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

White conservatives don’t deny “climate change”. Journalists deny English.

Yesterday I wrote that the media is a rubber stamp for government and green propaganda, and today, the perfect example of certified nonsense appeared.

Not only is the headline 100% incorrect, Why conservative white men are more likely to deny climate change”, the body of the story barely tries to add a caveat. The poorly designed study used the ambiguous phrase “global warming” instead of “climate change”, which is not much better. Ask me if I believe in global warming, and I’ll ask you — warming since when?

The journalist, Adriana Barton, has dutifully repeated Orwellian newspeak, and wins today’s award for The Destruction of the English Language.

Can anyone name a single white guy who denies the climate changes? (And more to the point, for pedantic trolls, is that a person who is a well known skeptic, i.e. do they matter?)

What else could the phrase “to deny climate change” mean? Hands up, who thinks that the climate has not changed since that Thursday afternoon when Earth was formed in 4.5 billion BC (pace Ian Plimer)?

In their arts degree, I thought journalists wrote essays on “transcending existential paradigms”, “stripping assumptions bare”, and you-know, writing… accurately?  What’s the difference between an “investigative” journalist and an unwitting sock puppet, who can tell?  Activists, and some pollies, want the public to think that those who disagree with the UN are the kind of barking mad, grumpy old sods who are too stupid to realize that, you know, the climate changes.

The debate is about whether man-made emissions are changing the global climate, not about whether the climate changes.

The UN defines “climate change” as being man-made. But that’s no reason to dump centuries of functional discipline of words like “denies”, “change” and “climate”.

It’s a reason to ask why the UN is a/ incompetent with English, or b/ getting away scott-free with Orwellian perversions.

When they bastardize our common language, and fog the debate with inaccuracy, they win. How many readers of the The Globe and Mail read the headline, or the story, and think skeptics deny the climate changes?

This misinformation is propaganda.

——————————————————–

PS: We already know past studies showed skeptics are smarter.

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.0/10 (5 votes cast)
White conservatives don't deny "climate change". Journalists deny English., 8.0 out of 10 based on 5 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/68x4c3m

223 comments to White conservatives don’t deny “climate change”. Journalists deny English.

  • #
    Sean

    I wonder if the “conservative white men” might also be correlated with engineering, scientific and technical competency coupled with being a little past middle age (when people tend to be more conservative anyway). I attended an engineering and science college back in the 70′s and the male female ratio was 9:1. Besides being conservative and male, this age group has been through at least 5 “save the planet” scares in their adult lifetimes. I look at getting the prominence of the sociologists at this state of the game in the climate change debate as sending in old men and young boys into the fight to fight a desperate rear guard action just before defeat.

    00

  • #
    Cookster

    Well said Jo. This study in itself is a perfect example of all that is wrong with the great scare campaign. Brendan O’Neill has published an excellent rebuff in The Australian today (linked). I particularly like his pointing out that Green types like to think they are the forward thinking ‘progressive’ types when the reverse is much closer to the mark. Personally if it had not been for the crude terms continually used by so called “scientists” and their elitist supporters to denigrate sceptics I would never have become sceptical in the first place!

    00

    • #
      Robert

      There you go. I am 47 and back in school to complete an engineering degree I started years ago (ended up doing what I was going to school for etc. so it was on the back burner for awhile).

      As Sean has mentioned I have seen at least 4 “the world is going to end unless we…” scares none of which had any basis in fact and none of which did anything but cause unnecessary stress, poverty, and pain to most while enriching a select few.

      While I occasionally will give it back to one of the faithful with both barrels and can be just as evil and nasty as they are I prefer not to. I walked that road myself many years ago and it is only through good friends, hard times, and having my nosed rubbed in reality a few times that I no longer consider those “social circles” anything to be proud of.

      As I have told many of them when they launch on their rants, keep it up, you are doing more to drive people to our way of thinking than anything we could do.

      They truly are their own worst enemy. But it is easier on their psyches to attack us than to flagellate themselves.

      00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        I agree, they are their own worst enemies.

        And, they are so seriously serious.

        I find that humour is always a good tactic to have available.

        This is why I still insist on calling it “global warming”. I am inevitably corrected: “It’s climate change”.

        Which means I can quickly look around, smile, lean closer, and say, in a conspiring way, “it always does, doesn’t it?”

        00

  • #
    Stephen Harper

    I think that I might just be offended, insulted, humiliated and intimidated by that article. I think that I might just have been racially vilified; and after all, the test is how I feel about it all. If I feel vilified then that will be good enough for Bromberg, J of the Federal Court. Just ask Andrew Bolt. Where do I file my law suit?

    00

    • #
      PaulM

      Where do I file my law suit?

      More importantly, where do we find a lawyer willing to lodge a class action on our behalf, pro-bono (now isn’t that just the greatest tax minimisation scheme ever invented), as is the fashion for those that ran the case against Bolt. I asked my family friend who is a QC if he would be up for it and was shocked to find out he was a vile capitalist who expects the people wanting the case to pay for it. What is the world coming to….

      00

    • #
      brc

      Jokes aside, if you’re a white male I can see a lot more offense in this ‘study’ than in the Bolt articles. I hope someone decides to file a lawsuit just to prove the point. Of course it would never succeed, but it would be a nice little shot across the bows for all those soft-headed cheerleaders who would trash free speech principles just to get a dig in at someone they don’t like.

      00

    • #

      I’m not offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated by that article. I treat it with the contempt it deserves. I consider it to be just another piece of evidence that those on the”dark side” believe that they’re losing the argument, and the trust of “Joe Public”. The article, and many others like it, have a whiff of desperation about them. If you can’t win the argument, insult your opponent. It’s an old ploy, and rarely if ever works.

      00

  • #
    Cookster

    Oops, here’s the link to Brendon O’Neill’s article which did not seem to work in my original reply?

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/climate-sceptics-are-todays-radical-rebels/story-e6frg6zo-1226161595881

    00

    • #
      Steve Schapel

      Thanks, Cookster, great article. I particularly enjoyed “… having lived cushy lives, they now laugh in the face of the End of Days”.

      00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    I find it hard to get my head around the logic of the climate changers arguement that while the present rate of addition of CO2 “pollution” into the atmosphere is somehow atmospheric accumulative that a reduction of the addition of CO2 “pollution” by 5% or whatever will lower the present level of CO2 in the atmosphere.

    A plus and a plus doesn’t equal a minus.

    Or am I misunderstanding their arguement?

    00

    • #
      MaryFJohnston

      Hi Kevin

      We discussed this before on another thread, you are right, they can’t isolate the quantities they quote because there are many large and seriously important unknowns.

      What they are doing is ASSUMING that Nature is in a state of Equilibrium and therefore ANY variations detected are of HUMAN origin.

      There is no scientific basis for their assumption.

      Strangely they do allow that half of all human CO2 is naturally sequestered in some versions of their theory.

      00

      • #
        Streetcred

        Mary … let’s take that to the next level, humans are just as much part of Nature as is any other life form … therefore Nature being in equilibrium will continue to maintain the balance. Does this sound too much GAIA like? Hope not! But anyway it just goes to suggest that the CAGW fraternity should chill a bit and let things adjust naturally.

        00

        • #
          MaryFJohnston

          Hi Streetcred

          When you say “humans are just as much part of Nature as is any other life form” you are using the analogy that; If natural origin CO2 is taken care of by nature then so should Human origin CO2.

          That should be this case assuming there is enough “reagent” material available for that to happen.

          In many chemical reactions the rate can be slowed if there is insufficient amount of an ingredient.

          In this case you could say that CO2 is the reagent in short supply.

          If we humans in our “unthinking greed” create extra CO2 then the reactions should be able to speed up and absorb that extra CO2.

          It wont happen overnight but it will happen.

          Think of it as a “forcing”.

          The Ca waiting in the oceans goes to CaCO3 eventually and the huge amount of vegetative lifeforms (trees grasses mosses etc) berserk , they love CO2.

          We had a long exchange on another thread over this topic with the Belgian fellow “Ferdinand” who seemed to say that human CO2 was special and couldn’t be absorbed by nature.

          See comment by Rereke Whakaaro below for a funny post.

          00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … am I misunderstanding their arguement?

      No, you are misunderstanding their math.

      To the “climate changers” there are two types of CO2 molecule. Type one CO2 is very beneficial to plant growth, and by inference to all life on Earth. Type two CO2 is a dangerous man-made pollutant that is a threat to all life on Earth.

      Type two CO2 has been locked up in the ground for millennia, but now the evil coal miners and oil men are releasing it to compete against the type one CO2, and the type one CO2 is being driven out.

      The “climate changers” are not sure where the good, type one CO2 is going to, but they do know it is going somewhere because the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is not increasing as fast at the models predict. And, that fact alone is proof of how evil and insidious the type two CO2 is.

      See, it is all so obvious when you have a liberal arts degree …

      00

      • #
        Lawrie

        Rereke,

        Does it ever occur to the intelligentia/greens/youthful-stupid that had it not been for the industrial revolution with it’s fossil fuelled development that they would still be agrarian and living very short and risky lives? Does it matter that most agrarian types today (raises his hand) having dealt with the vagaries of nature first hand accept that there are changes in climate, seasons and weather patterns? I am one of those white,male deniers who have lived in the real world and am truly amazed at the sudden discovery by some that city life and offices are far from the norm. It’s like they just discovered that milk comes from cows or pork from pigs and not from Coles.

        00

        • #
          Kevin Moore

          For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

          Could it be that the rise of CO2 levels from pre Industrial Revolution levels of around 280 ppm to what they say is around 390 ppm now, is merely due to nature counteracting the huge reduction in area of the worlds forests?

          I presume that plant life is benefiting from the increased CO2.

          00

      • #
        Colin Henderson

        Bad CO2 and Good CO2 are indistinguishable. CO2 that is “man made”, slows the transmission of heat and/or is dissolver in the ocean is Bad until such time as it is taken up by a green plant or algae, at which time it becomes Good CO2. Carbon Dioxide which is gasses off from the ocean, released by volcanoes or produced by human respiration is always Good, even when it “traps” heat.

        00

    • #
      PaulM

      Have you ever noticed how The Prime Minister describes the Governments target as a -5% reduction in carbon polution? Now compared to our magnificent leader’s grasp of the English language, I would fall into the category of negative functional illiteracy, what she appears to be saying is that the Labor/Greens target is to increase emissions of carbon pollution by 5%. Either that or she is showing her suitability for a UN post alongside St Kevin.

      00

      • #
        lmwd

        she is showing her suitability for a UN post alongside St Kevin

        This is my suspicion and I’ll bet a chocolate fish on it! She knows she is toast here, so what’s her next career move? It is not like there is no precedent. Helen Clark, former PM of NZ, did just that off the backs of the NZ people!

        00

  • #
    J.H.

    Climate change is natural. There is no denying it….. The question should have been posed as this…. Do observations validate the hypothesis of Anthropogenic Global Warming.

    ….. The answer is, NO.

    00

  • #
    Tristan

    “When you start talking about climate change and the need for major changes, carbon taxes and lifestyle changes, [conservatives] see this as a threat to capitalism and future prosperity,” said McCright. “So conservatives tend to be very negative towards climate change.”

    Seems about right.

    As for ‘Orwellian newspeak’ cf. Climategate

    00

    • #
      Winston

      What a dumb suggestion, Tristan. Climategate emails were an example of how scientists OWN words showed what they were conspiring to do, and their hidden agenda to bully and marginalised anyone who dissented from their views, as well as how they manipulated data to “prove” their case. The only Orwellian link is in your distortion of that fact in your obtuse and unthinking response. War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Climategate is Newspeak. Who cares if it’s true, just state it repeatedly and it will be so. You’ve seriously lost the plot, Tristan. I held such high hopes for you. By the way, I am white, male, middle aged and conservative. QED. Correlation equals causation, you know. And in my sample, of one, 100% of the sample correlated with the assertion. Must be correct!

      00

      • #
        lmwd

        Now, now Winston let’s not be hasty. I’m female and white (and hate to admit to approaching middle age) so do I count? Oh, forgot to mention educated…..

        00

        • #
          lmwd

          Actually, I do seem to recall an earlier thread in which Jo discussed some other research results showing sceptics to be on average better educated (mathematically and scientifically literate) than the true believers.

          00

        • #
          Winston

          People like Tristan can only argue the merits of their case after they pigeon-holed you into a demographic to make it easier to demonise you. If a conservative does that they accuse them of being reactionary cranks, probably rightly so. But- one rule for them, one rule for “us”, whoever “we” are.

          00

          • #
            Streetcred

            Extreme cognitive dissonance comes to mind as an explanation for young tristan. He must have a real tussle in his mind after being spoon fed the “it’s not your fault” line throughout his schooling … well I assume that he did finish a reasonable level at school as he has some semblance of writing ‘skill’.

            00

    • #
      Tristan

      Climategate emails were an example of how scientists OWN words showed what they were conspiring to do, and their hidden agenda to bully and marginalised anyone who dissented from their views, as well as how they manipulated data to “prove” their case.

      I thought it was an example of a media beat-up.

      Who cares if it’s true, just state it repeatedly and it will be so. You’ve seriously lost the plot, Tristan. I held such high hopes for you. By the way, I am white, male, middle aged and conservative. QED. Correlation equals causation, you know. And in my sample, of one, 100% of the sample correlated with the assertion. Must be correct!

      I’ve stated something repeatedly? I’ve misunderstood correlation? Where?

      People like Tristan can only argue the merits of their case after they pigeon-holed you into a demographic to make it easier to demonise you. If a conservative does that they accuse them of being reactionary cranks, probably rightly so. But- one rule for them, one rule for “us”, whoever “we” are.

      Yet more leaping and bounding.

      Extreme cognitive dissonance comes to mind as an explanation for young tristan. He must have a real tussle in his mind after being spoon fed the “it’s not your fault” line throughout his schooling

      What is or isn’t my fault? Any cog. dis. regarding AGW would require me to hold multiple opposing views on the topic. You’ll have to point those out to me.

      00

      • #
        Winston

        I thought it was an example of a media beat-up.

        Tristan, you “thought” wrong. The media barely reported it when it should have been at the forefront in the MSM. They did their best to sweep it under the carpet- hardly a beat up then, is it? Rewriting history yet again.

        00

  • #

    Take heart, this is just representative of a stage in the battle, for the necessary debate has never taken place.

    Mohandas K. Gandhi famously said “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.”

    We’ve seen the “ignore” stage played out over the last few years. A “few ill-informed sceptics” somehow became a “well organised conspiracy of deniers funded by Big Oil”, as the “ridicule” stage developed. The very term “denier” was borrowed from “Holocaust denier”, as we well know, along with the implied “We don’t really mean they’re fascist , but hey, if the cap fits…”.

    The “ridicule” stage is now almost fully developed, with the seemingly interminable analysis of motives (political or otherwise) and so-called “hidden funding” of the “denier machine”. There’s tedious comparison of “deniers” with tobacco company executives, and tearful hand-wringing over the “attack on science and scientists”. There are plenty of other examples, including the self-destructive “No Pressure” campaign which died at birth under a shower of incredulous criticism.

    So gird your loins for the coming fight, for the “denier machine” is growing in strength. Our weapons are reasoned argument and open debate, our ammunition scientific papers, factual evidence and climate history, our targets supposition, ill-founded belief and bluster. The “hot-spot” won’t be a chimera high in the troposphere, apparent only to “true believers”, but here in the blogosphere.

    Another famous quote springs to mind, no attribution necessary (I hope). “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    Activists, and some pollies, want the public to think that those who disagree with the UN are the kind of barking mad, grumpy old sods who are too stupid to realize that, you know, the climate changes.

    Well, speaking as a certified barking mad, grumpy old sod, who is too stupid to realise a lot of things, I still realise that the climate changes. Epic fail for that person there.

    I quite liked the climate yesterday, but the one today is the wrong colour, and sounds a bit dodgy, if you ask me. Perhaps it is because I don’t have my hat on back to front, like you are supposed to?

    Perhaps wearing your hat the wrong way round causes global warming?

    That makes just about as much sense as anything else that the ganders spew out today.

