbert lets Merzian shoot off his mouth, without interruption.
(VIDEO 46mins)TWEET: Sky News Australia:
@TheAusInstitute’s @RichieMerzian: The NEG was unique in bringing climate and energy policy together. What you are now seeing is investment certainty going out the door.
2 REPLIES
https:/ /twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/1034570222831775745
10
High authority figures say that CO2 is the problem.
So you’re all wrong aren’t you, so shut-up!
There’s more wild weather and worse storms!
CO2 is making this globe dangerously unlivable as it warms the atmosphere!
All the ice is melting much, isn’t it!
All the oceans are rising rapidly!
OR IS IT?
Is it that, as far as can be seen, all the weather effect today are well within normal natural variations. Could it be that these days weather news is (alarmingly)reported in seconds and from everywhere — weather events especially so (less so if it’s about cold, snow, increasing ice, etc). Back 100 years or more ago much that happened with the weather went unreported because we did have easy communication to remote areas, and no 24/7/365 satellite surveillance of the whole world.
What little warming that has happen (since the ‘end’ of the Little Ice Age (LIA)) amounts to about 1°C in 100 years. And yes the rate of increase has gone up recently but it is not much more than happened over the period 1910 to the late 1930s (and why did that happen?). (see https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/tssts-3-1-1.html)
As for ice, if we have truly exited the Little Ice Age (LIA) then ice levels and glaciers should reduce. The Arctic and Antarctic should be melting as we leave the LIA! Currently the natural reduction that was being experience has slowed — almost to a stall. IMO this indicates that a cooling appears to be evident, and with the current solar minimum, may persist for a while. Are we going back to the cool 1960-1970 climate or to something more pronounced like a Dalton (or even a Maunder) minimum? Who can say. Climate studies seem to be lost in the minutia of CO2 physics, and not looking at the big picture or the long view.
The sea levels are just fine with rises of about 1.44 mm/yr to 1.7 mm/yr when measured by tidal gauges. They haven’t risen markedly till we started (mis)using satellite data to measure it. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level_rise ).
Overall I believe life (all life) would be better with more warmth.
The Medieval Warm Period marked a time when all life flourished. The cooling periods after that shows that colder climate kills far more. Remember that all life on the planet now have ancestry that survived historically warmer times than now. Why should they not survive a little warmth now? Darwin surmised that local variations in conditions, including climate, was the main driver for ecological change, adaptation and eventually the differentiation of species. Adaptation and change go together.
So give me and my fellow travelers some more global warm, for 1°C or 2°C rise is easily adapted to, where as 1° or 2°C cooler spells death for so much flora and fauna, making life far more difficult for us humans.
Now I’ll just shut up eh?
100
Science is about verifying something that already exists.
The climate issue is all about something happening in the future concerning things that do not exist and for which the scientific method is undefined.
The Earth orbiting the sun is predictable but predicting the occurrence of a cat 9 earthquake in the New Madrid Seismic Zone in the US is impossible, since the forces that could conceivably cause such an event are not at present being observed in operation. (I add that the New Madrid Seismic Zone is in the middle of a tectonic plate).
The climate issue is all about prophesy and its striking how Old Testament like the climate alarmists are.
90
Its akin to Millenarianism.
12
Good to see you active again, Louis. And Bullwinkle has been sorely missed too. Good to see you both. 🙂
So they have prophesied many times. So what? Let him whose prophesy comes true be the real prophet.
50
Yes science can sometimes be about verifying something that already exists. It’s also about verifying something that existed in the past but not longer exists today, such as dinosaurs (presumably). As for climate change it’s all about something in the future and it becomes the realm of prophesy as you say rather than science. Science no longer can be used a definitive tool to make predictions about something that hasn’t happened yet unless it involves precise physical theories that are tested and shown to be accurate. One such example is the use of certain mathematical equations to predict the path of the planets and comets orbiting the sun decades in advance.
40
I will not debate deniers, but will engage with skeptics
40
A new paper highlighted at wuwt and Judith Curry appears to show that coral bleaching is not exactly new.
‘Porites spp. corals exhibited variable bleaching patterns with bleaching frequency (number of bleaching years per decade) increasing (1620–1753), decreasing (1754–1820), and increasing (1821–2001) again. Bleaching prevalence (the proportion of cores exhibiting bleaching) fell (1670–1774) before increasing by 10% since the late 1790s concurrent with positive temperature anomalies, placing recently observed increases in GBR coral bleaching into a wider context.’
The authors suggest warmer water is the trigger for bleaching, but I think its because of a fall in sea level caused by strong El Nino. What do you think?
20
el gordo
“The Hoover” won’t like that!
10
Looking a little further, seeking a clue from sea surface temperature.
