JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

David Archibalds Speech — plus protests coming up

Monday 15th at Tanya Plibersek’s office, Sydney 12 noon – 2pm. 150 Broadway. The Minister for Doomsday.

Tuesday August 16th 2011 Parliament House Canberra 12 noon. Details here

August 22nd The Convoy of No Confidence arrives in Canberra. See Just Grounds for details. (Get the petitions in the post now!)

Climate is a non-problem. What is happening is Cooling

Archibald Speech Rally Canberra 16th August 2011

My first duty to you today is tell you what is happening to the climate.  What is happening is cooling.  The oceans started cooling in 2003, and the atmosphere is following.  There has been no warming since 1998.

In fact, the temperature of planet today is almost the same as it was when satellites first started measuring it in 1979.  No one under the age of 32 has experienced global warming.  Some of us predate that and remember the heavy frosts of the nineteen seventies.  Those frosts are returning, and worse.  Solar activity is weakening, and will remain weak for another 22 years.

We in this blessed country will be spared the worst of it, but a large portion of the grain belt in the northern hemisphere will have crop failures due to longer winters and early frosts.  Canada will go from being a large exporter of grain to becoming a frequent importer.  As long as Australia remains a net food exporter, we will benefit from the shorter Northern Hemisphere growing season.

For us, climate is a non-problem.  Carbon dioxide’s heating effect is real, but minuscule.  The one hundred parts per million that we have added to the atmosphere in the last one hundred years has heated the planet by one tenth of a degree.  We will add another hundred parts per million over the next fifty years.  The total of two tenths of a degree will be very welcome by mid-century.

In fact, the more carbon dioxide we add to the atmosphere, the better.  During the ice ages of the last three million years, the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere got as low as one hundred and seventy-two parts per million.  Plant growth shuts down at one hundred and fifty parts per million.  Life above sea level was almost snuffed out due to a lack of carbon dioxide.  We were only twenty-two parts per million from extinction.  We came so close to dying out due to a lack of carbon dioxide.  And, for those amongst us who like plants and animals, they would have died out too.

The more we can increase the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere, the safer life on this planet will be.

The more we can increase the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere, the safer life on this planet will be.  For those amongst us who feel for the Third World, increasing the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere is like giving them free fertiliser.  Their crops will grow faster.  Who amongst us would be so heartless as to deny the Third World that benefit at no cost to themselves?  The Government hunkered down here in front of you is that heartless.  But then, they don’t care about Australians either.

This fake problem of climate is distracting us from real problems.  The first of which is the fact that our oil self-sufficiency is declining rapidly.  It is 40% now.  It will be down to 25% by 2015.  We now import oil from as far afield as Azerbaijan, Algeria and the Congo.  We are forced to rely upon their kindness to keep our farms and factories running.

It need not be like that.  We could make our own transport fuels from our own coal.  And keep the money we pay for them in Australia.  But that won’t happen while the carbon tax lives.

…most of our institutions have failed in their duty to serve and protect

As a scientist, what saddens me is that most of our scientific institutions have failed in their duty to serve and protect the Australian people.  The CSIRO, the Bureau of Meteorology, the universities – have all failed us. And then there are the institutions that actively, and purposefully, and very treacherously, conspired against us.  Chief of which is the ABC, which has ceaselessly promoted the bizarre cult of carbon.

The next Government will inherit a lot of debt. To pay off that debt as quickly as possible, sacrifices will have to be made.  The easiest sacrifice to make would be to shut down the ABC.  None who love this country will weep for it.

Just as this Government did not weep for the cement workers who have already lost their jobs due to the carbon tax.  The ABC is well past its use by date.  It sees Australia through its perverted lens of self-loathing.  The large fortune that is spent keeping the beast alive would be better spent paying off Labor’s legacy of debt.

Consumer confidence took a dive when Australians realised that the Government was pressing ahead with the carbon tax.  It is hard to be positive when you realise the Government is doing its best to destroy the economy.  Long term damage to the economy from this tax has been going on for years, but is now accelerating.

Ideally, there could be a very good outcome from this carbon tax debacle.  It is not enough to merely put things back the way they were before this particular lot of Australia-haters came along.  We must use this opportunity – your righteous anger – to unleash the Furies on those who failed us, and those who conspired against us.

There are so many wrongs that need to be righted if we are to make Australia the earthly paradise it is meant to be.  So let’s right those wrongs.  It is not enough to simply defeat this tax.  Let’s not put up with the system that took Australia down the road to disaster.

Let’s have a good cleanout.  It requires effort on your part.  Coming here today is only the beginning.  Many of you are shareholders, and many of the companies you are invested in have sold their souls to get their snouts into the carbon trough.  Make their lives hell.  They deserve it.  Hound the directors until they recant.

As for any politicians who have ever believed in global warming, or supported the carbon tax, or a carbon-constrained economy, there is no hope for them.  They are either too stupid or incompetent to be taken seriously.  Merely recanting, at this late stage, won’t be enough.  Make their lives hell too, just as they wished a diminished life on you.

Australia will soon face some big challenges as the world enters one of its most turbulent periods.  Just maintaining our standard of living in the face of those challenges will require a lot of rigor.  We will only get the required level of rigor if we demand it.  Firstly of ourselves, and then of the politicians we choose to represent us.  Even then, keeping Australia safe and secure and happy will take our eternal vigilance.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 1.0/10 (1 vote cast)
David Archibalds Speech -- plus protests coming up, 1.0 out of 10 based on 1 rating

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/3ceqr5m

122 comments to David Archibalds Speech — plus protests coming up

  • #
    The Black Adder

    No, no, no, no…

    The Science is Settled !! Nothing to see here folks, move on… :)

    Thank God for people like David Archibald.

    00

  • #

    I know that this is probably ancient, but for those of you who haven’t seen this, here’s a small ten question test for you.
    Answer the simple questions, and before you move to the next question, read the responses carefully.
    http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html
    Tony.

    00

  • #
    stephen.richards

    These guys persist in saying that co² causes some warming. It may not cause any warming at all at this moment. Certainly, co² can absorp IR at very narrow energies but that does not mean that it can cause global warming. No-one has made the definitive, engineering study level, physical model that can accurately describe the effect of co² on the atmosphere and hence the planet. Remember, transfer of heat from gas to water is not an efficient process and therefore, the seas warm from direct solar radiation, for the most part. The transfer of energy from the seas is most through evaporation and convection. So the biggest source of energy on this planet, apart from the sun, is the oceans and they have shown no sign of warming for at least a decade. Not co². Don’t go there with “co² causes heating”.

    00

  • #
    Pete H

    David, as an Ex-pat Brit I am full of admiration for the above.

    Were I still living in the riot torn U.K. I would find it amazing that a British Tory Prime Minister had even admitted that Australia had a Labour Prime Minister, never mind written to her congratulating a proven liar that she had “Done Good” with regard to CO2!

    Then again, here is a guy who now has a pop at thugs breaking windows on the high street but who, in his Oxford days as a member of the Bullingdon Club along with Boris the London Mayor (who also feigns outrage)though it a jolly good jape to throw plant pots through restaurant windows!

    The quality of the leadership in our societies is at an all time low. None of them, be it Australia, the U.K. or the sewer that is Obama’s mob have ever held a real job and are hell bent on destroying all that we hold worthy.

    Whilst you guys shut down the funds to the ABC help the Brits shut down the BBC. They stand for the same thing and are as alike as identical twins! Attack both public funded corporations for ignoring their near identical governing rules about the reporting they do. They ignore it at their peril and should be dragged to court for ignoring the guidelines good people set down for them. They should also be forced to remove any pension funds invested in Carbon trading to ensure they have no bias!

    I so look forward to seeing the sensible people of Australia throwing the stupid, lying person currently representing you all into the gutter, not just out of office but out of politics. She is a liar and and thief of moral values.

    Good luck to all in the “Convoy of No Confidence”. You are setting a wonderful example to real democracy!

    00

  • #
    KuhnKat

    Inspiring!!

    00

  • #
  • #
    Alpha Tango

    TonyfromOz:
    August 12th, 2011 at 1:20 am

    Only got 9/10 but its a good quiz :)

    00

  • #

    Shouldn’t we have guessed that 180 deg in the opposite direction was more likely true when our Leftist friends told us it was warming? Those who read Pravda knew how to do this routinely.

    00

  • #

    TonyfromOs @ 2:

    Critical evaluation of “The Global Warming Test”

    Summary:

    There are five questions that are given wrong answers by the test maker or are invalidly formed and cannot be answered.

    There are five questions given, by the test maker, correct answers or are correct as far as we know.

    The test was either incompetently or maliciously done. It is, at the very least, a very poor test if the intent was to communicate what is actually known about so called “global warming”.

    Analysis:

    1. “Global warming” is a real phenomenon: Earth’s temperature is increasing.

    The answer depends upon the time scale used:
    The temperature is decreasing over the past decade
    The temperature is increasing over the past century
    The temperature is decreasing over the past millennia

    So the correct answer to the question is that there is no correct answer. The question is in the form “Do you still beat your wife? Answer yes or no.” It is an invalid question.

    2. The “Greenhouse Effect” is real and contributes to global warming.

    There is no global greenhouse. The Greenhouse Effect is based upon numerous false assumptions that are non-physical in the free atmosphere: flat earth, back radiation, and simulated high feedback amplification. Since it is not real it cannot contribute to global warming. The correct answer is false contrary to the answer given by the test makers.

    3. The main cause of Global Warming is:

    The test maker’s answer is: orbital eccentricities of Earth and variations in the Sun’s output

    As far as we know, this is the case. Levels of man produced CO2 have nothing measurable to do with it.