    [Gander - a male goose (n.); to take a look at something (sl.); a person who intentionally writes or speaks in a way designed to give a totally false impression (sl., sic.), derived from propa-ganda].

    00

  • #
    Tom

    The thing I found most instructive about the article in the Toronto Globe and Mail is that zombie junk like this is still appearing in the Canadian mainstream media in the months after Canada’s left-leaning Liberal opposition was decimated in a federal election (in May) for preaching the warming religion. The lesson for Australia is that the zombie journalists at Fairfax and the ABC will continue to disgrace their profession even after the Gillard-Brown government is dismissed for the same reason. It doesn’t seem to matter how flimsy is the IPCC hypothesis and that there’s mounting evidence that this small cabal has deliberately doctored the data or tortured it to make their infantile theorem appear to “work”, the MSM choir will continue their denial of the mounting evidence that climate alarmism is a manufactured crisis. I believe it will take the legal authority of a royal commission in Australia to compel a forensic examination of the evidence for man-made climate warming and an end to the formulation of public policy based on “opinion”.

    00

    • #
      MaryFJohnston

      Tom

      Totally agree that this is so important that only a Royal Commission will provide hope for change.

      00

    • #
      Lawrie

      What you say is unfortuinately true. The folk who banged the drum cannot admit their own failure. Neither can they admit that they were mislead and that because they were too damn lazy to do some simple research.

      PS Love the avatar.

      00

    • #
      brc

      Yes, but once these soft-brains are far away from the ability to change legislation I really don’t care how they fill in the 5 minutes a day they spend on the can. THey can twist their faces into contortions at the injustice of it all, but it will all just be yelling into the wind.

      Once the next government goes in carbon taxing and trading is dead (or the coalition government will fracture in half, and that will be very interesting indeed).

      Once carbon taxing and trading has been killed by a popularly elected government, it is dead forever.

      At that point the Age and the ABC luvvies can hand-wring themselves into knots, it won’t matter, because the rest of the country will have moved on. And eventually so will they, once they find a scapegoat to blame all their previous positions on.

      Just how many of them have formally repudiated all their prior pro-communist views anyway? Ie, Gillard, J, formerly of the hard-left? Not a one. They just let it slide into history and airbrush over it and pretend it never happened.

      00

  • #

    The Orwellian newspeak aspect is just about right. If climate change encompasses CAGW and long-term non-anthropogenic, along with extreme weather events, then there is no refutation. Anyone who denies “climate change” is by definition abnormal.

    A similar argument is provided by John Cook redefining as “skeptic” as one who reads all the consensus “science” and swallows it whole. Anyone who seeks alternative views, or who sees deep flaws in the CAGW arguments, or who just senses something it not quite right, is a “denier”.

    The purpose of Newspeak was to so distort the language that contrary views cannot even be articulated without an implicit admission of being sub-human.

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    The tag “older white conservative male” is just that; a tag.

    It is very useful, though, because it can be used to differentiate substantial blocks of self identifying young progressive, world saving voters who can give pollies access to the coffers.

    OK. So we have identified a new type of political mechanism that is wrongly using its position in government to indoctrinate and “sequester” potential voters; how do we get our democracy back?

    00

  • #
    Llew Jones

    Belief in “climate change” it seems is essentially a leftwing disease and its diagnosis also the best test for identifying a wolf in sheep’s clothing like Turnbull.

    Not too sure where the non-white conservative male Presidential candidate, Herman Cain, stands these days but noticed a left wing male climate change disciple wasn’t too impressed by this Black “denier” at Jan this year:

    “Climate denier GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain..”

    by Christopher Mims

    20 Jan 2011 12:53 AM

    Herman Cain has been described as an “a true longshot underdog” in the 2012 race for president of the United States, but he’s also a popular talk-show host and telegenic former CEO with no political baggage who is weirdly popular with the political press, and he might even be the first Republican to announce his candidacy.

    He’s also a dyed-in-the-wool climate change denier. His current website, hermancain.com doesn’t reflect it, but a cached copy of one of his opinion pieces from 2009, at his old site, hermancain.org, which now redirects to his .com, lays out his views unambiguously:

    “It is outrageous that the head of the United Nations, the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Obama Administration are all dismissing these revelations [the manufactured "Climategate" scandal] as they push onward with their political agenda in the face of scientifically manufactured results.

    This is no longer a controversy. This is conclusive. And once again, liberals choose to ignore the facts.

    It’s a scam.”

    This = not good. Cain is yet another Climate Zombie who, despite being a smart guy (he has a degree in mathematics; he sits on the board of companies like Whirlpool) has been taken in by a Conservative culture of anti-science nonsense….

    http://www.grist.org/article/2011-01-19-gop-presidential-candidate-herman-cain-will-snuff-your-seed

    00

  • #
    Neville

    This is a comment I made at Jen’s blog, but the white male in this case is a leftwing, delusional dingaling.

    Bolt shows just how wrong Juliar’s chief climate commissioner has been over the last decade or more.

    His delusional predictions are a standing joke around Australia and yet we seem to be heading for an affirmative vote on this treasonous co2 tax.

    The tax will include a poison pill that prefers property rights on the holder of co2 credits making it very difficult for an incoming govt to wipe it out without saddling Aussies with more crippling debt.

    Perhaps the life of the credits would/should be finite and a new govt could just refuse to issue/recognise any new credits. But this will be very messy and once again proves what a disaster and embarrassment Labor govts are to Australia.

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/those_rains_the_experts_swore_would_not_fall/

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      There is/has been a suggestion that the real, as opposed to the nominal, value of the credits will be close to zero. An incoming government can therefore merely pass legislation that sets the nominal value equal to their real value. If this is true, it effectively means that the Government has garnered the tax, but is not forced to pay it back. Any profits that have been made through trade against the credits would remain.

      I am not a tax expert (for which I thank the deities) but you might get the drift.

      00

    • #
      brc

      I honestly think the poison pill thing will fade into nothingness. Without serious money to prosecute the case, who is going to bother?

      The fact is governments change their mind all the time, people are always put out, but in general there is sweet fanny adams that can be done.

      Just try legal action against the government for devaluing your property by building something unwanted next to it and see how far you get.

      Who is honestly going to try and sue an incoming coalition government for destroying carbon trading? BHP? Some debt-loaded, subsidy hungry wind operation? The UN?

      All that needs to happen is for Tony Abbot to make it priorities no 1 through 10 on assuming office. He’ll have a thumping mandate and people who stand in the way will rightly be called out for it. The greens will scream and rant and nobody but their dearest supporters will listen.

      It just has to happen in the first part of the first term and then for the whole thing to move on. Much like the dismantling of workchoices and replacement with the FWA act. They did what they said they were going to do, and everybody just accepted it (not always happily) because they just got on with it. The coalition would have been stupid to try and block in the senate or make too much noise, and that’s what they did too.

      Seriously – if you were a CEO of a large corp, you’d be involved in dealing with the carbon tax because you have to. But you wouldn’t be betting the farm on this thing, given the public mood.

      You’ve got to remember that a post-next election Labor party is going to be a decimated place, and many of the current faces will no longer be there. Swan won’t win his seat. Gillard will resign either before or after the election, depending if she gets toppled. Rudd will probably still be around and, if he wasn’t leader going into the election will probably be so afterwards. The ones that do survive will never want to hear the word ‘carbon tax’ ever again.

      Honestly, I cannot think of any example where a government changed the rules like this, destroyed a lot of business but seriously copped financial penalty for doing so. Yes, there will be cries of ‘sovereign risk’ and there will be moaning, demonstrations and hair-pulling. The forthcoming effigies that will be made of abbott will make the ‘ditch the witch’ signs look like kindergarten projects. But I don’t see anyone actually taking action against the government. THat would just be stupid, counterproductive and ultimately futile, because, as we know, even coalition governments aren’t against passing the odd bit of retrospective legislation if they think they really have to.

      Final word : it’s very hard to beat the player that gets to write the rulebook, and who will spend your money fighting you.

      00

      • #

        brc,
        you say here:

        Gillard will resign either before or after the election, depending if she gets toppled.

        This has always seemed incongruous to me, and now especially considering PM Gillard.
        The quote will be blah blah blah, … renewal … regeneration … give someone else a go, etc.

        She will have been the front person for the decline of the ALP, and she’ll be allowed to just slide into retirement with her PM,’s Super, her perks, and extras, and probably go back to lawyering.

        This will necessitate a by-election, and hopefully, the people will show their disgruntlement by not electing someone from Labor.

        Perhaps a three year term at the back of the Opposition benches might serve to show her that you can’t just wreck the Country and ride off into the sunset.

        Perhaps if Australia is lucky, there won’t be enough ALP members left that she can retire, and maybe her Party, suitably chastened, should not agree to her retiring from politics.

        After doing what she has done, maybe three more years of ‘serving the people’ from the back benches would be appropriate.

        Huh!

        Don’t hold your breath.

        She’ll just quit and say it was not her fault. She might even blame Senator Bob.

        Tony.

        00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Good analysis brc. Thank you.

        00

  • #
    PaulM

    Jo,

    It’s a reason to ask why the UN is a/ incompetent with English

    Well our ever so intelligent and eloquent Minister of Climate Change & Energy Efficiency, in the latest expose of denier thinking, says that the Coalition opposes Labors Clean Energy Future, because they are racist xenophobes who don’t want to trade with foriegners. So in line with the Government’s appraisal of denier thought, the answer to that question must be because the UN has too many foriegners involved in it.:)

    00

    • #

      Don’t laugh Paul but that’s exactly what is wrong with the UN at the moment.

      Far too many despots, too many uneducated “Revolucion” types are in charge.

      When the UN can seriously appoint Iran to chair the Womens Rights Commission, when Libya China Indonesia and Iran can get seats on the Human Rights Commission, you know the UN is totally %#@*ed.

      The quicker countries like Oz US NZ and Canada withdraw funding and support from this corrupt red tape entity the better.

      00

      • #
        MaryFJohnston

        Right

        We don’t need the UN and it shouldn’t be given our money. It’s ours.

        00

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Actually Mary, we do need the UN.

          We need it as an ongoing example of what happens when you have Government by Bureaucracy.

          We should encourage the UN to do what the UN does, but then totally ignore any of its edicts, pronouncements, and requests for money over and above what it needs for its own administration.

          The same can be said for the European Commission. Except they have gone further and formed their own currency, and look at where that is going …

          And [free analysis alert] the pound is not immune to any meltdown in the Euro.

          00

      • #
        PaulM

        Baa, a more effective mechanism would be for the US to call in the debts the UN owes it, followed by using the UN process itself with the US, UK, Australia and any other western nations willing to, to renounce the universal declarations and treaties to which they are signatory along with an official repudiation of the UN Charter and a formal letter to the General Assembly renouncing membership. The UN would then have 12 months to instigate massive reform and restructure, initiate a full review of all relevant treaties of face the withdrawl of the main financial and military contributors to it’s functions.

        00

        • #
          MaryFJohnston

          A mighty idea!

          00

        • #
          Geoff Sherrington

          PaulM, Do you know how many treaties there are? At one stage Gareth Evans was rattling through about two a week. Depending on whether you count multiple unilaterals together on a topic, as one big multilateral, there are more than 1,000 treaties that Australia would have to undo. It’s no lenger easy to find this little bit of info by searching the Net, because the Newspeak people have done away with what used to be a simple list “The Australian Treaty List” and replaced it with a whole heap of smaller lots each with caveats and conditions. I doubt if many Members of Parliament have any idea how many treaties involve us. I do know that some Judges place them very high on the list of “that which should be left alone”.

          00

          • #
            PaulM

            Geoff there are only a handfull of Key treaties and universal declarations that would need to be renounced. What I am talking about are those based around the founding charter of the UN. In renouncing those treaties and universal declarations those nations who took that step would be repudiating the legitimacy of the UN and the letter to the General Assembly would be reinforced by those actions.

            Simply put, when you find a crumbling edifice, you don’t need to remove every structural member to have the whole thing crumble, you only need to remove the key supports.

            00

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Geoff makes a good point.

            In most, if not all cases, a commitment under an international treaty takes precedence over domestic law.

            Kevin made a commitment at Copenhagen (when precious few others did), and Australia is bound by that.

            It is my belief that the ALP thought it was a good chance to put Australia up there with the big boys.

            They did this on the basis that, if they won the next election by a decent majority, they could always find the money from somewhere, and it they lost the next election then it would give the Coalition something they had to deal with – a sort of, “up you sport”.

            They probably never considered having such a slim majority that the Greens could end up running the show from the back-room, and could do that whichever major party could be made to cut a deal.

            Kevin signed the paper, so it was Labour’s problem, and they were made to step up to the plate because the Coalition were not going to have a bar of it.

            What a bitter pill for Julia to swallow. The fine legal mind had missed a salient point – the need for the ALP to adjust to working in a coalition arrangement, with its need to balance conflicting hostile forces.

            So, her solution to the problem is to go all-in with the Greens, and create a monster that is going to take decades to dismantle.

            The fact that it is going to damage the Australian economy is beside the point. In fact, if she can leave the economy in such a mess that the Coalition will have to spend their whole term sorting it out, then that is all to the good. If she can create a situation that is to the detriment of programs that the Coalition wish to pursue, then she will have won.

            At least she will have won in her particular corner of reality.

            00

          • #
            MaryFJohnston

            Hi Geoff Sherrington

            Your last line is an interesting point and one which gives me as a lay person (legally) some hope for our judiciary.

            My wife is a lawyer who while not directly working now in that area does teach Law part time. She outlines how she has to get across certain ideas to students and in doing so opens up “the law” for me.

            She is fascinated by the fact that you must give a case example for decisions because a judgement could be misinterpreted without the cas example to refer to.

            There isn’t much point to the above except that my legal “education” now has me asking a question about our subservience to UN Law.

            So; If we have Australian Law that covers a facet of our lives can we have UN Law that overrides that?

            Does any elected Australian Representative like, for example Gareth Gareth, have the authority to endorse acceptance of UN law on our behalf that conflicts with Australian Law.

            I feel that the Commonwealth has rights but also obligations to us that may stand in the way of binding us to UN Law?

            Whatever, the UN is a farce and should be abandoned.

            00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Perhaps they’re just taking lessons from Humpty Dumpty, that great authority who insists that a word can mean whatever he means it to mean. So you see, there is a precedent for this.

    00

  • #

    Conservative?? CONSERVATIVE???? WTF?

    This whole CAGW scare campaign has been going on since the mid 80′s, that’s nearly 30 years.

    The only people trying to CONSERVE this scam are the wunch of bankers, the pooffo pinko commo lezzo latte sipping sandal wearing hairy armpitted tree hugging pirius driving dirty bare footed tofu eating soy drinking pushbike riding in the wrong lane on Sundays easily offended always blame someone else type green scumbags.

    The rest of us, who are in the main middle aged, been there seen off the scare types, who are not interested in faceless unelected Eurocrats making local laws for us and taxing us to the poor house.
    WE WANT TO PROGRESS FROM THIS CRAP and can’t wait for the next round.

    Me thinks they got their conservatives and progressives bass ackwards. /rant off

    00

    • #

      “Been There Seen off the Scare”

      Great T-Shirt potential (and mouse pads, fridge magnets coffee mugs etc etc)

      How about it Jo?

      00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The only people trying to CONSERVE this scam are the wunch of bankers, the pooffo pinko commo lezzo latte sipping sandal wearing hairy armpitted tree hugging pirius driving dirty bare footed tofu eating soy drinking pushbike riding in the wrong lane on Sundays easily offended always blame someone else type green scumbags.

      I bet you Imwd’s chocolate fish that you can’t say that in one breath.

      00

    • #
      Bob Malloy

      The only people trying to CONSERVE this scam are the wunch of bankers, the pooffo pinko commo lezzo latte sipping sandal wearing hairy armpitted tree hugging pirius driving dirty bare footed tofu eating soy drinking pushbike riding in the wrong lane on Sundays easily offended always blame someone else type green scumbags.

      Pass the man a soap box, he has something to say.

