Either there are a lot more skeptics than believers, or the skeptics are more likely to be on the net.
Some polls you may want to take part in (which are registering around 3 out 4 votes for skeptics).
The Greens are running scared.
The Herald: Do you support a carbon tax?
813 votes and 71% say NO.
The Greens: Do you support the Greens’ plan on emissions trading?
Nearly 2000 votes, and 80% say NO.
SkyNews: Do you support a price on carbon?
Unknown number of votes and 87% say NO.
UPDATE: And they are running scared.
The Greens poll has been up for around 2 weeks, and I linked to it today, and within hours it’s gone (h/t cohenite, alan and andy). I’ve got the screenshot.
Keith points out that NINE MSN is running a poll 
“Should an election be called before a carbon tax is introduced?” (See the thin line strip with a question below the main news photo).
YES 105,454 NO 25,043 (81% say YES)
h/t Keith and all the other good people who helped. Sorry I wish I could find the original emails!
Being against a carbon tax doesn’t necessarily mean being a skeptic, however it does mean something very important: Australians are not as stupid as the government assume they are.
50
Jo – Without people like you and without the internet the agw shucksters probably would have pulled their scam off.
40
Appears the Greens and the SkyNews polls are closed, msybe they didn’t like the “no” responses
30
Nine MSN running a poll : should an election be called before a carbon tax is introduced?
Currently at 1-00pm
YES 36,856
NO 8,294
http://ninemsn.com.au
10
Yeah well if the extinguishment of commentry from Paul Howes & the comments of the CFMEU head in SA are anything to go by the ALP political party machine is on high alert.
I wonder if any of their Spin Masters are either watching these polls or have a planned response?
10
The way I see it, there are two options:
1) Push the tax on carbon based life forms in, get your backside handed back to you at the next election (even more so than if you hadn’t), and see it repealed by the next government
2) Call a referendum
I prefer option 2 as it might actually force an even handed debate
It’s so basic, even someone with a Bachelor of B.A. or in parliament can understand it. I’m sure referendum would be in their vocabulary, surely?
10
Still can’t believe I heard this on the 2 o’clock news. Some lying ALP member declaring that they have a mandate to impose this tax on us. They went to the election with a policy to do something about about climate change he reckons. .Useless discussing trying to discuss anything with such a mindset.
10
The Liberal Party must be getting worried too. The way I see it, the Labor Party is falling on its sword. The party bet it all on the win. The Liberals followed the group think and the opinion polls to a lesser extent and bet on the same horse for a place. Unfortunately the show horse is pulling up lame.
I’ve never been a supporter of the National Party, but I am now. I’d be only too happy to see the Labor Party and the Liberal Party relegated to the political sidelines for a decade or so to rotate through a generation of limp conformists. Hopefully both groups can find someone with independent thinking who is not afraid to speak up. May have to do some poaching from the National Party.
20
for argument’s sake, let’s say CAGW is true….
WE STILL DON’T WANT THE GOVT OR ANYONE ELSE COMMODIFYING CARBON DIOXIDE. GET IT!
20
If the ABC was relevant, Part 32.
(The Repairman)
(SCENE: Front door of BRYAN’s home. Door bell rings. BRYAN answers door. It is JOHN.)
John: G’day. I’m here about the climate.
Bryan: What climate?
John: Your climate. Our climate. THE climate. I’m here to fix it.
Bryan: What’s wrong with it?
John: It’s buggered. Absolutely buggered.
Bryan: No it isn’t. I was using it this morning.
John: What for?
Bryan: For drying the washing out the back.
John: Spoken like a true layperson! What you have just witnessed was not the working of an healthy climate, but a clear manifestation of catastrophic global warming! Scientists warn that if current trends continue, solar drying of your clothing will cause it to be not only dried, but pressed and lightly toasted as well!
Bryan: You know what?
John: What?
Bryan: I don’t believe you.
John: You have to believe me!
Bryan: Why?
John: The IPCC, the climate science, the models…
Bryan: What about the models?
John: They’re excellent models. Very robust.
Bryan: What makes you say that?