    4. The Greenhouse Effect is caused primarily by:

    The real answer is that it is caused by fevered imagination and hype but the test makers gave three choices that can have no relationship to something that does not exist. As stated, the question cannot be answered correctly.

    5. Which most accurately describes the effects of Global Warming in the United States over the last 100 years?

    The test maker’s answer is: temperatures have risen < 1° C

    As far as we know, this is the case.

    6. How much Carbon dioxide (CO2) is in Earth’s atmosphere today?

    The test maker’s answer is: less than 1/10th of 1%

    OK, here is another answer they got right.

    7. Carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants damages forests.

    The test maker’s answer is: False

    That’s right, CO2 is plant food and not a pollutant at any level less than over 20 times the current level. A level we could not reach even if we burned ALL the known reserves of fossil fuels.

    8. Which answer below provides the best explanation for the following temperature record?

    The test maker’s answer is: Natural variations in global temperatures may occur in roughly 500-years cycles.

    Not wrong but incomplete. There are many other natural cycles of shorter and longer periods that also contribute to the temperature record. This is true even if you limit your view to a fraction of a blink of geological time of 1000 years. The question cannot be answered correctly. They even explain as much in their discussion of the “correct” answer. Invalid question.

    9. Which of the following is not true about an increasing greenhouse effect?

    The test maker’s answer is: the consensus of scientists is that the problem warrants drastic action

    This is another invalid question with an apparently correct answer. Since there is no greenhouse effect, none of the answers are correct. Their justification of their answer is based upon number of “scientists” agreeing or disagreeing with the existence of an increasing greenhouse effect. The fact is, a nose count has NO relevance with regard to an increase or decrease of any effect let alone a non-existent greenhouse effect. The question has no correct answer because it is base upon a long series of false premises and inapplicable logic.

    10. Which temperature measuring method most accurately measures global warming?

    The test maker’s answer is: orbiting weather satellites

    As far as we know, this is true. However, since we have no way of checking the answer, we don’t really know how accurate the measurements are. The answers simply appear to be self consistent and appear to have shorter error bars. We still don’t know the real global temperature. All we have is an educated guess that is likely better than the cooked guesses from other methods.

    Scoring:

    Questions that are invalidly formed – 2
    Questions based upon false premises given wrong answer – 2
    Questions that are allowed only wrong answers – 1
    Questions that are as far as we know correct – 2
    Questions that are well formed and have correct answers – 3

    Conclusions:

    The test makers receive a score of 50%.

    There are five questions that are given wrong answers or are invalidly formed and cannot be answered.

    There are five questions given correct answers or are correct as far as we know.

    The test was either incompetently or maliciously done. It is at the very least a very poor test if the intent was to communicate what is actually known about the so called “global warming”.

    00

  • #
    Bulldust

    Slightly O/T but this piece at The Australian is a real concern:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/gillard-knifes-hawkes-red-tape-reform-to-shield-ir-law-from-scrutiny/story-e6frgd0x-1226113366999

    It seems the Gillard Government is weakening the one group that is a gatekeeper against harmful political policies. We have such a regulatory gatekeeper in WA for example, and their purpose is to examine the benefit:cost (amoung other things) of proposed policy changes.

    Apparently such oversight is an incovenience for a socialist Government and must therefore be dismantled, or at least weakened sufficiently to allow the Green/socialist dogma to pass without check. To me, as a Government employee who works in policy areas all the time, this is the most alarming thing I have seen yet.

    00

  • #
    Gustav

    Yes, I agree with regards to the “greenhouse effect”. The idea is fishy and the paper by Gerlich and Tscheuschner does a good job of discussing the theory’s numerous shortcomings. So, why does water vapour have the well known effect of moderating weather? IR-active gases such as water vapour and CO2 indeed absorb (and re-emit) IR radiation. This results in slowing down the heat transfer through the atmosphere and also in reflecting the incident radiation back into space during the day. In effect, heating gets slowed down during the day (compare, for example, how quickly it gets hot in the Death Valley with a longer time it takes to get warm during the day when you’re in Elizabeth City in North Carolina). Similarly cooling gets slowed down at night (again, compare how quickly it gets cold at night in the Death Valley with how long it takes to cool when you’re in Elizabeth City). But the above does not imply that the presence of IR-active gases in the atmosphere increases the global average temperature, because this is a matter of the balance between daily heating and nightly cooling. It may very well be the other way round. Compare again the Death Valley with Elizabeth City. They’re both at roughly the same latitude, receiving similar amount of solar radiation. But the Death Valley is excessively dry, whereas Elizabeth City, being close to the ocean enjoys high humidity: there’s plenty of IR-active water vapour there. So, one might think that Elizabeth City would be warmer on average, in summer, than the Death Valley. But it’s not the case: the Death Valley is warmer, even on average. This means that the “cooling” effect of IR-active gases during the day overcomes the “heating” effect of these gases at night. I’ve used the inverted commas here to remind the reader that these gases neither heat nor cool anything by themselves. They merely affect heat transfer through the atmosphere behaving like impedance in electric circuits.

    The reasoning that leads to the idea that without the “greenhouse effect” the average temperature on earth would be -18C is flawed. The number is an artifact of Hoelder’s inequality and does not represent any physical reality–as Gerlich and Tscheuschner rightly point out. That this would escape the attention of countless physicists, astrophysicists, climatologists and even mathematicians who have been looking at the equations for the past 200 years is in itself an interesting commentary on science. The issue is further complicated by the ocean, which has a very low albedo and is a huge heat reservoir, far more important for the Earth’s climate than anything else. In fact, we may well say that our climate is driven almost entirely by the ocean and it matters little what the chemical composition of the atmosphere is: as long as it’s transparent to the wavelengths at which the sun emits most energy and as long as water vapour can penetrate into it and form clouds.

    00

  • #

    “Many of you are shareholders…..” – we are all shareholders in our own countries. The boards of directors, in the guise of politicians and ministers are failing us. They are spending time, effort and worst of all money – our money on things we don’t need, that our countries don’t need, and which won’t solve the supposed problems we’re told we face, but actually are making things worse.

    I can’t disagree with anything David Archibald said – a rare event for me.

    BTW – I love this comment editor!

    00

  • #

    Gustav is correct folks….not only do oceans control the temperature, but they also control the ratios of atmopsheric gases. The PDO & AMO are driven by changes in the Earth’s fission rate which is controlled by solar and cosmic particle bombardments along with solar system gravitational changes. The Earth’s fission produces heat and ‘elemental’ atoms which bond to form elemental molecules and compounds. The gas portion of these elemental molecules including Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Sulphur Dioxide are then ‘outgassed’ at undersea vents at 0 C and 150 atmospheres of pressure. At these conditions these molecules liquify or solidify, like Methane Calthrate. The oceans is therefore at maximum saturation awaiting currents to warm or reduce pressure prior to outgassing. This is explained in “Earth’s Missing Geothermal Flux” along with other interesting information on the government controlled psy-ops of Faux Science and Faux History at

    http://www.FauxScienceSlayer.com Veritas Vos Liberabit !

    [air has a Specific Heat of 1.0, CO2 has Specific Heat of 0.8....the total 'delay' in OLR from CO2 is 5 milliseconds...CO2 warms nothing]

    00

  • #
    JK

    Maybe some light comic relief? Is via NofrakkkingConcesus
    http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/170f627ee7/stop-the-environment?

    00

  • #
    Joe V

    Pete H @ #3

    There are no riots across the UK. Only in England is it that society appears to be breaking down. Despite their local difficulties the smaller members of the UK have always had a strong sense of community, that has proved harder to maintain , South of Hadrians Wall & East of the Bristol Channel.
    Long standing local conflicts that do exist tend to be more tribal in nature, than the ‘mindless’ behaviour now being witnessed with no apparent cohesive element.

    00

  • #
  • #
    pat

    11 Aug: Tim Devaney: Washington Times: No friendly skies between U.S., EU
    Dispute centers on carbon-trade program
    Airlines from around the world that fly into and out of the EU are fighting to overturn a new rule that would cost them billions of dollars for their carbon-dioxide emissions, not just over European skies, but during the whole trip…
    The U.S. has joined China, Australia, Canada, and the United Arab Emirates in protesting the move, saying it violates international law, which calls for a regulator like the International Civil Aviation Organization to make these decisions…
    This has led ETS opponents to believe that the program has little to do with airlines reducing their carbon footprint, and more to do with debt-strapped European governments scrambling for money.
    “It’s a cash grab,” Mr. Lott said. “This tax isn’t necessarily going to improve the environment. The EU has made no promises that the money is going to be spent on improving the environment, or improving the efficiency of the aviation system.”…
    The EU expects to pocket between $49 billion and $82 billion.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/11/no-friendly-skies-between-us-eu/

    00

  • #
    Treeman

    Lionell, I agree. Having looked at the 10 questions a few times and got a few “wrong” I’d dismissed it as rubbish. Well summarised indeed!

    Jo
    Henry Ergas writes in today’s Australian
    Gillard has “neutered” the Regulatory Impact Assessment process that has been in place since the Hawke Government and strengthened by governments since then.
    Obama’s failure to get an ETS over the line result in the US saw him regulate through the EPA that CO2 is a “pollutant”

    Here in Australia we’ve seen a general stiffling of debate on climate change and even calls for climate change deniers to be tattooed

    There are calls for a review of the Australian media when none is required. The disturbing thing about all this is that these are signs of a major shift towards less transparency and social constraints that smack of totalitarianism. If for whatever reason Gillard can’t get her Carbon Tax over the line, a neutered the Regulatory Impact Assessment process will ensure compliant bureaucrats do it for her. Thanks to the increasing discredited IPCC, policies are already in place.