‘Analysis of the trends in the data suggests that the Indian, western Pacific, and western Atlantic Ocean regions were cooling until modern warming began around the 1830s. The early 1800s were an exceptionally cool period in the Indo‐Pacific region, likely due to multiple large tropical volcanic eruptions occurring in the early nineteenth century.’
Tierney et al 2015
You’ll notice they give no credit to the Dalton Minimum.
30
In Caledonia ‘the record indicates that, from 1701 to 1761, surface temperatures were on average 1.4C cooler than during the past 30 years.’
T Correge et al 2001
Doing my sums it appears coral bleaching was increasing during a time when SST was 1.4C cooler.
20
Solar irradiance is a major player in the bleaching of coral, but they are hedging their bets.
http://www.co2science.org/subject/c/summaries/bleachingsolar.php
20
All good points, el gordo
30
Yeah, I think we have a strong case: coral bleaching is natural and not caused by human folly.
30
Somewhat off topic . . . but since it has to do with debating . . . . . it’s this time of the year again and I’m wondering if we’re ever going to see/hear a proper debate with reference to what took place on September 11, 2001 ?
11
I will suggest that you find a blog that discusses such things,
offer your ideas and the information you have,
and ask the others on that blog to discuss the topic.
A debate usually involves a person or two arguing for something,
and another person or two arguing the opposite.
Go state your case. Have fun.
50
My take on what will happen with the new Scomo government on energy will
be more of the same only a watered down cordial (lime cordial because it’s acceptablely green)version of what Turnbull and Frydenberg were up (think Josh is second in command)to.
The “learned “ catechism of climate change ,Paris Agreement and emissions is not something
that can be undone undone overnight or in Ten days .Especially when the msm is still
on script (ABC etc,etc,etc). No the momentum of this juggernaut (especially financially
vested interests )will not allow things to change.Australia has always been “one step” behind
the rest of the world in doing things .So my pessimistic take is that while one can hope things
will change in this country—— however unfortunately this is not going to happen.
Cheers Mike Reed
60
If the new PM is for Australia first and foremost he has a large number of MPs who are not, meaning who would not allow Paris Treaty to be abandoned, etc.
Like PM Abbott he faces a Cabinet of globalist left persuasion who will do their best to get what they want regardless of what their leader wants.
And again like Abbott faced voters will gain their own perceptions about what the government does and blame the PM without understanding that he was unable to get the numbers.
And then there are state and territory governments following UN agendas.
40
I always find the argument about the overwhelming scientific consensus quite interesting but it always immediately brings to mind the movie “12 Angry Men”. One man couldn’t in all conscience join the ‘consensus’ and eventually swayed the other 11 to his view.
50
Consensus science is typically anti-science unless there is definitive evidence to support it. History is full of events to show that is so. As for the so called consensus on man-made catastrophic global warming there is no definitive evidence to support it so it becomes anti-science.
50
To the 60 signers of the “credibility letter.” For collateral, I’ll put up a nickel for the totality of your credibility. You can donate the three cent overpayment to Joanne’s blog.
40
comment in moderation for a few hours.
29 Aug: ClimateDepot: Marc Morano: UN Commissioned Report: ‘Capitalism as we know it is over’ – Urges ‘climate change-fueled switch away from fossil fuels’
“Capitalism as we know it is over. So suggests a new report commissioned by a group of scientists appointed by the UN Secretary-General.” … Those are the stark implications of a new scientific background paper prepared by a team of Finnish biophysicists. The team from the BIOS Research Unit in Finland were asked to provide research that would feed into the drafting of the UN Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR), which will be released in 2019…The IGS is supported by a range of UN agencies including the UN Secretariat, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the UN Environment Programme, the UN Development Programme, the UN Conference on Trade and Development and the World Bank…READ ON
http://www.climatedepot.com/2018/08/29/un-commissioned-report-capitalism-as-we-know-it-is-over-urges-climate-change-fueled-switch-away-from-fossil-fuels/
recently a caller to Alan Jones/2GB referred to Australia’s involvement in the following:
Wikipedia: The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (or Global Goals for Sustainable Development) are a collection of 17 global goals set by the United Nations Development Programme.The formal name for the SDGs is: “Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” That has been shortened to “2030 Agenda.”…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals
amazingly Jones said he knew nothing about it and asked the caller to send him some info, so he could study it. she said she had already done so, but he said he hadn’t received it, so she will send it again.
if Jones knows nothing about it, what chance the Australian public having a clue about it?
40
Pat, I checked out the agenda wonkipage and it resembled a children’s play-school book with bright art in bright colours and happy shiny smiling young people and the word GAOL [jail] repeated 17 times… oops, hang on, oh… it was their 17 Goals to the SDG Pyramid – and yes, the ‘people’ were at the bottom while the mythical one-eyed ‘goal’ hovered above all. Artwork copyrighted by United in Diversity Creative Campus. The what?