John: They all reach the same conclusion – they agree with each other.
Bryan: They don’t happen to use the same input numbers, perchance?
John: There is a level of collaborative effort, yes.
Bryan: And they all use atmospheric CO2 level as a major input?
John: Of course.
Bryan: Why’s that?
John: Because atmospheric CO2 level is a significant driver of global climate.
Bryan: So what do all of these “robust” models conclude?
John: That atmospheric CO2 level is a significant driver of global climate.
Bryan: Funny that. You know what?
John: What?
Bryan: I don’t believe you.
John: But the climate record! The long term climate record!
Bryan: Which goes back how far?
John: As early as 1850 – the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.
Bryan: Even though global temperatures have gone down, as well as up, during that period?
John: The downward cycles were simply the earth’s natural variation.
Bryan: But the upward cycles are global warming?
John: Absolutely.
Bryan: No chance that the upward cycles aren’t natural variation as well?
John: Of course not! They wouldn’t be man-made then, would they? And anyway, the trend for the last 150 years clearly shows a long term warming trend, interspersed by some decades of cooling.
Bryan: Sort of expected, really.
John: Che?
Bryan: Sort of expected. If you’re coming out of a little ice age, then you expect things to be warming up. Otherwise you’d still be in the little ice age, wouldn’t you?
John: I think you’ll find that the little ice age (LIA) did not, in fact, occur. Plus, it was only a localised event of a strictly transient nature. The peer-reviewed literature clearly demonstrates a stable global climate up to the time of the Industrial Revolution.
Bryan: You mean the hockey stick? Don’t make me laugh!
John: This is no laughing matter, my good man. The peer-reviewed literature clearly shows that temperature was benign and stable until the intervention of mankind.
Bryan: You mean YOUR peer review literature? As reviewed by people who are paid to agree with it? As discussed in the Climategate© emails? As distinct from the geological, sociological, archeological, oceanographic and historical evidence to the contrary?
John: That comment was not very helpful.
Bryan: Suit yourself, but I still don’t believe you.
John: What about the rising sea levels? You can’t deny the rising sea levels. Scientists believe that sea levels around the globe are rising due to the effect of the melting ice caps.
Bryan: Of course. And they’ve been rising for about 8000 years – just after the end of the last major ice age. Haven’t noticed anyone taking a walk from Russia to Alaska lately, have you?
John: The Barents Sea would be a bit of a problem, no.
Bryan: That’s because rising sea levels covered the land bridge a few thousand years ago. Well before SUV’s became fashionable, you’d agree? Looks like natural variation to me.
John: I reject your reality and substitute my own.
Bryan: You’re a loony!
John: No, I’m a Climate Scientist. And if you don’t believe me, just look at all the catastrophic climate events over the last 20 years. The droughts. The heat waves. The glaciers. The snowstorms. The floods. Can’t you believe your own eyes?
Bryan: So global warming causes droughts? AND floods? Heatwaves AND snowstorms?
John: The floods and snowstorms were only weather events, of course.
Bryan: Just like the decline or plateauing of the global temperatures these last 10-15 years, I suppose?
John: You are being very unreasonable – I can see this conversation is not going to take us anywhere. The science is settled, the debate is over. I think it better if I left now, without fixing your climate.
Bryan: OK, but before you go I’ll just give you a demonstration of the Carbon Tax.
John: Jolly decent of you.
Bryan: Care to show me your wallet?
John: Sure. [Pulls out wallet from pocket.]
Bryan: Now, I’d like you to open your wallet, close your eyes and think nice thoughts about Gaia.
John: OK. [JOHN holds out wallet, smiling blissfully. BRYAN helps himself to the cash.]
Bryan: Thank you for saving the planet. [Shuts door.] And I still don’t believe you!
20
KeithH @#3
I have been watching that poll since it opened. It hasn’t’ much varied from 82% in favour of an election over the day. So even though its not a scientific poll I think the fact that its hung around the 82% across the entire day is fairly indicative of the opposition people have to a carbon tax.
10
Reason is starting to permeate the public mindset. Skeptics numbers are growing.