    It’s quite frightening that the Gillard minority government appears to be facilitating government by regulation. Regulation by the inept who’ve been employed the inept, hell bent on removing any vestige of transparency, is disturbing to say the least.

    Ergas is right

    This is no time to remove what few constraints there are on economically costly regulation. Global uncertainties demand more scrutiny of red tape, not less. And we need scrutiny that is rigorous and independent, not a fig leaf for whatever deals the government cuts.

    00

  • #
    Winston

    Dear Jo,
    Paragraph 2 in the post should read
    “no one under the age of 32 has experienced global cooling” I think

    00

  • #
    Madjak

    This is Australias finest hour!

    Right now, around the world, intelligent rational and logical people are looking to us to lead the way away from the inept, naive and morally bankrupted.

    The days of the anointed ones “Managing” the media through coercian, spin lines and manipulation are over. Misinformation, more often than not cannot survive public scrutiny.

    Global warming is front and centre as the technologies enabling this matured when climategate broke ( or more accurately failed to break in the Australian MSM).

    00

  • #
    Paul R

    The one hundred parts per million that we have added to the atmosphere in the last one hundred years has heated the planet by one tenth of a degree. We will add another hundred parts per million over the next fifty years. The total of two tenths of a degree will be very welcome by mid-century.

    I hate this surrender to insanity, the we are responsible for this 100 ppm is highly speculative and yet repeated as fact even by those opposing the fraud.
    Believers don’t need a lot to cling to to maintain their faith and to put man pants on the Chuck Norris molecule just gives them a hallelujah moment.

    00

  • #
    Raven

    This is OUR democracy at work , the age and it’s cronies has decided( editor Alcorn) that the questions on the our say site are being deliberately manipulated , and they may only answer questions that are good( WTF) , a call to getup and their ilk is then felt necessary to balance the equation in a democratic manner , for eg: they claim ABs blog has a high readership and this is unfair .
    Make up your own minds but these people are really starting to piss me off .I voted for Fongs Q because he believes in global warming, he just wants a straight answer to a straight question ( I know he must be young )
    It would appear this makes the age and others associated with this new direction uncomfortable !
    They are calling for more balanced questions for want of better word and what better place than here for them to come from…

    http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/andrewbolt/

    http://oursay.org/the-sunday-age

    00

  • #
    pat

    11 Aug: Toronto Star: Robert Benzie: Europeans complain Ontario’s green energy policies are protectionist
    In Brussels on Thursday, the EU announced it is complaining to the World Trade Organization over subsidies Queen’s Park gives renewable energy producers that use domestic goods.
    “This is in clear breach of the WTO rules that prohibit linking subsidies to the use of domestic products,” it said in a statement…
    Energy Minister Brad Duguid made no apologies for the province’s green energy program, which has led to $20 billion in investment and created 20,000 jobs — and should generate 30,000 more by the end of next year…
    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1038102–europeans-complain-ontario-s-green-energy-policies-are-protectionist

    00

  • #
    pat

    11 Aug: ABC: AAP: PM still wants the carbon tax
    Ms Gillard told a community forum in Perth on Thursday night that the Australian economy is expected to grow despite global economic turmoil and there is no better time to introduce a carbon tax.
    She said she understood that many people would be disturbed to see the dramatic movements on global stockmarkets, the frantic political negotiations over debt in the US and the “widespread mayhem” on the streets of London.
    “What the Treasury is telling us is, we can put a price on carbon and the economy will continue to grow,” she told the Perth audience.
    “If we can cut carbon pollution by 160 million tonnes and still have more jobs, still have economic growth … why wouldn’t you do it?”…
    http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/pm-still-wants-the-carbon-tax-20110812-1ipgf.html

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    So, why does water vapour have the well known effect of moderating weather?

    It doesnt, excecpt that it helps heat transfer in weather systems. The so called GHG of H2O vapor isnt correct either.
    The Archibald speech is basically correct.

    00

  • #
    pat

    Sky News are the last people who should be in charge of counting heads at these unbelievable and undoubtedly staged events:

    12 Aug: West Australian: Daniel Emerson: PM’s carbon tax sales pitch wins over forum
    Prime Minister Julia Gillard managed to sway a majority of voters at Perth Town Hall behind her carbon tax last night in a suggestion her sales pitch on the flagship reform is beginning to resonate with the public.
    A pre-forum poll of participants attending The West Australian/Sky News’s people’s forum showed that just 30 per cent were in favour of the tax, with 33 per cent against and 37 per cent undecided.
    But after Ms Gillard’s well-rehearsed explanation of the tax and the Government’s reasons for pursuing it, followed by 21 questions from the floor, the numbers swung significantly her way.
    Fifty-six per cent said they supported the tax, with 26 per cent against and 18 per cent undecided…
    http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/10025031/pms-carbon-tax-sales-pitch-wins-over-forum/

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    OK (leaked opposition doc released) so if it costs 70 billion to ‘get rid’ of the CO2 plant food tax, whats it costing to implement it! 70 billion! Sound dodgy to me. If it isnt implemented then doesnt it cost 0 billion?.

    00

  • #
    Raven

    As I’ve mentioned elsewhere , apparently only skeptics and deniers dominate the Internet …….Now an age opinion well , the propaganda machine grinds relentlessly forward .
    This must be the new way to denounce skeptics ,if we are not careful we will all soon be cast as witches and soothsayers …
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjeqRHdBwkY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    Our fate awaits us .
    Anyway I thought all the slugs were in Canbera

    00

  • #
    Grant (NZ)

    man pants on the Chuck Norris molecule

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah……

    00

  • #
    pat

    re sky news gillard forum in perth:

    there is only one video on sky news, click “National” to find it and check out the people in attendance. the reporter admits only about half of 21 questions were even about the carbon tax. love the young woman who praises the PM for not backing down under public pressure:

    Economy can withstand tax – Gillard
    http://www.skynews.com.au/video/

    the only other video i can find concerns a question about gay marriage.

    11 Aug: Youtube: Tom makes Prime Minister Julia Gillard uncomfortable
    My fiance Tom asking Prime Minister Julia Gillard a question about same sex marriage in relation to the Carbon Tax. Video taken from Sky News and filmed on 11 August 2011 during the Perth People’s Forum at the Perth Town Hall
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErCjjYYG6yk

    a comment in the second video suggests there are several videos on sky news website, but i have searched all video categories and cannot find any except for the one i’ve linked to above.

    00

  • #
    Ian Hill

    Loved it. That’s the sort of speech you used to hear from an angry headmaster berating the whole school for misbehaving, except this time half the staff are implicated as well.

    00

  • #

    In a speech at the U.N. Kevin Rudd talks up, Global Governance – Climate Change – Agenda 21 [sustainable development]

    YouTube “The price of failure:Rudds UN call for reform”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZxuabpHFck&feature=related

    00

  • #
    pat

    btw it would be interesting if those in attendance at the Perth Forum – who were so won over to the carbon (dioxide) tax – would come forward and tell us what the PM said to change their minds!

    00

  • #
    connolly

    Whatever she said in Perth we cant wait for the PM to pitch it in Wollongong. Bluescope is halving steel production. They are preparing to off shore the Australian steel industry. But the economy is going gang busters. Right. Come back to the east coast and try to sell that you liar.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/jobs-threat-as-bluescope-steel-buckles/story-fn59niix-1226113425924

    00

  • #

    “We want to get rid of carbon [dioxide] pollution in the atmosphere”, says Julia.

    So the optimum level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that Julia and the Watermelons wish to achieve is zero.

    Stop the world – I want to get off.

    00

  • #
    Winston

    My apologies for post 14. Clearly I misunderstood what David was saying there.
    While what I wrote is correct I believe (Under 32yo’s have not experienced global cooling unlike those who lived through the 1970s northern hemisphere winters, and I believe this demographic will soon experience this for the first time over the next decade), David obviously was referring to NET global warming since temps are down to 1979 levels. Of course, there was some modest warming experienced in the intervening period up to 1998, followed by subsequent cooling 1998 to 2011. I hope “net warming” is what he intended in his post, or perhaps I’m off with the fairies. If so, I’m happy to be further corrected.

    00

  • #
    Andrew Barnham

    I read this and I am quite bothered by it. Firstly it is reverse alarmism. Don’t be alarmed by things getting hotter, be alarmed by things getting colder. Secondly it is full of errors. A CAGW believer can pull it apart with ease.

    “In fact, the temperature of planet today is almost the same” – weasel words. Satellite record shows warming 0.14c per decade. (I don’t buy into the implicit assertion that all this warming is mad-made though).

    “The one hundred parts per million that we have added to the atmosphere in the last one hundred years has heated the planet by one tenth of a degree” – more weasel words and misrepresentation by careful selection of units; which Alan Jones also was recently outed for.

    Most of rest is political comment. Some I agree with some I don’t. If Archibalds intention is to preach to the choir, maybe. But people who I know personally who disagree with me on position of CAGW will seize upon this and use it to laugh at me. And rightly so I suspect. Poor performance, I expect better, not just from BOM/CSIRO but from vocal people like Archibald too.

    00

  • #
    Winston

    Andrew @ 32

    Don’t be alarmed by things getting hotter, be alarmed by things getting colder.

