Ray Evans writes a review below of Robert Manne’s essay in The Monthly entitled A Dark Victory: How vested interests defeated climate science. (Forgive me Ray for slipping in one or two thoughts of my own below). Ray Evans is the secretary of The Lavoisier Group one of the first original skeptical groups in Australia (I’ve put a few notes on that at the base of the article). It was Graham Readfearns review (ABC Drum) that apparently brought the Manne article to Ray’s attention.
Dear All,
Readfearn’s review was a lamentation of defeat and disappointment. So I immediately bought a copy of The Monthly and with eager anticipation began to read Robert Manne’s account of the tragedy which he claims has befallen him and his fellow warmists. It was a disappointing read.
There was nothing new in Manne’s arguments seeking to legitimize his passionate belief in imminent climate catastrophe. His palpable anger, bordering on hatred, of the global warming sceptics, or to use his loaded term, denialists, all of whom were Americans, was unsettling.
“While climate change denial . . . exists almost exclusively in the English speaking democracies . . and although it has spread to Canada, Australia and the UK, within the Anglosphere its place of origin and heartland is the US.”
Robert Manne places the sceptical scientists from the US in a political context. He names Frederick Seitz, Fred Singer, William Neirenberg and Robert Jastrow as attached to the Marshall Institute and as “Cold Warriors who had once supported the Vietnam War and the neo-conservative hawkish policies of the early Reagan administration”. As far as I am aware, neither Neirenberg nor Jastrow have played any part in the global warming debate* (See update below).
Richard S Lindzen is undoubtedly the most distinguished scientist within the ranks of the scientifically qualified global warming sceptics. He is Professor of Meteorology at MIT, his publication record is awesome, and his leadership role in sustaining what was originally a small band of scientific brothers (but now much larger) was critical. Robert Manne, although admitting Lindzen’s scientific eminence, then dismissed him as “the fanatically anti-communist Lindzen.”
An important weapon in the warmist armory is the accusation that global warming sceptics are in the pay of the fossil fuel industries; Big Oil is usually cited as the primary villain. The Lavoisier Group whose annual income rarely exceeded $20,000, was routinely dismissed by every Green organisation in Australia as in the pay of the fossil fuel industries. The ratio between the financial resources enjoyed by the warmists (most of their money – including Robert Manne’s salary – comes from the taxpayer) and the sceptics, is at least 100 to 1 [JoNova thinks it’s closer to 5,000 to 1]. And yet, despite this huge advantage, despite the enthusiastic support of the chattering class elites who control the ABC, the Fairfax media, the universities, and what is left of the protestant churches, Manne concludes his lamentation with these two sentences :
The long war the denialist movement had fought against science and against reason, in the US and throughout the English-speaking world, has indeed achieved a famous victory. This is a victory that subsequent generations cursing ours may look upon as perhaps the darkest in the history of humankind”
[Darkest in the history of humankind? Deniers are worse than Pol Pot and The Black Plague? — Jo]
How was this victory possible? There are, in my view, two reasons. The first is mentioned by Manne.
“More importantly, it was becoming clear that the most important effective denialist media weapon was not the newspapers or television but the internet”.
Manne is right here. Just as Gutenberg destroyed the monopoly which the Church had enjoyed for many centuries on publishing the Bible, the writings of the church fathers, and other religious documents, so the internet has destroyed the power which was described in the Climategate emails. This is the power which a small group of people in key institutions such as the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, the Hadley Centre at the UK Met Office, and which, across the Atlantic, included James Hansen at NASA, and Michael Mann, now of Penn State University, (but in 2000 at the University of Virginia), were able to wield by excommunicating (to use religious terminology) any scientist who did not subscribe to the warmist doctrines they were promoting throughout the Anglosphere.
They controlled the learned journals which published papers on climate science; they maintained close links with journalists and columnists on key newspapers such as the New York Times and influenced what they wrote; and they were very effective in creating and sustaining myths such as “98 per cent of scientists support the position that anthropogenic carbon dioxide has caused global warming.”
It was through the internet that this monopoly of revealed doctrine was broken. The key event was Michael Mann’s attempt to remove the Mediaeval Warm Period from the global temperature record with his notorious hockey stick. The hockey stick was used as a reredos at the launch of the 2001 IPCC’s third assessment report in Shanghai, and Canadian mining analyst Steve McIntyre, with a long experience of chasing down dodgy exploration reports, was able within a short time to expose the hockey stick as a fraud.