30
AGENDA 21, blue print action plan for
infiltrating and controlling all minerals,
all plants, all education, all information,
(no debate) all private property…transition
from representative government by unelected
boards and commissions,my own serf research,
a foot thick, George Soros globalist Agenda,
cross-references to this. Take time to listen
to the first 5 minutes and Rose Koire on the
ground experience of UN land use policy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ykELwj1Ta8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ykELwj1Ta8
30
The other part of the agenda is do destroy civilization by getting rid of hydrocarbon (so called’fossil’) fuels. OIL is bad they say, so lets invent a scam, we need an event like um..YES! CO2 causes catastrophic global warming! (ramped up from the 1980’s) its transnational so no-one can deny it. All govts must pay the price.
20
Uh-oh, incredible ain’t it, how a
significant group of evidence-based
‘real’scientists, engineers, people who
run their own enterprises, critical thinkers,
sceptics in the empiric, classic tradition,
have been out-manoevred by pie-in-the-sky
socialists, UN globalists ‘n bankers, by
sheeple-teachers and indoctrinated-social-
justice-warriors who’ve adopted Gramsci’s
‘Long March through the Institutions’ policy
and Saul Alinsky how-to, ‘Rules for Radicals,’
(isolate dissenters and stop debate.) And here
we are, with no political party of choice –
captive to UN treaties and guvuhmint from
afar, – and with no plan of effective action
against them. 0____//
10
“If ‘balance’ means giving voice to those who deny the reality of human-triggered climate change, we will not take part in the debate, say Jonathan Porritt, Caroline Lucas, Clive Lewis and 57 other writers, politicians and academics”
Has anyone actually heard a debate between actual experts? Or are there none on the man made Global Warming side. I means someone with physics, chemistry,mathematics and who has made a life study of meteorology against someone with the same qualifications?
I have heard Dr.Paul Nurse, geneticist debating with James Delingpole, journalist. I have heard Lord Monckton, mathematician debate with Ian Dennis, economist.
I have never heard a real debate between warming proponents who have a comprehensive knowledge of the subject and never heard a proponent of Man Made Global Warming who does not earn their living from promoting the subject.
It’s really laughable. What credibility? Tim Flannery’s degree was in English because he could not get into an undergraduate science course. Nor Al Gore.
80
So I looked up the three main writers of this letter refusing to debate science..
Johnathan Porritt Despite training as a barrister, Porritt decided to become an English teacher at St Clement Danes Grammar School (later Burlington Danes School) in Shepherd’s Bush, West London, in 1974.
Caroline Lucas. Lucas won a scholarship at the University of Kansas, then gained a Diploma of Journalism, before studying a PhD in English from the University of Exeter with a thesis entitled Writing for Women: a study of woman as reader in Elizabethan romance.
Clive Lewis. Born in London, Lewis grew up on a council estate in Northampton, the son of a single father. He was the first member of his family to attend university, reading economics at the University of Bradford. After completing a post-graduate diploma in journalism, he worked on local newspapers in Northampton and Milton Keynes before being accepted into the BBC’s News Trainee Scheme.
So why would they refuse to debate science? They don’t know any.
130
Excellent comment but bo alarmists care about the truth of it.
60
Oh boo, I meant no.
30
Bo’s ok as they generally stink…..
30
So let’s dig further. As I suggest, these are all people making a living from man made Global Warming, often non entities until they discovered a real source of wealth and fame.
Johnathan Porritt. Porritt was educated at Wellesley House School, Broadstairs, Kent;[8] Eton College;[9] and Magdalen College, University of Oxford, where he won a first class degree in modern languages
Jonathon Porritt was born in London, the son of The Lord Porritt, 11th Governor-General of New Zealand
So not struggle street then, but a teacher?
How did that go? Did he stay a teacher?
In 1984 Porritt gave up teaching to become Director of Friends of the Earth in Britain, a post he held until 1990.
1993–1996 he chaired United Nations Environment and Development UK (UNED UK).
Inaugural Chair of the incoming Labour government’s Sustainable Development Commission (SDC)
chairman of Sustainability South-West,
President South-West Round Table for Sustainable Development
trustee of the World Wildlife Fund (UK)
board of BBC Wildlife magazine and actively supports the efforts of experts promoting renewable energy and sustainable development
endorser of the Forests Now Declaration, presented at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) meeting
Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire
honorary Doctor of Laws of the University of Sussex in 2000.
Honorary Doctorate from Heriot-Watt University in 2001.
honorary graduate of the University of Exeter.
Chancellor of Keele University.