20
The exception would be ninemsn: Should there be an election before the carbon tax is introduced – 80% say yes. Oops.
10
Jo,
Have you seen this latest purile offering from richard glover?
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-dangers-of-boneheaded-beliefs-20110602-1fijg.html
Telling deniers what to believe….shall we salute Die Fuhrer to, Herr Glover?
Its really as dumb as poking a bull in the eye with a pointed stick and being surprised when it gets angry. Especially as the bull hasnt done anything to deserve such treatment.
Cheers
M.
10
Sarah has pulled her poll; ha! And the fairfax effort at the NMH seems to have crashed, ha!
10
If there’s so many anti-taxers & skeptics out there; that’s a lot of people they will have to threaten. (See pevious article.)
Then again, it worked for Hitler.
10
I wonder if John B will drop by to discuss the success of the Greens poll ?
10
Anyone else getting Error 403 – Access Denied,on the Greens poll ??
10
Yes, The Greens Poll has been pulled.
So has the Herald poll.
How funny!
Their polls ended up disproving all their reports.
Where were all those ‘ordinary Australians’ who support the Gillard Govt putting a price on Carbon (O2)?
Where were those thousands of people who attended the rallies?
All the polls were overwhelmingly against a carbon (O2) tax.
On one you had to vote yes to vote no to the introduction of a Carbon (O2) tax. That’s because you were asked to vote whether we should have an election before the introduction of a Carbon (O2) tax.
Still was overwhelmingly against the idea.
10
Dave N in 1,
Whilst what you say might be logically correct, the most important thing about these polls is that the warmistas cannot point to them in support. For example if more people wanted a TAX then Flim Flam, Juliar and all the rest would say “See most people want a TAX therefore by logical extension they believe in AGW”.
These poll results speak volumes if only you want to listen………………..
10
I am puzzled about the online polls. I always have assumed they would not be honest. Given that it would be easy to determine the results you want and make sure of result. A bit like government reports where a firm is hired as an external entity to produce it. The firm is told the result required and then lo and behold the report comes out that way. But it appears the Greens expected a result in their favour and did not rig it, amazing.
10
The NMH poll seems to be back up:
http://www.theherald.com.au/polls/
But methinks young Sarah won’t be playing the democratic card again.
10
Harr harr. Yes that Greenie poll now takes you to:-
In that scolding, school marmish, patronising tone we can expect from a Greenie led , beaurocratic , centralist, authoritarian world, that sounds so much like a big sister – hiding what she’s really up to.
10
climatenonconformist: #13
That is what happens when you start asking people for money.
Until then, most people have a “Yeah, whatever” response. But when you ask them to pay, they suddenly get really interested, really informed, and really alarmed. And they do those things really fast.
The good news is, that these people were not skeptics before – they were more apathetics. But now, they are on to it, and will start talking to their friends, who will discuss it on Facebook, and tweet each other, and so it will go viral (we hope).
Confidence tricksters have something they call the money-shot. It is the all or nothing point where people will get their wallets out. Timing is critical, and the whole trick depends on it.
Obviously Julia isn’t even a very good confidence trickster. We should be thankful for small mercies.
p.s. Yes, I know that apathetics is not actually a word, but it should be. There is enough of them.
10
M @ 16
I heard Richard Glover on radio today – he says he’s been hammered with emails mainly from the US – apparently they are very angry emails – as they should be.
he doesn’t seem to be concerned that writing the following is unbelievably provocative, he’s still in the Robyn Williams, Tony Jones fantasy land.
10
Latest on ninemsn poll
YES to an election before carbon tax 79,000
NO 18,458
10
Despite the enormous trend obvious in these polls, the ridiculous Mr Brown sees fit in today’s NZ Herald to lecture the poor benighted and ignorant Kiwis on how much more eficient the Aussie carbon tax will be than the Kiwi’s own ETS. Does he think this is another manifestation of trans-Tasman rivalry or is he as stupid as he appears? Most Kiwis know the ETS is illogical and counterproductive, but Brown seems to be a drongo of the first water.
