Resisting Climate Hysteria

[Julia]

Has to be, that's the survival technique of being in politics. Show me one that is not. Have to play whatever ball is thrown and play it hard.

So what.

"So what?" Where is all your previously espoused idealism, explod?

That's an incredibly cynical comment and unworthy of you.

I don't believe the voting public have entirely given up on the hope for some level of honesty and integrity amongst government.
But certainly, there's little evidence of it amongst the present bunch.

I can't think of anyone, other than perhaps Nick Xenophon, who might genuinely have the good of Australia at heart. For the others, it's all about their own egocentric search for power.

The Greens engage in it with a veneer of wanting to be seen to unselfishly care for the planet and suck a lot of people in, but in the end it's about power for them too.

We are in Far Far Away Land, where seemingly, climate is not longer an issue.

What? Climate is no longer an issue? For god's sake, we are hearing about little else!

 

[sails]

...Most useful thing you can do in the education of any child is what my grade 5 and 6 teacher was really trying to achieve. Teach them to get of their ***, do something about it rather than whinging (absolutely his key point), think for themselves, do proper research into how things really are, and don't just believe what they are told. I've kept that principle ever since, and it has served me well thus far.

Smurf, thanks for your detailed post...

You certainly had a wonderful teacher in grade 5. I especially liked your last paragraph where you were taught to think for yourself and not just believe everything you were told. Very sound advice.

While this granddaughter is being encouraged to think for herself, I wonder about the other impressionable youngsters who haven't been taught to think more objectively.

When she brought this work to my place for help because she struggles with writing essays and got into trouble because she hadn't finished it in school. In fact this teacher ripped her work out of her book because it wasn't good enough. At least she wasn't detonated as per 10:10 - nevertheless it hasn't warmed me any further to this one-sided teaching especially to kids .

Thankfully not much longer to go with this relief teacher. But how much brain washing of her own beliefs does she do to kids who don't question as she could have access to many hundreds of young children in the course of her relief teaching.

 

[Logique]

This seemingly unilateral proposed withdrawal of water rights by the Feds.

It's good that South Australia finally gets a better deal on water. But for generational farmers? Such times deliver extreme rhetoric, but you hear '...will meant the death of towns...tripling of food prices...farmers will walk off...houses plunge in value...now trapped here...'

Save for those in or near the Murray Darling Basin, you can't imagine the despair of farmers and multiplier industries in small agricultural and irrigation towns like Griffith and Mildura.

Make a submission says Tony Burke.

What I'm saying is: it's about the way change is managed. It's no good skulking around the inner city making ideological pronouncements about how things ought to be, in farming, forestry, mining, fisheries, coal and uranium mines.

You can't go around shutting down industries forever. Inevitably there are economic and social consequences. The Greens hour in the sun will be curtailed very quickly unless they wake up to this. And Labor's with them.

The despair in the bush will turn to anger soon enough.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Too Hot for the Alarmists?

On Joanne Nova's blog she picks up on the ongoing dispute between NZ Climate Science Coalition v's the National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) who claims NZ has been warming at 0.92 °C per 100 years.

"But when some independent minded chaps in New Zealand graphed the raw NZ data they found the thermometers show NZ has only warmed by a statistically non-significant 0.06 °C. They asked for answer and got nowhere until they managed to get the light of legal pressure onto NIWA to force it to reply honestly. Reading between the lines, it’s obvious NIWA can’t explain nor defend the adjustments."​

Since the NIWA data has influnced NZ climate policy there could be a significant legal battle brewing.

As some on this thread keep pointing out - the climate consenus scientists have proved there is global warming, and yes I agree that the warming is man made - specifically by those who are 'adjusting' temperature records. The consenus science continues to unravel....

 

[Logique]

Extract from source: http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/

Hal Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, resigns from the American Physical Society in protest at its attempts to shut down debate on its global warming stand:

"....It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.

Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist....

...I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation [from the American Physical Society]"

....A short precis of the author’s qualifications:
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making).

 

[Knobby22]

So Ozwave guy? Where have the glaciers in New Zealand gone?

Maybe they should return in a puff of logic?

 

[wayneL]

Yup!

The wheels are falling off the whole "science is settled" BS.

The political bandwagon is proving to be more robust at this stage however. I fear derailing that particular gravy train will be a whole lot uglier.

In the meantime a whole host current and important environmental issues remain un-addressed as the world's attention is diverted by the polarized co2 farce.

I wonder if seeing that the ecofascists have long wanted to jail and/or execute the so called "deniers", whether they will report to police stations for their own arrest as the scam is gradually exposed.