What is curious about Robert Manne’s bitter polemic is the absence of any criticism of the Australians who have made important contributions to the global warming sceptic’s case. Bill Kininmonth, for example, was head of the Bureau of Meteorology’s National Climate Centre from 1986 to 1998. He represented Australia at the World Meteorological Organisation for twenty years. His 2004 book Climate Change: a Natural Hazard is an authoritative rebuttal of the warmists’ claims of mankind’s responsibility for global warming. But Kininmonth does not rate a mention in Robert Manne’s list of guilty scientists. Another important omission is Garth Paltridge, who was head of the CSIRO’s Antarctic Research Division, and whose book Climate Caper, based not only on his scientific knowledge but also on his experiences as a CSIRO senior officer, opens a window onto the way the CSIRO became enmeshed in the global warming scam.
An Australian astronomer, Ian Wilson, unknown even to many Australian sceptics, but whose contribution to our understanding of the interplay between the mechanics of the solar system (particularly the influence of the Jovian planets on the position of the Sun) and our climate, is of international significance. He is, not surprisingly, absent from Robert Manne’s list of scientific villains, but he is undoubtedly an Australian scientist of very great importance in this debate.
“…our Australian luminaries are well known to many of their compatriots and attempts to blacken their reputations would backfire seriously on the author. “
There is a reason for Manne’s focus on the US. The American scientists he names and denigrates are names that can be found in most of the warmist tracts that he relies on for his arguments, and are known personally to few Australians. But even more significant is that our Australian luminaries are well known to many of their compatriots and attempts to blacken their reputations would backfire seriously on the author.
Australia’s scientific contribution to the debate over the global warming swindle has been significant. But our political contribution has also been important. The defeat of Malcolm Turnbull as Leader of the Federal Liberal Party by Tony Abbott on 1 December 2009, was an important event in the Anglospherian struggle between the warmists and the sceptics, and in the long term, it means that any attempt to decarbonize Australia on the grounds that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, is bound to fail.
Robert Manne’s other extraordinary mistake is his failure to appreciate that under no circumstances were the developing countries going to accept a global regime of decarbonisation. Both India and China are undergoing programmes of modernization without historical precedent. Many hundreds of millions of people in both countries are still without access to electricity. Without electricity there is no domestic refrigeration. A population which can enjoy domestic refrigeration at affordable prices means that their food production is effectively increased threefold. So India and China, often at war with each other in recent times, came together at Copenhagen to ensure that there was no global agreement on decarbonization, but more importantly to make sure that trade barriers could not be used as instruments of extraterritorial control over emissions of carbon dioxide.
This was an outcome which was already clear from the preparatory work on which the two nations had been engaged. There was a half-hearted attempt by the US to drive a wedge between the two nations. It was counterproductive. Australia’s prime minister at the time, Kevin Rudd, was convinced that China was bluffing on this issue, and when he discovered at Copenhagen that he had been living in a fantasy world, he vented his spleen by calling the Chinese rat-f**kers.
But the Chinese and Indian race to modernity is a geo-political fact which is beyond argument and which is of huge economic and political importance to the world. And Robert Manne, Professor of Politics at Latrobe University, is blissfully unaware of it.
The European attempts to establish a global regime of decarbonization, in which they would be the dominant players, were doomed from the beginning. And just as the euro is soon destined to fail as a European currency, so the dreams of a Europe free from fossil fuel based electricity are likewise empty fantasies.
In Australia, the Coalition, soon to win government with a huge majority, is committed to decarbonization through command and control machinery. Until we have a government which accepts that anthropogenic carbon dioxide has no impact whatsoever on our climate, and behaves accordingly, we have a problem.
——————————————————————–
Ray Evans is the secretary of The Lavoisier Group.
The group was alert to the exaggerated nature of the enhanced greenhouse effect way back in 2000, and was one of the first Australian groups to promote vigorous debate and discussion of the Kyoto Protocol. Even as recently as 2007, there was little other organized opposition in Australia. The Lavoisier group deserve our thanks for being so far ahead of the game and leading the way. Thanks to Ray, one David Evans was invited to go to Bali for the UNFCCC, …and David’s wife invited herself to join them. 🙂 Thus Jo Nova, unknown nobody in the skeptic world, met Marc Morano, Christopher Monckton, Craig Rucker, David Archibald, Vincent Gray (85 then and still going strong now), Will Alexander and the team from NZ: Bryan Leyland, Owen McShane, Greg Balle and generally had a riot of a time being one of 12 skeptics among 12,000 believers. From this melting pot, the Skeptics Handbook was born. Thanks Ray!
————————————-
UPDATE: Richard Lindzen writes to say that “for the record, both Bill Nierenberg and Bob Jastrow were early opponents of global warming hysteria. See my discussion in Climate Science – Is it designed to answer questions. Bill was the long time director of Scripps Oceanographic and prepared the NRC 1983 Carbon Dioxide report of the NAS. This was a major predecessor of the IPCC reports. Bob was the founding director of GISS which Hansen currently directs. Both Bob and Bill are now dead. A number of senior officials who were instrumental in starting CO2 programs became early skeptics. This included James Schlesinger who was our Secretary of Energy (and Secretary of Defense).”