    So, you would say that the bitterly cold winters of the 1970′s represent the “climate optimum” then? I think the modest warming in the intervening period was unequivocally a good thing, and I don’t see any valid argument to show that blizzards and short growing seasons could ever be a good thing, especially with a growing global population. We all would like to eat, if thats OK by the government, that is.

    00

  • #
    Andrew Barnham

    Hi Winston @33. I am not making any claim about what is an optimal climate. I am merely taking issue with the shrill tone of the speech. Frosts, crop failures, net import dependency, cat and dogs living together, mass hysteria! I’m just plain worn out and completely fatigued, constant barrage of doomsday fear-mongering; irrespective of it’s origin or substance.

    00

  • #
    Raredog

    A good speech though I have a few problems: Winston @ 14 points out what seems to be an error; not sure that calling for the shutdown of the ABC is a good idea – would rather David called upon the ABC to adhere to unbiased coverage; would be careful about attributing all of the increase of atmospheric CO2 to human causes. Otherwise – good work.

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Gustav @9

    A great piece.

    00

  • #
    MattB

    Joe V FYI my welsh cousin informs me there was unrest in Bangor, Llandudno, Rhyll.

    00

  • #
    Bruce D Scott

    Thank you very much Jo, for more hope in a sea of mendacity.

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Only got his far and had to comment:

    “The one hundred parts per million that we have added to the atmosphere in the last one hundred years”"

    As has been pointed out on other threads many would dispute giving a value to this.

    The full array of sources and sinks is so far away from being known that all that can be

    said is that human addition of CO2 to the atmosphere is incapable of being quantified

    in view of other more massive forces at work which swamp the human effect.

    Not very scientific.

    00

  • #
    Winston

    Andrew @34
    Hi Andrew, I do agree entirely with your contention that we are all suffering from scaremongering fatigue, but I would say that it’s hard to fight the relentless onslaught from the “evil empire” without pointing out that one could equally be alarmist about exactly the opposite scenario being currently touted. So, therefore the solution is to come back down to earth and focus on optimising our technology and agricultural practices to contend with whatever scenario may befall us. Clearly, exclusive dependence on renewables fails the test no matter which outcome might befall us.

    00

  • #
    Andrew Barnham

    Winston @40. Interesting point. It requires the explicit qualification you outline to be an effective polemic; which Archibald’s speech does not provide. Or maybe satire: Dr Strangelove: or how I stopped worrying and learned to love the global climate.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Really, its time for some betting. Choose a year, or a decade, and lets have some climate bets.

    We can start now, with the decade we are in. Will the average world temperature be warmer or cooler in 2011 – 2020 than it was in 2001 – 2010? We’ll need an agreed temperature measure – Maybe UAH channel 5, given its looked after by a “skeptic”. We’ll also need to agree on the algorithm to be used to produce an “average temperature” for the decade.

    Then people can start putting their money where their mouth is, and showing just how much faith they have in their predictions of warming or cooling.

    Jo could start right here on this blog. Any time anyone posts on this blog, they have to make a $100 bet on warming or cooling. The money goes in a kitty, to be divided up amongst the winners in at the end of 2020. Other blogs could join in, WUWT, Judith Curry, Skeptical Science, Real Climate, Deltoid, Tamino etc etc. The kitty could end up pretty big! Not sure how it should be invested though….

    If microtransactions were feasible, you could also have a $0.10 bet per comment….

    00

  • #

    JB

    The kitty could end up pretty big! Not sure how it should be invested though….

    Perhaps we could invest the winnings in, er, Carbon Credits.
    Tony.

    00

  • #

    John Brookes @ 42

    Perhaps the predictions found on the internet that Betelgeuse is going to go supernova in 2012 will have an effect on the odds?

    00

  • #
    Winston

    Andrew @ 41
    Perhaps the Bill Gates funded seed repository off Norway represents the “mineshaft gap” alluded to in Kubrick’s wonderful comedy. Perhaps they are really saving our “Purity of Essence”!

    00

  • #
    Brett_McS

    “… the more we increase carbon dioxide” the better.

    Excellent. Let’s have none of this “carbon sequestration”, “carbon capture” and similar appeasement nonsense, which are just another aspect of the whole scam, anyway.

    Plants are struggling with the low levels of CO2 we have in the atmosphere now.

    Let’s pump up the (partial) pressure and Green Australia!

    00

  • #
    Grant (NZ)

    John Brookes @ 46

    Our government has already laid a bet that the temperature is going to increase. They have used my taxes and then the ETS costs on top of any expenditure to pay the wager.

    Whether to not it goes up or down, I lose.

    00

  • #
    Bingi

    The speech is a joke right?

    I mean really – you expect anyone to go along with that global cooling alarmist nonsense.

    Quick! we must immediately pump more CO2 into the atmosphere or we are all DOOOOMED!!! Aaaaaahahaahaa!!! I love it!

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    JB @ 46

    You are already way behind….Bets on AGW PAST predictions

    You want to go there???

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Bingi back from the dead …..Or was it back from the damned Banned

    Something must be agitating………. :)

    00

  • #

    We’re told that there’s a problem with releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.
    Carbon Capture and Sequestration ….. (ho, ho ho)
    Consider this.
    ONE large scale coal fired power plant, and let’s go with one of those new technology plants, two large generators around 1,000MW each, hence 2000MW nameplate capacity.
    It burns around 4.5 million tons of coal a year, and yes, that does equate to around one ton of crushed coal every 7 seconds. (The existing ones burn around 6.5 to 7.5 million tons.)
    At that 4.5 million tons, and with the average multiplier of 2.86, that then equates to a tick under 13 million tons of CO2 each year.
    Let’s explain CCS and just why it will never be achieved on the large scale.
    This process will consume around 40% of the total power produced by the plant, which, er, sort of defeats the whole process of supplying large scale power.
    They have to capture the CO2 from the (long thin tall) stack, separate it from the other exhausts, then liquify the CO2 (well, somehow anyway, because that is achieved at an enormously low temperature) then pump the CO2 to the, er, wherever that hole in the ground might be.
    To do that they need perhaps hundreds and more Kilometres of pipelines with pumping stations and cooling stations along the way.
    Then at that hole in the ground, they need a huge Pump to push the CO2 into the ground, where it needs to be sequestered FOREVER, now also keeping in mind that as that liquid CO2 sinks to depths where the surrounding ground is hotter, it turns back into a gas, expanding considerably.
    All this needs to be achieved AT THE SAME RATE it is being emitted from the plant.
    The plant has an expected minimum life span of 50 years, so now that hole in the ground has to contain 650 million tons of CO2.
    This is just for one plant, which can have its licence to provide extended out to 60 and even 75 years.
    For any more plants, then find more holes.
    If the hole fills, then find more holes.
    Construct more pipelines, pumps, cooling stations etc.
    Now perhaps you gain some inkling of the scale of something like this and why it will never be achieved.
    Some small scale enterprises are working with hundreds of tons, and most have even abandoned that.
    Still, our Government sinks millions into this fantasy, mainly on discussion committees and the like, and, er, also govt funded studies into this.
    And people still say that costing factors for this dream nightmare need to be structured into costings for new technology coal fired power.
    It costs an extra 50% on top of the original cost and now produces only 60% of the power for consumption.
    Hence the lifetime cost extrapolation for the plant now becomes horrendously more expensive.
    The hope is that factoring in these new things will make renewables more competitive, and even with that factored in, these new tech plants are still 7 to 10 times cheaper than renewables.
    If you actually think CCS is something that can be achieved, because of the way technological advances are coming in so soon, then you definitely have rose green coloured glasses.
    This madness about the problem with releasing CO2 into the atmosphere is feeding these people Oxygen, and if there’s a buck to be made (from the govt) then of course they’ll talk it up.
    Buckleys!!
    And None!!
    Tony.

    00

  • #
    Winston

    JB @ 46- with 97% of scientists agreeing with the CAGW meme, does that mean I get odds of 32 to 1 about global cooling by 2020?- if so I’ll have a piece of that action!

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Mattb

    So all your logic and science is trumped by a rogue mob in: Bangor, Llandudno, Rhyll.

    Are you prepared?

    00

  • #
    pat

    thought i had a chance to watch the Perth Forum at 1.30pm on A-PAC. after all it was listed for 1.30-2.30. however, switched on the TV at 1.30pm only to find the last question being asked and then the program finished with Sky’s David Speers saying almost all the questions were about the carbon tax, but that a few questions were asked about other topics. this didn’t jibe with Sky’s David Lipson in the video i posted earlier saying only just over half the questions (there were 21 altogether) were about the carbon tax.

    oh well, at least A-PAC is now repeating Murry Salby at the Sydney Institute, which is some consolation.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Winston @ 56

    That is smart money I think!

    00

  • #
    gnome

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again- Gaia, hungry for carbon dioxide to green a post ice-age world, has assisted the rise of a species capable of releasing some of the locked up carbon. It may not do anything for suboptimal temperatures but the plants need it desperately. And after we have released it we will go on Gaia’s scrapheap

    Does anyone seriously think Homo sapiens will still be walking the earth next time Gaia blinks (say in a million years or so) or that this won’t be a green and pleasant place long after we are gone?

    00

  • #

    I agree with the first part of the headline…”Climate is a Non-Problem”.
    Though I suspect it’s true, I’m not sure about the 2nd part…”What is Happening is Cooling”

    To say Canada will become a net importer of food is selling man’s capabilities short, just like the greenie alarmists do.

    We had cooling through the 60′s and 70′s, Canada did just fine, it went through a growth spurt. In fact most of the globe experienced amazing growth. Why? TECHNOLOGY and CHEAP SOURCES OF POWER.