I do not support arrest myself (unless there has been genuine fraud), but I sure am angry enough to point out their gross hypocrisy and enjoy their humiliation.

But the sooner the whole thing is unravelled, the sooner genuine issues can attract the attention they deserve.

 

[Julia]

This seemingly unilateral proposed withdrawal of water rights by the Feds.

It's good that South Australia finally gets a better deal on water. But for generational farmers? Such times deliver extreme rhetoric, but you hear '...will meant the death of towns...tripling of food prices...farmers will walk off...houses plunge in value...now trapped here...'

Save for those in or near the Murray Darling Basin, you can't imagine the despair of farmers and multiplier industries in small agricultural and irrigation towns like Griffith and Mildura.

Make a submission says Tony Burke.

What I'm saying is: it's about the way change is managed. It's no good skulking around the inner city making ideological pronouncements about how things ought to be, in farming, forestry, mining, fisheries, coal and uranium mines.

You can't go around shutting down industries forever. Inevitably there are economic and social consequences. The Greens hour in the sun will be curtailed very quickly unless they wake up to this. And Labor's with them.

The despair in the bush will turn to anger soon enough.

I'm very ignorant about the whole Murray-Darling Basin situation, so welcome any input from those who understand what's proposed.

But, on the face of it, taking up to 45% of water allocation away from agricultural land (do I have this right?) is surely going to drive a lot of these producers out of business. As a consequence, aren't prices of commodities grown there, plus food, going to rise exponentially?

Is the alternative, i.e. doing nothing and hoping for continued rain, eventually to result in the same loss of productivity if that rain doesn't come, and allow the river to flow as it once did?

It seems so easy for the city based Greens et al to ride roughshod over the lives of the people in the small towns whose lives will be so hugely impacted.
Perhaps it's necessary?

Is it feasible for, say, the cotton and rice growing areas to instead be given over to producing food for Australians, rather than crops that are mainly destined for export? Aren't both cotton and rice very water hungry, or is this a myth?

Would be interested in others' comments on this.
I'm just more and more concerned that the whole country is rolling over to the damn Greens who don't care about anything other than their own ideology.

 

[noco]

I'm very ignorant about the whole Murray-Darling Basin situation, so welcome any input from those who understand what's proposed.

But, on the face of it, taking up to 45% of water allocation away from agricultural land (do I have this right?) is surely going to drive a lot of these producers out of business. As a consequence, aren't prices of commodities grown there, plus food, going to rise exponentially?

Is the alternative, i.e. doing nothing and hoping for continued rain, eventually to result in the same loss of productivity if that rain doesn't come, and allow the river to flow as it once did?

It seems so easy for the city based Greens et al to ride roughshod over the lives of the people in the small towns whose lives will be so hugely impacted.
Perhaps it's necessary?

Is it feasible for, say, the cotton and rice growing areas to instead be given over to producing food for Australians, rather than crops that are mainly destined for export? Aren't both cotton and rice very water hungry, or is this a myth?

Would be interested in others' comments on this.
I'm just more and more concerned that the whole country is rolling over to the damn Greens who don't care about anything other than their own ideology.

Yes Julia, the darn Greens are getting too much say for liking. They have got the Labor Party by the "SHORT AND CURLIES".

Have you ever heard of the Bradfield scheme? It was an engineering sytem to divert water from North Queensland Waters into Lake Eyre. The amount of water which would have reached Lake Eyre would have created its own inland rainfall and no doubt that rain may have fell in the Muarry/Darling Basin, because most of the air flow is directed to that area from Lake Eyre.

The Burdekin dam is currently overflowing at this time of the year and flowing out to sea. Governments have talked for years about rasing the height of the Burdekin Dam by 2 metres which would have quadrupled the capacity.

Various Governments have spent billions upon billions of tax payers money on stupid desalinisation plants instead of on schemes like the Bradfield scheme.
The desal plant on the Gold coast is only some 5 years old and is a rust bucket already costing millions of dollars to maintain.

We can find $43 billion for NBN, yet we can't inject such funds into water. OMG. woopee for the Greens!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.johnston-independent.com/bradfield_scheme_a.html

 

[OzWaveGuy]

The political bandwagon is proving to be more robust at this stage however. I fear derailing that particular gravy train will be a whole lot uglier.

In the meantime a whole host current and important environmental issues remain un-addressed as the world's attention is diverted by the polarized co2 farce.

Yes agreed on both points. The consensus science has failed to prove AGW, hence the recent policy decisions by labor/greens look to try and force the "consensus" through (again).

 

[So_Cynical]

So Ozwave guy? Where have the glaciers in New Zealand gone?