Robert Manne, like most “warmists” is a well paid academic feeding of the federal government purse. Never faced with the stress of rising prices and a limited income. Never faced with job insecurity (academic tenure is sooo protected). Always flaunting his left views but with zero understanding of how those less well off than he and who, although he would never admit it, he regafrds as dross. Give this guy the flick he’s a totally self centred apologist for the Greens.
10
Frederick Seitz, Fred Singer, William Nierenberg and Robert Jastrow are the main bad guys in Oreskes and Conway’s book Merchants of Doubt. They have all been involved in the global warming debate at some point, but it’s mostly from 1995 and earlier (Singer is the only one of them still living). Their relevance to the current situation is thin. So is their connection to the tobacco industry, which is also part of the theory presented in the book.
10
Manne lives in an alternate universe. In fact, climate change alarmism was invented in the
English-speaking democracies and has been adopted into national government action only in Europe and Australia. The rest of the world looks on with astonished disbelief as the massive overreaction to climate change alarmism contributes to the collapse of the EU economies and kills Australia’s trading advantage in the world.
It’ll take more than post-modern dreaming to destroy the earth, Robert. “It’s Mabo … it’s the vibe,” said lawyer Dennis Denuto in the Castle; he might as well have been describing the standard of the New Age “climatology”, where political activists are accepted as “scientists”. It will be a matter of mirth and derision for future generations that fruitcakes like Robert Manne actually succeeded – briefly – in hijacking Australian government policy.
10
I am sorry to have to contradict you, Tom, but the earliest reference I have for the alarmism is the term Klimaheizung, in Germany (literally climate heating), from a 1956 article in a Green Movement newsletter about Gilbert Plass.
00
Climate Religion dates back to the beginning of civilization – think sacrifice.
00
Feeling a bit pedantic here, English is a Germanic language so Tom could be off the hook so to speak.
00
Tru dat … language trees are interesting:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/IndoEuropeanTree.svg
00
Thanks for that, Bulldust. I resource that I did not even know existed …
00
Just regarding that quote “exists almost exclusively in the English speaking democracies”, here’s a list of non-English speaking climate sceptic websites from the EcoTretas blog:
http://ecotretas.blogspot.com.au/p/skeptical-views-in-non-english.html
But, to give credit where it’s due, perhaps the “democracies” bit was correct.
00
Ray Evans is a superb writer. A measured pace, with a clear and concise development of a central theme, supported by facts and references that do not intrude into the overall flow of the article.
I am extremely thankful that he is not writing propaganda for the other side of the debate.
00
A most interesting article, and I am ashamed to admit I was unaware of the Lavoisier Group (until now) Thanks Jo.
00
They’ve accused us for years of being anti-science, paid lackeys of big oil, climate criminals, despoilers of the environment and being drones of some shadowy organised conspiracy against them. We long ago wrote off such accusations as propaganda stereotypes, designed to dehumanise and marginalise us but what you have to take on board is that in a very real sense, they’ve become victims of their own propaganda. The lies have been repeated so often that they now believe them themselves.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/03/16/the-climate-wars-revisited-or-no-truce-with-kings/
Robert Manne is the perfect example of the above.
Pointman
00
Pointman, the claims about a “well-funded, well organized, coordinated attack” on climate scientists looks like a kind of a religous credo at first sight, but it is clearly aimed at poorly informed target groups already used to the idea that “big industry” is bad for all sorts of reasons, and therefore Big Oil and Tobacco etc. must be behind climate change “denial”.
As ridiculous as it is, it’s in fact been very effective. That’s why they still stick to it. Question is, how long can they keep up this nonsense.
00
Hi Bebben. Yes, it has been effective and they’ll continue to push those same old propaganda memes, but times have changed radically since Copenhagen. Increasingly, ordinary people are tired of all the eco-scares and more worried about their economic circumstances. They should have changed their propaganda to address that new environment at least two years ago. They haven’t, so all that propaganda is wasted by still being directed at the true believers, which is good news for us.
Pointman
00
It’s a paradox that the alleged corporate interests have not done more to defend themselves against these claims. They have all this money to spend, and they can’t even cough up an effective “disinformation campaign” against these attacks on them. Instead, they are allegedly busy sending FOIA requests to impede the work of climate scientists. Hardly the most effective way to defend their interests.
00
I can sum up the Left in 5 words.
‘They believe their own bullsh1t.’
00
Fortunately, they are the only ones.
00
I wish that were true. There were also quite a few over-schooled, under-educated middle road people that sucked up teh stupid very deeply. Hopefully the wake-up trend continues and they actually learn something; instead of waving a useless basket-weaving degree in someone’s face and say well, the science must be settled.