    We know from our history that we will innovate, we will always find better, cheaper, easier ways to do things and we will find these new ways faster than ever before. It has been thus since Ug struck 2 pieces of flint together.

    We also know that the key is CHEAP SOURCES OF POWER. Comparatively, nothing else really matters.
    Give the Canadian farmers cheap sources of power, make it profitable to be a farmer and watch Canadians feed themselves as well as others.
    Same applies to the US, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, Russia etc etc.

    So yes the Globe may well cool, but then it will warm again, then cool then warm etc as it has been doing ad nauseum.

    I’d like to hear a speech from a well respected person telling us NOT TO WORRY.
    I’d tell you that, but I’m not respected (in a profile sense)

    00

  • #
    Pete H

    Joe V:
    August 12th, 2011 at 6:12 am
    Pete H @ #3
    “There are no riots across the UK. Only in England is it that society appears to be breaking down.”

    I take your point Joe though I could rebut your comment I do not want to detract from the topic here.

    My point was about our stupid, lying, untrustworthy political leaders and that also includes the north of the border where First Minister, Alex Salmond, is hell bent on turning out the lights with his reliance on windmills!

    00

  • #
    Joe V

    Matt B @41.

    Thanks Matt B.
    Nothing out of the ordinary in Wales ‘though, part from a few ‘isolated incidents, in Cardiff.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-14472218

    Unless it’s the unspeakable BBC pretending. ;-)

    00

  • #
    J.H.

    Excellent speech. He is right. It isn’t enough just to get back to where we were. It’s crunch time. It’s time to stop Socialism, under the guise of environmentalism, from gaining anymore influence.

    The hypothesis of AGW was never about science…. it has always been about the politics. That is why the debate was deemed as over. “The science was settled.”

    The Eco fascists are no longer just Green nutters on the fringe with a bit of tacit support from mainstream politics…. They have gained enormous wealth and power via biased media representation and are now front and center Mainstream nutters hell bent on destroying Australia’s economy and way of life. The only thing stopping them at the moment is that they are so unpopular and unwanted, that the Democratic process is keeping them at bay. So much so that Eco extremist Greens like Clive Hamilton cry for the Democratic process to be suspended!

    Green AGW advocates want to suspend the Democratic process! It doesn’t get clearer than that…. and these people have the ear of Gillard, Labor, the EU, The UN…

    So, now that we have seen them for what they are, and have almost stopped them from doing their worst…. Now that we can clearly see their foul objectives…… It is absolutely incumbent on conservatives and patriots, those who aspire to Capitalism, ownership of property, Freedom of speech and Democracy, to ensure that rampant Socialism can NEVER raise it’s Fascist head again.

    If we want to avoid the dysfunction that cripples Britain and sends their very children maddened and enraged into the streets looting and burning, intellectual cripples disadvantaged by the crushing oppression of the Welfare state…… Then we need to act.

    It starts by with-holding from the socialists their very life blood….. Everyone else’s money.

    We shame them, we de fund them and we enshrine in legislation guarantees that government cannot run deficits, give away national sovereignty, nor interfere in the property rights of individuals or their enterprise.

    …. and we do not listen to one more Socialist lie or promise from them. They are incapable of truth as they are incapable of compassion…. indeed, their compassion IS a lie.

    00

  • #
    Joe V

    Pete H @ 63.


    My point was about our stupid, lying, untrustworthy political leaders and that also includes the north of the border where First Minister, Alex Salmond, is hell bent on turning out the lights with his reliance on windmills!

    That is true of course, though ‘ community ‘ where it exists transcends the shenanigans of politicians.

    Salmond is seen as a bit if a joke, and indeed seems to enjoy playing the clown, ‘ though that may just be his disguise.

    The smaller countries are more used to enduring, oppression & hardship.
    The Poll Tax was inflicted on Scotland first, as a social experiment. Despite large scale protest and civil disobedience ( Ie. Not paying), it was deemed a success and introduced to England.
    That’s when the riots started, that finally led to the downfall of Thatcher.

    00

  • #
    Mike Jowsey

    Lionel @9

    I initially thought this was a pedantic rant, but no! Well critiqued – and thank you I don’t have to waste my time even looking at the quiz. If I ever come across a similar sort of thing, I might ask your specialist skill be deployed!

    00

  • #
    Joe V

    And Pete@ #3, reviewing your comment, I agree with all you say ‘though, except the perhaps unintended generality of your generalisation about the riots.
    Social cohesion may be breaking down everywhere, but it’s more advanced, if it ever existed to the same extent , in England.
    Scotland also has large ( proportionately) Immigrant communities, but they tend to be better accepted & integrated there, not that I’m attributing it to immigration, but a lack of cohesiveness that may well aggravate intolerance to things like migration, political elitism, expense fiddling, austerity, bankers, despair.

    00

  • #

    John:

    Really, its time for some betting. Choose a year, or a decade, and lets have some climate bets. We can start now, with the decade we are in. Will the average world temperature be warmer or cooler in 2011 – 2020 than it was in 2001 – 2010?

    Then people can start putting their money where their mouth is…

    Sure :-) $100, is that all? On a ten year bet it’s hardly worth the effort.

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    Speaking of protests, I wonder how many of the ‘protestors’ in England are believers of AGW. I’m coming around to the view that support of AGW has a lot to do with vanity and ego and the preference for ego fulfillment over civic duty and concern for the social infrastructure which Western society provides; anyway I thought this was to the point.

    “Stick it to ‘em
    Fuelled by nights of drinking and looting, two teenage girls tweeted enthusiastically about the London riots being ‘a bit of fun & sticking it to those “rich” small business owners.’

    They probably didn’t know the name of the young black man shot in Tottenham, whose death supposedly sparked the initial outbreak of violence. Nor did they appear concerned about looming public expenditure cuts.

    A number of major English cities are now in lockdown after four nights of anarchy. But the protests are not anger at fat-cat salaries or rampant capitalism.

    Rather they are a symptom of the spiritual and moral rupture of English society. The protests are criminal, not political.

    The Anglican Bishop of London, Dr Richard Chartres, thought the riots were not ‘wholly unexpected.’ If he meant that the violent scenes were foreseeable, he was correct.

    A segment of English society is broken. Lacking any moral compass, the perpetrators of this violence have no awareness of the values and duties essential for the health of a civil society.

    A culture of welfare dependency has corrupted the values of social and economic productivity. Family dysfunction and breakdown has stripped away the virtues of stable and responsible relationships. The law’s preference for the rights of the perpetrator over those of the victim has corrupted the dignity of justice.

    A key principle of civil society is that there are necessary constraints on individual freedom – both legal and self imposed.

    Yet for a generation, society – the police, the judiciary, human rights lawyers, social workers, teachers, and politicians – has been complicit in rolling back those constraints.

    Distaste for imposing any measure of compulsion or responsibility on a generation of young people, be it in the home, the classroom, or in any public space, has bred contempt for manners and decency.

    The result is the emergence of a culture of absolute individual entitlement and narcissistic self-centeredness that is susceptible neither to guilt nor shame.

    All informal institutions of civil society – the family, the place of worship, the surf club – have both a duty and a capacity to instill the manners and decency we expect of our citizens.

    The primacy of individual entitlement has perverted civil society. And this perversion was foreseeable.

    The Reverend Peter Kurti is a Visiting Fellow with the Religion and the Free Society Program at The Centre for Independent Studies.”

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Jo, I was thinking $100 for each post. And if the $100 is invested wisely, who knows what it’ll be worth in 10 years?

    As for odds, Winston, I think evens. After all, both sides are certain that they are right, so you would think that everyone would see evens as more than fair.

    Now we just need a trustworthy person to run this. I’d do it, but any money that came my way would get spent, and there would be no payout. So we need a trustworthy volunteer…. Any takers?

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    I will be glad to hold all monies; as an officer of the court I am far more trustworhy than average citizens or even climate scientists.

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    John Brookes @ various re bet

    As usual John you’re a half a year behind the times.

    The betting started back in January.

    http://notrickszone.com/category/climate-bet-for-charity/

    00

  • #
    The _observer

    To john Brooks;
    quote

    “We’ll need an agreed temperature measure – Maybe UAH channel 5, given its looked after by a “skeptic”. “

    John; seeing your such a smartarse, I went to the trouble of providing this link for you.

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1979/plot/uah/from:1979/offset:1/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2000/trend/plot/uah/from:2000/trend/offset:1

    It compares the HadCRUT3 temp graph with Roy Spencer’s (PHd climate scientist) UAH temp graph.

    You may wish to comment on why the “sceptics’” graph shows an uptrend since 2000AD & the climategate frauds graph shows a flat trend

    Steve

    00

  • #
    The _observer

    to John Brooks

    John; this is also interesting.

    here

    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1979/plot/uah/from:1979/offset:1/plot/rss/from:2000/trend/plot/uah/from:2000/trend/offset:1

    we see the other sat data, RSS also with a flat trend from 2000 AD.

    Of course the RSS team wouldn’t be considered “sceptics” by you john.

    What’s your comment on the reasons for the up trend again from the “sceptic”, but not the ‘good guys’ john?

    00

  • #
    Bob Malloy

    Off topic:

    Something that may have been missed by most that bothered to open the Government’s B.S. mail out. At the bottom of page four in the fine print in the blue section is the following passage.

    The Commonwealth of Australia does not
    necessarily endorse the content of this
    publication.

    Now if the Commonwealth is not necessarily endorsing their own publication, why should we. More of our money wasted, and they admit it in their trash sheet.