      00

      • #

        What can I tell ya Bob, I like to clear things off my chest every so often.
        It’s all the suppressed ‘ists in my system that overheats once in a while and kicking the dog just ain’t the same as a rant. (my kid learned long ago to quietly disappear when my ears start to go a tinge of red)

        00

  • #
    pat

    i posted about taxpyers’ money and the proposed Windlab Kennedy Wind Farm, which would depend on the proposed 1000km Copperstring high voltage electricity line being built on a recent thread, here:

    http://joannenova.com.au/2011/09/dr-david-evans-four-fatal-pieces-of-evidence/

    well, some conservative white males seem to have had an epiphany of sorts about viability and the pollies and MSM are suitably outraged. Giles has a lot more to say than what i’ve excerpted, but alarmist journos are going to bump up against economic realities that they’ve never faced in real life, and that’s where the sceptics will win in the long-term. let’s just hope taxpayer monies stop flowing to these dream schemes sooner rather than later:

    7 Oct: Climate Spectator: Giles Parkinson: Xstrata gas deal sinks renewables hub
    Hopes of building one of Australia’s largest renewable energy hubs in north Queensland appear to have been dashed after the Swiss-based global mining giant Xstrata signed a deal instead with AGL Energy to build a gas-fired power station in Mt Isa.
    Xstrata had been mulling three strategies to ensure future energy supply for its Mt Isa mining operations: the extension of the current sole supplier, the gas-fired Mica power station (an idea it dumped a while ago); go for another gas-fired station; or participate in the CopperString project that would link Mt Isa with the grid at Townsville via a 1000km transmission line, and unlock a series of renewable energy projects, including wind, solar, biomass and geothermal found in between.
    Xstrata decided on the “safe” option and went for more gas, and signed a deal on Thursday with AGL and pipeline group APA to build a 242MW gas-fired power station at a cost of $500 million, and a 17-year supply contract.
    The decision by one of its major customers almost certainly signals the end of CopperString, which would have cost at least $1.5 billion, but was backed by state and federal funding, and of a multi-billion dollar renewable plan, including the $1.5 billion, 750MW Kennedy wind farm – which would have been the nation’s largest – and a host of other renewable projects. Among them were several solar thermal projects; another wind farm and solar plant at Mt Isa; a 400MW biodiesel and biomass plant using kapla trees being considered by another CSIRO spin-off called PhytoFuel; a 100MW hydro project, and a biomass project proposed by Samsung; and several geothermal prospects. In all, up to 3000MW of renewable projects were envisaged…
    It also means that Queensland will likely struggle to meet its renewable energy target, as CopperString would have unlocked its best renewable resources. As it is, the state has only 12MW wind farm in the south and a single turbine on Thursday Island to show for its renewable efforts, apart from a whole host of solar PV on rooftops and the two largest solar thermal projects, including the Solar Dawn flagships project, that are on the drawing board.
    Xstrata says it has based its decision around the reliability and cost of energy, and a spokesman said it relied heavily on a report produced in 2009 by former Port Jackson principal Rod Sims (now chair of the ACCC) to justify it on environmental and social criteria…
    http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/xstrata-gas-deal-sinks-renewables-hub

    7 Oct: ABC: Paul Sutherland: Green energy companies left reeling, as Xstrata pulls out of power project
    Windlab was one company planning to tap into CopperString’s transmission lines, but chief executive Roger Price says its plans need to be reassessed…
    Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan, who was a vocal supporter of the project, has said in a statement to the ABC that the Federal Government is disappointed with the decision, and they will now reassess the energy future of the north-west.
    Federal independent Member for Kennedy Bob Katter says the decision means the death of clean energy in the region.
    But Steve Du Kruijff, the chief operating officer of Xstrata Copper in North Queensland, says the gas-fired Diamantina Power Station was the best option for the energy needs of Xstrata Mount Isa Mines.
    http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/201110/s3334455.htm

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … the proposed Windlab Kennedy Wind Farm, which would depend on the proposed 1000km Copperstring high voltage electricity line being built on a recent thread

      Why don’t they just use aluminium cables, like everybody else? :-)

      00

    • #
      CameronH

      With such massive and undeveloped gas resources now being discovered why would anybody even consider the risk inherent in unreliable, inefficient, and expensive renewable energy?

      00

  • #
    Neville

    I wish Rossi’s cold fusion reactor all the best and would love to see it work.

    In theory cold fusion should be a goer but I’ll remain sceptical until it’s signed sealed and delivered.

    http://coldfusionnow.wordpress.com/2011/10/06/first-commercial-cold-fusion-reactor-tested-in-bologna/

    00

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      As I remember several fusion technologies were about ready to go big time by the end of last year. Then silence.

      I notice that there’s no mention of the problem of obtaining the light isotope of H2, which is much less common than the heavy isotope if I remember. No mention of how much is needed either.

      It’s even more interesting that the very validity of the test runs is challenged, there being no measurement of the actual steam quality and the obvious fact that the steam output had a lot of water in it so the result might not be anything close to what was claimed.

      http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/08/07/rossis-scientific-failure-in-seven-steps/

      If indeed this is cold fusion it seems to need a lot of work.

      00

  • #

    I’m white, not sure about conservative and apparently I’m grumpy too! Flying the flag.

    The proponents can change the goal posts all they like but the fact is, it is ‘Global Warming’ they are promoting and I fail to see how one can deny an unproven theory.

    The onus is on the proponents to prove without a doubt that it is and will continue to warm before throwing insults at us ‘rebels’!

    Sorry, computer models don’t cut it, they are nothing more than mere electronic crystal balls. Hard evidence please? Until such time there is nothing to deny.

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Baa Humbug

    As you seem to be saying: They don’t conserve ANYTHING and I would add that most of them don’t actually PRODUCE anything or pay taxes.

    In Australia over the last 40 years working taxpayers have had an increasing burden to carry; looking after the sick and deserving of temporary support, OK, but to provide life long tax free weekly income or to be looking after someone elses children because they “can’t be bothered’ is doomed to collapse. It’s just vote harvesting – political opportunism.

    So while “taxing us to the poor house” they are actually “overloading” a large portion of the populace who are decent and responsible enough to try to do the right thing.

    The correct word to use to describe this situation is SLAVERY.

    Outlawed 150 years ago but despite the lack of chains it is still here, in a new guise in Western democracies where gullible taxpayers are fleeced mercilessly by the politically corrupt and their masters.

    00

  • #
    observa

    You can’t keep denying the facts deniers. Obviously we need another colourless odourless gaseous fertiliser trading scheme to finish these dastardly deniers off once and for all.

    00

  • #

    [...] it to be lacking in evidence. Secondly, who questions that climate changes? Jo Nova exposes this hatchet job on the English language. Brendan O’Neill has a critique of the study. Apparently, there’s something called [...]

    00

  • #
    handjive

    Well, I for one, am confused.

    These guy’s just don’t fit the Green progressive group-think, pigeon-holing identikit models:

    CHINESE President Hu Jintao is having to stare down claims that human-induced climate change is an elaborate American conspiracy, as the country’s carbon emissions surge despite tough government constraints.

    “Global warming is a bogus proposition,” says Zhang Musheng, one of China’s most influential intellectuals and a close adviser to a powerful and hawkish general in the People’s Liberation Army, Liu Yuan.

    Mr Zhang told The Age that global warming was an American ruse to sell green energy technology and thereby claw its way out of its deep structural economic problems.

    High five, white boy!

    00

    • #
      rukidding

      Oh gees lets see if I have got this right.The Americans think the Chinese are scamming the system to sell the west renewable energy.
      And the Chinese think the Americans are scamming the system so they can sell the Chinese renewable technology.
      Maybe Mr Zhang when he is through with the Americans could have a little word to our Mr Combet.:-)

      Think I will get a large bag of popcorn this should be fun

      00

    • #
      Robert

      Just goes to show you the strange logic is that exists in the communist mind.

      If we here in America created this in order to sell green energy technology and bail ourselves out, then why is so much of the manufacture of that technology taking place in China where they benefit from the jobs and revenue? It sure as hell isn’t doing us any good.

      Strange people, but then again we are talking about a country that doesn’t see a problem with running over protesters with a tank.

      00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … Hu committed to lower the “carbon intensity” of economic output … by 2020.
      China appears on track … thanks to … Chinese economic growth

      Very oriental.

      We are not going to reduce carbon, we are only going to reduce its intensity. We are going to do that by building lots more power stations across the country, so lowering the intensity of carbon at the key places where white foreigners visit. And by the way, having more power stations will help us increase our economic growth.

      00

  • #
    Ross

    For Tony and others who made a submission on the Clean Energy Bill this a must read ( if you have not already seen it )

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/a_government_committee_to_discover_you_love_this_tax/

    00

    • #

      For all of you who did make submissions to this, I want you to read this very carefully.

      I made a submission and it is shown at Joanne’s Post at this link:

      The Carbon Tax is so bad, people are asking if this is treason

      I received back from the Committee an email saying that my submissions would not be treated as a submission per se, but as correspondence.

      As a little puzzled as to why it would not be considered as a submission, I went to the Government site and looked at quite a few of the submissions.

      Ah, well, I thought, fair cop, it really was just an email, and not a full submission in pdf form along the standard guidelines as they all seemed to be.

      So, then imagine my surprise when the following turned up as a full submission, and read this whole submission very carefully.

      http://climatechange.gov.au/en/government/submissions/clean-energy-legislative-package/~/media/government/submissions/cel/public/CEL-Submission-KerrieChandler-20110811-PDF.pdf

      It’s er, shall I say, a whole lot shorter than mine in fact, the only difference being that this submission is in favour of the CO2 Tax.

      This is just a joke, not that mine did not count, but that in saying submissions similar to mine will not be published, and just treated as correspondence, while this one gets through as a full submission.

      Like me, I feel sure most of you will be outraged.

      If this wasn’t so serious, you’d just have to laugh.

      Tony.

      00

      • #
        val majkus

        Tony the other point is that so far as I can ascertain there can be no reason to divide incoming e mails into ‘submissions’ and ‘correspondence’
        at http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jscacefl/index.htm is the invitation for submissions and quoting:

        The Committee invites interested persons and organisations to make submissions by Thursday 22 September 2011 . Please refer to our brochure called preparing a submission for more information. Please note that there are no terms of reference for this inquiry.

        what should be in a submission:
        http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/documnts/howsub.htm#what

        There is no prescribed form for a submission to a parliamentary committee. Submissions may be in the form of a letter, a short document or a substantial paper. They may include appendices and other supporting documents.

        Submissions should be prepared solely for the inquiry and should be relevant to the terms of reference. They may address all or a selection of the points outlined in the terms of reference. Submissions may contain facts, opinions, arguments and recommendations for action.

        It is helpful if submissions are prefaced by a brief summary of the main points.

        Supplementary submissions may be lodged during the course of an inquiry to provide additional information or comments on other evidence.

        Where there are no stated terms of reference to my mind the necessity or otherwise for a carbon tax can certainly be addressed

        There’s an interesting comment on the andrew bolt link referred to above:

        Saw this, made some calls to my network in Canberra.
        Yes, the fix is in on this one. They were “flooded” (their term) with ‘anti’ submissions running about 8-10:1. There was a clear and overwhelming ‘anti’ thrust to submissions.
        Some bright spark in DCC (a name was mentioned but I will not divulge it) made an administrative policy decision that as the JSCACEFL (REPS) was going to recommend the tax (that being its appointed task), submissions recommending against the tax did not constitute submissions at all. Therefore these submissions were not submissions but correspondence, as they touched on matters pertaining to what the JSCACEFL (REPS) was not appointed to recommend.
        Reading the JSCACEFL (REPS) ToR… it’s a poor ToR. That fits to the partisan/religious task of the Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation, which is to force you to pay indulgences for your sins against Gaia.
        So a submission was defined as submission which made a worthwhile contribution to the appointed task of the JSCACEFL (REPS). Correspondence was defined as a submission which did NOT make a worthwhile contribution to the appointed task of the JSCACEFL (REPS): ie which opposed its pre-ordained outcome.
        This definition is on extremely shaky ground. I do not think it’s valid.
        I would recommend to those who have had their submissions redefined as correspondence to take the matter immediately to the Ombudsman or straight to the AAT. My interlocutors made the same recommendation.
        This is important. What has been done here is to redefine the term ‘submission to a parliamentary Committee’ in such a way as to destroy the public’s right to have a meaningful say in the work of that committee.
        I did not make a submission to this committee. Therefore I can do nothing.
        HOWEVER, those who did make submissions, only to have them rejected as ‘correspondence’ CAN take the matter to the Ombudsman or the AAT.
        Naturally, take it first to your local member as an issue which threatens the ability of the public to have any say at all in Committees. This is a direct threat to duly constituted public policy process in this country.
        Mk50
        Brisbane (formerly MarkL of Canberra)
        Mk50 of Brisbane (Reply)
        Sat 08 Oct 11 (11:48am)

        My suggestion would be to notify Greg Hunt, Denis Jensen and I may have more suggestions and I’m sure others here would as well

        00

      • #
        cementafriend

        Agree, Tony! I also made a submission which was treated as correspondence. I made the a point that the “carbon” (carbon dioxide) equivalence figures where wrong, particularly that of methane which should be about 1/5 instead of 21 times (see here which I added to the submission http://jennifermarohasy.com/blog/2011/07/natural-gas-more-polluting-than-coal-only-according-to-the-ipcc-a-note-from-cementafriend/)and that the Acts would likely be open to legal challenge. I copied my submission to some MP’s so it would not be lost.

        00

      • #
        Joe V.

        A government seeking the adulation of sycophants, rather the counsel of concerned citizens. Who do they think they are fooling ?

        00

    • #

      Good stuff! More ammo for the challenge. This CO2 Tax is far from a done deal.

      Will put a package together tomorrow. Wish I could be in the Public Gallery on Wednesday to jeer. Oh well, will just have to watch the protestation on TV.

      00

    • #
      Robert

      Is there a media outlet that you have available that would publish a collection of the submissions and the responses that were received calling them “a correspondence”?

      Preferably one with a sufficient body of readers that you can move this issue off the blogs and into the press.

      I read through some of the comments in the link Ross provided and one was a suggestion much the same as what I proposed. Further down was a comment indicating that historians will look at the public record and see that (contrary to what I am seeing from all of you) the nation supported this legislation.

      The numbers of submissions (4000 or so isn’t it?) as well as the way they were filtered to only accept those that supported the governments desires needs to get documented somewhere outside of the web where more will see it. Preferably somewhere that can also be used as evidence in court should things have to move to that level.

      And save your emails and letters. I learned a long time ago when dealing with anyone in any position of authority or power, keep a record of anything they tell you so they can’t deny it later when their ass is on the line.

      00

  • #
    Rick Bradford

    But the meeja, government & the Greens have their beloved ‘consensus’ to fall back on.

    Too bad that research shows that to be pure balloon juice as well.

    For example:

    * Groups in which individuals have no knowledge of others’ estimates have more diverse opinions and produce a wider range of responses that is more likely to include the correct answer.

    * Groups in which individuals have knowledge of others’ estimates have less diverse opinions and produce a narrower range of responses that is less likely to include the correct answer.

    * Most important, individuals in the second kind of group develop greater confidence in their estimates. They herd as a result.

    * Interacting crowds exhibit convergent opinions even when there are factual answers to questions.

    00

  • #
    Sean McHugh

    The scientists’ microscope has discovered the “white male effect”. Wow! Who said that science has gone soft and fuzzy? The syndrome needs to be contained to this sick group before it finds its way into the rest of the population. Perhaps this looming problem is why the Labor/Greens have opened the door to those who are more healthy and suitable, boatloads of adults who are mostly male but not so pale.

    00

  • #
    Faye Busch

    A product which is owned has a Trade Mark (TM) attached to its name.

    Alarmists who market and lovingly own “Climate Change” should have a Propaganda Mark PM attached. I’d prefer BM (Bullsh*t Mark).

    People then might work out
    PM
    Climate Change doesn’t mean climate change.