00
Thank you for this enlightening review. It succinctly counter-balances the uni-ocular Manne rant with factual context.
Nevertheless, I continue to struggle with understanding what potential reasons might exist that explain the enfeebled performance of the delinquent Fourth Estate throughout the CAGW / climate change travesty. The absence of their critical analysis, of persistent, hard questioning in a relentless search for the truth is not only monstrous, it is an important warning.
This period has demonstrated that it is a facile task to manipulate the MSM, who should never to be trusted or relied upon in the future to safeguard civil society. It is also a warning for future generations to preserve the freedom of the imperfect internet and ensure that it remains inviolate to the predictable and inevitable endeavours of the Ministry of We Know Best. Finally, that old chestnut – absolute power corrupts absolutely – is borne out. Mann and his cohorts, drunk on their increasing sway, deluded by the success of their debunked schtick, sought to re-write climate history and expunge the Medieval Warm Period. In the face of a mass of evidence to the contrary, their self-delusion betrayed them – and they unbelievably and criminally thought they could get away with it!
So – the question remains: why the persistent and enfeebled performance of the Fourth Estate? How long will the politicians get away with this destruction of civil liberty?
00
Two reasons (although there are others).
The almost complete absence of scientific knowledge among journalists.
Journalists see science through the paradigm of politics. When presented with a ‘consensus’ (real or manufactured) they consider dissenting views as fringe and not worthy of reporting. They fail to understand that science isn’t the (stated) opinion of scientists.
00
Have a look at the book, “Flat Earth News”, by Nick Davis, and all will be revealed.
A review of the book can be found here.
00
Manfred,
I think we are seeing the end of the influence of newspapers. The blogs are the only media covering the “debate”. TV is the lazy mans news source and we have little influence there although apart from the ABC neither do the warmists.
00
Manfred
You have to go back to basics.
1. The Bankers and big corporations Are the socialists. CARTOON: Karl Marx & Wall Street backslapping 1911 and Description
2. In the USA JP Morgan grabbed control of the media in 1917
1917 US Congressional Record Check the Board of Directors for your news media. See how many went to London School of Economics (Fabians) or Oxford How many were on the boards of banks…
3. In the USA with the Corporations providing an unknowable amount of the campaign funding through Super Pacs, do you really think socialism would have even been known much less popular without the backing of the bank funded media and the corporate funded politicians?
A narrowly divided Supreme Court on Monday reaffirmed its landmark 2010 decision allowing corporations to spend unlimited money on elections, deciding that a state court was wrong to uphold Montana’s century-old ban on political spending by businesses.
Most of politics and what is in the news is nothing but smoke and mirrors to divert the attention of the citizens while they are being fleeced. CAGW is just another of a very long series of Con-games played upon the public by the politicians, central bankers and more recently the Corporations no matter what the country.
As Jo says FOLLOW THE MONEY
00
You wonder how us “denialists” are winning over Al Gore’s zombies?
We just asked one little question:
Show us REAL evidence that man’s CO2 is causing dangerous warming. That’s all we ask.
And I’d like to remind you that:
1. Nature emits over 95% of the annual CO2 emissions.
2. CO2 FOLLOWS temperature in Al Gore’s ice cores.
3. Water vapor causes about twice as much greenhouse effect as CO2.
4. Unusual weather is NOT evidence of its cause.
5. Correlation is NOT evidence of causation.
6. Climate correlates better with solar cycles than with CO2 and over centuries.
7. Climate models are not evidence for a variety of reasons including the fact that they are considered poor by the top climate scientists in their own emails.
Its been over 20 years and we’re still waiting.
Thanks
JK
00
Robert Manne drops into Jo’s blog on August 4, 2012 at 5:07 pm and says:
“Who among all your respondents has read the article under discussion? It was published yesterday and is behind a paywall? As I wrote, the denialists hunt in packs.”
Since then bloggers have asked him dozens of questions to which he has not answered even ONE question or responded AT ALL.
Mr Manne, I can assure you – I don’t hunt in packs – my opinions are my own and you and any of your typical sycophants need to do a lot more to convince me that your assumptions and opinions are correct.
IMHO there MUST have been something sorely missing in your upbringing. Did your parents NOT teach you the power of scepticism and the necessity to question EVERYTHING in life?
If they did – then your motives to me a fairly clear – you think you have a preordained calling to be better than an ordinary person such as me and that your powers of deduction place you well above us “mere mortals”.
Let me assure you – IT DOESN’T!!
If they didn’t school you in this manner then I sincerely feel a great deal of sorrow for your position – an opinion without scepticism or questioning is purely GULLIBILITY!!