10
Good point Rereke,
Reminds me of an old economic axiom….
When I buy myself something with my own money I am very careful about both price and functionality.
When I buy something for someone else with my money I still select carefully by price, but I’m not so tightly concerned with functionality.
When I buy something for someone else with some other person’s money I’m neither very concerned about price or functionality, but with what is most convenient and quick for me to purchase and deliver.
Everything government does is purchased with other people’s money for someone else. Naturally, the price government pays is always too dear and the functionality poor, while the political convenience approaches optimal. This explains why the Air-We-Breathe Tax works so well for the Gillard/Brown government. It meets their basic requirements. To hell with the rest of us.
10
Can somebody with a bigger screen than me please PLEASE get a full screenshot of the ERROR 403 message on Sarah Hanson-Young’s poll and post it here as a .JPG file or similar?
The absolute disconnect between a “public poll” and “you are denied access” is utterly priceless and deserves to be recorded for posterity.
It would be too much to hope somebody got a screenshot of the original poll . . .
10
MikeO: #24
Is there no end to their incompetence? 😉
But seriously, it is in the psychological nature of these people to assume that, because they KNOW they are RIGHT, the vast majority of people will agree, thus shaming we few skeptics into into submission. Therefore there was no need to rig the results.
Do they now have to face the possibility that they might be wrong? No, of course not, it is just that the great unwashed are too stupid to understand the message. Therefore, they need more PR and prime-time snuff movies, and full-length feature films about the wonders of Gaia.
Then, once we have all been suitably bombarded by all of the garbage, they will hold another poll, but this time they will rig the results.
10
wes george: #32
Those are very good points Wes, They sum it up much better than I did, or could.
10
The tax itself is not solely what should be focused on but also its intended meaning. It is an intentionally muted beginning to a retreat from the highly industrialised society for Western countries and hence signals a serious reduction in living standards. I hope an appreciation of that reality is part of what motivates the large numbers who, in polls, vote against the tax. That is the real crime of which Gillard, her motley crew, including the Independents and the Greens are guilty.
It seems that China and India are at the same time encouraged by the scaremongering UN “climate change” embracing politicians to continue in the opposite direction. That seems to me to be a piece of information that all Australians should be aware of as it shows how seriously the UN really takes ACC and fossil fuel emissions.
10
Interestin how the REDS (greens) poll The Greens: Do you support the Greens’ plan on emissions trading?
http://sarah-hanson-young.greensmps.org.au/polls/do-you-support-greens-plan-emissions-trading
now gives “Error 403 – Access denied”
Obviously they didn’t like the results running AGAINST them !
Censorship anyone????
10
ABC warmist Richard Glover unleashes his inner totalitarian and demands that climate skeptics be TATOOED for their beliefs !!!
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/when_the_warmists_start_selling_ill_start_buying/
This character is dangerous and mentally deranged !
10
Thanks! I just voted…… (where I could)…..
AND – ABC warmist Richard Glover = Econazi!
10
There is fate worse than being tattooed for a rational and intelligent person. Being forced to listen to Glover’s immature, pedantic and completely unfunny drivel that he pumps out every afternoon (at taxpayers expense) would be cruel and inhuman treatment of the worst kind. I take a tatt for the team any day. But compulsory Glover never!
10
Rereke Whakaaro:
At #34 you say concerning the ‘greens’ and the poll they pulled:
You may be right, but I think it is something else.
They only talk to each other and they bolster the opinions of each other.
Indeed their web sites censor any comments which do not bolster their opinions (which is why those web sites are called ‘echo chambers’).
The MSM emits a biased message that supports their view.
Few dissenting voices are broadcast.
So, ‘Greens’ are programmed by the only information they get on a subject that they care about.
But most people do not care about a subject unless and until it affects them; e.g. by threatened imposition of a tax.
Hence, ‘Greens’ are isolated from – and have a disconnect from – the views of most people. And they think most people think the way they do.