    00

  • #
    jl

    John brookes@47. Someone is already betting my money (and yours) on this climate thingy. I hear that the kitty is way beyond big…more sabre-tooth-tiger. They sent me a nice picture book in the mail that said they were trustworthy enough to spend my money, so I believe them. And best of all, they have an inside tip that is so good that they have put all our money on one horse, none of your namby-pamby ‘evens’.

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    Great speech by David Archibald, particularly this bit:

    As for any politicians who have ever believed in global warming, or supported the carbon tax, or a carbon-constrained economy, there is no hope for them. They are either too stupid or incompetent to be taken seriously. Merely recanting, at this late stage, won’t be enough. Make their lives hell too, just as they wished a diminished life on you.

    For those of you who think things will somehow get “all better” simply by having an election, may I remind you that the Libs ALSO have a “climate change” policy. AND the Greens will have fifteen seats in the Senate until 2014, and at least five after that until 2017.

    Isn’t it about time we started thinking about some pro-active action?

    How about a new political party – The Australian Realists or something like that? Like the original Democrats, it has no policies, just the promise that all legislation will be subjected to a “reality check”.

    The group runs on the strength of a simple published “checklist” which is to be applied to all proposed legislation. Policy that passes the test is supported in Parliament, policy that doesn’t gets a “fail”.

    We forget about the House of Reps, and put up a team for the Senate in every state. With people like our host Jo, David Evans, Richard Archibald, John Nicol, Bob Carter, John McLean, Ian Plimer and Tom Quirk, plus folk like Mick Pattel who started the convoy, I reckon with all the voter dissatisfaction out there by the next election at least one seat from every state and the NT would be immensely “do-able”.

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    Myself @ 78

    AND the Greens will have fifteen seats in the Senate until 2014, and at least five after that until 2017.

    That should have been nine seats and fives seats, not fifteen. Old Timer’s Disease.

    Either that, or the Merlot.

    00

  • #
  • #
    Winston

    O/T with apologies but the magnum opus continues…
    Once again the players are in brackets to denote the roles they are best suited in playing.

    Act I Scene III:

    Narrator: So, it came to pass that Caesar (Gillard), consulting her newfound ally Cassius (Bob Brown) (to whom she owed a great debt, due to his support allowing her to remain as Emperor), and acting upon the advice of the best Soothsayers money could buy, embarked upon a great austerity, applying the taxation blowtorch to the peasantry. The plebeians expressed resentment and protested at the measures, but their pleas for sanity fell upon deaf ears. So, the land fell into disrepair, fields were untilled and the mills that relied upon their grain remained still. The marketplaces were silent and deserted, the populace remaining huddled against the cold in their houses, unable to even provide the basic necessities and sustenance that were once plentiful and taken for granted by all and sundry. But, at least the Gods would now be appeased, and the evil ‘Carbonis’ spirit would be controlled, thought Caesar. Little did Caesar know, but she was sowing the seeds not only of the economic decimation of the Empire, but also of her own demise! As discontent among the populace had grown exponentially, her colleagues had begun to doubt her leadership qualities and were busily plotting her downfall. It had also fed the flame of revenge in the heart of Circus Maximus( Kevin Rudd), who was determined to live by the axiom, “ultionis est cena optimus servo frigus” (Revenge is a dish best served cold)!

    Setting: Roman Senate- The “Theatrum Absurdum”- Temporis quaero et refero( Q&A time).

    A flourish of trumpets heralds Caesar’s arrival, young maidens precede her spreading rose petals to mark her path. Various politicians are huddled in groups, murmuring to one another as her procession enters.

    Cassius (Brown): Popilius Lena! Come hither, I must speak with you before Caesar arrives. I have consulted our glorious god, Sol, as well as the four Venti and it is clear that they have the power to vanquish this evil Carbonis. I have Caesar over the proverbial barrel and we must press home our advantage now. If Caesar stands in the way of our plans for “Gubernationis Unum” (One World Government), we must strike first to eliminate her. She is weak and lacks our resolve. Caesar is, I fear, only interested in maintaining her power, not in the nobility of our cause to rid Gaia of the horrendous pestilence that is mankind.

    Popilius Lena(Milne): Too right, Cassius! The “Rufus Capitis” (aka the Ranga) needs to be taught a lesson, she never lets me announce the policies we’ve cooked up together, I’m starting to get heartily sick of her grandstanding. Who does Caesar think she is anyway? Doesn’t she realise that we are the enlightened ones? Quick, I’ll sharpen the cutlery!

    Cassius(Brown): Steady, Lena, patience. We must wait for the time to be right, soon the planets will align and our time will come. We will lead the faithful into a green and prosperous future, sitting around carbon-neutral campfires, singing songs and sleeping under the stars, as Gaia intended, in harmony with nature and following life’s great unending circle. (Stares of wanly into the distance, daydreaming of his glorious Utopian dreamland)

    Meanwhile, in another part of the chamber, another group gathers……………………

    Brutus Swannius(Swan): I think we will have to take action to rid ourselves of this Caesar! Friends, if Caesar cannot convince the plebeians of my magnificent mathematical skills and my brilliant Carbonis tax plan, we are done for! And we all know what that will mean- Marcus Antonius(Abbott) will take control of the Caesarship and we will be consigned to the dustbin of history quicker than you can say “Mundi Pecunia Articulus”(Global Financial Crisis)!

    Pompey(Hawke): (tugging his ear) Ahhh, I reckon we should speak to Cassius(Brown), he’s the puppetmaster in this scam, so maybe we can garner his support in a coup d’etat, just like Achilles Incognito(Keating) did to me in ’91. I’ll just wander over to Julia now and offer her my full and unequivocal support and faith in her leadership. That’ll be the signal to get those knives sharpening! (Exuent)

    Casca(Shorten): Yea, I think her popularity is at such an all-time low that we will all go down with her if we don’t act now. Loyalty is all well and good, but she’s had her XV (15) minutes of fame and self-preservation has to be our paramount consideration now. It’s every man for himself now that she is as popular as a camel at a Get Up conference! I, for one, put my hand up for the Caesarship. I’m the man for the job, if I do say so myself.

    Metallus Cimber(Garrett): Oh, for god sake, Casca! Everyone nows you want the job, but you need real charisma for that. You can’t be serious if you think your Forrest Gump look is Caesar material, mate. I mean…. cardigans, really! Even Decimus(Crean) here has a more vibrant, charismatic personality than you.

    Decimus Brutus(Crean): But, guys, I really do have a vibrant, charismatic…………

    Casca(Shorten):( interrupting) But, I’ve got dibbs on the job, guys! I saw it first, and it’s MY turn (stamps feet). How many leaders do I have to get rid of to become Caesar, for chrissake? Macbeth made it all look so easy when he did it. And besides, my mother-in-law is the Praetor, and she said it was OK by her if I had a turn.

    Trebonius(Ferguson):Look, let’s not fight over it. We’ll worry about the details later. Nobody on this side of politics ever worried about such details up to now, so I think we’ll just wing it like we always do. Time is of the essence now, and Caesar’s time is just about up.

    Cinna(Wong): Pipe down everyone, no need to get catty! You’ll all give the game away. First, we have to make sure we all pretend to show her our full support until the time is ripe. I agree, timing is all important, and we don’t want to screw this up any more than it already is!

    Meanwhile, in another corner of the room…………………………..

    Lazarus(Howard): Look at this Caesar, now. Parading in like she owns the place, taking credit for all my good economic ground work I did in making the Republic the envy of the world. Why, boat loads of people came wanting to live in Rome such was the standard of living here until I put a stop to it! Now, she’s making a dog’s breakfast out of her Empire. Green Utopia indeed! Even the fleas and the rodents are leaving. (Wistfully) Once we were the envy of the Greeks, the Egyptians, the Mycaenae, the Gauls………………

    Marcus Antonius(Abbott): Yes, Yes. But we do have the popular support behind us now. You and I both know this Carbonis tax is a toxic and massively unpopular impost on the common people. It is stifling investment and productivity when the Empire is bedevilled by the outside world’s economic problems, let alone Caesar’s pet projects weighing down the public purse. But, we can’t risk going against those 3 Soothsayers, or else we will be branded as heretics! Before we would know what hit us, we would be headlining with the lions at the Colisseum quicker than you could say “Caro repens” (Fresh meat)!

    Lazarus(Howard): Just keep the pressure on her, she’ll crack. Either that, or her mates over there (gestures toward Swannius) will get in first. Her goose is well and truly cooked. The longer that lot stay in power, the more they shoot themselves in the foot with their knee jerk reactions and ham-fisted policies.

    Octavius(Turnbull): I don’t know, I rather like this Carbonis tax (adjusting his money belt under his toga). I actually thought it was a pretty good idea, myself. After all, the plebeians don’t really need the money, do they? What good would they do with it anyway. Better to keep the money in the bank, so to speak. Seems like sound fiscal policy from my point of view.

    Marcus Antonius(Abbott): Look, Octavius, whose side are you on anyway. If you like Julia’s leadership so much, you’re welcome to switch over to the other side any time. They don’t call you “Caucus non sequitur” for nothing. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence with you, isn’t it. Anyway, back to tin tacks. I’m just conscious of not appearing too negative and having the Tribunes paint me as a spoiler. In a funny way, I wish Julia would get something right so I could say something positive for a change!

    Lazarus(Howard): (Laughs) Lets see what our fearless leader has to say for herself….