Fame and fortune and he owes it all to Climate Change. Debate it? He created it. It made him.
Caroline Lucas
After being “utterly inspired” by Jonathon Porritt‘s book Seeing Green, Lucas joined the Green Party in 1986. She recalled in 2007: “I thought, right! I’m going there now” to the Green’s main office on Clapham High Street, near where she lived. “I’m just going to dedicate the rest of my life to this party”. True to her word, she did.
She joined the Green Party in 1986
Various party roles, also serving on Oxfordshire County Council from 1993 to 1997.
Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for South East England
Party’s Female Principal Speaker from 2003 to 2006 and from 2007 to 2008.
First Leader of the Green Party in 2008, she has just retired as President.
Clive Lewis
8 September 2015, Lewis was appointed to the Labour frontbench as a shadow minister in the Energy and Climate Change. Appointed to Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet as Shadow Secretary of State for Defence in June 2016, Lewis was appointed Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.
=============================
So all expert in wildlife, sustainable development, climate dynamics, meteorology, zoology, biology, botany, anthropology and not a single science qualification to be seen. Without the UN and the environment, Porritt would be still teaching. Languages presumably.
Climate Change made them all what they are. How can they deny it?
To now deny or even debate man made Climate Change would destroy them.
Consider they now agree it was all made up? Would they care?
They are still ‘campaigners’. It’s all about the battle. Who cares about what?
It’s about winning, not right and wrong.
or ‘It’s a living’.
60
Hmm ? …Energy Minister Angus Taylor outlines his plans for addressing Energy issues..
as i suspected,..Wordy and vague .
90
He had previously promised to remove ‘subsidies’. That means the RET, LGCs, STCs.
Do that and he will fix the system in 24 hours and save the government. Paris or no Paris.
Refuse to do it and the system cannot be fixed. That is where all the stolen cash goes, as payments (‘subsidies’) for worthless LGCs and STCs marked up by the electricity retailers.
We the public are paying for all the windmills and solar farms. It is costing a fortune and we get nothing back.
121
29 Aug: WUWT: AAASofA: “Pentagon fires a warning shot against EPA’s ‘secret science’ rule”… Riiiight.
by David Middleton
As is often the case, this really dumb article in Science (as in She Blinded Me With) was originally published by Energy & Environment Greenwire (a publication that has almost nothing to do with energy), kind of like The Grauniad citing SkepSci…
(excerpts) “While we agree that public access to information is very important, we do not believe that failure of the agency to obtain a publication’s underlying data from an author external to the agency should negate its use,” Patricia Underwood, a senior Pentagon official in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment, wrote in recent comments on the EPA proposal.
Because it’s “improbable” EPA would always be able to obtain such underlying data, Underwood added, “this should not impede the use of otherwise high-quality studies.”…
However, believe it or not, that’s not the most moronic thing about this article…
Who the Hell is “Patricia Underwood, a senior Pentagon official in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Energy, Installations and Environment” and when was she authorized to speak on behalf of the Pentagon? The fact that a low-level bureaucrat in the Department of Defense has Trump Derangement Syndrome, does not constitute the Pentagon firing “a warning shot against EPA’s ‘secret science’ rule.” It is nothing more than an example of one bureaucrat being upset at the stifling of other bureaucrats…
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/29/aaasofa-pentagon-fires-a-warning-shot-against-epas-secret-science-rule-riiiight/
I’ve done a quick search and this seems to be the one and only time Underwood has ever spoken out about anything!
LinkedIn: Patricia Underwood
https://www.linkedin.com/in/patricia-underwood-a076a39
30
more shock and outrage:
29 Aug: ClimateChangeNews: Keep calm and carry on flying and eating steak: UN Climate Change ad criticised
A video promotion for carbon credits has been criticised by campaigners for appearing to mock climate-friendly lifestyle choices and promote a controversial scheme
By Megan Darby
There is no need to change your lifestyle to stop climate change, just buy carbon credits.
The message of a UN Climate Change (UNFCCC) video promotion entitled “Keep calm and offset” has been swiftly condemned by campaigners for downplaying the urgency of the climate challenge and promoting a controversial carbon market.
Published on Facebook and Twitter, the video strikes a jokey tone, showing a man trying to give up his car, flights, steak and even breathing to cut his carbon footprint.
“OK, we know that’s slightly impractical, so here’s the real solution,” says the narrator, directing viewers to a revamped website where they can pay to cancel emission reduction credits issued through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)…
NGO Carbon Market Watch reacted with shock. The Brussels-based NGO is preparing to launch a campaign to end the CDM, citing concerns about its environmental integrity.