But their views differ greatly from the views of the bulk of the population. And this difference is apparent to ‘Greens’ when e.g. the 10:10 snuff movie is met with shock and disgust, their polls show what most people really think, and they do not win elections with landslide majorities. These results give ‘Greens’ genuine bemusement because they really do think their daft and fringe ideas are sensible views that most people hold.
Richard
10
Damian Allen@39
Probably not. He thinks he’s a comedian. His CV tells us he is an arty farty and so wouldn’t know what science was if it bit him on the bum. Or as is the case for that breed, is told what to believe.
Notice he thought our grandparents did a super job for us by leaving us a better world. Wasn’t long ago when there were only about a billion of us on the earth. Nearly 7 billion just 100 years later.
So how did our grandparents leave us a better world that caused an unprecedented growth in population? Oh just by embracing the Industrial Revolution and things like cheap energy and what followed were great technological advances in so many fields including medicine. In turn there has been a great increase in average lifespan, which means most babies and children are now making it to mature adulthood and a much easier and prosperous life for all.
So arty farty Richard Glover those of us in the know about these things including many aspects of carbon are determined to pass that rich heritage we got from our grandparents on to our children and grandchildren free of the sort of naive nonsense that issues from your relevant information, deficient mind.
10
Jo,
I expect the next explanation of why the polls were shut down is that the skeptics hijacked the polls with their big oil money backing.
Any way to make themselves to look like the poor innocents and that the skeptics are the highly paid and highly organized enemy to the current government.
10
Joe Lalonde@45
A reasonable alternative explanation is that most Greenies were confused by the multiple choice question. Would Sarah Young-Hanson admit it though?
10
Click on the Greens Poll now and you get to see a cat! The Greens are a strange bunch all right. I remember Bob Brown on election night last year talking about the need for more …. love! I have never heard a politician talk like that before.
I followed Sarah’s links a bit and came across the following:
“… the need to turn Australia into a flourishing carbon neutral powerhouse …”.
An oxymoron crossed with a contradiction in terms in the one phrase! I couldn’t achieve that if I tried.
I then clicked on that link and got back to the cat.
10
So far, at Say ‘Yes’ to More Taxes, the poll (near the bottom of the page) asking “Would you support a tax on carbon dioxide?”, had 96% answering “No, even if carbon dioxide were responsible for global warming, no Australian tax could affect the climate for good or ill.”
10
Noticed on the 7pm project that it was claimed that polls are not a good indication of public opinion. They also claimed that it was only a 500 sample? ? ?
All the polls Jo posted here had way more than 500 voters.
I also bet that if it had favoured a carbon tax or a mandate for the Gillard govt, 500 would have been more than enough!
I missed which particular poll they were discussing. They also used an interview with John Hewson to further discredit that particular poll.
Huh? ? ?
10
I have just visited the Green’s site and have seen the cat. Is this woman serious. This is the type of air head nonsense that one would expect from some not too bright school child. It is sobering to think that Sarakh Hyphen Young and her other bunch of air heads will be in control of the senate soon.
10
Richard S Courtney: #43
I agree Richard. These are very valid points, and they go along way to explaining why the greens KNOW they are RIGHT.
Another thought also occurred to me in reading your comment: As a generalization, Greens tend more towards the liberal arts than they do towards the hard sciences, as do most journalists in this post-modern era – the days of having specialists (other than Courts, Sports and Politics) on the payroll are long gone. They are therefore natural bedfellows, who will sing the same lullabies to each other.
Polls (and elections) are the only way that your average homo-sapien (as distinct from homo-apatheticus) can break into this cycle of mutual self-gratification. We need more polls.
10
Are the tatts free? If Julia (not me) is paying, I will have one. I tired of everyone else getting the govt freebies.
22M people, 85% sceptic/anti carbon tax @ $100 per tatt == $1.87 billion.
I think we need a new tax to pay for the tatts.
10
I have not been a big follower of polls.
But I do notice that alarmists/warmists behavior in the rare times they try to “debate” me and other skeptics in various places on the internet I go.Have shown a strong capacity for being profoundly confused and ignorant.Also have difficulty staying on topic and to make rational replies.They commonly descend to the name calling and ad homonyms.
Debating with an AGW believer is like talking to a child.
