Resisting Climate Hysteria

[wayneL]

If your convictions are strong enough and you are elequent then there is money to be obtained.by publishing them from a number of shadowy organisations. Who knows ? If you are persuasive enough and form a philosophy then you could set up a religion like Ron Hubbard. Go for it, Cynic.

Speaking of shadowy organisations, how about The Climate Council that surreptitiously (But amateurishly, so got busted) deleted Ms Curry as detailed just above?

How about the Pacific Institute?

On Thursday, March 24th, POLITICO announced disgraced climate scientist Peter Gleick has stepped down as president of the Pacific Institute, though he will remain there as a researcher and fundraiser. Interestingly, no successor has been named, so “the search for a new president is underway.” What was the hurry?

In 2012, Gleick stole the identity of a Heartland board member (committing identity theft, a federal crime) and used it to commit a second crime (stealing and revealing confidential documents from a competitor, industrial espionage). He confessed to both crimes, but not to a third crime, libel, which he very likely committed by forging a document and lying repeatedly to his allies ”” and then to the general public and to his own board of directors ”” about the true origins of that document. He has yet to confess to that crime. This whole hoary incident is called Fakegate and is documented on this site.

The Heartland Institute, Gleick’s victim, carefully documented Gleick’s crimes and tried to persuade the U.S. Attorney for Northern Illinois to prosecute him, but failed. At the time, we couldn’t understand why: Gleick confessed to committing crimes, and the crimes he committed caused great damage to Heartland’s reputation and to the wider world of public policy debate. Letting him go unpunished would set a terrible precedent: Groups that support different perspectives on controversial issues are now apparently free to break the law to attack and discredit their opponents.

 

[explod]

Speaking of shadowy organisations, how about The Climate Council that surreptitiously (But amateurishly, so got busted) deleted Ms Curry as detailed just above?

How about the Pacific Institute?

Sounds to me like he was an undercover working for the oil lobby.

 

[wayneL]

Sounds to me like he was an undercover working for the oil lobby.

Okay plod, pinching myself.... WTF????

Who was working undercover?

 

[explod]

Sounds to me like he was an undercover working for the oil lobby.

Climate Council, Pacific Institue, all infiltrated by oil lobby FBI to destroy credibilty of climate change

 

[Tisme]

Climate Council, Pacific Institue, all infiltrated by oil lobby FBI to destroy credibilty of climate change

I don't think anyone denies climate changes....it's more playing the man who is carrying the message that is contentious and whether that message has correct cause and solution.... that and a lot of Henny Pennys doing battle with a lot of self professed debunkers and the rest of us are Cocky Lockys.

 

[wayneL]

Climate Council, Pacific Institue, all infiltrated by oil lobby FBI to destroy credibilty of climate change

Okay, I'm still at a loss. *Who* are these "oil lobby" infiltrators?

 

[trainspotter]

Nurse .... NURSE ....

 

[explod]

From a bit of facebook chat today:

"Just in case you were worried that our federal government weren't taking climate change seriously, you'll be relieved to know that a Senate Committee report has 'examined the possibilities for reducing greenhouse gas emissiond in Australia, and makes hard recommendations for achieving these greenhouse gas reductions. The Committee concluded that the greenhouse effect is real after examining the scientific evidence and from there, working towards finding practical and affordable solutions'.

That report was tabled on 12th February 1991, so I'm sure we'll be getting on to it anytime now. Just as well I recognised it was real early enough"

 

[noco]

From a bit of facebook chat today:

"Just in case you were worried that our federal government weren't taking climate change seriously, you'll be relieved to know that a Senate Committee report has 'examined the possibilities for reducing greenhouse gas emissiond in Australia, and makes hard recommendations for achieving these greenhouse gas reductions. The Committee concluded that the greenhouse effect is real after examining the scientific evidence and from there, working towards finding practical and affordable solutions'.

That report was tabled on 12th February 1991, so I'm sure we'll be getting on to it anytime now. Just as well I recognised it was real early enough"

No doubt the Senate committee would have been dominated by the Greens and Labor...Who was on the committee plod?

 

[explod]

No doubt the Senate committee would have been dominated by the Greens and Labor...Who was on the committee plod?