    00

  • #
    pat

    handjive -

    5 Oct: Clickgreen.org.uk: Building boom causes China’s carbon emissions to triple
    Constructing buildings, power-plants and roads has driven a substantial increase in China’s CO2 emission growth, according to a new study involving the University of East Anglia (UEA)…
    The study, entitled A ‘Carbonizing Dragon’: China’s fast growing CO2 emissions revisited’, is published today in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. It emphasizes that putting a low carbon infrastructure in place in China as well as other emerging and developing economies from the beginning is a key global challenge to avoid ‘carbon lock-in’ – where a country could be stuck on a path of high emissions – which would have a significant and persistent impact on future emissions…
    The study’s lead author Jan Minx, from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and the Technical University of Berlin, said: “Up to 2002 there has been a race between consumption growth and efficiency gains. However, the recent rise in emissions is completely due to the massive structural change of China’s economy. Emissions grow faster and faster, because CO2 intensive sectors linked to the building of infrastructure have become more and more dominant. China has developed into a ‘carbonizing dragon’.”…
    They found that emissions almost tripled between 1992 and 2007, growing by about four billion tonnes, with 70% of this growth happening between 2002 and 2007. The average annual CO2 emission growth alone in this period was similar in size to the total CO2 emissions in the UK. While exports showed the fastest CO2 emission growth at one point, capital investments and the construction industry then overtook…
    http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/analysis/general-analysis/122602-building-boom-causes-china%5Cs-carbon-emissions-to-triple.html

    recently it was reported CO2 emissions increased 45% in the past two decades, yet the so-called global temperature flat-lined.

    expecting the undeveloped countries NOT to develop is unconscionable. hopefully, those countries that have been conned into believing they will receive billions per year from some mythical climate fund will wake up before Durban.

    00

    • #
      cementafriend

      The Potsdam Institute fur Klima (PIK) is about as useful and full of propaganda as Steffen’s ANU Climate Change Institute.
      Steffen who comes from the US seems to be able to bend the minds of those, on all sides of politics, who have no technical competence (Malcom Turnbull has demonstrated how gullible he is; Gillard, Wong etc are also lawyers).

      00

      • #
        rukidding

        Hey cementafriend don’t think Turnbull is gullible.You are not gullible when you can see a big pot of gold at the end of the line.

        00

        • #
          cementafriend

          I was thinking of the OzCar and Grech debacle. Sure for Turnbull his Goldman Sachs friends & money are attractive. The fact is any carrot for power and money distract his judgement but is any lawyer capable of a reasonable judgement especially when they have no technical qualifications?

          00

  • #
    Joe V.

    Economic reality makes UK Conservative Ministers realise that Climate Change will have to pay it’s way.
    At last, David Cameron who congratulated Julia Gillard on it’s Carbon Tax only weeks ago. His Chancellor declares an end to unilateral action on Climate, as Europe stalls.

    Climate Change Minister

    & the Chancellor

    00

  • #
    pat

    handjive -
    no surprise that the John Garnaut with the sarcastic tone who wrote the Age piece on China is the son of Ross Garnaut!

    2009 Festival of Ideas: John Garnaut is the Asia Economics Correspondent for The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald, based in Beijing. He also writes occasionally for the International Herald Tribune, The Diplomat magazine and various other publications.
    He is the son of Professor Ross Garnaut, author of the Garnaut Climate Change Review.
    http://ideas.unimelb.edu.au/2009/speakers/jgarnaut.html

    00

  • #

    Skeptics that do put: CO2, the phony GLOBAL warming, and the constant, real climatic changes in the same sentences; are guilty as hell. Same goes for the ones that put sunspots in same basket as climate. Same goes for the ones who think that it needs GLOBAL warming, for the climate to change. It only proves that the Warmist propaganda cooked lots of Skeptic’s brains also.

    1] water changes the climate, not CO2. Same sunspots, same CO2 affects Brazil, Australia, Sahara and Burma. Why is not same climate in all those places? H2O changes the climate. But my articles are avoided by Skeptics; because I have the real proofs. Climatic changes are not related with the phony GLOBAL warming.

    Climate can change for better, not just for worse. Save more stormwater on the land = improves the climate. Reposes farmer’s water, to drain in the estuary = climate deteriorates. Most of the active Skeptics are big city slickers; they don’t need irrigation – no need to think that much. Then they complain, when the Warmist point that Skeptics have zero knowledge on climate…? Learn some real proofs: http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com

    Ridiculing constantly Al Gore, doesn’t make one knowledgeable. The alternative, real proofs are on my website; have you got stomach for real proofs? PAST GLOBAL WARMINGS WERE NOT GLOBAL. Unless you get that, Warmist see the Skeptics as spoiled children. I have proven why there is no such a thing as GLOBAL warming – stop debating how many whiskers Santa has – realize that Santa and GLOBAL warming don’t exist. Past phony GLOBAL warmings will not prove that is no warming in 100 years. Grow up!

    Warmist are there to tell lies – shouldn’t be blamed – same as nobody blames crocodile for eating people. The stereo type Skeptics that are constantly finding ”back-door exits” for the Warmist are encouraging carbon tax, by their total ignorance + by being scared to realize that their proofs are invented by the Warmist. Warmist know that those proofs the Skeptics use, are phony. Tragically, when I present real proofs to an active Skeptic, he behaves same as; when child is told that Santa is not for real… GUYS, REAL PROOFS EXIST!!! Forget about sunspots and phony Maunda minima / maxima – they were NOT GLOBAL!!! They are water pistols, invented by Warmist; for Plimer to arm his Smarties.

    00

  • #

    A study that is both racist and sexist. Sort of a generalised ad hominem against the largest demographic amongst Engineering professionals in the West. Any other group, and the study would never have seen the light of day.

    00

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Bill – Good point! Since it attacks white males it will not be seen as either sexist or racist. Had the same study made the same claims against dark-skinned females and the howls of outrage would have been deafening. It just goes to show that speaking from “moral superiority” allows you to make the most immoral statements with absolute impunity.

      It is hypocrisy of the highest order.

      00

  • #

    OPEN LETTER TO ALL THE SKEPTICS
    On one cubic kilometer of air is 20 different temperatures – and it changes every 10-15 minutes. Atmosphere is not as human body, if under the armpit is 1⁰C warmer = the whole body is warmer. In the atmosphere, BY THE LAWS OF PHYSICS, when one place gets warmer, for any reason – other place MUST get colder. When cloudy = upper atmosphere warmer – on the ground milder. No clouds = hotter days, colder nights. That is not GLOBAL warming. Unless are evenly distributed 20 thermometers MINIMUM, on every cubic kilometer recording for every 15 minutes the temperature = nobody knows; what was the temperature in the atmosphere even for the last year. HOW CAN ONE COMPARE ONE UNKNOWN WITH OTRHER UNKNOWNS?!?! As long as THE ACTIVE SKEPTICS TALK ABOUT WARMER AND COLDER YEARS, Warmist have no mature opponent; and they know that.Warmist concocted the warmer and colder years ON THE WHOLE PLANET.

    Sunspots are not affecting only parts of the surface – but many places is good climate, another bad = sunspots have nothing to do with the climate. Water controls the climate! B] the heat that is released today by the sun, has taken million years to get from the interior of the sun to the surface = temperature doesn’t go up and down like yo-yo! C] sunspots are made of pure carbon – they are heavier than hydrogen = sink deep inside in short time. They are not programmed to affect between 3-7 than from 21-23 Greenwich time… if is all day = Brazil should be same desert as most of Australia, but is not. Wake up, Skeptics!

    Proving that Maunder minima / maxima were GLOBAL, is prolonging the Warmist lives (because laughter prolongs life) Leading Warmist know that they don’t know the temperature for the WHOLE troposphere for last year – Skeptics pretend to know the WHOLE GLOBAL temperature for 5BC, 1230AD…????!! When people were scared to sail for more than 50km west of Portugal; not to fall of the planet…?

    Climate in Australia was changing for dryer 300 – 400y ago – when was much more eucalyptus trees than Warmist / Greg Hunt intend to plant. Was less cars and even less electricity was used at that time. Verdict: human cannot produce GLOBAL warming, but can change the climate, for better and for worse. New dam, improves the climate – drain the stormwater into the estuary = as if it wasn’t any rain = worse climate. Bob Brown and Flannery are against new dams – they know why. You want to know why? If you too naïve for real truth, stick to sunspots, maunder crap; or learn real proofs: http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com

    00

    • #

      Stefan, I have gone to your website and it is in desperate need of editing. Your English is good, but it is not your first language and it shows. Your arguments are disjointed and lack impact because there is too much emotion in your words. You need to have a better structure to what you are trying to say. Your skill seems to be in physics rather than communication and you really need some technical help in how to construct an argument. You go into detail with setting context and you make statements without clear supporting arguments or proofs, or at least the distance between the “dots” are too large for people to make the connection. I get much of what you are trying to say, but it is hard work and it shouldn’t be. You obviously have a lot of information and ideas to convey, but it is not being communicated effectively. Take the time and effort to get a skilled science communicator to help you construct your arguments in a way that everyone will at least understand them, even if they do not agree with them.

      I have put a website address in my post name that is a good example of how to communicate effectively. The subject matter is more economics, history and politics than science, but you should still see what I mean about how to convey ideas.

      Just trying to help.

      00

    • #

      Stefan the infamous James Hansen of NASA GISS says the very same thing as you, i.e. surface air temperature is meaningless.
      In fact his statements are on the GISS web site for all to see.

      GISS Surface Temperature Analysis
      The Elusive Absolute Surface Air Temperature (SAT)


      Q. What exactly do we mean by SAT ?

      A. I doubt that there is a general agreement how to answer this question. Even at the same location, the temperature near the ground may be very different from the temperature 5 ft above the ground and different again from 10 ft or 50 ft above the ground. Particularly in the presence of vegetation (say in a rain forest), the temperature above the vegetation may be very different from the temperature below the top of the vegetation. A reasonable suggestion might be to use the average temperature of the first 50 ft of air either above ground or above the top of the vegetation. To measure SAT we have to agree on what it is and, as far as I know, no such standard has been suggested or generally adopted. Even if the 50 ft standard were adopted, I cannot imagine that a weather station would build a 50 ft stack of thermometers to be able to find the true SAT at its location.

      Q. What do we mean by daily mean SAT ?
      A. Again, there is no universally accepted correct answer. Should we note the temperature every 6 hours and report the mean, should we do it every 2 hours, hourly, have a machine record it every second, or simply take the average of the highest and lowest temperature of the day ? On some days the various methods may lead to drastically different results.

      Q. What SAT do the local media report ?
      A. The media report the reading of 1 particular thermometer of a nearby weather station. This temperature may be very different from the true SAT even at that location and has certainly nothing to do with the true regional SAT. To measure the true regional SAT, we would have to use many 50 ft stacks of thermometers distributed evenly over the whole region, an obvious practical impossibility.

      Q. If the reported SATs are not the true SATs, why are they still useful ?
      A. The reported temperature is truly meaningful only to a person who happens to visit the weather station at the precise moment when the reported temperature is measured, in other words, to nobody.

      This is the link

      The fact that even the guru of CAGW admits we don’t even know the average temperature of a given single location, (let alone the whole globe), doesn’t stop the scam artists from perpetuating their lies.

      Follow the money, ALWAYS follow the money.

      00

  • #
    val majkus

    (copy of an e mail from Menzies House

    Dear val majkus,

    Four thousand, five hundred Australians have just been censored by the Gillard-Brown regime.

    I thought I had seen everything. I thought after all the attacks on freedom of speech I have written to you about before, that nothing could surprise me.

    I was wrong.

    In a shocking and historically unprecedented suppression of political expression and abuse of democracy, 4,500 Aussies – all opposed to this unnecessary and destructive tax on carbon dioxide – have just been told that they don’t count. That their opinions don’t matter. That their thoughts are not allowed to be heard.

    The background: As you will remember, last month, the Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation asked for submissions about the carbon dioxide tax legislation. They specifically stated that they “encourage submissions to its inquiry from a wide range of individuals and organisations”. There were no terms of reference.

    Although they only gave us one week, four thousand five hundred of us took the time to write to the committee. Four thousand five hundred Australians took the time to read the over 1000 page legislation. Four thousand five hundred Australians wrote in depth submissions detailing the flaws in this proposed legislation.

    Yesterday we discovered that their work will be surpressed. Will be silenced. Will be censored and stripped from the record without a trace.

    NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENT HAS THIS OCCURED.

    An Australian Parliamentary Committee has NEVER BEFORE censored submissions to this extent. Nothing has come even close. Ever. There is NO historical precedent for such a mass rejection of submissions.

    To rub salt into the wound, the Government was more than happy to accept earlier submissions in favour of the tax that were just two sentences saying, for example, ” “I am writing to express my support for the government to legislate to put a price on carbon. I urge the government to move ahead with the Carbon Tax.”

    Yet lengthy, in-depth submissions opposing the tax on carbon dioxide have been rejected and stripped from the record.

    Julia Gillard and Bob Brown have just officially stuck up their middle finger at us and told us that we don’t count.

    Don’t let them get away with it!

    Contact as many newspapers, TV stations, Radio Channels, Bloggers as you can and spread the word! (There is a good list of media contacts here you can start with) – and don’t just email! Phone, fax, and write letters to the editor about! We MUST get the word out! Also, forward this to all your family and friends, share this with your facebook friends by clicking here: and then post it on twitter by clicking here:

    Do anything you can to spread the word about this disgraceful abuse of democracy and silencing of Australians by the Gillard-Brown Government.

    There is only ONE reason why the Gillard-Brown Government is trying to silence us: they know that we are right and are scared to engage in debate. Let’s not let them get away with it.

    Timothy Andrews
    Managing Editor
    Menzies House

    PS: Please spread the word about this disgrace by forwarding this email to all your family and friends, sharing this with your facebook friends by clicking here and then post it on twitter by clicking here:

    00

  • #
    Anonymous coward

    Re: English language: the expression is ‘scot-free’. Doesn’t have anything to do with Scotlant or people named Scott.

    Fixed. Ta! — JN

    00

  • #
    val majkus

    http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/2011/10/disgraceful-4500-aussies-silenced-by-the-gillard-brown-regime.html
    the link to Menzies House
    You can get updates from that site by subscribing
    so far as I know no money involved

    00

  • #
    val majkus

    just in case people miss it please see my answer to TonyfromOz above

    Tony the other point is that so far as I can ascertain there can be no reason to divide incoming e mails into ‘submissions’ and ‘correspondence’
    at http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jscacefl/index.htm is the invitation for submissions and quoting:

    The Committee invites interested persons and organisations to make submissions by Thursday 22 September 2011 . Please refer to our brochure called preparing a submission for more information. Please note that there are no terms of reference for this inquiry.
    what should be in a submission:
    http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/documnts/howsub.htm#what

    There is no prescribed form for a submission to a parliamentary committee. Submissions may be in the form of a letter, a short document or a substantial paper. They may include appendices and other supporting documents.

    Submissions should be prepared solely for the inquiry and should be relevant to the terms of reference. They may address all or a selection of the points outlined in the terms of reference. Submissions may contain facts, opinions, arguments and recommendations for action.

    It is helpful if submissions are prefaced by a brief summary of the main points.

    Supplementary submissions may be lodged during the course of an inquiry to provide additional information or comments on other evidence.
    Where there are no stated terms of reference to my mind the necessity or otherwise for a carbon tax can certainly be addressed

    There’s an interesting comment on the andrew bolt link referred to above:

    Saw this, made some calls to my network in Canberra.
    Yes, the fix is in on this one. They were “flooded” (their term) with ‘anti’ submissions running about 8-10:1. There was a clear and overwhelming ‘anti’ thrust to submissions.
    Some bright spark in DCC (a name was mentioned but I will not divulge it) made an administrative policy decision that as the JSCACEFL (REPS) was going to recommend the tax (that being its appointed task), submissions recommending against the tax did not constitute submissions at all. Therefore these submissions were not submissions but correspondence, as they touched on matters pertaining to what the JSCACEFL (REPS) was not appointed to recommend.
    Reading the JSCACEFL (REPS) ToR… it’s a poor ToR. That fits to the partisan/religious task of the Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation, which is to force you to pay indulgences for your sins against Gaia.
    So a submission was defined as submission which made a worthwhile contribution to the appointed task of the JSCACEFL (REPS). Correspondence was defined as a submission which did NOT make a worthwhile contribution to the appointed task of the JSCACEFL (REPS): ie which opposed its pre-ordained outcome.
    This definition is on extremely shaky ground. I do not think it’s valid.
    I would recommend to those who have had their submissions redefined as correspondence to take the matter immediately to the Ombudsman or straight to the AAT. My interlocutors made the same recommendation.
    This is important. What has been done here is to redefine the term ‘submission to a parliamentary Committee’ in such a way as to destroy the public’s right to have a meaningful say in the work of that committee.
    I did not make a submission to this committee. Therefore I can do nothing.
    HOWEVER, those who did make submissions, only to have them rejected as ‘correspondence’ CAN take the matter to the Ombudsman or the AAT.
    Naturally, take it first to your local member as an issue which threatens the ability of the public to have any say at all in Committees. This is a direct threat to duly constituted public policy process in this country.
    Mk50
    Brisbane (formerly MarkL of Canberra)
    Mk50 of Brisbane (Reply)
    Sat 08 Oct 11 (11:48am)

    00

  • #
    Andrew Marven

    Well Jo is right again – after “stefanthedenier”s magnificent letter here – yes sceptics indeed obviously excel in the neurone dept. Nobel prize stuff.