The UN is promoting “junk credits,” said policy director Femke de Jong…
The CDM has been dogged by reports of fraud and perverse incentives…
A UN Climate Change spokesperson could not be reached for further comment…
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/08/29/keep-calm-carry-flying-eating-steak-un-climate-change-ad-criticised/
10
29 Aug: ClimateChangeNews: Green fund woes loom over upcoming climate talks
By Megan Darby
Difficulties within the UN Green Climate Fund will bleed into sensitive negotiations on climate change next week in Bangkok…
Diplomats have six days in Bangkok to try to condense a pile of informal notes into a structured text in legal language. The output will form the basis for final talks in Katowice, Poland in December…
Troubles at the GCF, a totem of rich-poor cooperation on climate change, are “not helpful” to this task, said Benito Müller, an Oxford-based specialist in training developing country negotiators. “If the replenishment becomes a failure – we won’t know that for at least a year – then we are in really deep trouble.”…
One of its problems shows no sign of resolution: Donald Trump’s refusal to hand over a promised $2 billion contribution…
Other problems are structural…
Müller proposes some changes to the way it is run to foster a more collegiate atmosphere, ahead of its next meeting in Bahrain in October. These could be as simple as introducing speaking restrictions to cut into an existing “airtime oligarchy”.
“If [the Bahrain board meeting] moves reasonably smoothly, all the doom and gloom right now will be alleviated,” said Müller…
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/08/29/green-fund-woes-loom-upcoming-climate-talks/
10
29 Aug: ClimateChangeNews: Pakistan to apply strict green rules on Chinese coal deals: Imran Khan advisor
The country is locked into “potential disaster” coal projects, says new PM’s climate chief Malik Amin Aslam, promising to make the “best out of a bad situation”
By Zofeen T Ebrahim for Third Pole
Out of the 21 energy projects to be completed on a fast track (by 2019) with a cumulative capacity of 10,400 MW, nine are coal power plants, seven wind power plants, three hydropower, and two are HVDC transmission line projects.
Nearly $35 billion of the $60 billion worth of loans for producing energy from the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) will be used to build new power stations, mainly coal-fired.
The projects completed include two mega coal power plants of 1,320 MW each, one in Punjab’s Sahiwal (commercially operating since May 2017) and the other in Karachi’s Port Qasim (Commercially operating since April 2018) using imported bituminous coal with modern supercritical coal-fired units. According to news reports, the country’s National Accountability Bureau has initiated an alleged corruption probe into both the costly projects.
Another one under completion is in the Thar desert in Sindh, about 400 kilometres from the port city of Karachi. It includes mining and setting up two 330 MW power plants at a cost of $2 billion. Once completed, it will be the first large power generation project using local coal…
The Sindh Engro Coal Mining Company has finally reached the coal seam in the desert. According to the company’s chief executive officer, Shamsuddin Shaikh, by October the company would have dug down to 162 metres to be able to dig up “useful” lignite coal…
Other projects in the pipeline include three 1,320 MW coal power plants. The ones at Rahim Yar Khan (in Punjab), and Hub (in Balochistan) to be completed between December 2018 and August 2019 respectively, will use imported coal. The third one, at Thar Block VI (in Sindh), will use indigenous lignite coal…
Talking to thethirdpole.net, Malik Amin Aslam, the newly appointed advisor to the Pakistani prime minister on climate change, said most existing coal based projects would likely have long-term agreements. This would mean that the new Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) government only had the option of making the “best out of a bad situation”…
There is little doubt that PTI will back the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and by extension, the coal-related projects that go with it, said Kugelman and that it will not “rein in” the coal projects, as that would risk “antagonising” China…
In terms of hydropower there is the 969 MW run-of-the-river Neelum Jhelum hydropower project (in Pakistan administered Kashmir), and the addition of a fourth unit to the Tarbela hydropower plant, contributing an additional 1,410 MW of power. Several other hydropower projects are underway, including a 870 MW hydropower plant in Sukhi Kinari (in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province to be completed by 2021), a 720 MW plant in Karot (to be completed by 2021) and an 1,100 MW plant in Kohala (to be completed by 2023) on Jhelum river in Pakistan administered Kashmir. Two smaller hydropower projects of 80 MW and 100 MW each at Gilgit-Baltistan are also under review.
There is also the 3,600 MW re-gasified liquefied natural gas (RLNG) based power plants in Haveli Bahadur Shah, Bhikki and Balloki (all three in the Punjab province), and four wind power plants in Sindh province – three of 50 MW each in Dadu, Gharo and Sachal – and a 100 MW wind farm at Jhimpir.
Pakistan’s future energy mix is not all coal, but there is no getting away from its dependence on coal just yet.