10
I will post Speedy’s popular comment as a post very soon. 🙂 I just wanted to update the thompsons scenario and Peter Kings tonight.
10
NINE MSN isn’t very careful about who they let vote. I just gave you another yes for a new election.
10
Well tragically the NSW State Government has backflipped on the solar panels rort:
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/energy-smart/ofarrell-abandons-plan-to-cut-solar-tariff-20110607-1fpmz.html
Now all those middle and upper class voters feel entitled to rip off their poorer neighbours. This is what happens when bad policy (such as a “carbon price”) becomes legislated. All the vested interests make it very hard to unwind the damage.
10
I have to laugh when the climate zombies (and Wayne Swan) claim the 45,000 national turnout at the weekend showed how strongly ordinary Australians felt about the need for a carbon tax. As a callow youth from the bush in 1971, I remember coming over the Collins Street hill in Melbourne, jaw dropping to the floor, to see a reputed 500,000 people stretching up to state Parliament House in the biggest protest against the Vietnam War. Now THAT was a mandate that the ALP used to take power a year later. How ironic that little closet lefties from that era (like me) are now dedicated to saving Australia from the ALP-Greens disaster.
10
The apparent resignation of Craig Thomson in Dobell may yet be the trigger for a repeat of 1975.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/alp-mp-drops-fairfax-lawsuit-20110605-1fnhc.html#ixzz1OR63VLQU
We live in interesting times indeed!
10
Another ticket clipper is on the way for your money
http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFLDE75407H20110605?sp=true
10
[…] polls tell the same story. http://joannenova.com.au/2011/06/skeptics-rule-online-polls/#more-15142 But the comment by “Speedy” following the above story is just a […]
10
Oops!
That should be “apparent possible resignation”. I perhaps live in too much hope.
10
Cate Blanchett rumoured to have bought a BEACHFONT property in Vanuatu !!
CATE BLANCHETTE IS A HYPOCRITE AND A LIER !!!!!!!!!
IF YOU HAVE ANY OF HER MOVIES …….
BURN THEM !
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/cate-blanchett-rumoured-to-have-bought-a-property-in-vanuatu/story-e6frf7jo-1226070501785
10
Hypocrisy and saving the planet go hand in hand Damien.
What i am about to say may seem a little off topic but please bear with me.
For those of you that dont know there is a great furore going in oz at the moment about the live export of cattle, it has come to light that some of the cattle we export are being treated cruelly before they are slaughtered, poloicians and leaders of radical organisations are frothing at the mouth as i type. We have calls that range from the banning of live export to putting a $X per head on cattle exported to fund a gov dept to oversee the slaughter process.
Now dont get me wrong i am not condoning the inhumane treatment of animals but it just so happens that the very same politicians and leaders of the radical organisations that are frothing at the mouth over live cattle export are the same ones pushing the carbon tax and by all accounts dont have a problem with oz selling and exporting carbon pollution (thats coal to the sane) all over the world to the highest bidder.
So its not Ok to export live cattle but it is OK to export the very pollution that is destroying the planet?
As i said Damien hypocrisy and saving the planet go hand in hand.
10
Oh dear warmists!
A peer-reviewed paper published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics finds global warming over the 20th century “not significantly different” from warming episodes that occurred in earlier centuries. The paper finds that the increase in solar activity over the past 400 years explains the warming, without any need to search for a unique cause of late 20th century warming, such as greenhouse gas concentrations.
http://www.cdejager.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/2009-episodes-jastp-71-194.pdf
Oh no sorry its that dam .3% of CO2 ..I forgot!
10
Oh whilst on the subject of Cates gettaway in Vanuatu and sea level rise here is a PDF from the worlds leading sea level expert…..sorry the worlds leading NON IPCC sea level expert.
Have a read and you will find its not only the surface temps that have been diddled.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/the_great_sea_level_humbug.pdf
10
pattoh, what makes you think that Craig Thompson,member for Dobell would not have won his case against Faifax.He should have continued this with every chance of a win.