    Caesar(Gillard): My loyal subjects. As you know, it has been necessary for me to introduce a Carbonis tax, based on the best science available to us, to appease the Gods and to negate the dreadful waste of our modern lifestyle. Now, I plan to compensate the plebeians well for this tax so that XC%(90%) of households will not be disadvantaged in any way. In fact, with this tax, by my calculations, we should raise pecunia maximus (a truckload of cash) for dolor minimis (minimal pain). Those who oppose the tax are only whingers and parasites who are trying to cause disruption to our plans for social renewal. Also, don’t listen to the lying words of that agitator, Marcus Favonius (Andrew Bolt), who is responsible for spreading a scurrilous scare campaign about this tax and my leadership. I can reassure you all, the plebeians are very happy I am taxing them this way, because they understand that only good can come from giving generously to the government to rid us of this unseen evil Carbonis that threatens the safety of Rome. I promise I will wear out my sandals marching from one end of the Empire to the other to sell this tax, I will climb every mountain, ford every stream. I will fight them on the beaches, I shall fight them in the fields and in the streets, I shall fight them in the hills; I will never surrender, until a large part of the Empire is subjugated and starving and until, in God’s good time, the New World Order, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old!

    All: All Hail Caesar! (with faux enthusiasm)

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Perhaps the predictions found on the internet that Betelgeuse is going to go supernova in 2012

    Kevin Moore Id go for Eta Carina its BIGGER! So much for the doomsayers.
    @ Grant in NZ I came to Aus with the idea that the great Aus Govt WASNT going to implement an ETS.. how silly I was..

    00

  • #
    MattB

    “With people like our host Jo, David Evans”

    Sorry MV – didn;t you read Archibald’s speech?

    “…who have ever believed in global warming, … there is no hope for them. They are either too stupid or incompetent to be taken seriously. Merely recanting, at this late stage, won’t be enough.”

    00

  • #
    Wayne, s. Job

    The general public are hanging for the truth, the time is ripe to tell it like it is, and put the lie to these inconsequential carpet baggers pushing the fraud of CO2 pollution. This Gillard woman is pushing the greening of the red agenda that she pushed in her socialist forum days.

    None of what she is doing has anything to do with climate or conservation it is the destruction of our system to usher in a new system of government control. Not going to happen Julia, we are on our way to to the capitol. We may not be armed and marching but we are coming, the internet has them f$$$ed.
    Time to say good night Julia.

    00

  • #
    Get_Down

    The data on the BOM website contradicts their own policy & confirms there is little change between current temperatures & those of twenty years ago.

    The climate maps for Australia indicate the maximum, minimum & mean temperature anomolies for the vast majority of the Australian landmass are less than the reference period 1961 – 1990

    http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/awap/temp/index.jsp?colour=colour&time=latest&step=0&map=maxanom&period=12month&area=nat

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    MattB @ 83

    Yes I did read the speech. Especially the bit you quoted. Let me change your emphasis for you:

    “…who have ever believed in global warming, … there is no hope for them. They are either too stupid or incompetent to be taken seriously. Merely recanting, at this late stage, won’t be enough.”

    First of all, the statement is about politicians. It actually starts off:

    As for any politicians who have ever believed in global warming,

    None of the people I listed have ever been politicians.

    Second, and more to the point, Jo and Davis held views they BELIEVED in, and CHANGED those views when the science became obvious to them. Unlike our politicians who only “believe” in that they think will win them votes.

    Third, and most important of all, Jo and David changed their views YEARS AGO, as a result of their studies of the facts, and not as a result of some focus group deciding there were now more votes in jumping ship than going down with the captain.

    But of course you knew all that before you posted. But having aligned yourself so solidly with the other genocidal mass-murderers, you really don’t have much of a choice, do you MattB?

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    MattB @ 83

    BY the way, did you bring your Plan B?

    Apart from buying some jumpers and letting the peasants eat cake, that is.

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    MattB @ 83

    Tell me MattB, do you actually have anything constructive to add to the idea of a group of Realists in the Senate to put a check on the lunacies of the Greens?

    Or are you just here to stir?

    Again?

    Sorry, why am I even asking?

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    The_Observer – thanks for the graphs. I imagine the trends are different over the past 11 years because the different groups are measuring slightly different things. The longer the time period, the better agreement between them will be.

    You aren’t thinking, are you, that some people fiddled their temperatures back in the 90′s, and have now had to throttle them back a bit to avoid looking like shonks? Shame on you if you are.

    Memoryvault, you are tiresome.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    An admission. I only just read the speech. What an absolute shocker.

    How could anyone suggest shutting down the ABC? What about Rake and Sea Change? What about Play School and Bananas in Pyjamas? Four Corners, Media Watch, Country Wide and Australian Story? The Health Report and Philip Adams on Radio National? Eoin Cameron for breakfast on 720 in Perth? Is Macca still doing Australia All Over? Without the ABC we would never have enjoyed The Chaser, or The Gruen Transfer, or lusted after Miff in Spicks & Specks.

    No, there are things a government can do to save money, but abolishing the ABC is not one of them.

    00

  • #
    janama

    This is as dummy spit. join it or don’t. I’ll join it.

    00

  • #
    janama

    I mean – this is the reality. Thank you David.

    00

  • #
    Blimey

    Is this the same David?

    http://n3xus6.blogspot.com/2007/02/dd.html

    Or is it this one, writing in “Oil & Gas”, telling us it’s not warming.

    http://www.davidarchibald.info/papers/Warming%20or%20Cooling.pdf

    Interesting choice of journal.

    00

  • #
    Joe Lalonde

    Jo,

    Interesting that billions of years are of no consequence to climate science. Only a few hundred years and much of that science is tainted for a certain outcome.

    Uncertainty is the major factor in science along with bad conclusions.
    If you stopped the planet and solar system, ALL the current science parameters would change as we are used to motion as the driving mechanical force behind science.

    00

  • #

    @PeteH

    “The quality of the leadership in our societies is at an all time low.”

    Spot on and they have the cheek to talk about our “broken” society …

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/london%e2%80%99s-burning-an-alternative-viewpoint/

    Pointman

    00

  • #
    Andrew Marven

    Are you actually all on drugs.

    You’re putting your faith in a non science alarmist like Archibald. Nexus6 summed it all up … and we know what Leif Svalgard thinks too.

    You guys are just magnets for bunk merchants. Suckers.

    00

  • #
    RWTH

    Agreed. Defund the ALP Broadcasting Corporation.

    00

  • #
    Joe V

    John Brookes @ #71

    Now we just need a trustworthy person to run this. I’d do it, but any money that came my way would get spent, and there would be no payout

    John,
    I’m sure you can be trusted , and your adhesion to such socialist principles is admirable. :-)

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Andrew Marven: @96

    Andrew, find yourself a good tutor who can help fix the deficiencies in your science education.

    After a few years you may be able to do one of those late entry courses at UNI and gain entrance to a science degree course.

    If you finish that you may have a chance to understand what’s going on here, if not in the rest of the is very confusing world.

    All the best.

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Get_Down: ( 1 /Get Up ?)

    I just love sarcasm in the morning.

    good one

    00

  • #
    pattoh

    Cohenite @70

    Having the uneasy feeling that pushing the Fabian Agenda for Global Governance (with the result of submitting the nation’s economic sovereignty to an un-elected & un-answerable body), I was pointed at a book by Geoffrey Robertson (Hypotheticals) called “The Tyrannicide Brief”.

    There are some interesting parallels. Most particularly the nature of sovereign power & commonwealth.

    What would constitute treason?

    00

  • #
    1DandyTroll

    @MattB:
    August 12th, 2011 at 6:39 pm
    “With people like our host Jo, David Evans”
    Sorry MV – didn;t you read Archibald’s speech?
    “…who have ever believed in global warming, … there is no hope for them. They are either too stupid or incompetent to be taken seriously. Merely recanting, at this late stage, won’t be enough.”

    Is it any wonder that you don’t garnish any respect when you can’t even make a correct quote.

    If you gonna take the time to ridicule something the least you can do is actually take the time to understand how to do it.

    As I recall it though, communists never took the time to understand anything they just wanted something delivered.

    00

  • #
    The _observer

    .

    John Brooks; “You aren’t thinking, are you, that some people fiddled their temperatures back in the 90′s, and have now had to throttle them back a bit to avoid looking like shonks?”

    .
    .

    Well Hansen is a real bastard for doing that. Thay’s why I didn’t bother including NASA GISS on my temp graph. ;)

    00

  • #
    The _observer

    John Brooks “How could anyone suggest shutting down the ABC?”
    .
    .
    Yes, make it user pays, so anyone who wants to hear or view ABC’s rubbish can. And those that don’t want to hear or view their rubbish don’t have to pay for it.

    00

  • #
    Andrew Marven

    DandyTroll and MaryFJohnston – have you ever listened to Archibald’s wild alarmist global freezing apocalyptic predictions. Well I have.
    Have you read his atrocious papers. Read a “published” paper at http://n3xus6.blogspot.com/2007/02/dd.html Considered his non-statistical non-scientific approach.
    Seen his methods chastised repeatedly on-line by accomplished solar physicist, Leif Svalgard. As usual you lot never hold your own to any account. Lax sloppy sceptic standards.
    We’ll just add that to his interesting advocacy for chilli powder derivatives as cancer therapy. Some pretty big claims.

    Mary I think you need that basic education. Consider Gullibility 101 and Come in Spinner 102.

    00

  • #

    The _observer: @ 104

    I totally agree …maybe Fox could pick upthe ABC and run with it.

    Say YES to an election now !!

    00

  • #
    pat

    back to the Perth carbon (dioxide) forum with the PM. how believable is this audience?