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/08/29/pakistan-apply-strict-green-rules-chinese-coal-deals-government-advisor/
20
29 Aug: Reuters: French minister’s exit may give EDF’s nuclear plants new lease of life
by Geert De Clercq, Michel Rose
The shock resignation of the French environment minister may mean that EDF can not only extend the lifespan of its ageing reactors but could even build new reactors in France, the world’s most nuclear-reliant nation…
“EDF leadership will be drinking champagne,” said Gerard Magnin, who in 2016 resigned from EDF’s board in disagreement over its all-nuclear strategy.
“Hulot was the last remaining obstacle to a strategy with nuclear as the sole option for security of supply and carbon-free energy,” he told Reuters by phone…
French President Emmanuel Macron is an advocate of nuclear but the popular Hulot served as a counterbalance…
But EDF internal documents show it plans to build two new reactors by 2030 to renew its fleet. EDF CEO Jean-Bernard Levy has said publicly he expects France will eventually build 30 new-generation reactors in decades ahead.
Hulot told the daily Liberation before his resignation that Macron was likely to support those plans…
France has long championed nuclear to secure its energy independence…
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-france-politics-nuclearpower/french-ministers-exit-may-give-edfs-nuclear-plants-new-lease-of-life-idUKKCN1LD27E?rpc=401&
20
climate leaders failing the CAGW mob everywhere:
29 Aug: Bloomberg: Why Coal Power Is Merkel’s Biggest Climate Challenge
By Brian Parkin and William Wilkes
3. How reliant is Germany on coal?
About 120 coal power plants provided 36 percent of Germany’s electricity last year. In 2000, coal provided half of the nation’s power..
4. Can Germany really kick its coal habit?
Weaning the global economy off fossil fuels was never going to be painless, cheap or quick…
5. How is Germany fighting climate change so far?
Germany got 36 percent of its electricity from renewables last year, up from 17 percent in 2010. It also has the highest power prices in Europe. And even with that shift, country is on track to miss its target 2020 to slash total emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels. The coal commission IS supposed to recommend how to make good on those targets while balancing the needs of industry…
6. What do power companies say?
Though united in backing the energy shift, coal plant operators like RWE, Uniper SE and STEAG GmbH say moving too quickly will cause a jump in electricity costs. They also want the coal commission to consider the impact on jobs…
7. How much leverage does the coal lobby have?
Lots. Of the coal commission’s four chairpersons, two are former governors of German states that are among the richest in coal: Saxony and Brandenburg. Those two commissioners are conduits for pressure to keep hard coal and lignite plants running for as long as three decades. And they have a strong argument. Nobody wants soaring power prices or an unreliable grid, which might increase social unrest and boost the populist Alternative for Germany party should tens of thousands of workers lose their jobs in power plants and mines…
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-29/why-coal-power-is-merkel-s-biggest-climate-challenge-quicktake
28 Aug: BusinessGreen: James Murray: Merkel deals blow to hopes of bolder EU climate targets
She added that “many member states already aren’t fulfilling today what they promised”…
27 Aug: EurActiv: Merkel speaks out against more ambitious EU climate targets
By Claire Stam
The environmental organisation Greenpeace sharply criticised Merkel’s course on climate policy. Instead of taking leadership in climate protection in Europe and supporting Germany’s coal phase-out, she now intends to block climate targets at EU level, the NGO criticised.
Merkel now admits that “she herself has become the biggest obstructor of a more ambitious EU climate policy,” Greenpeace said. “This reveals Merkel’s failure on climate policy”.
10
29 Aug: Woornambool Standard: Opposition grows to Bookaar solar farm proposal
Opposition is growing against a 605-hectare solar development planned for farming land near Camperdown.
Bookaar-Camperdown Community Action Group’s Andrew Wilson said since forming the group he had been “blown away” by the number of people voicing their opposition.
“We have been inundated with members, people who are opposing this potential development,” he said…
Mr Wilson was one of five concerned residents who addressed Corangamite Shire councillors at their meeting on Tuesday
Corangamite Shire is due to rule on whether it will grant a planning permit for the development on September 25.
The council has made the unprecedented move of relocating its September meeting, which had been scheduled for Skipton, to Camperdown for the decision.
As of Wednesday afternoon, seven objections to the proposal had been received. Objections close on September 3.
Mr Wilson, a fifth-generation Bookaar farmer who leases 17 per cent of the development area, said change to land use, environmental impact, drainage, glint and glare, land devaluation and fire risk were among the biggest concerns.
He said claims made in proposal documents that the land was of a “secondary-class nature” were “absolute bunkum”.
“This is up with the best farming land in south-west Victoria, the food bowl at the moment of Victoria and one of the only areas in the country which is not in a drought,” he said.
“On this area I grow wheat, canola and faber beans. I’ve always obtained successful crops.”
Mr Wilson said with 700,000 solar panels that will require no water drainage was also a concern for nearby landholders.