My advice to you is VERY simple (no charge although I already help pay for your salary) – entertain some scepticism in your life, answer your critics and the questions the bloggers have posed OR (if you can’t do either of those) just slither off into “utopia” in your parallel universe never to be heard from again.
Cheers,
00
I wrote what I thought of as a considered, polite and factual response to Robert Manne’s essay in The Monthly, and posted it to The Monthly ‘comments’. Not only was it not published in but that my future endeavours to log on were blocked.
The man is a charlatan and a show pony. He is as interested in genuine dialogue as a empty ATM.
00
Now THAT’S something to point out to him next time he shows his face. Thanks for including that, Manfred, it clearly shows he’s not interested in dialogue at all. So he accuses us of not listening (not reading the article) and then he himself doesn’t listen to reasonable questions and you get blocked from comments.
Again and again these people do what they accuse us of doing. Do they really not see it in their own behaviour? It’s amazing!
00
Hey Jo – above all he left out YOU!
00
Aaargh, I knew Aussie bloody stralians were neck deep in confabulations to discombobulate that Australian Living treasure chest, Robert Manne, if there be a constant in this meme on skull duggery it be that bloody moniker Manne (sometimes with an e and sometimes without).
Anyway seriously, anyone who had always respected science or indeed learning by way of critical thinking, would have been hopping the fence between fascism / totalitarianism to libertarian thinking after a short exposure to lies and incompetence.
Faux intellectuals have always used the same basic creed it’s become boring over millenia, censorship, sanctions, ostracisation, bullying brown shirts and hob nailed boots optional, but that never failing mantra a classic, the ends justifies the means.The ends never justifies means.
Thank you for your precis Ray, me I always like the sun for the crime of warming the earth, it’s wot bin doing it for ages, guvnor.
This should not have been a citizen’s revolt alone, where were our institutes of learning in this unscientific assault, they was hiding in the refectories drinking plonk and eating cucumber sammiches. (Not all but the most important one and all).
The truth is as important in the life gas cycles.
Enough philosophical poop decking from me.
Australia has woken up and Manne and his crew are squirting in their nappies.
00
Aaargh, indeed Capt’n Jack!
One could ask 2nd rate mate Bob Manne,”Where’s your buccaneers”, because, they aren’t on his buccin’ head!
Other wise, he would have listened and asked some relevant questions, like, “Where is the Medieval Warming Period”, amongst many other most basic 101 science based questions.
It be a long walk along the plank for you, Bob, you scurvy proglodyte!
00
> the ends justifies the means.
This is one of those phrases like “climate change” that cannot possibly be intended to mean what it literally means.
In fact, the ends are the only thing that can ever justify the means. The “ends” are goals and to decide what to do you must plan backwards from the goal state to the present state, identifying a series of operations that will transform the present state to the goal state. In other words the means are justified by the ends, or the ends justify the means, they’re the same meaning.
Typically when people dismiss the phrase as something which could not possibly be true, they are either incapable of logical thought, or else they intend the phrase to apply to a specific case and not as the generalisation that it is in literal terms. There are two ways that the meaning of these words are tailored to make the dismissal valid.
Either the “ends” claim a particular value that is disputed, or the “means” in a particular case do not fully account for their costs.
In this case we could say that lowering CO2 emissions don’t justify the carbon tax because we do not place any value on the intended result of lower CO2 emissions, even if the carbon tax were effective at doing that.
We could also say that the exacerbation of impoverishment and starvation in the 3rd world as a result of biofuel subsidies and anti-coal sanctions, plus the suppression of Australian business profitability, are costs of the means that will lead to the actual result being worse than the intended “ends”, thus the means of that particular plan are unjustified.
Unfortunately the Captain said “The ends never justifies means.” which interpreted literally is nonsense.
I suspect the Cap’n may have availed himself of the King’s Rum too often on this day, but an hour in the scuppers with the hosepipe on him will have him shipshape faster than a spinnaker in a squall.
00
So Manne laments that “denialists” have won.
Can he or anyone else explain exactly what it is we have won?
Did we win the scientific debate? I.e there is no CAGW?
Did we win the media debate? I.e the majority believes there is no CAGW?
Did we win the political debate? I.e the majority of politicians don’t support CAGW policy?
00
“Drinking the Kool-Aid” is a metaphor commonly used that refers to a person or group’s unquestioning belief, argument, or philosophy without critical examination.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid
00
A simple search on “climate” in google news shows that the media has not stopped their alarmist reporting on climate change. Here are some articles in the last week:
http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2012/08/08/3562596.htm
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444320704577569231537988226.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://m.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/study-links-last-ice-age-and-warming/story-e6frg8y6-1226434253182
http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/scientist-blames-climate-change-for-heat/story-e6freuz9-1226443151658
So what exactly does one obscure article in “The Monthly” begrudgingly claiming denialists have won really amount to? Here is a test: ask the next person you see on the street what they think of the news that “climate skeptics have won”.