I think he had only acted within the bounds of our current crop of politicians and bureaucrats. Just take the $100,000.00 expenditure for flowers by our Governor General. And this is all we know of.
To each his own.
10
Did anyone get the final figures for the ninemsn poll?
At 7-00am today YES 105,454 NO 25,043
At 8-00am ” YES 109,158 NO 25,762
Then I went to golf!!!
IMO the significance of this poll should not be underestimated, coming as it did after a fortnight of intensive non-stop propaganda by government and associated CAGW believers.
It included the Steffen Report which was just a rehash of the UNIPCC 2007 fairy-tales Report: the
Cate Blanchett/Michael Caton celebrity ad: the trundling out of former Prime Ministers and a bitter investment advising former Leader of the Liberal Party: compliant church leaders, who, if the UK experience is similar, have their Church Pension Funds invested in companies relying on heavily subsidised renewable energy investments: the almost daily recycling of all the old scare-’em-silly disaster scenarios by a succession of all the usual suspects,Gillard, Combet,Brown, Milne, Flannery, Karoly et al: the mindless GET UP/Unions Say Yes to a Carbon(dioxide)Tax etc.,etc.
Despite all this, in a 24-hour period nearly 135,000 people chose to register a vote with a mmassive majority calling for an election and by default,registering their opposition to a tax on carbon dioxide. In my view, these numbers reflect the widespread concern in the community which journalist and polticians fail to recognise. Combet dismisses us as rabble stirred up by Tony Abbott. How wrong he is!!
I doubt we will ever see these poll numbers reported on the ABC nor any other arm of the MSM but please help make it known to as many pollies, blogs and other outlets as possible.
10
Ralph Prestage
I am not particularly commenting on the legality, morality or intent of any elected or employed public officer. The point I was (poorly) alluding to was the tenuous position of the minority government & speculating on where any un-expected change might lead once the Greens have the control of the senate.
Again, we live in interesting times.
10
Roy Hogue @ 49
That really surprises me Roy. Did you use a different computer? Normally, before you vote you get the YES, NO options on the website. Once you vote, when you access the ninemsn again on the same computer, only the current poll count shows. It’s one of the reasons I like this poll, unlike some others.
10
#41 Surely substituting a picture of a cat, introduced predator species, for The Missing Green Poll is environmentally inappropriate? They’re not thinking clearly, they must be rattled.
10
The Greens’ Poll is back today, same page. They claim to have had 2695 responses, 72% in favour – how do they manage to hide the decline like that?
10
Cats are notorious for killing an enormous amount of wildlife !
Displaying an image of a feline instead of the poll on the greens (REDS) website is the height of Stupidity.
Still, their real agenda has absolutely nothing to do with the environment anyway so ………
10
“David Cooke” (65)…….
The killer cat still appears on the REDS website.
10
Mike O in 21,
I think i found your answer in post 65. In the end it was rigged.
10
David Cooke, I can’t see the Greens poll? If someone can, please pop up that link here. Save a screenshot. Please!
10
A screenshot of the poll as it was is here.
10
Here it is:
http://sarah-hanson-young.greensmps.org.au/polls/do-you-think-government-should-adopt-greens-safe-climate-bill
10
David Paris, Digital Communications Coordinator for the Greens’ Parliamentarians, has kindly and swiftly responded to the inquiry from Say “Yes” to More Taxes; he writes:
10
[…] like their plan. Even though this poll started on May 4th, 2009, within 2 hours of the link being posted here, a dreadful accident must have occurred and the page disappeared to a 403 error. It wasn’t just […]
10
Check out this sort of post on the SHY Green website….
Good to see about 3000-4000 people at the Adelaide “Yes” rally and hear about 45000 around Australia were able to turn up on Sunday.
Hopefully with the combined efforts of all the Green groups and with our involvement at the negotiating table the carbon price and the package of measures will provide the start we all want to tackle the issue in a sustainable way.
As a supporter of the recommendations and work of Ross Garnaud it is pleasing to see he has provided sound economic support to the work of our scientists so all decision makers have a basis for sensible action.