    12 Aug: Sky News Blog: Ben Harvey: Forget that carbon stuff, just let gay partners get hitched
    If there is one lesson Julia Gillard can take away from last night’s meeting it is that West Australians don’t seem that interested in putting a price on industrial emissions.
    We are, however, keen to marry our lesbian or homosexual life partners, smoke dope to make us feel better when we are sick and secure Federal funding for whitewater rafting facilities.
    For a community meeting which was meant to be about the carbon tax, there were a lot of questions which required the Prime Minister to preface her answer with the words: “That is a little off-field.”
    Take Josh, for example. The amiable young bloke from the eastern suburbs must have thought all his Christmases had come at once when he was selected to be part of the meeting with the PM.
    He clearly didn’t give a hoot about the carbon tax but thought Ms Gillard should stump up $5 million so he and his mates could go whitewater rafting at Champion Lakes in Armadale.
    Southern suburbs dad Jason wanted to know whether the Prime Minister was open to the idea of seriously ill people being able to alleviate their pain by smoking cannabis. He even constructed a nifty carbon tax segue, arguing that the production of life-saving drugs was carbon intensive.
    “Most of my questions about the carbon tax have already been answered, so I am going off topic,” one woman declared, before reading from a pre-prepared question on same-sex marriage worded so precisely it suggests she was never, ever going to ask anything about an emissions trading scheme.
    Minutes later, a well-spoken young man again broached the subject of gay rights, asking how the Government could, in good conscience, tax his relationship with his partner but not recognise it through marriage…
    COMMENT BY DFB: My god, where did they find this bunch of clowns?
    REPLY TO DFB BY Bomber: at a labor party meeting, oh sorry, that was a labor party meeting.
    http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/opinion/post/-/blog/benharvey/post/24/comment/1/

    not surprisingly we were told by the West Australian yesterday, almost double the number were in favour of the tax at the end of the forum compared to when they came in!!!
    Sky says that even anti-carbon-(dioxide)-tax West Australians have moved on!!!

    12 Aug: Sky News: No better time for a carbon tax – PM
    In a state where federal Labor holds only three of the 15 seats and opposition to the carbon tax has been made clear, Ms Gillard was expected to be greeted by a hostile reception.
    But in a possible sign people had moved on from the issue of the carbon tax, nearly half of the questions directed to Ms Gillard were topics such as food labelling, same-sex marriage, cannabis and aged care…
    http://www.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=649357&vId=

    00

  • #
    pat

    Sky has video and this article on their front page, but nothing on the Opposition Budget itself! nice going Sky:

    13 Aug: Sky News: Oppn has a $70b black hole – PM
    The document says it will cost $27 billion to scrap the planned carbon tax and the opposition will have to find $8 billion for pledged tax cuts..
    http://www.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=649755&vId=

    no doubt the Oppn can save pleny by getting rid of the zillions of inspectors for the following plus those inspectors who will assess how green our homes are, etc etc:

    13 Aug: Gold Coast Bulletin: Alister Thomson: Plumber’s ire over solar hot-water checks
    Figures obtained from the Gold Coast City Council show 111 of the 145 inspections carried out since January 1 revealed at least one defect in the installation process.
    Industry insiders say rebates on offer for solar hot water have unfortunately been a magnet for “cowboy” operators who don’t play by the rules, potentially putting homeowners at risk with “shonky” installations.
    Mr Mays said he understood ”cowboy” plumbers and electricians had been lured to the rebate-backed part of the industry, but council inspectors were punishing the companies working within the law.
    He said Gold Coast City Council inspectors were offering free audits while working off a 25-point checklist, which they kept secret.
    He said the council checklist was based on an interpretation of Australian Standards that differed from the State Government.
    ”Plumbers are going berserk because we never know what the rules are,” he said…
    http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2011/08/13/340695_gold-coast-news.html

    00

  • #
    pat

    any new govt could save tens of billions by scrapping the NBN madness:

    13 Aug: SMH: Clancy Yeates: Treasury had early concerns about NBN, papers show
    THE government was warned by Treasury that the national broadband network would expose taxpayers to ”considerable financial risks” only weeks after the ambitious high-speed internet plan was unveiled.
    Previously secret documents, made public yesterday, also reveal Treasury told the government it would have to consider shielding the $36 billion network from private-sector rivals to help make it viable….
    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/treasury-had-early-concerns-about-nbn-papers-show-20110812-1iqwf.html

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    Yes, Pat, scrap the NBN. That is Rupert’s policy, and he is trying to get rid of the government so that there is no NBN. Why? Because fast internet takes away his ability to make money.

    So yes, scrap the NBN and pay through the nose to Foxtel….

    00

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    Lionel Griffith @ 9

    There is no global greenhouse. The Greenhouse Effect is based upon numerous false assumptions that are non-physical in the free atmosphere: flat earth, back radiation,

    Have to nitpick you on two points there.

    Quite obviously there is a global greenhouse effect, it’s called water vapour. Or do you not believe in water vapour?

    Also, back radiation is real. By real I mean for a few hundred dollars in parts anybody can measure it in their own back yard at night. So yeah, pretty real by any standard. See instructions from (drum roll) Roy Spencer on how he measured downwelling IR from the night sky. With such simplistic tools he can only detect the IR effect of clouds (that water vapour stuff you don’t believe in) not any evidence of CO2 back radiation, but it proves the existence of “back radiation” regardless of its source. The back radiation is always there, but without the sun’s input there will always be more radiation going up than coming back down – ie a net cooling takes place concurrent with back radiation from the sky.

    You might want to avoid throwing the baby out with the bath water in future.

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Re 111

    I’ve read the first 2 lines and I’m having a bet with myself that somewhere in the rest of this he will strike with “CO2 increases the amount of water vapour which increases heat holding power which will lead to us all being INCINERATED!!

    OK back to it.

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    OK OK OK

    I was wrong!! No actual mention of incineration or “feedback effect”, but he did mention the beast, back radiation, and without this you can’t get AGW.

    00

  • #

    Blimey: #93
    August 12th, 2011 at 8:45 pm

    Is this the same David?

    http://n3xus6.blogspot.com/2007/02/dd.html

    Nice attempt at playing the man you moron.
    I followed your link. Here is their forensic dissection…

    Yes, Archibald has written the same paragraph twice. It doesn’t appear to be a printing error either as each of the paragraphs are slightly different (i.e. projection of solar cycle 24 maximum verses projection of a solar cycle 24 maximum).

    The Dalton Minimum is spelt Delton below. There’s a space missing in …..experienced a2.0C decline.

    Quibbles maybe, but basic errors such as these indicate little effort was put into the writing

    But your fellow moron opens the post with the following…

    Firstly, some background. In a rather silly post from NZ denialist Vincent Grey over at Jen Marohasy, a fellow by the name of David Archibald popped up…

    That would be Vincent GRAY
    Quibble maybe, but basic errors such as this indicate little effort was put into the writing.

    Didn’t you notice that Blimey? you self satisfying repetitive stroker.
    Your posts are a total waste of time you Richard Cranium.

    00

  • #
    Andrew Marven

    Baa Humbug – only a complete shonk would cherry pick Nexus’s critique as you have – disgraceful. Are you that intellectually bankrupt.
    But like most of your ilk – you always give your own crowd a free ride.

    00

  • #

    Hey fool, it wasn’t me that made the original link.
    The article picks on grammatical errors and says that that is an indication of sloppy work whilst at the same time making the very same errors itself.

    Sloppy work is sloppy work irregardless of which side it’s on.

    Do you not get the irony you idiot?

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Andrew Marven: @ 105

    Yes.

    I agree ..

    The ABC should be disbanded and fund stream redirected to research at CSIRO.

    00

  • #
    MattB

    “Third, and most important of all, Jo and David changed their views YEARS AGO,”

    Did they? the blog is what 4 years old maybe? Or 3? People have been claiming AGW is bunkum and they had the science to prove it way before Jo and David jumped off the wagon. If you follow the science that made Jo change, well it’s not that long ago that the hotspot issue arose. I’m pretty sure that was the tipping point.

    Anyway back to the entire quote I am accused of mis-quoting:
    “As for any politicians who have ever believed in global warming, or supported the carbon tax, or a carbon-constrained economy, there is no hope for them. They are either too stupid or incompetent to be taken seriously. Merely recanting, at this late stage, won’t be enough. Make their lives hell too, just as they wished a diminished life on you.”

    I mean that is pretty much every single politician given that 1.5 elections ago there was bipartisan support for an ETS. Even now there are precious few who would go on the public record saying they don’t think AGW is a problem. It matter not what they actually think… a pollie who thinks the science is crap but toes the party line is surely far worse than someone who at least thinks it is real and votes/speaks accordingly. A liar is far worse than a fool surely.

    00

  • #
    Paul H

    Don’t be fooled by the “Climate Disruption” strategy either.

    Check out 1971′s climate for a bit of perspective.

    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/08/03/essay-by-reader-paul-h-is-our-climate-becoming-more-extreme/

    00

  • #
    Bush bunny

    O/T Evergreen solar manufacturer has just gone bust. Started in the US
    moved to China and 800 jobs were lost. Rumours they are to return $21 million of the monies given to them by the State government who gave them $58 million in subsidies before they moved to China? So truth is coming out Solar ain’t as cool as it is supposed to be.

    Hope Al Gore invested in it, eh?

    00

  • #

    [...] JO NOVA BLOG Climate is a non-problem. What is happening is Cooling Archibald Speech Rally Canberra 16th August 2011 http://joannenova.com.au/2011/08/david-archibalds-speech-plus-protests-coming-up/ [...]

    00

  • #