To me this sort of article is a false declaration of defeat and a propaganda tool to promote complacency and a sense of false victory among skeptics.
While the MSM alarmist machine keeps dolling out the koolaid we have won nothing. Less so if we think we have.
00
Sonny
Completely agree with your statement that: “the media has not stopped their alarmist reporting on climate change”.
It’s still rife on government sponsored radio and TV channels.
Listened to another “scientific’ propaganda diatribe the other day about how the world was warming still and it was “worse than we
thought” and that if we don’t act soon we will all be incinerated.
people believe this stuff.
It sounds real.
It’s coming over the “radio”.
The only way of deflating this crap is to expose the vast amounts of theft from the public purse and the commensurate additional days needed to be worked to pay for it.
We are being enslaved to support the lifestyles of the connected and influential.
KK
00
The only way we will be “incinerated” by global warming is if cosmic events cause the sun become a red giant. Some people believe this will happen soon as part of 2012 doomsday theories. (not me though!)
http://paneandov.com/
00
When the Sun reaches the end of its nuclear cycle it will collapse and we on Earth will be engulfed inn the fireball.
This , of course, will take place in several billion years time.
So far in the future I’ve forgotten whether its millions or billions.
KK
00
Pane Andov asserts that a gamma ray “super wave” emanating from an explosion at the center of our galaxy is heading for our solar system and will cause the sun to go red giant.
00
This wave is travelling at the speed of light no doubt?
Therefore for us to know from whence it came, requires it to already be here, and since it does not appear to have already turned the sun into a “red giant” (whatever one of those is), I can safely assert that it will not.
Astronomy is the science of studying the history of the universe. It cannot predict anything about the future, or even the present state of the Universe outside of our own solar system.
00
Strangely, incineration from some galactic event seems more probable to me than CO2 induced warming catastrophe. Perhaps when government find method of taxing beyond the limits of the earths atmosphere they will too?
00
(in reply to 13.1.1.1.1 but seems to be too deeply nested for the system)
Clearly this Pane Andov is a nutter. However, in post-normal science, it’s possible that this “super wave” is real and therefore we should do all we can to protect ourselves from the predicted disaster. I suggest building 3 enormous spaceships to take the world’s population somewhere safe. Mr Andov, along with climate scientists, ABC employees, the Greens, Labor politicians (am I forgetting anyone?) can go on the first ship. Al Gore can be the captain of it. The rest of us will follow … promise.
(For those unfamiliar with H2G2, see here.)
00
I`ve always prefered the “Eaten by a giant mutant space goat” hypothesis to the “Hit by a mysterious super wave” simply because visualizing it is Soooo much more entertaining 🙂
00
As are all the books … Douglas Adams is sorely missed.
00
No. No. No. You all have it wrong…
Our doom will arrive as a wave of hellish nanotech. Grey Goo for everyone…
Unless I’m wrong – in which case does the giant mutant space goat have a frick$$en laser on it’s head???
00
Manne clearly does not read very widely if he says this :
If he did read more on the subject he would know of the skeptics in Germany , Denmark, France ,Russia , China etc etc .
All he really had to do was look at the languages Jo’s Handbook has been translated into —the translations were all done because demand , not some sales push.
00
(Very helpful comment!) CTS
Yup, and have a look at Portuguese EcoTretas’ blogroll of skeptical sites in non-English languages:
http://ecotretas.blogspot.no/p/skeptical-views-in-non-english.html
My guess is that it is far from complete.
BTW I emailed EcoTretas a while ago to include a Norwegian skeptical site. He responded swiftly and kindly and in English and promptly included the site.
Other commenters from other countries/languages may want to do the same.
00
Bedden
I think you should email that link to Robert Manne.
00
” While climate change denial . . . exists almost exclusively in the English speaking democracies ..” is about as accurate as anything else Robert Manne has to say, almost on any subject.
The easiest thing in the world to do for an academic is to spout off half-baked, sweeping statements that have little or no factual basis, but with such moral indignation and the certainty mustered only by the truly deluded.
Clearly, it is not for one so erudite as Mr Manne to engaged in the measured and considered balance of differing positions within an issue, the cut and thrust of intellectual argument regarding the validity of either case, the integrity of acknowledging the limits of certainty or the areas requiring deeper analysis. This would require too much intellectual effort, deductive capability and self-awareness. So it is much easier for him to project his own deficiencies upon his supposed adversaries, and hide behind the apron strings of those “experts” he chooses to believe, because it corresponds with his predetermined belief system and inherent prejudices born of narcissistic rage that he lacks the qualities or expertise to rigourously analyse the data before him.