Apparently pretty even noco. Margarette Thatcher in United Kingdom was a very big influence on this acceptance that there was an established problem but the money lobby destroyed it all.

Your mob are run by the wealthier lobbyists and the ordinary people, that you call commos, do not stand a chance. And for the record state Alp govmints, victoria and queensland are supporting coal expansion. So a lot of your rantings and large quotes cannot be taken seriously.

 

[noco]

Apparently pretty even noco. Margarette Thatcher in United Kingdom was a very big influence on this acceptance that there was an established problem but the money lobby destroyed it all.

Your mob are run by the wealthier lobbyists and the ordinary people, that you call commos, do not stand a chance. And for the record state Alp govmints, victoria and queensland are supporting coal expansion. So a lot of your rantings and large quotes cannot be taken seriously.

Pretty even ha....A little bit of research indicates 3 Labor...1 Green ....2 Liberals....That is 2 to1 on the Climate Change committee......Looks like leftist domination to me.

 

[explod]

Pretty even ha....A little bit of research indicates 3 Labor...1 Green ....2 Liberals....That is 2 to1 on the Climate Change committee......Looks like leftist domination to me.

Would not describe them as very left back then, Thatcher certainly was not. Though not part of the Aussie scene the point is the evidence was and remains overwhelming. The distortions were introduced as the lobby groups began to donate big to political parties and many scientists rely on government funding for thier research. CSIRO cut back because this right facist government does not want people to know.

Have you picked up and read that book I recommended to you noco, a few times but you never respond. "The Sixth Extinction was on the science of our current situation. In great annotated detail is discusses the core samples taken in Antartica which jwere found to have been in place and solid for many millions of years, so to say a bit of el Nino and melting happens often is pure crapola. Currently the bottoms of the permafrost are melting and releasing methane which in turn is now accelerating the global warming.

 

[ghotib]

Pretty even ha....A little bit of research indicates 3 Labor...1 Green ....2 Liberals....That is 2 to1 on the Climate Change committee......Looks like leftist domination to me.

A little bit more research would have been useful Noco:

Plod refers to a Senate Committee report tabled 12 February 1991 (hereinafter The Plod Report).

1. The Plod Report was the work of the Senate Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, not a "Climate Change committee". In 1990 its members were:

Senator B.K. Childs (ALP, NSW) (Chair)
Senator B.R. Archer (LP, TAS)
Senator the Hon. P.E. Baume (LP, NSW)
Senator R.L.D. Boswell (NPA, QLD)
Senator B.R. Burns (ALP, QLD)
Senator J.R. Coulter (AD, SA)
Senator R.A. Crowley (ALP, SA)
Senator J.R. Devereux (ALP, TAS)

i.e. ALP 4, Coalition 3, Democrat 1. Government majority and Democrat wild card, though of course in committee balance of power isn't relevant.

2. The Australian Greens party was formed in 1992, more than a year after The Plod Report was tabled. No Greens were involved in the report.

3. As far as I can see there has never been a Senate "Climate Change committee". You might have been looking at the Senate Select Committee on Climate Change Policy, which reported in November 2009. But that had 10 members where you only refer to eight, and really 18 years is surely beyond the time travelling abilities even of an Australian Green. Even a female Australian Green from Tasmania. FWIW the members were:

Senator the Hon Richard Colbeck, Chair, Tasmania, LP
Senator Christine Milne, Deputy Chair, Tasmania, AG
Senator the Hon Ronald Boswell, Queensland, NATS
Senator Doug Cameron, New South Wales, ALP
Senator Michaelia Cash, Western Australia, LP
Senator David Feeney, Victoria, ALP
Senator Mark Furner, Queensland ALP
Senator the Hon Ian Macdonald, Queensland LP
Senator Louise Pratt, Western Australia, ALP
Senator Nick Xenophon, South Australia, IND

That's ALP 4, Coalition 4, Australian Greens 1, Independent 1. You'll remember that the dissenting report from this committee came from the 4 ALP (i.e. government) senators, which strongly suggests that the views of the committee were far more diverse than a simple left V right. As is usually the case when grownups discuss complex issues.