“Downstream we will not be able to take this water, it will be an absolute disaster. It will take out bridges, it will take out dams it will take out everything,” he said…
“This is going to benefit one family and one multi-national. It’s not going to benefit anyone else in the community. They will drag all their crap in from China, they will bring guys down from Melbourne and probably do night work. They’re going to wreck our roads, what’s in it for us? There’s absolutely nothing, I don’t see any benefit,” he said…
Action group vice-chair and Bookaar Fire Brigade member Andrew Duynhoven described the project as a “massive industrial installation”, with not enough work done on the environmental impacts, glint and glare and fire risk.
“The proposal has a lot of holes in it, in its form currently. It doesn’t indicate what type of panels, what type of batteries that they will use.”
“I know we are the food bowl… I’m happy to be the food bowl, but I don’t want to be the power bowl.”
Mr Duynhoven said the development’s fire risk was “just unknown”.
“I only hope that when I stood up at the botanical gardens during the St Patrick’s Day fire, when I was part of the group up there wondering how the hell we were going to combat the fire as it was coming up the hill. I hope I don’t have to make that same decision when I’m behind the Bookaar fire shed,” he said.
Darlington Road resident Beth Marburg said her house would be closer to the development than the McArthur family.
“It’s not as if Bookaar is an empty landscape, plenty of people live in Bookaar, many people will be affected by this directly,” she said.
“Our place is a hobby farm and it’s going to destroy the landscape, it’s going to rob us of our rural amenity and it’s going to devalue our property.”
***Infinergy Pacific is hosting two drop-in consultation sessions in Camperdown on Thursday. The first session is from 11am-1pm and the second from 3pm-6.30pm at the Killara Centre.
https://www.standard.net.au/story/5614250/opposition-grows-against-solar-farm-proposal/
20
30 Aug: PopularMechanics: Study Shows How Badly Smog Can Cripple Solar Farms
New research finds that severe air pollution can eliminate all profits from solar panel installations.
by Avery Thompson
A lot can keep solar panels from generating electricity, from cloud cover blocking the sun to simply being nighttime. But according to recent research, one of the biggest obstacles facing solar farms is smog and haze from air pollution.
It’s not surprising that air pollution can make solar panels less effective since it can cut down on visibility and reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the ground…
This new research, from scientists at MIT and Singapore, calculates how much solar energy is lost due to smog in many of the world’s biggest cities. In the city of Delhi, one of the world’s most polluted cities, electricity generation is reduced by more than 10 percent the study finds, which translates to a cost of more than $20 million…
A loss of this size could spell doom for many urban solar farms by seriously inhibiting their ability to turn a profit. Pollution can turn a money-making solar farm into a money sink…
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a22864730/smog-can-cripple-solar-farms/
29 Aug: Science Daily: Air pollution can put a dent in solar power
Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Summary:Air pollution, especially in urban areas, can significantly reduce the power output from solar panels, and needs to be considered when design solar installations in or near cities
FULL STORY: Ian Marius Peters, now an MIT research scientist, was working on solar energy research in Singapore in 2013 when he encountered an extraordinary cloud of pollution. The city was suddenly engulfed in a foul-smelling cloud of haze so thick that from one side of a street you couldn’t see the buildings on the other side, and the air had the acrid smell of burning. The event, triggered by ***forest fires in Indonesia and concentrated by unusual wind patterns, lasted two weeks, quickly causing stores to run out of face masks as citizens snapped them up to aid their breathing.
While others were addressing the public health issues of the thick air pollution, Peters’ co-worker Andre Nobre from Cleantech Energy Corp., whose field is also solar energy, wondered about what impact such hazes might have on the output of solar panels in the area. That led to a years-long project to try to quantify just how urban-based solar installations are affected by hazes, which tend to be concentrated in dense cities.
Now, the results of that research have just been published in the journal Energy & Environmental Science, and the findings show that these effects are indeed substantial…
Overall, they project, the potential losses “could easily amount to hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars annually.”…
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180829115514.htm
***same problem with bushfires, dust storms – and not only in or near cities.
20
comment in moderation re: 30 Aug: PopularMechanics: Study Shows How Badly Smog Can Cripple Solar Farms
30
Just listening to ABC radio and Dr Karl says we should just trust the science on climate change / globull warming .
Someone rang in and asked for empirical evidence to prove the theory and straight away he fired back “what’s the difference between empirical and the evidence ” then went on a long winded tangent that basically said the heat coming through the atmosphere is able to pass straight through Co2 because it’s hot but as it bounces back up it gets cooler then trapped .
70
It seems that Dr Karl K is trying to outdo the Pope for the title of Scientist of The Year.
It’s hard to believe what comes out of the mouths of public figures.