    Good to see another day wasted in the echo chamber with the usual suspects talking to each other.
    Knock yourselves out guys – meanwhile the real science (unreported by Jo and Davey) continues.

    Durka Dur guys http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TXpBfRlLnv8

    —————————-
    REPLY: Don’t post under two different names. “police_state”. Which science is “real science”?

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    Is it just my imagination or did two identical posts, one by “Andrew Marven” and one by “Police_state”, just get “disappeared” from the blog?

    [Astute observation. Well done. Concrete boots work a treat.] mod oggi

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Dunno,

      I disappeared too.

      00

    • #
      memoryvault

      Mod Oggi

      You are the Mod so your call, but . . . .

      “disappearing” posts is the hallmark of Septic Science, Unreal Climate and all the other “guardians of groupthink” that we are supposed to be opposed to.

      Is it REALLY where we want to go?

      (I unapproved them for the purpose of letting other mods know about the post duplication under two names within 2 minutes.The one with Andrew’s name has since then been re approved) CTS

      [Let's not read too much into it MV. They were 2 IDENTICAL posts by the same person using 2 DIFFERENT screen names.
      If a commentors purpose is NOT to contribute to the blog discussion, then the comment has no place in the blog discussion. This has NOTHING to do with how some other blogs conduct their discussions.
      We can't just have open slather. I'll put Jos blog conduct against any of those you named with pride and full confidence.] mod oggi

      00

  • #

    To Truthseeker@32.1: physics, arithmetic, chemistry are the most reliable sciences. I have all the reliable proofs. To start learning Oxford English, to please people that cannot find anything wrong in my proofs (or no stomach for real proofs)… If you only know how bad Einstein’s English was… Genuine Truth-seekers decode hieroglyphs, to get the truth.

    I HAVE THE PROOFS THAT: 1: people cannot produce any GLOBAL warming; no matter how much they try. Because of instant expansion of oxygen and nitrogen. Phony GLOBAL warming has nothing to do with Oxford grammar. I have proven that the Warmist are doing lots of terrible damages; which, the Skeptics cannot notice; because they are obsessed with CO2, same as the Warmist. If grammar is obstacle; should the damages continue and increase, until I get my Oxford English polished. I read lots of you with perfect grammar commenting, but no substance, no solid facts. If you learn the real damages they are doing, would be emotional. If you did read, you would have known about the damages – my long sentences wouldn’t be obstacle. Anybody would like to help me present all the real proofs – be part of the wining proofs; will be appreciated. You Truthseeker, be fair to yourself; read the real proofs; you will be glad you did: http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com

    Al Gore has perfect grammar – I have the truth / proofs / facts and formulas. Should Gore’s perfect grammar win, or my real scientific proofs? It’s up to you people, to help me, or to look for something misspelled / or not enough dots, because of not having stomach for real undeniable proofs. I challenge anybody to find something wrong with my proofs – if you cannot = I must be correct. Because we all find lots of wrong with Al’s doo-boo!

    00

    • #
      memoryvault

      Stefan

      Truthseeker didn’t say you needed to go get a degree in Oxford Grammar. He (she?) gave you credit for apparently having something really important to offer, only your ability to express yourself was letting you down. He (she) suggested you get some help editing your material.

      I made much the same observations myself several weeks ago when I offered my services (as someone with 25 years professional writing experience, 15 of them as an engineering technical writer).

      I’m sorry mate, but I make quite a good living re-writing complex mechanical, chemical and electrical engineering concepts and procedures originally written by people every bit as clever as you, and significantly cleverer than me. The difference is they accept their strengths are in engineering, not writing.

      Your choice of Al Gore as an example for comparison would be particularly enlightening – to yourself – if only you gave yourself the opportunity to properly consider. On the few occasions that Gore has been caught on record having to say something impromptu, he has proven himself to be a complete and utter bungling, tongue-tied idiot.

      When he gives his “inconvenient truth” addresses, however, the presentation is slick and professional, and his grammar is impeccable. The reasons are simple. His presentations are prepared by professional graphics people, and his commentary is written by professional word-smiths.

      Like Truthseeker I’ve been to your blog and I happen to think what you are trying to convey is significantly more important than Al Gore’s drivel. But at least his drivel is in terms that are understandable to the average person.

      Dwell on it Stefan. We are not criticising you, we’re trying to help.

      00

      • #
        Truthseeker

        Memory Vault – Thank you. You are absolutely correct.

        Stefan – I am am willing to believe science is excellent and your proofs may be compelling, but I cannot be sure because you are not COMMUNICATING them effectively. You language construction is not taking the reader on the journey you want them to take. You do not choose good analogies and since you understand the material very well, you do not put in enough “dots” for the reader to be able to join them to understand the thread of your argument. What you see as obvious is not obvious to a person who is not as familiar with that material as you are. Please take Memoryvault up on his(her) offer. It is a good offer and will allow you to reach the people you clear quite anxious to reach out to.

        00

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      I will second Memory Vault. I found what you had to say very interesting. But your presentation makes it very hard to get from the proposition through all the evidence to the conclusion.

      It’s not what you say that’s the issue here. It’s how you present it.

      00

  • #
    Michael

    Re the re-classifying of Correspondence as a submission which did NOT make a worthwhile contribution to the appointed task of the JSCACEFL (REPS): ie which opposed its pre-ordained outcome.
    I was wondering if we would have a case for the Discrimination Tribunal or Human Rights Commission,for a nice class action or do they have impunity?

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    Is this what a typical member of the Union of Concerned Scientists looks like?
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/07/friday-funny-the-newest-member-of-the-union-of-concerned-scientists/

    00

  • #
    val majkus

    for historians who like to be ‘on the right side of history’ as Ms Gillard insists is the final test of public life don’t miss this article
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/too-many-wrongful-claims-to-be-on-the-right-side-of-history/story-e6frgd0x-1226161589327

    LAST month Julia Gillard insisted the final test of public life was not whether you were “on the right side of the politics” but whether you were on “on the right side of history. And in my experience, the judgment of history has a way of speaking sooner than we expect.”
    US President Barack Obama confidently declared this year: “History will end up recording that at every juncture in the situation in Egypt, that we were on the right side of history.”

    British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg says the countries that stood up to the old regimes during the Arab spring are “on the right side of history” while US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton thinks countries trading with Syria are on the wrong side and should “get on the right side”.

    Suddenly history not yet written has emerged as a source of legitimacy for a bewildering variety of claims and causes.

    Invoking the blessing of history is an implicit claim on a higher form of providential validation.

    Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
    .End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
    It is a way of saying: “You are not only opposing me but also the almighty figure of history, a sacred transcendental being who must be appeased.”

    It represents a half-hearted, ineffective stab at a moral judgment.

    When Gillard advises people to keep in step with the march of history on climate change, her words convey an implicit warning.

    Those who get on the wrong side will face not only the judgment of the electorate but risk being trampled under history’s jackboot.

    and more …

    check out the article

    00

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Val Majkus – you are correct it is an excellent article. My perception is that of all of the MSM, “The Australian” seems to be the best of a bad bunch in terms of journalist professionalism. That publication has certainly gone up in my estimation.

      00

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Obama and Gillard both die at the same time and they meet at the Pearly Gates where St. Peter asks them both, “What are your credentials that allow you to enter Heaven?”

      Both give the same answer. “I was on the right side of history in everything I did.”

      “Wrong,” cries St. Peter. “Whether you were on the right side of history or not can only be known after you both are history.” And with that he springs the trap that sends them both down to Hell.

      The moral of this story is that it’s better to think less of yourself and be surprised that you were more highly regarded than you expected than it is to think too highly of yourself only to find out you were wrong.

      00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The mythical “they” have obviously found a new use for the climate models.

      Since the climate models have proven so accurate in predicting climatic conditions decades and centuries in advance, it only seems reasonable to use them to predict geopolitical, commercial, and social future-states. After all, we know more about political history than we do about climatic history. Bristlecones never lie about the game of Kings.

      So the use of models lets the politicians choose which side if history they want to be on based on mathematical certainty.

      We in the west can choose to be on the “right” side of history; relegating those we despise, to be on the “left” side of history much in the way that the French despise the English for driving on the “left” side of the road.

      It is always nice when politicians refer to “the march of history”, because they are alluding to the ides of March, and the death of Caesar, and therefore their own demise.

      00

  • #
    bananabender

    Engineering and the physical sciences are overwhelmingly male professions.

    Engineers and physical scientists consistently rate in the highest percentiles of critical thinking ability.

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    Michael @ 38

    The case has nothing to do with racial discrimination unless you could somehow establish that all the “rejected” submissions were from one ethnic group.

    There are two courses open:

    1) – An appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) with a request for an injunction against the findings of the Committee being used for anything until the appeal is heard.

    2) – A Writ of Mandamus under S75(V) of the constitution against the Secretary of the Committee through the High Court with a request for an injunction against the findings of the Committee being used for anything until the appeal is heard.

    Either course, if successful in obtaining an injunction, would stop the passage of the legislation in its tracks. Unfortunately either course would require expensive lawyers and a barrister, OR the backing of the “opposition”, so don’t expect anything to happen.

    Still, every cloud has a silver lining. The coming deafening roar of crickets chirping from the Liberals over this matter should put paid, once and for all, to any idea that they are in any REAL way opposed to any of this.

    I had hoped the similar roar of the sound of silence over Dennis Jensen’s attempts to table some REAL science might have woken some people here up to the fact that the Liberals are NOT our friends.

    Apparently it was not.

    00

    • #
      Michael

      Actually someone I know has just contacted several LiberaL and national mp’S In regard to this issue,in regard to helping us. Also I have filed a complaint with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal pointing out how the government committee re-classified all the submissions that it didn’t like as correspondence,thereby stacking the committee’s report in there favour by insuring that the commitee’s didn’t get to read the actual submissions. I’m prepared to follow up my complaint as far as it goes.

      00

  • #
    ferdinand

    I’d never heard of Adriana Barton before so I looked her up. The first item says “Adriana Barton Left-wing Cnadaian bigot”. Enough said I think.

    00

  • #
    PaulM

    Has anybody else noticed that since the migration to the new format the blog has become somewhat troll free and lacking in the streams of mindless O/T posts about SFA?

    If this is the case, one can only hope that the trend spreads across the blogosphere as the quaility of the conversation has improved markedly, the prose more relaxed and the overall atmosphere much more conducive for informative, entertaining and rewarding interactions amongst contributors.

    A big thumbs up for whatever the cause.

    00

  • #
    Tristan

    Mv, I hope to get a chance to chat with Mr Cook at some point (he works just down the road) and one of the things I’d like to find out is why your posts were removed. Did you post under the same moniker at SkS?

    00

  • #
    Joe V.

    A Government that can ignore a submission by TonyfromAus, clearly hasn’t a clue what it’s dealing with.
    Their partiality makes a mockery of the whole process of consultation, but worse than that , holding this sham consultation, it wastes people’s time & cynically so, and that I’d insulting.

    This Govt seems to easily to forget that it cannt treat the Austrslian public with the same derision it treats the Opposition.

    00

  • #
    brc

    It’s all very simple, really.

    The goal of many is a fully planned society. One where inequities can be banished forever, where the state has greater priority over the individual, for this is the only way to guarantee a monitored distribution of wealth.

    The carbon taxing plans fall straight into this, for nothing has a greater input into wealth than energy. An energy tax and overriding energy regulation is a central planners dream.

    However, once you’ve decided that the needs of the state override the needs of the individual, dissent must be silenced. There is no other way. Not only does dissent have to be silenced, it also has to be made frightened to speak. Otherwise, how does the collective needs override the individual?

    Once the need to silence dissent is required, there is also needed a communal singing from the song sheet to ensure that everyone’s interests are aligned.

    We all laugh at the videos of North Korea where the brainwashed subjects all praise the leader and the country, and sing about their grand plans. But are blind followers of the climate faith all that different? Do they not all sing in unison, hail the great leaders of the movement and collectively pour scorn on those who don’t agree?

    Make no mistake, the Bob Browns of this world know they need total group acquiesience to their plans. That’s why they are so keen on press control and suppression of dissent through any means possible. That’s why their supporters love sliding into fantasies about shutting up the stupid selfish voters who only want the ability to choose their own way in life.

    That’s why you get groups developed for scapegoats to blame all the problems on. Many different groups have been chosen over the years – the Jews have been perennially popular – but it seems that middle aged white males are the new group.

    It’s funny to me – I would have said that middle aged white males probably have the highest levels of education as a group due to history and past education trends (I’m not silly enough to think it will stay this way for the next generation). It’s funny isn’t it, when the collectively highest educated set is also the least convinced about something. Makes you wonder, doesn’t it.

    00

  • #
    • #
      Winston

      Honestly, Tristan
      And you tried to say above in post 7.2 that you don’t attempt to categorise people into demographics in order to try to win an argument- so much for- “Yet more leaping and bounding”. And then you link to the picture of the tin foil hat brigade. Don’t run the risk of letting any honesty in there, boyo. Also, I’d say you’re a lot closer to believing in the need for that tin foil hat than anyone else here….perhaps it will keep that evil carbon out from those dirty polluders.

      00

    • #
      Tristan

      Don’t read too much into it darlin’ I’m just trolling.

      00

  • #
    rukidding

    brc when has the needs of the individual overrode the needs of the state(society).You have the right as an individual to obey the law if you don’t the society(state) will deal with you.
    In a democracy like ours we get to vote for the people who we think will instigate laws that the majority of us agree with.If enough of us think we would be better off with a centrally planed government,and there is about 10% of our population who think that we should(Greens)) then that is what we will have.
    I have never been under any illusion when it comes to my rights v the state

    00

  • #
    Neville

    BTW Bolt will discuss AGW with 3 scientists on his TV show tomorrow at 10 am and repeated at 4.30 pm channel 10.

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    Tristan @ 45

    We have already had this conversation. Why do you persist in trying to maintain the illusion that we have not?

    And why on earth would I bother posting under another name at Septic Science?

    00

    • #

      Septic Science has a long-running habit of leaving out inconvenient little facts. I chanced on a post there recently in a Google search. I was attempting to discover how many glaciers exist worldwide, in order to contrast that figure with the number of glaciers monitored, and demonstrate the paucity of data. The post, An overview of glacier trends, shows data for 30 “reference” glaciers, and Cook shows a graph comparing an average for these to data for “all glaciers”, in order to “prove” that the 30 are representative. What he fails to mention, but which a check of his source reveals, is that “all glaciers” refers to 111 glaciers surveyed. His source also reveals that there are well over 100,000 glaciers worldwide, and that this is a “gross underestimate”, by possibly 44%. So much for truth and “settled science”.

      00

    • #
      Tristan

      Sorry Mv, I remember talking about it but not the details.

      The post, An overview of glacier trends, shows data for 30 “reference” glaciers, and Cook shows a graph comparing an average for these to data for “all glaciers”, in order to “prove” that the 30 are representative. What he fails to mention, but which a check of his source reveals, is that “all glaciers” refers to 111 glaciers surveyed.