In the medium term ( 2-5 years) it is important we set ambitious targets for the future with effective strategies to achieve a comprehensive plan.
A price of $26 per tonne is a start . In the long term we need to 100% renewable energy and a reduction in emission levels to around 380ppm. The suggested level of 450 ppm is way too high.
I propose that we increase their demands incrementally… e.g. No! 300 ppm must be our goal, No! $70 per tonne carbon tax… No! feral camels must be included in GHG accounting!….. the death of a thousand cuts…. See who can get their obsequious posts onto the Greens website…
10
Even better is the senator’s twitter-feed:
Locked in a legal limo? That’s all the asylum-seekers have to chauffeur for all their trouble getting to Australian waters? Looks like they’ve got themselves a long stretch.
10
Hey I found something useful on the Greens Webpage – Yes amazingly it’s true – here it is :
We’re making it easy for your voice to be heard. The Greens believe in grassroots democracy. This section of the web site is a practical example of us putting our principles into action.
You can write a letter to the paper or call talkback radio using the tips we provide, or choose to write your own letter on a topic that interests you!
The letters page is one of the most-read pages in the newspaper so your letters can make a real difference.
Letters to the Editor
Adelaide Advertiser: submit letter here
The Age: email letters to [email protected]
The Australian: submit letter to [email protected]
Australian Financial Review: email letters to [email protected]
Canberra Times: email letters to [email protected]
The Courier Mail: submit letter here
The Daily Telegraph: email letters to [email protected]
The Herald Sun: submit letter at http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/editorial/letter
Mercury: submit letter here
The Sunday Times – Canberra: email letters to [email protected]
Sydney Morning Herald: email letters to [email protected]
The West Australian: submit letter to [email protected]
Northern Territory News: submit letter here
Tips: The shorter the better. Ideally your letter should be no more than 200 words. Personalise your email as much as possible. Start by referring directly to the issue that is concerning you, and explain how it affects you personally. Newspapers take personalised emails from their readers much more seriously than pro-forma emails.
Make sure you submit your full name, address and contact number (you can request your address is withheld, but editors like to confirm who you are).
Talkback radio
Talkback radio is designed as a forum for you to have your say – use it! Here’s some of the various radio stations that operate talkback to start you off:
Australia-wide
ABC NewsRadio – 13 9994
ABC Radio National – (02) 8333 2821
ACT
ABC Canberra (666AM) – 1300 681 666
NSW
ABC Newcastle (1233AM) – 1300 233 222
ABC Sydney (702AM) – 1300 222 702
2GB (873AM) – 131 873
2UE (954AM) – (02) 9930 9954
2SER (107.3FM) – (02) 9514 9514
2SM (1269AM) – 13 12 69
FBI (94.5FM) – (02) 8332 2999
vega (95.3FM) – 13 25 10
2NUR (103.7FM) – (02) 4921 5000
SA
ABC Adelaide (891AM) – 1300 222 891
FiveAA (1395AM) – (08) 8223 0000
Fresh (92.7FM) – 1300 7 FRESH
Radio Adelaide (101.5FM) – (08) 8303 5000
TAS
ABC Hobart (936AM) – 1300 222 936
7HO (101.7FM) – (03) 6216 1017
NT
ABC Alice Springs (783AM) – 1300 019 783
ABC Darwin (105.7FM) – 1300 057 222
QLD
ABC Brisbane (612AM) – 1300 222 612
WA
6PR (882AM) – (08) 9221 1882
ABC Perth (720AM) – 1300 222 720
RTR (92.1FM) – (08) 9260 9210
VIC
3AW (693AM) – (03) 9690 0693
3CR (855AM) – (03) 9419 0155
ABC Melbourne (774AM) – 1300 222 774
JOY (94.9FM) – (03) 9699 2949
PBS (106.7FM) – (03) 8415 1067
SYN – (03) 9925 9907
RRR (102.7FM) – (03) 9388 1027
10
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/special-features/carbon-tax-pm-announces-23-per-tonne-carbon-price/story-e6frg19l-1226091685789There is one here in the Sunday Times. Overwhelmingly skeptical.
10