KK
60
KK
After noticing them for around 50 years with most of them it isn’t
40
RR
He’d have a conniption if you fed him this I’d guess from James Delingpole
“It’s not science I don’t trust – it’s the scientists”
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/its-not-science-i-dont-trust-its-the-scientists/
30
“As campaigners and thinkers who are led by science and the precautionary principle, and who wish to debate the real and vital issues arising from human-triggered climate change, we will not assist in creating the impression that climate denial should be taken seriously by lending credence to its proponents, by entertaining ideas that lack any basis in fact,” they wrote.
Ref: https://dailycaller.com/2018/08/27/climate-alarmists-global-warming/
Signatories seem unaware that the “precautionary principle” has more to do with bias/prejudice than with science.
60
The precautionary principle requires a correct assessment of the cost as well as the risk. What’s the point of taking a precautionary principle to action when the cost will destroy the economy and the lives of many people? The cost of adapting to any hypothetical climate change would actually be far less costly and more prudent if the time comes.
30
The Australian (no headline showingin results) 23 mins ago – Paris emissions target role shifts … Angus Taylor’s sole aim is cutting electricity prices as PM Scott Morrison shifts emission … Price cuts over Paris emissions
VIDEO: 1min36secs: 30 Aug: Guardian: Angus Taylor: ‘I am not sceptical about climate science’
In a speech in Sydney, new energy minister Angus Taylor denies being a climate change sceptic. But he adds that ‘I am deeply sceptical of the economics of so many of the emissions-reduction programs dreamed up by politicians, vested interests, technocrats and politicians around the world’
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/video/2018/aug/30/i-am-not-sceptical-about-climate-science-angus-taylor-video
30 Aug: AFR: Don’t go it alone on energy, business leaders tell Scott Morrison
Business leaders urged the Morrison government to return to the negotiating table and pursue bipartisan energy policy with the states rather than “going it alone” and threatening “big stick” policies to get electricity prices down, which they say history shows do not work…
In his first speech in the role, Mr Taylor omitted any mention of the wind power industry and said his priority was to get electricity prices down by ending moratoria on new coal and gas extraction, underwriting new “stable” generation such as upgrades to legacy generators, settling default retail prices and cracking down on “price gouging” and market manipulation by big generators under pain of fines and US-style trust busting powers…
Ross Edwards, a senior executive at EnergyAustralia, welcomed Mr Taylor’s focus on getting prices down and re-establishing the confidence to invest as a central goal of any energy market reforms the government may make…
https://www.afr.com/news/dont-go-it-alone-on-energy-business-leaders-tell-scott-morrison-20180830-h14qhm
50
O/T BUT
“‘Climategate 4’ email dump about to happen – Mann’s cohorts lose in court”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/30/climategate-4-email-dump-about-to-happen-manns-cohorts-lose-in-court/
40
I can already hear their excuse – the dog ate the emails.
30
I’m guessing this might be a problem as there will be cross references to the Climategate releases
30
Pack of dogs ate our emails 🙂
20
What part of ‘CO2 levels have NO correlation with earth’s temperature’ dont they get?..
Also “‘Climategate 4’ email dump about to happen – Mann’s cohorts lose in court” GOODY!
[AGW (renamed ‘climate change’) the greatest deliberate science [snip] in all history].
10
As the earth warmed there has been an increase in cloud cover.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DhIMgNQVMAA4k76.jpg
10
While temperatures are stable and not climbing at all for the last twenty years, the last resort is to say it’s still warmer than 1980.
After twenty years of no warming anyone arguing Global Warming knows the jig is up.
Of course they don’t want to debate it. Would you?
There never was any science. There never was a debate between equally qualified scientists.
The fact is man made global warming made Michael Mann, Tim Flannery, Al Gore, Pachauri, Christiana Figueres and lawyer Johnathan Porritt and thousands more rich and famous. Degrees, books, chairmanships, fame and fortune. Respect and recognition. Champions. They can all retire now, satisfied that they have done well. Too bad about all their victims.
40
When it becomes apparent that the world temperature is actually dropping sharply, as is predicted by the only group who can fit the last 2500 years accurately with science, a lot of Climate Change people are going to retire. So they are firing up #metoo, all the rest of the anti Democracy stuff as they dream of the socialist state.
I was amused this week that one of the early accusers of producer Weinstein and his casting couch (shock, horror) who was a virginal 21 year old looking for a part, might herself be charged with underage activity at 37 with a 16 year old. More than one. The commentator wants a new campaign, #mentoo.
31
My point here is that the virtuous self righteous anti Trump Hollywood knew all about the casting couch. In fact everyone did. Now they pretend it is all news to them. The degree of hypocrisy in Hollywood and the media is beyond belief. Climate is not the only subject where the jet set are just acting.
21