      You don’t need to check the source, just read the article, part of which you seem to have misunderstood anyway. 228 glaciers have been monitored at various points over the period 46-06, the max during any one year being ~105. Typically glacial studies use the 30 reference glaciers due to the continuous nature of their data. Cook wondered whether these results were consistent with using the data from all available glaciers (228 total). He drops the ‘available’ after the first mention (which he shouldn’t have, especially in the case of the graph), but even a fairly casual reading of the article reveals that Cook is not pretending anything.

      ________

      Monitoring 228 glaciers, 111 glaciers, 105 glaciers, or 30 glaciers out of more than a hundred thousand glaciers worldwide cannot tell anybody anything. The term “cherry picking” hardly describes this level of absurdity. — Editor

      00

      • #

        I didn’t misunderstand anything in the article, and I’m not criticising the data content. I find your tone rather condescending. A casual reader would conclude that all meant all, and not 228. My figure of 111 was from another a similar graph on the source site.

        “You don’t need to check the source, just read the article” – WHAT? I can’t believe you actually wrote that. I DID check the source, but with a little difficulty – Cook’s link leads to a page with links to pdfs – a link directly to the chapter with the graph would have saved some trouble. A link below one chart simply leads to the main page of the WGMS site, all but useless. Sloppy terminology and sloppy linking – 6/10

        00

        • #
          MaryFJohnston

          MH

          Think PATRONISING.

          He has never dealt with the science, just the semantics; maybe the temperature up there makes it seem like AGW is real, no arguments needed.

          00

      • #
        Tristan

        You said

        What he fails to mention, but which a check of his source reveals, is that “all glaciers” refers to 111 glaciers surveyed.

        Yet he does mention how many glaciers there are data for (228) in his post, which is why I said

        You don’t need to check the source, just read the article

        I certainly didn’t mean to advocate not checking sources! I was referring to the implication that critical information from the source article wasn’t present in Cook’s post, when it actually is. This is why I thought you may not have read the article in its entirety. Apologies for any condescension.

        Sloppy labeling and linking, agreed, no error bars either. I reckon it gets a 6 1/2.

        00

      • #
        Tristan

        Mary, Mary, quite contrary, learned about thermal expansion yet? ;)

        00

    • #
      Tristan

      Monitoring 228 glaciers, 111 glaciers, 105 glaciers, or 30 glaciers out of more than a hundred thousands glaciers worldwide cannot tell anybody anything. The term “cherry picking” hardly describes this level of absurdity. — Editor

      In that case, editor, you must think all statistics is cherry picking.

      00

      • #
        Winston

        So you think 228 out of at least 100,000 reaches a level of statistical significance? And just how were those particular glaciers selected? If they were selected on the basis of accessibility, that could skew the results there. And any sample that small out of such a large sample base has huge error bars which make it hard to accept any conclusions drawn therefrom.

        00

        • #
          Wendy

          well….he obviously thinks that the last 100 years out of the last 4.5 Billion years is statistically significant, if that tells you anything.
          ;)

          00

      • #
        Tristan

        I know it might seem that to the layperson that large population sizes make statistics less ‘significant’ but the effect of population size quickly plateaus. Error bars are almost entirely dictated by the relationship between sample size and standard deviation.

        00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    Oh dear looks like the futile science argument again.
    Just gotta wake the public up to realise they are being duped by the globalists evil plan by funding

    C3 ‘pseudo-green alarmists making up the “green” machine are truly evil’.

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    “Indeed, without global action, a carbon tax in Australia cannot do anything to mitigate the effects of climate change.

    Here although this statement is intended to say Plantfood tax is a waste of time it make me boil over to see the beginning part ..without global action.. and… mitigate the effects….Words from the globalist bankers.

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    I suppose its a bit late to comment on the original post now. But, better late than never.

    I think its a good idea to characterise AGW “skeptics”. I reckon, they tend to be male, middle-aged or older, tending to overweight, and likely to drive a smelly 4WD. They listen to shock jocks and read Alan Bolt, because they enjoy being outraged by the stupidity of the modern world. As a rule, they greatly distrust governments (any government).

    We could of course take a quick survey here. Age, height, weight, car, opinions on Jones & Bolt.

    54 178cm 90kg Nissan Pulsar (but I cycle as much as I can) hate Jones, find Bolt amusing.

    00

    • #
      memoryvault

      60 (in two weeks), 183cm, 85kg, Eunos 800 sedan (17 years old and in showroom condition – does about 5,000klm a year), on record as stating Jones and Bolt are paid mouthpieces of the “establishment” whose job it is to stir up dissension – especially “cash for comments” Jones.

      .
      Since there are (so far) only the two of us in this “survey”, sort-of blows your “characterisation” out of the water, doesn’t it John? After all, I’m older than you, taller than you, lighter than you, own a car with an overall smaller footprint than yours, and have a far more sceptical understanding of the Jones and the Bolts of the world than you.

      00

      • #
        memoryvault

        PS – at only 178cm tall and yet 90kg, you are obviously not cycling nearly enough. Or maybe you should be like me and just lay off the junk food and beer.

        Works wonders.

        00

      • #
        MaryFJohnston

        64 — 5ft 11in – 11st 7lb — some riding mostly bushwalking

        00

        • #
          Winston

          But Mary
          Are you male, though? Coz, if not, your going to skew the data in all the wrong directions and JB will have to massage the data to fit the hypothesis. After all, the original premise doesn’t have to be abandoned just because the data doesn’t even remotely fit the theory, now does it?

          00

          • #
            MaryFJohnston

            Yeah Winston

            M

            Male

            Not Female.

            Sorry, the monika is taken from my great grandmother, may she rest in peace, to give me some anonymity and the opportunity to feel ambivalent when Tristan or whoever refers to me as “cutie”.

            :-)

            00

    • #

      Not too late – I read your comment! It’s never too late, if you have some thing worthwhile to say. I don’t think it’s a good idea to categorise anyone or anything without very good reason. I’m not sceptical of AGW because I’m white, middle-aged, overweight, read Alan Bolt or any other characteristic. I’m sceptical because I have a brain and can use it. I’m sceptical because I understand some of the underlying science and can see the flaws and weaknesses in the AGW case. I’m sceptical because I follow up source links in web articles and blog posts, and make up my own mind – I don’t need it made up for me.

      00

    • #
      Winston

      49 2005 Suzuki Swift (25,000km in 6 yrs) 179 cm 88kg Never listened to Alan Jones with the exception of his stint as Australian Rugby coach. Didn’t even know who Bolt was until the AGW/ CAGW controversy piqued my interest, and have only visited his blog consequent to that. I like a straight shooter, it’s OK to be wrong so long as you say what you really think, and I believe he is more inclined to speak his mind than any other journalist. Often don’t completely agree with him, but he can spot a hypocrite a mile off and isn’t afraid to say so – hence his popularity. The fact that the left hate him so much makes him thus a valuable contributor, keeps your heads from being too firmly implanted in your collective rectums, so you should thank him, really.

      00

      • #
        memoryvault

        Winston’s reply makes it two to one against your “theory” John.

        .
        It also makes you the outright winner – by a long shot – in the “tending to overweight” class.

        Maybe you should buy a “smelly 4WD”. After all, you seem to fit the profile better than any other respondent. Might be good for your “image” –

        such as it is.

        00

        • #
          John Brookes

          All male so far (I’m assuming), and the only one telling (thanks MV) is middle aged, and yes, I’m a comparative fatty (which bugs me). And no old 4WDs – I’m not stereotyping very well.

          Incidentally, I sometimes mark 1st year uni assignments, and have occasionally thought, when looking at a particular error, “that just has to be a girl” (or a guy) – and you know what, my success rate runs at about 50%. Which isn’t a success rate…..

          00

          • #

            52, 5’11″ 58kgs and I have a 100% guaranteed fool proof works every time all the time for all people diet John….STOP SHOVELLING FOOD IN YOUR MOUTH, nobody ever gained weight from breathing fresh air.

            I like Bolt, I think he is an inherently decent bloke with good motives.
            Jones? am not a fan at all.

            Have voted labor all my life except the one time I voted for Malcolm Fraser, BUT NEVER EVER AGAIN.

            Hobby farmer with lots horses and some cattle chooks ducks (all rescued) and lots of wildlife that seem to like me, especially the 6th generation magpies and butcher birds who visit the house as they please (usually eat and run without saying thanx)
            I don’t kill things (except redback spiders mozzies and rats), not even the ample red bellied black snakes on the property.

            I drive an old EF Falcon with lots of dents due to horse kicks (bastards lol) coz it pulls my horse float well.

            Dunno if I’m a sceptic, heretic or denier. All I know is I have yet to see any evidence that burning fossil fuels alters our climate to any discernable degree. Got any?

            00

      • #
        MaryFJohnston

        Hi Winston

        I like Bolt because he annoys the Greenies so much. They go apoplectic over his rants.

        He’s a bit hard to watch but I love how he stirs them up!

        00

    • #
      PaulM

      45, 2003 Mazda RX8 (2nd Hand purchase) & 2007 Mini Cooper, 175cm 83kg, never listened to Alan Jones and have never read anything by Alan Bolt, Andrew Bolt on the other hand, I have read, have participated on his blog since its inception and regularly correspond with him. The quality and worth of the man are quite obvious in these correspondence. I find it curious that you say you find Bolt humorous but don’t even know his name and as such the veracity and worth of your opinion is thus compromised.

      00

      • #
        John Brookes

        Hmmm, I like the sound of your cars!

        00

        • #
          PaulM

          The RX8 is an absolute pleasure to drive, by far the best piece of automotive engineering Mazda has put out, it doesn’t handle quite as well as the MX5 but then again it isn’t as light. The biggest problem with the RX8 is it doesn’t feel fast, until you look at the speedo, the suspension and steering are so sweet that even at 100mph you don’t feel anywhere near breaking traction and the ride is amazingly smooth. The mini is also a great little car and with my first car having been an ex rally Cooper S (British Racing Green with electric silver racing stripes), I couldn’t resist buying the new one. It’s a fun little car to drive. Iv’e put 960000 on the mini and 60000 on the RX8 and haven’t had an ounce of trouble with either and am chuffed that I got them. Both are worlds apart from the other cars I’ve had and both are the type of car that you just want to point in a direction and drive simply for the pleasure of doing so.

          00

        • #
          PaulM

          Bernd Felsche, indeed it does, but Mazda has been using rotary engines for quite a while.

          00

    • #
      Tristan

      29; 185cm; 65-70kg; bus/train/ferry/feet; Jones has lots of anger (suppressed desires?*) and low credibility; Bolt has partisan commentator disease (tends to arrogance and polemic, never pretty from any angle).

      *cheap shot!

      00

      • #
        PaulM

        Your opinion of Bolt is a reflection of your own prejudices and bears no resemblence to reality.

        00

      • #
        Tristan

        Pretty easy for me to say ‘ditto’

        00

      • #
        Winston

        Tristan and JB,
        Inner city dwellers have the luxury of busing and train riding everywhere, not an option for those who live in rural or semi rural areas where no such services exist. As to the tendency to arrogance and polemic- pretty much describes the personality traits of EVERY troll who has made his or her way onto this site. Note, not a 4WD or SUV among the skeptics, showing the weakness of JBs original character assessment. Also, let’s look at Al Gore’s profile, approximate 180 cm 100 kg 3 SUVs, private jet, Enjoys being outraged by the stupidity of the modern world. Most likely listens to Larry King, reads the Wall St Journal and NYTimes. Sounds like a green enviro-nut to me. Really, you guys need to work it out. You are being had by the bankers, who are playing you like guitar strings.

        00

    • #
      Tristan

      I distrust governments but like taxes. I don’t get outraged at the differences between myself and others but it bums me out from time to time. I think political leaning correlates more strongly with AGW stance than anything else.

      00

      • #
        Winston

        You claim to like taxes.
        Obviously you don’t particularly care whether it is spent wisely or not! Governments waste much of their revenue due to the fact it isn’t THEIR money. Private enterprise at least respects their own money enough to keep costs down and attempt to maximize efficiency. No one here thinks we shouldn’t pay any taxes. It is a case of already a real tax rate of about 70 % once taxes on income, GST, government fees and charges on every facet of society, stamp duty, etc, etc, plus the cut bankers take in loan and credit interest, is it any wonder the cavalier attitude of government riles the average consumer? The governments tax rates are fine as they are, what needs to change is reducing the bloated public service and for governments to tender for projects with an eye on the bottom line. Some people in government who know how to run a business efficiently would not go astray either. But people like you wouldn’t vote for them!

        00

    • #

      60, 184cm, 84kg, (which is 5kg above my healthy weight BMI, about right for my age I’ve been told by my GP) Played Grade cricket till I was 42. 2001 Holden Astra (Opel). (before that, 4 Corolla’s and one Camry since 1969). Never listened to Jones. Never heard of ALAN Bolt. However, I do like to read ANDREW Bolt.

      Relax with anything by Pink Floyd, from any of their 18 (studio) albums, and I have 16 of them on vinyl. Also love anything by Neil Young (17 Vinyls). Love my vinyl, and have around 400 of them, all now converted to digital. Took 10 months and a wonderful German computer program.

      Favourite book is Atlas Shrugged, (figures I hear some of you say) Like Count Leo Tolstoy, Michener, Tom Wolfe, Anton Myrer, Val McDermid, Asimov, Doc Smith’s ‘Lensman’ series, Larry McMurtry, and I have all 29 Arthur W Upfield ‘Bony’ novels. For the Classic Oz novel, perhaps ‘Poor Fellow My Country’ (Xavier Herbert) or ‘Power Without Glory’ (Frank Hardy).

      All of it boring, white, middle class, middle age pap, so I’m told.

      Life has never been so good, which is the opposite of what it’s supposed to be ….. evidently!

      Tony.

      00

      • #
        Winston

        Love vinyl, too! Sound is better, fuller and more rounded. My brother thinks I’m off my rocket to believe that, but to each his own.
        Have had upwards of 1500 or so, but whittled them down to a prime 400. Wore out several copies of Van Morrison’s “Astral Weeks” in the process.

        00

        • #

          Same here.
          I have a pristine ‘Dark Side’, a pristine ‘Wish You Were Here’, and copies of both that actually get played, and in fact I’ve ‘worn out’ both playing versions, long since replaced. Also have a pristine, sealed in a plastic sheath, and never opened vinyl of ‘The Division Bell’, a coloured picture vinyl, one of very few vinyls made of that last Floyd album in 1994.

          Tony.

          00

          • #
            Winston

            ‘Wish You Were Here’ is one of my favourite albums, and the title song especially for that matter- very telling lyrics with respect to personal liberty, avoiding the pitfalls of excessive government control, having the courage to stand up for what’s right no matter what it might cost you, implying that passivity is the worst of sins (and yes, I do know it’s also about Syd Barrett fighting off his personal demons and drug abuse- a dual meaning IMO):

            “So, so you think you can tell Heaven from Hell,
            blue skies from pain.
            Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?
            A smile from a veil?
            Do you think you can tell?
            And did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts?
            Hot ashes for trees?
            Hot air for a cool breeze?
            Cold comfort for change?
            And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage?
            How I wish, how I wish you were here.
            We’re just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year,
            Running over the same old ground.
            What have you found? The same old fears.
            Wish you were here.”

            Have a pristine 5 Album “Complete Buddy Holly” set which is extremely rare, plus old Blues Albums like Howlin’ Wolf’s “Red Rocking Chair” Album, Ray Charles Best of (solely Japanese issue), Jazz Classics from Miles Davis and John Coltrane, Nick Drake’s “Five Leaves Left”, etc etc. Pity they don’t make any Radiohead or Coldplay on vinyl, though I did see U2′s “Joshua Tree” album was brought out on vinyl at one point, at a premium no doubt. Middle aged pap, possibly, but commercial interests have ruined the modern recording industry- turning much (but not all) into product- this being what happens when accountants take over the creative process.

            00

          • #

            As this Post is just about ‘tapped’, I don’t Joanne will chide me much for staying away from the topic, and on music.

            Have you ever noticed that each generation thinks it was they who ‘invented’ music.

            That was never more starkly brought home to me than when I was teaching the electrical trade to new guys at the RAAF School of Technical Training for 6 years.