Any one of the posters here don’t need a “pack” to best you in an intellectual argument, Mr Manne, because in a battle of wits, Sir, you are patently unarmed.
00
more insanity…
8 Aug: Weekly Times Now: Kate Dowler: Carbon farming rate trap
EXCLUSIVE: CARBON farming could cost farmers, instead of making them money, and result in rate bills tripling.
The Victorian Government does not recognise carbon farming as a legitimate farming activity under land tax and valuation acts and has ruled out changing the laws…
The Victorian Coalition’s move puts it at odds with the federal Coalition’s Direct Action policy, which relies on tree plantings as carbon sinks…
Environmental Farmers Network spokesman and Ararat farmer Peter Forster said the news was very concerning.
He said the rules urgently needed to be changed to prevent farmers from being deterred from going into carbon programs.
“This is outrageous and means farmers trying to do the right thing (enter carbon farming Initiative programs) are going to be disadvantaged,” he said.
“People are already reluctant to go into carbon farming – this will be the nail in the coffin.”
Mr Forster is about to plant 55ha for carbon credits under the CFI…
Agriculture Minister Peter Walsh confirmed carbon farming was not classified as a farming activity and flatly ruled out reviewing it.
He said recognising it could distort the market and produce “a managed investment scheme debate all over again”.
Prime agriculture land should be used for food and fibre production and people should be “very careful” about entering carbon schemes, he said.
But as “long as the majority of the business is for primary production they will still have primary production status, if it is purely a carbon sink it won’t have primary production status”.
When asked what he thought of the federal Coalition’s policies to encourage tree plantings for carbon abatement, Mr Walsh repeated “people need to be very, very careful about going into carbon farming.”
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2012/08/08/520931_latest-news.html
00
8 Aug: SMH: Rachel Wells: Firms point to government schemes
However, they argue federal and state government interventions such as smart meters, energy efficiency schemes, and reliability targets, as well as the carbon tax, are equally to blame for driving up electricity bills…
Andrew Dillon, general manager of corporate affairs at the Energy Supply Association of Australia, which represents energy distributors, generators and retailers said there was
”no doubt that investment in infrastructure is impacting on bills – but there’s also no question that programs like the renewable energy target, state solar feed-in-tariffs, and energy efficiency schemes have also added to power bills”…
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/firms-point-to-government-schemes-20120807-23snp.html
00
The warmists had a morally unassailable cause, protecting the life of an entire planet, and leaders of apparent high standing. Gore, Jones, Mann, Hansen, Salinger – all eminently successful, intelligent and forthright. People to admire, emulate and, when needed, follow into the Valley of Death. Trouble is, the leaders were also, by necessity, prophets of doom. Like Harold Camping who claimed the Bible told him the world would end October 21, 2011 (also May 21, 2011, but he had the math wrong the first time, apparently), the Goreists have been hoisted on their own petards: the end hasn’t yet come.
Some these days would disagree: Hansen says that anything bad on a big scale IS CAGW in progress. But most adults recall some other bad years prior to CO2’s power being possible, and their grandparents have told them of the ’30s and some seriously bad years. So the idea that what is happening today is unusual is possible but not definite: the jury is still out, for sure. Which is not what the warmists are saying. We are in the End Days, they say.
A little extreme or premature, perhaps, even for the Camping crowd.
The real problem for the warmists is that they are authority-driven. Dad knows best, though as Gore, Dad has a thousand dollar suit that their own fathers never had. And if it turns out that Dad is wrong, or that he was overzealous in his pitch, then the comfortable world of the warmist comes crumbling down. It will turn out that one must determine how things are by himself, not just for himself. You can’t rely on Dad to know.
The skeptic is comfortable with the idea that the authorities exaggerate what they know and misdirect us to further their own ends while claiming that all if for our best interests. The cynics expect the authorities to be ignorant or maliciously furthering their nests at our expense. It is only the optimists – the warmists, I should say, who believe, who stake their reputation on the words of the highly placed. While much of the human race suspects anything that comes from a man on a pedestal, the warmists listen and cheer.
It is very exciting and very satisfying to get behind someone who Knows, is very assured that he Knows (just ask the Germans). It is very distressing if it turns out that you were listening to a clone of Harold Camping.
If CAGW falls down, if Watts and the others can get some official government body to question the historical data behind CAGW, to say that at a minimum the current temperatures are less than promoted, there will be millions of very agitated ex-warmists. Gore’s wealth came from their pockets, after all.
You cannot take someone’s passion and abuse it without consequence. At the same time, once someone has given their passion to someone else – this abused spouses – they will defend the indefensible for as long as possible. To be a fool is one thing, but to be a fool of the heart, ahh, now there’s bitterness in that!