If anyone is still reading, I found all the committee information on the Australian Parliament website (www.aph.gov.au), which is complicated to navigate and painfully slow on my painful broadband connection.

 

[orr]

A little bit more research would have been useful Noco:



If anyone is still reading, I found all the committee information on the Australian Parliament website (www.aph.gov.au), which is complicated to navigate and painfully slow on my painful broadband connection.

I did and appreciate the effort Thimker; And fear not our 'enlightened' current political overlords are hurrying us toward internet infrastructure on par, almost, with Zambia. I like to think of it, affectionatly, as 'Fibrosis to the no-nodes'....

 

[ghotib]

I did and appreciate the effort Thimker; And fear not our 'enlightened' current political overlords are hurrying us toward internet infrastructure on par, almost, with Zambia. I like to think of it, affectionatly, as 'Fibrosis to the no-nodes'....

Fibres up the Nose?? Such strange affection

 

[basilio]

Another paper has been published in Nature which suggest the Antarctic ice sheet could break up far more quickly than currently expected.

Climate Model Predicts West Antarctic Ice Sheet Could Melt Rapidly

By JUSTIN GILLISMARCH 30, 2016
Continue reading the main story
Share This Page

For half a century, climate scientists have seen the West Antarctic ice sheet, a remnant of the last ice age, as a sword of Damocles hanging over human civilization.

The great ice sheet, larger than Mexico, is thought to be potentially vulnerable to disintegration from a relatively small amount of global warming, and capable of raising the sea level by 12 feet or more should it break up. But researchers long assumed the worst effects would take hundreds ”” if not thousands ”” of years to occur.

Now, new research suggests the disaster scenario could play out much sooner.

Continued high emissions of heat-trapping gases could launch a disintegration of the ice sheet within decades, according to a study published Wednesday, heaving enough water into the ocean to raise the sea level as much as three feet by the end of this century.

With ice melting in other regions, too, the total rise of the sea could reach five or six feet by 2100, the researchers found. That is roughly twice the increase reported as a plausible worst-case scenario by a United Nations panel just three years ago, and so high it would likely provoke a profound crisis within the lifetimes of children being born today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/31/science/global-warming-antarctica-ice-sheet-sea-level-rise.html

 

[explod]

In my view political actions and behaviour have everything to do with the climate change debate.

From Clarissa Waters 24th Feb 2016

"For every $1 they donate to the old parties, fossil fuel companies get $2000 back in government handouts and subsidies. What do the Libs and Labour get? Massive election warchests and cushy jobs working for coal, oil and gas companies.

 

[explod]

"WE SCIENTISTS DON'T KNOW


I used to think the top environmental problems were biodiversity loss, ecosystems collapse and climate change.

I thought that with 30 years of good science we could address those problems.

But I was wrong.

The top envioronmental problems are selfishness, greed and apathy...
... and to deal with those we need a spritual and cultural transformation

-and we scientists don't know how to do that. " Gus Speth.

So I am convinced that the only current alternative here in Australia is to join the growing support for the Greens. And by the way they do not accept donations or monies from the corporate sector.

 

[Logique]

The Greens are part of the Coalition now aren't they? In Victoria anyway.

Here are the Greens not accepting corporate sponsorship:

Web millionaire bankrolled Greens - January 8, 2011
SMH, Paddy Manning: http://www.smh.com.au/national/web-millionaire-bankrolled-greens-20110107-19iw9.html

A MULTIMILLIONAIRE internet entrepreneur worried about climate change bankrolled the Greens' federal election surge last year by making the largest single political donation in Australian history.

Wotif founder Graeme Wood, whose wealth is estimated at $372 million, gave $1.6 million to fund the Greens' television advertising campaign, helping to significantly increase votes for the party in key states. The Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate from mid-year....

 

[explod]

The Greens are part of the Coalition now aren't they? In Victoria anyway.

Here are the Greens not accepting corporate sponsorship:

Yes, do recall that now. Should have qualified it to the oil, gas and coal industry. There is little doubt that clean energy such as Momentum will increasingly move to support the Greens.

They do not have coalition type agreements wih labour or libs. In fact the ALP can them here in Victoria at every opportunity.