Maybe they should return in a puff of logic?

So any deniers want to comment on the NZ glacier situation? i spent half an hour googling and found the usual 19 outa 20 sites backing up the global glacial retreat story and the usual 1 outa 20 sites in total denial.

Oh that's right i keep forgetting that half the deniers are only in half denial, cos its like getting warmer but its all natural.

 

[wayneL]

So any deniers want to comment on the NZ glacier situation?

Well there's no deniers here.

But in about 2mins I found this FWIW

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=10569888

 

[OzWaveGuy]

There's some obvious confusion on this thread between natural varibilty of climate (that's well documented) and the "consensus" theory of AGW by the IPCC - folks, temperatures don't stay flat over long or even short periods of time, believe it or not, but temperatures do change and are shown to ocillate. Glaciers around the world have been ocillating between advancement & retreat since the late 1800's (and of course over much longer periods of time: eg little ice age, and longer)

Whilst not directly covering NZ glacier movements (Wayne has provided some insight above), I thought this article covered the topic in good detail... http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/...ice-in-relation-to-north-atlantic-sst-record/

"Compared to North Atlantic SST record, the period with most glacier growth/retreat lags the ocean by 5 years, matching the lag in surface record. Extremely warm European summer in 2003 is clearly recognizable, when all observed glaciers retreated. But similar period occurred in 1945-1950, followed by years with prevailing growth in late 70ties/early 80ties. This glacier behavior is also discussed in recent study “100 year mass changes in the Swiss Alps linked to the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillations” . Based on the AMO peak in 2005 and observed 5-year lag, rebound of Alpine glaciers in the near future is expected."​

Use of the "Glacier retreat" argument is used and misused extensively in the IPCC AR4 reports as documented across the net.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Too Hot for the Alarmists?

On Joanne Nova's blog she picks up on the ongoing dispute between NZ Climate Science Coalition v's the National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) who claims NZ has been warming at 0.92 °C per 100 years.

Alan Jones talks to Rodney Hide – NZ politician on carbon tax and touches on the fraud above.

 

[noco]

Julia Gillard states Climate Change is real and it is real, but it is not caused by CO2 emmissions. Tony Abbott says it is "crap" which I am sure he refers to latter.

My visit to New Zealand 1979 indicated the glaciers in the south island had been receding for decades before.
The link below says it all. We should have a Royal Commission to reveal the truth.

http://www.corybernardi.com/2010/10...m_campaign=Feed:+CoryBernardi+(Cory+Bernardi)

 

[Julia]

Alan Jones talks to Rodney Hide – NZ politician on carbon tax and touches on the fraud above.

Oz, this link goes to a discussion about "RUOK Day" and suicide, a discussion between Alan Jones and Prof McGorrie on mental health.

Would be interested in the original discussion you referred to on carbon tax in NZ.

With thanks.

 

[sails]

... We should have a Royal Commission to reveal the truth...

Noco, I agree with you but can't see the GG authorizing a Royal Commission into something that labor party are hell bent on implementing. Could put a bit of strain family events...

I suspect the GG would prefer to stay clear of anything so political.

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Oz, this link goes to a discussion about "RUOK Day" and suicide, a discussion between Alan Jones and Prof McGorrie on mental health.

Would be interested in the original discussion you referred to on carbon tax in NZ.

With thanks.

Apologies, here we go http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_podcasting&task=playaudio&id=2&f=13&Itemid=41

 

[OzWaveGuy]

IPCC Changes History

As us humans can be a forgetful bunch sometimes and we can often overlook what our non-elected global prophets for the common good have provided - I thought I'd add a summary of the changing historical record provided in the IPCC AR reports since there is belief on this thread that temperature changes are "unnatural" and "illogical" and the IPCC must be believed.

AR1 and AR2 correctly estimated the global and European long term temperatures, but in AR3 (with the famous Hockey Stick) the temperatures are flat and explode upwards mid-twentieth century. Why the change?

The Medieval Warm period was a global phenomenon, so why flat line it out of the recent report?

 

[jonojpsg]

INterestingly the Tasmanian gov has just decided to leave a few residents in the lurch subject to coastal erosion. Basically the minister said if they jumped in for some they would open up a whole Pandoras box of potential future claims for help... makes sense I guess, if people want to build in coastal areas they take that risk.

The book Half Gone, which was more about Peak Oil, had a good discussion about the role of the big reinsurance companies in addressing cllimate change - but I haven't seen any action from them regarding this so maybe the market is telling us something?? Still if the insurance companies stop issuing cover on property within certain limits of the coast this could have a huge impact on prices, etc.