            During the Practical subjects I would allow the guys to play music for background while they were working.

            I came back from morning Smoko and one of the young Apprentices, around 17 years old was playing a lovely piece of music.

            I wandered up and was listening to the beautiful guitar work.

            When the young guy came up, he said, “Is it too loud for you Sarge?” (code for … Don’t like this new stuff do you, Sarge)

            “No,” I replied, “I was just admiring David Gilmour, and I haven’t heard this.”

            It was ‘On The Turning Away’ from Floyd’s ‘A Momentary Lapse Of Reason’, as he told me, just released, (late 87) and he had taped it from the CD to play while he worked.

            He seemed astounded that I knew who it was, so he proudly told me that upon hearing this he went out and purchased their first album, ‘Dark Side Of The Moon’.

            He was incredulous when I told him that ‘Dark Side’ was their 8th Studio album.

            After that the whole course of 24 young men looked upon me not only as their Sergeant, but almost as an extra member of their Course.

            At around the same time, my 17 year old son was also getting into music.

            When I purchased my albums, I would listen to them, and the ones I really liked I would then tape onto UD C90 tapes, because I could usually get one album per 45 minute side of the cassette tape. That way, I could play the music on the Tape deck instead of risking ‘marring’ the album with constant playing. To that end I had around 6 dozen tapes. My 17 year old ‘thought’ that my music was a relic from the past.

            With each visit home, some of those tapes would disappear, until after two years all I had left was a dozen or so of those tapes. When I pressed him, he said he really enjoyed what I had, and even he looked on me in a different light.

            Music – The great equaliser.

            I gently dropped the hint, and got ‘Lapse’ for Christmas, one of only 2 Floyds albums I don’t have on vinyl.

            I still love Gilmour’s guitar on that song ‘On The Turning Away’.

            And Winston, if you like the middle Floyd, perhaps you might also like the early Alan Parsons albums, ‘Tales of Mystery and Imagination, Edgar Alan Poe’, and ‘I Robot’. Parsons was the engineer for Floyd from Atom Heart Mother onwards till he struck out on his own.

            That ‘Mystery and Imagination’ has some of the best electronic music recorded, on one whole side, ‘The Rise and Fall Of The House Of Usher’ including the single best storm sequence recorded in my opinion, and until you hear it with good full headphones, you don’t realise how good a music engineer he really was.

            Parsons holds a dubious record from 1985, when Randy Newman won his first Grammy. Parsons is now the most nominated artist for a Grammy not to have won one, taking that dubious honour from Randy.

            For all of you, does this Randy Newman bring to mind any person with, er, red hair.

            Big Hat No Cattle

            Tony.

            00

    • #
      Tristan

      Tony

      My Dad’s a shade older than you and also played grade cricket (or maybe he played reserves/2nd grade, I’d have to ask). He also has the entire collection of Bony novels and read a few to me when I was a wee’un.

      00

    • #
      NicG.

      I like this game, so many mental images to make one shudder.

      50yrs next bd, 184cm, 84kg, 2006 Ford 1.8l motor (Mondeo – so that should give away my geographical location), no opinions on Jones & Bolt as not enough info. Ethnically white but with a helluva tan as I cycle, run, walk and generally get outside as much as I can. A small ‘spare tyre’ but a full head of hair so the ‘thickening around the middle and thinning on top’ doesn’t quite work.

      FYI; Time-served Apprentice in the aviation industry then another 10 years practicing the craft. Then a step sideways into Tech Writing and Illustration firstly during the early 1990′s in aviation (Service Bulletins) but for the last 12 years have been working for a company that manufactures laboratory grade equipment to sense/detect chemical warfare agents and toxic industrial chemicals which is then placed into the hands of first responders and military ‘grunts’. If you’d like a task that causes a bit of analytical thinking try picking the brains of scientists (real ones not the ‘climate’ variety) and PhD’s, sorting the ‘wheat from the chaff’ and then presenting this info in a form of words and pictures that your squaddie of average intelligence can use, not only to operate the quipment, but maintain and fault-find to ‘board’ level – well you can’t ‘cos it’s my job! Occams Razor is second nature.

      Cheers.
      NicG.

      00

      • #
        Truthseeker

        What is this? “Top Gear” meets “E-Harmony” for the over the hill set? If you are trawling for companionship, there are actually sites dedicated for that. Not this one.

        00

        • #
          Winston

          Funny comment, Truthseeker.
          But, I would have to offer a dissenting opinion, in that I feel have some limited personal information about the people you’re talking to stops one from excessively generalising or categorising people on the basis of some arbitrary demographic, and therefrom casting aspersions of guilt by association. Perhaps the anonymity of this and other blogs is a weakness in this way, allowing people to distract from the points on offer by painting an inaccurate portrait of those opposite in the debate, as John attempted to do in post #58( and Adam Smith was a past master at doing). As one can see, the skeptic demographic is widely variable, except for age, and that fact goes largely to the apathy of those in the Gen X & Y demographic who have better things to do with their time- drinking, surfing, partying, lovemaking, skydiving, playing Rugby, etc- than to spend time on blogs arguing about science and the cult of CAGW. Those of that age group whom I have spoken to don’t believe the cult either, but don’t perhaps understand what is actually at stake yet, given they have been so indoctrinated and lulled into a state of indifference by a lame duck media. Their liberty hasn’t been challenged like my parents and grandparents generations were. Of course, the pre baby boomer generations are going to see the parallels with past similar attempts to subjugate democracy and undermine prosperity, whether by pseudo-religious zealots, rapacious profiteers or political control freaks with an inflated sense of their own importance.

          00

      • #
        MaryFJohnston

        Sounds like you got the jackpot there!

        00

    • #

      I’ll play. I’m 51, 175cm and weigh 70kg. My BMI is 22.9 and it is all muscle.

      I drive a Triton 4WD V6 trayback as being a tradesman (when I feel like working) I require such a vehicle. It does not smell though. Clocked up 32,000km in the last four years.

      I’m just at ease wearing rugger shorts, polo shirts and steel caps as my Italian Cashmere wool bespoke suits, French cuffs and Italian leather shoes. Have a penchant for silver and diamond cufflinks.

      I have met Alan Jones but only listened to his program once, whilst staying at my aunt’s place on my way back from the Convoy. Found the program somewhat demure and certainly not the stuff of a so called ‘Shock Jock’. Maybe it was an off day for Alan.

      On Andrew Bolt, don’t agree with a lot of his opinion but don’t find it offensive. Seems to get the blood boiling of the lefties which exposes their hatred of anything that does not fit snugly into their group think. Don’t mind his show, it emanated from a chat at Alan Jones’ birthday party in Sydney. Am pushing for the show to be an hour, going head to head with Insiders next year. That would be interesting.

      Oh, don’t consider myself conservative. I find the right wing as odious as the left wing. Both extremes are totalitarian. A prime example is being banned from Just Grounds because I prefer to post as ‘scaper’ which has been my screen name for years. I find the action as a restriction to identifying myself as such an assault upon my personal freedom. Fascists!

      00

      • #
        MaryFJohnston

        “”Both extremes are totalitarian.”" Can relate to that.

        00

      • #
        Twodogs

        Whaddya mean “both”? Aren’t all extremes totalitarian?

        00

      • #
        Wendy

        and to begin to balance things out a tiny bit….
        FEMALE, conservative, 50, 5’6″, 178 lbs (recently remarried and fighting the “married 20 lbs”), 2006 Mazda 3 hatchback daily driver, 2008 Corvette Z06 pleasure car, can’t watch any Aussie telly here in the states although we are currently watching Bathurst!!!!! WAAHOO! Enjoy Bolt’s columns for the most part.
        Geology degree, oil industry shill……Don’t tell me islands are sinking due to globull warming when those islands are sinking due to normal geologic processes!!

        00

    • #
      Sean McHugh

      I think its a good idea to characterise AGW “skeptics”. I reckon, they tend to be male, middle-aged or older, tending to overweight, and likely to drive a smelly 4WD. They listen to shock jocks and read Alan Bolt, because they enjoy being outraged by the stupidity of the modern world. As a rule, they greatly distrust governments (any government).

      If not already, you will soon be talking about the majority of Australians. Labor/Greens people tend to forget that. And who is Alan Bolt? It’s easy to obtain a supply of warmist rhetoric by reading Fairfax, watching commercial TV, and even more so, by listening to or watching the ABC. Could you please advise us where, in the media, John Brookes obtains data/information that detracts from AGW? Where, for instance would you find out that, contrary to reports, Tuvalu is not under water and its inhabitants have not been evacuated to New Zealand? Where would you be informed that, for the last 13 years, there hasn’t been the predicted global warming? Where, from the media, did you learn that the floods in Brisbane were not due to global warming and that the dams weren’t even supposed to fill under global warming? That expectation is why water wasn’t released till it was too late and is why people were killed. Where would you find out that in the south, housing estates were built on known flood plains that were no longer supposed to flood? Important stuff, don’t you think?

      Remember the backdrops of dry cracked ground (also polar bears and breaking ice) whenever the TV stations were talking about global warming? Is that the elitist-approved method for information impartation, John? Have you noticed how all those images, of dry cracked ground, have been pulled?

      Unfortunately, one does not get any semblance of balance from the proper sources so one is forced to go elsewhere to obtain information that hasn’t passed through the filter of political correctness. Finding out what has really been going on, does tend to shock, but surely some of that shock can be blamed on the politically-correct advocates who have withheld detracting information and passed on alternatives that are misleading and false.

      We could of course take a quick survey here. Age, height, weight, car, opinions on Jones & Bolt.

      Yes, whatever distracts.

      00

      • #

        Something odd.
        In the early days after I started doing this three and a half years ago, I would occasionally comment at the ABC site, when they opened up commenting.
        I used my own real name there, and not the screen name I have now been using since 2005.

        As I was in the main, speaking against the ‘meme’, most of my comments would not get up, or the ones that did drew responses that, er, shot me down, as they would think.

        One actual comment that did not get up, but which in fact drew a very swift response, was of an image of Kevin Rudd, in China, visiting one of those new coal fired power plants. It was a standard image, carefully taken from ground level, and looking up.

        There was Rudd, and some of his sycophants entourage. In the background. behind him was that terrible disgusting, derdy pollution pouring out of the stacks.

        Trouble is that it was the fat concave cooling towers, and that white stuff pouring out the top was just cooling steam clouds.

        Prior to that, in all their images concerning this dreaded CO2 emissions problem, they showed steam pouring from the cooling towers.

        I guess I might have been sarcastic a little tongue in cheek when I, er, mentioned the fact that it was only cooling steam from the ponds under those fat stacks.

        Needless to say, that was one Comment that didn’t get up.

        However, two earlier articles almost immediately had the images pulled and replaced with the thin stacks and the wispy barely visible exhaust wafting out, nowhere near as emotive as the thick white steam.

        Oddly, some articles still use the images with steam. More emotive than the other images.

        I think they were onto me after that, and I rarely if ever got a comment up after that. Then I just gave up. No point trying to tell the truth when the ABC is concerned.

        Tony.

        00

    • #
      Gee Aye

      cool… this is the climate sceptics RSVP

      178cm 70kg 46 with a Daihatsu Charade 1994.

      OK there is another car but my name isn’t actually on the ownership papers.

      00

    • #
      Tel

      Over 100 kilos, and over 190 cm, and over 40… not saying how much over.

      Don’t have a car, and if you saw the stack of boots I’ve worn through you would say, “Hey, these Chinese make crappy boots!” and I’d be inclined to agree.

      I’m a Libertarian, and not remotely conservative, I am from a partly Irish, partly Eastern European family so I have somewhat pale skin. I was brought up a Socialist, but then I studied a bit of history and a bit of economics and discovered what Socialism was all about (mass killing for the most part).

      cool… this is the climate sceptics RSVP

      I’m happy with my current situation, thank you.

      00

  • #
    Tim

    This simplistic propaganda is not meant for people like you, Jo. I think it’s purposefully targeted at those too busy to research the facts – those too ignorant to believe there is any other information apart from their MSM – those too hedonistic and complacent to care – those too uneducated to understand the tones of the English language – or those who just accept that if an idea presented as ‘fact’ is repeated enough, it must be correct. Or all of the above.

    That is the target market for their propaganda; I’m afraid it’s probably the majority.

    00

    • #
      Llew Jones

      Not so sure it is only white middle aged Aussies who know a scam when they see one. There are plenty of post-middle aged male and female Aussies out there who have lived longer than the MAers in the laboratory called Aussie climate and they know from that exposure that climate change is a natural and cyclical phenomena and CACC is either the rationale for a money grabbing (tax) scam or an ideological plot devised by madmen like the wild eyed Combet who has form as a past would be wrecker of the Australian economy ie. he is a white middle aged Aussie who cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of all Australians.

      00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Tim,

      You are probably right. But our unpicking of the simplistic propaganda does mean that some of the tricks – some of the mind games – some of the twisted phrases, do start to stand out.

      In responding with open and valid argument, we actually present a different story, and occasionally these are referred to in the mainstream press, even if only in vilification, and do cause one or two people to stop and think, and they talk to their friends, and the responses they get causes them to dig a bit deeper, and so the “darkened room” becomes a little less dark.

      One of the commentators here, Baa Humbug Bulldust, coined the phrase “Climategate” in a comment on the WattsUpWithThat blog. Several of the media hacks have tried to claim the credit, but the timestamps tell a different tale. The word, “climategate” with its reference to “watergate” implies malfeasance at the highest level, and so it should. This word alone has caused a lot of younger people to dig deeper, and go past their conditioning, and discover things for themselves.

      Once you can see the propaganda, you cannot go back, and you can no longer ignore it, and you must do something about it.

      [Actually it was our mate Bulldust who coined the phrase at 3:52PM PST Nov 19th 2009] mod oggi

      00

    • #
      Twodogs

      what a joke. Why do female east asian women keep telling me that global warming is a joke? And unsolicited? The silent majority is very big, and is represented in the polls. How many warministas are in non-labour/greens polling?

      00

  • #
    Baron

    listen up, those who worship the AGW doctrine, you ask even an amateur gardening novice which year do trees grow more, one that’s hot and dry, or one that’s wet and warm, then read the Mann’s tome justifying the hockey stick ‘science’ around the proxy of tree rings, tell Baron where exactly does the renown ‘scientist’ mention precipitation, ha.

    00

  • #
    Tom

    I think its a good idea to characterise AGW “skeptics”. I reckon, they tend to be male, middle-aged or older, tending to overweight, and likely to drive a smelly 4WD. They listen to shock jocks and read Alan Bolt, because they enjoy being outraged by the stupidity of the modern world. As a rule, they greatly distrust governments (any government).
    JB @58: Are you saying that CAGW believers tend to be young and skinny, more likely female than male, who probably listen to FM radio, are prone to fashion, trust governments (any government)and therefore have the least experience of life and work and tend to be the least qualified? I think you’ve nailed it!

    00

  • #
    pat

    regarding this quote from Zhang in the Garnaut piece posted by handjive -

    8 Oct: Sydney Morning Herald: John Garnaut: As China’s emissions rise, so too does sceptics’ hot air
    Mr Zhang, whose father was secretary to China’s former premier, Zhou Enlai, blasted Chinese policymakers for encouraging Chinese companies to buy foreign intellectual property in order to manufacture renewable energy equipment. The Chinese-made equipment helps the environment in other nations while leaving China with financial and environmental costs, he said.
    “The low-carbon economy, carbon politics and carbon taxes are actually driven by the West as the foundation for a new cycle of the virtual economy,” he added…
    http://www.theage.com.au/world/as-chinas-emissions-rise-so-too-does-sceptics-hot-air-20111007-1ldvl.html

    found these -

    5 Oct: Businessweek: Victoria Slind-Flor: Westinghouse Solar, Aker Biomarine: Intellectual Property
    Westinghouse Solar Inc. said it filed a patent-infringement complaint at the U.S. International Trade Commission seeking to block imports of solar-power systems made by Zep Solar and Canadian Solar Inc…
    The company has licensed its technology to Chinese and Japanese firms, and it has been in talks with other companies “in an effort to bring installation costs down on a more widespread basis throughout the solar industry,” Westinghouse Solar Chief Executive Officer Barry Cinnamon said in the statement.
    “Unfortunately, we believe that Zep Solar, Canadian Solar and others have not appropriately recognized Westinghouse Solar’s intellectual property rights by incorporating a system — the Zep System — that we contend infringes certain of our patents,” Cinnamon said. “As a consequence, we have turned to the ITC to address this issue.”
    Zep is based in San Rafael, California, and Canadian Solar is based in Kitchener, Ontario…
    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-05/westinghouse-solar-aker-biomarine-intellectual-property.html

    6 June: GigaOM: Katie Fehrenbacher: GE invests in and licenses solar tech from eSolar
    eSolar has signed long-term licensing agreements with NRG Energy, Penglai Electric in China, Acme group in India, and Ferrostaal AG in Europe, the Middle East and Africa…
    In addition to GE, eSolar has raised $170 million in investment from ACME group, NRG Energy, Oak Investments, Quercus Trust, Google’s venture capital arm, and Gross’ Idealabs.
    http://gigaom.com/cleantech/ge-invests-in-licenses-solar-tech-from-esolar/

    there are lots more. recall how the chinese govt had to shut down some solar panel factories following recent protests about pollution they were causing, and the West is fast finding out renewables are not viable, so China might be wondering if they will be left with unviable renewable factories!

    00

  • #
    val majkus

    further to my endless bleating about unaccepted submissions (see TonyfromOz’s case above) I’ve been wondering where that figure of 4,500 referred to in the e mail from Menzies House came from and I’ve found it in the dissenting report – if you go to http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jscacefl/report.htm#chapters
    you’ll see that the Dissenting Report is a chapter in the report and on page 3 of that report

    In this report of Coalition Members and Senators we have included the comments of hundreds of Australians – not just those few who appeared before the committee in its select few days of hearings in south-eastern Australia, or those professional organisations who made detailed submissions, but also many comments from the more than 4,500 people who made submissions to this inquiry, which the Labor-Greens-Independent majority refused to have published.

    and the conclusion is:

    Labor’s carbon tax is the wrong policy, for the wrong country at the wrong time:
    In the theoretical world, the penalty system has a lot of merit. In the context of Australia, with the market structures that it has, in our view the penalty system is precisely the wrong way to go … In the economic reality of the business world that we deal with day to day, the right policy has to be a blend of stick and carrot. This policy is all stick and not enough carrot.357
    To date, ETS mechanisms have proven only partially effective in encouraging reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This is due to the unpredictability and volatility they inherently create in the price of carbon, which discourages the significant, long-term investments in energy efficiency and low carbon technologies required to materially impact GHG emissions levels. 358
    I find it impossible to support this current legislation. It does not make sense. It is economically damaging. It is an exercise in futility. A better way is possible and it is a great shame, going to the point, that better ways were not explored.359
    Coalition members restate our belief that creating a giant new bureaucracy with costs approaching $400 million over the forward estimates so as to impose a multi-billion dollar new tax that will drive up the costs of everything in Australia but will not drive down Australia’s emissions is clearly the wrong approach.
    We believe there is a better way and recommend that the bills not be passed.

    00

  • #
    Neville

    Bolt will talk to Prof Garth Paltridge, Prof Bob Carter and Prof Peter Ridd about Juliar’s co2 tax garbage at 10am and repeated at 4.30 pm.today.

    It should be on Youtube and Bolt’s blog in about 24 hours for those who have missed it.

    00

    • #
      Truthseeker

      I have just watched the segment and it was done with clarity and clear logic. It completely debunked Julia’s assertions on carbon dioxide and climate and David Suzuki came in for a pasting as well. Whatever Bolt’s failings are on other issues, this segment was done well because it did not need any “spin”. He allowed the science to speak for itself from three scientists that communicated effectively.

      00

      • #
        MaryFJohnston

        My wife and I made the mistake of going to a free lecture by David Suzuki that was put on by our local council.

        We had expected to hear an environmentalist ; instead we heard a spiteful manic rant.

        It was enlightening to say the least and very disturbing to think that that turkey influences so many young people.

        00

    • #
      rukidding

      Unfortunately Prof Carter and Prof Paltridge did not come over all that well in my opinion. Prof Ridd on the other hand seemed to come over well.
      I have also seen Prof Plimer on tv and he was not impressive.

      Maybe some of these guys need to make some bold statements like Tim Flannery instead of coming over as trying to seem fair and unbiased.
      Like there has not been a decent cyclone in years or when was the last time you saw the Murray run dry.Ruffle some feathers.:-)

      00

  • #
    Ross

    Off topic but interesting. Maybe these guys could show the the “expert modellers” a thing or two about solving problems , if they were given the unadulterated data.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/games/5755509/Gamers-1-virus-nil

    00

  • #
    CameronH

    In relation to this racist slur against white people in general and white males in particular, I would urge you all to do some research on the developing field called “Whiteness Studies”. In this field of study white people are inherently evil and racist. It is actually a genetic thing so they can’t help it. In order to counter this is will be neccessary to control the actions and the rights to such things as free speech ect for white people by further legislation and regulation. Also by channeling more money to minority or ethnic special interest groups. One of the leading purveyors of this racist doctrine is a Prof. Noel Ignatiev whose final solution, clearly stated, is to abolish the white race. This is now creeping into university studies in Australia and a leading light in this is a Dr Fiona Nichols from the University of Queensland.

    I would urge everybody to write to all politicians and also to the universities and make an official complaint against this blatant racism.

    If this continues then you can expect to see more of such racist rhetoric as more and more of the blame for all ills are directed at white people and so called white priviledge that automatically goes to them.

    00

  • #
    Neville

    T/seeker what are Bolt’s faults and please can you give any evidence?

    Bolt says that everyone should be judged not by their religion, ( or lack of)not by their race etc but should be judged by their character and he said so in the recent court case believe it or not.

    Obviously Bolt is among the least racist people in Australia, but I’d like to see evidence to the contrary.

    00

    • #
      Kevin Moore

      Bolt wears blinkers when writing about the only democracy in the middle easts control over the largest open air prison in the world.

      00

  • #
    old44

    “for in the sciences the authority of thousands of opinions is not worth as much as one tiny spark of reason in an individual man.”
    Galileo Galilei

    P.S.
    Christopher Columbus was a sceptic and a denier.

    00

  • #
    Peter Lang

    “Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation” rejected 98% of submissions.

    The Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation called for submissions on 15 September 2011 with closing date for submissions on 22 September 2011 [1] http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jscacefl/index.htm

    Inquiry into Australia’s clean energy future

    The Joint Select Committee on Australia’s Clean Energy Future Legislation was established under a resolution of appointment passed by the House of Representatives on the 14 September 2011 and the Senate on the 15 September 2011 to inquire into and report on the provisions of the attached bills.

    The Committee invites interested persons and organisations to make submissions by Thursday 22 September 2011 . Please refer to our brochure called preparing a submission for more information. Please note that there are no terms of reference for this inquiry. [emphasis added]

    In order to facilitate electronic publishing of submissions, the Committee would prefer them to be emailed to jscacefl@aph.gov.au or sent on disk or CD-ROM to the Committee Secretariat in Microsoft Word® or Portable Document Format (PDF).

    Over 4500 submissions were received. However, the Committee has the power to decide which are “submissions” and which are “correspondence”. They decided only 70 were “submissions” and the rest were “correspondence”. Only those the committee deems to be “submissions” are published (and in reality only those will be considered).

    Could that many Australians get it wrong? Clearly they were intending to make submissions to the enquiry – they were making submissions that they understood would be properly considered by the committee.

    With that high a proportion getting it wrong, is it more likely that the committee’s selection criteria and selection process was not made clear beforehand.

    Below is the general instruction which describes “What should be in a submission” http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/documnts/howsub.htm#what

    What should be in a submission?

    There is no prescribed form for a submission to a parliamentary committee. Submissions may be in the form of a letter, a short document or a substantial paper. They may include appendices and other supporting documents.

    Submissions should be prepared solely for the inquiry and should be relevant to the terms of reference. They may address all or a selection of the points outlined in the terms of reference. Submissions may contain facts, opinions, arguments and recommendations for action.

    It is helpful if submissions are prefaced by a brief summary of the main points.

    Supplementary submissions may be lodged during the course of an inquiry to provide additional information or comments on other evidence.

    What was the selection process? Was it transparent?

    Were all the submissions reviewed and compared against selection criteria?

    Who actually made the decision about which to select and which to reject? Was it the committee or the secretariat?

    Is the process that was followed in this case what open and honest government means?

    Some of the 70 that were accepted as “submissions” do not appear to meet the requirements for a submission any better than mine does. For example, some were dated after the closing date for submissions. Many did not even mention any of the Bills.

    It should also be noted that the Committee Chair Person is Labor and the Deputy Chair is a Green (Senator Milne). Normally, the Deputy Chair would be from the Opposition.

    Can we have any confidence in the output of this committee?

    The report has just been released and the Introduction now defines the “Terms of Reference”. These are an after thought. These were not provided before over 4500 Australians wrote their submissions.

    The Introduction, paragraph 1.28, says:

    A large amount of correspondence was received by the committee. These items were not received as submissions to the inquiry because they did not address the actual legislation being considered.

    This is not true. At least 10 of the 70 accepted submissions did not mention the legislation.

    Furthermore, at least six were submitted after the closing date, including the first two listed on the website.
    http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jscacefl/subs.htm

    My submission is here: http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/07/06/carbon-tax-australia-2011/#comment-136435 and the addendum is here: http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/07/06/carbon-tax-australia-2011/#comment-136436

    00

  • #

    Baa Humbug 34.2 we are on the same frequency. Taking temperature for any area – can make a chart for that area, and be correct. But when they start referring GLOBAL – that’s where the lies start. If you take on 50m above ground – is just as misleading: in cloudy weather, higher is warmer / on the ground cooler; but depends to the thickness of the cloud + the altitude of it + what time of the day the cloud arrived. Next, sometime is the warmest at 11AM, on most days is after lunch – but never exactly at same time. Taking temperature data to know how warm the atmosphere is this year; is dumb / destructive, for two reasons:

    1] I have proven beyond any reasonable doubt that: extra heat / extra coldness in the troposphere IS NOT ACCUMULATIVE, how long will take me to get the truth public…? 2] because of most monitoring places are in Europe / USA = proof, they know that collecting data is meaningless. Unfortunately, the Greens have ‘’tree kissers’’ we, on the other side have ‘’the mirror kissers’’ the born losers. Warmist are wining with lies – most Skeptics are scared of the truth… When you point the whole truth to one – is same as pointing the solid ground to a person with head in his cloud.

    If is 5000 monitoring places in Europe / USA, another 1000 distributed around the rest of the planet… When a ‘’high’’ from Antarctic starts blowing over south Pacific – drops the temperature in upper atmosphere by 6-7-8 degrees – but not a single monitoring place. South Pacific air is 7 times larger than Europe + USA. The inaccuracy is plus / minus 7⁰C. YES, PLUS / MINUS 7⁰C – on their charts shows that one year, the whole year was warmer by 0,2⁰C; or cooler by 0,1⁰C. That can only come from a honesty deficient persons. I have already proposed in my book: all those temperature charts / from both sides; should be printed on soft paper – can have some positive use. http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com you will see all the proofs, simplified. Obviously, you don’t suffer from ‘’truth phobia’’ as some.

    00

  • #

    Memoryvault 41.1: I had an administrator on my previous website. Hardcore Greene /pretend Skeptic – SAME AS YOU. He was constantly sabotaging my pages; blaming others. Then demolished the lot. Now I have to start learning. Me putting comments on Joanne’s website is as saying: I have the proofs – you guys are articulate in English – together, we will see the end of the propaganda soon.

    Unfortunately, few ‘’Green Trojan mules’’ are prolific on this website – to lower the quality of the comments; and when they see some real Skeptic’s proofs – to degrade them in front of the others. You are only one of few: you have commented on this website few weeks ago, about my proofs: ‘’ you learned on my blog that O4 is a wondrous molecule, that comes out of cows’’

    I was wandering why nobody noticed, but now I don’t. Memoryvault: you didn’t find it like that on my website b] oxygen is not a molecule c] O4 doesn’t come out of cows. If you didn’t suffer from ‘’truth phobia’’ you would have learned there: grass absorbs 2H2O + CO2, keeps the hydrogen from the water / carbon from the CO2 = releases the rest; which is O4. That is 4 new oxygen atoms in the atmosphere – for every methane (CH4) created. Methane is heavy, sinks in the ground = benefit of new oxygen. If cow doesn’t eat the grass – fire burns it = destroys the benefit of the new oxygen. Or, the fungi rot the grass and turn it back into CO2 +H2O = zero benefit. Creating extra methane is essential – because we burn lots of natural gas – which is depleting the oxygen more than other fossil fuels. Creating extra methane reverses the damages. Methane is the good guy.

    Unfortunately, you as cow hater, vegetarian, suffer from ‘’truth phobia’’… In your comment now, you state that you are into physics and chemistry… if that is correct, I must be the Pope of Rome. That is constructive criticism. The few ‘’mirror kissers’’ that are prolific on this website, should have this in mind: lots of people are suffering, because of the misleading, and lots of damages are in progress. If you did read the page on methane, you would have realized that the damages in progress will affect vegetarians like you, even more. Evil doesn’t avoid ignorance. I strongly suggest to you: go back, read every sentence of that article, that will open your eyes. You will know, what real proofs are.

    Napoleon said: wining general is the one who knows, what the opponent knows. All articles on my website are related; if you read from the BEGINNING to the end; you will be glad you did. If I explain there on couple of other languages ( as I am already doing) will not help you much. Do you know why grammar teacher is not in charge of climate? It is completely simplified science that end of primary school kids can understand. Your truthseeker friend didn’t get put off by some long sentence, if it did = he is not a truthseeker, but probably Greene in disguise, same as you.

    Just for the record: oxygen is an element, not a molecule, O3 – O4 symbol can represent ozone; which is an isotope, cluster of oxygen atoms, but not a molecule. See if you can be honest to yourself, read, after comment. Making statements, without any knowledge; will not prevent the truth of wining. I am asking the genuine Skeptics: you be the judge: http://globalwarmingdenier.wordpress.com The answers on your questions are there. If is no sufficient information on some point, just point and ask. I will give you such a solid proofs, to remove Julia Gillard’s ”fig leaf” in few months. GUARANTEED!!! Anything I say, I can prove /substantiate.

    00

    • #
      Michael

      If I may ask,why in a few months? I’d like this tax,or the threat of such a tax gone ASAP. If you have evidence that could help..

      00

    • #
      memoryvault

      To the Pope of Rome:

      I do not hate cows, and I am not a vegetarian.
      I have never heard of O4 before and have no idea what the above rant is all about.
      I doubt very much that anybody else does, either.

      .
      Which pretty-much proves my point, I guess.

      00

  • #

    One would normally think Journalists are good with words, but Jo is right. That article is a painful read for anyone with a brain. Their lack of specificity and clarity render it wasted space.

    00

  • #

    I too had my submission re-classified as correspondence a despicable act by a despicable government body.

    Say YES to an election now !!

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Tristan @ 55.2.3

    “”"Mary, Mary, quite contrary, learned about thermal expansion yet? “”

    Are you saying that the Oceans are going to Boil.

    That’s what would need to happen to give sea levels rises you propose?

    That’s why I didn’t comment on your first response.

    Learn some thermo.

    If you could tell me when the ocean will boil I’ll avoid going swimming that day.

    Been going to the same beach for 64 years and guess what? ( does that sound ruddish) Well I’ll tell you what ( does that sound ruddish) :

    It’s coming:

    The lowest low tide where you can walk up to your ankles 50 metres out on the reef is JUST THE SAME AS 64 YEARS AGO.

    If there has been any sea level increase it would be no more than the 192 mm allowed by Nils Axel Morner; sorry that should have been 186 mm because the oceans “dropped” 6mm over the last two years.

    Lovey.

    Say hello to Kev the Sequestrator for me next time you see him, he needs a friend.

    :-)

    00

  • #
    MaryFJohnston

    Winston @58.1.2.1

    Refer 58.1.2.1.1

    00