00
Robert Manne berates Fred Singer as being a shill for the tobacco lobby. Perhaps young Robbie should look him up on Wiki, and follow the links to his excellent articles on passive smoking and junk science. I am a GP, and smoking obviously is not good for anyone. This does not excuse the junk science that has been used to “proove” the danger of passive smoking. Singer made it plain tht poor science should not be used for public policy prescription. Excellent scientific paper for an excellent scientist, But people like Manne cant understand science even if it is written for laymen.
00
smokers represent approximately the same percentage of the Australian population as ALP voters (< 30%). Using CAGW-like logic, the coincidence is too great, all ALP voters are smokers.
00
dr ian,
I LIKE the term “He couldn’t tell the difference between SHIT and CLAY”.
Cheers,
00
And we know which one he is trying to mold !!
00
I heard on the radio yesterday that Julia Gillard has written to the states demanding they stop blaming the carbon tax for power price rises or she’ll send the boys around. Federal intervention was the phrase used.
Something people might want to look into. Seems kind of dictatorial to me, if not megalomanical.
And on your Darkest in the history of humankind? Deniers are worse than Pol Pot and The Black Plague? Jo, I might add some contemporary history, the present destruction of an entire nation, facilitated by ‘Anglospherian’ government gunrunning; that being Syria. But then the New York Times, not to mention the Sydney Morning Herald, says President Assad is a megalomaniac, so it must be true.
00
If Syria’s Assad was or was not a megalomaniac, a humanitarian, a benign dictator or a pillar of democracy, we in the “free West” would be the last to know. The lens through which we view the situation as it unfold is so distorted (it was ever thus, but not to such an extent, IMO) that the truth of the matter is neither remotely plain nor even visble.
So, even if the UN’s actions were entirely moral or justified (which I doubt), it no longer is tenable to believe it because our trust has been so irrevocably broken by a relentless stream of media propaganda, infotainment, and deceptive molding of the truth to tell a narrative purely in the service of an ulterior agenda. How this situation can ever be retrieved is anyone’s guess, I suspect it cannot.
00
The situation can only be retrieved by relieving the government from control of your money.
I don’t claim it will be easy, only that it is the only solution. Money is very special, it extinguishes all debt. With its control comes everything you desire. If you desire to be as a God, enough money will provide. Until of course the day your money is actually found to consist of “scraps of paper”, that is to say, bad debt.
Debt cannot extinguish debt. The dollar itself IS the debt of the Reserve Bank.
00
bad debt at that
00
Pat, this does not surprise me in the least. “Carbon Farming” is not a business that will be open to the “great unwashed.” To make sure the new industry is reserved for the international
piratescorporations, only “Carbon Farming” in third world countries will be allowed to actually earn money. Laws and Regulations will see to it.The World Trade Agreement on Agriculture was written to wipe out peasant farmers through out the world. In Mexico 75% of the farming class was wiped out, in Portugal 60% and in India it caused the longest sustained wave of suicides in history. Now the South American and African “Land Grabs” are making the news.
If you look at the results of the regulations and laws written since WWII in all first world countries the net result is to make it almost impossible for the ordinary person to own their own business. Tax laws, business regulation, local land use laws and insurance requirements leave the ordinary person bewildered. Dealing with the red tape eats much of the time, effort and money that should be spent in starting and running the business. Worse the UN and WTO push for law “harmonization” between and among trading partners means joint UN/WTO committees write the laws and then they are disseminated to the individual countries to be rubber stamped. (Look up FAO or OIE and Good Farming or Agricultural Practices for a real eyeful)
Next add in AGENDA 21. The UN has stated bluntly:
Another:
Agenda 21 is and always has been about reducing us to the status of serfs. Rosa Koire (a Left wing Activist) has done a great job at her website, Democrats Against UN Agenda 21 in showing the steps being taken in the USA to box all of us in work compounds called “green cities”
The easiest way to drive people into cities is to bankrupt them with low paying jobs and very high living expenses. Jack up the cost of energy and ship all the jobs overseas and bingo. A once prosperous nation becomes nothing but slums like Detroit – This article is an excellent example of making the problem (Ratify WTO) then propose the solution. This is the future face of all our cities.
In New York City the “New first world” is already under construction. Smart Growth website and Smart Cities website and 175 Square Feet! Micro Studio in Morningside Heights and some folks see through all the hype: Agenda 21 Dorms for Empty Nesters
Here is where all this is actually coming from.
More on the ENRON CONNECTION: How Enron hyped global warming for profit
00
Good piece by Ray.
Manne is a disgrace and we have seen Readfearn’s agitprop before.
An interesting aspect of the Manne article is his reference to a class distinction between the elites pushing AGW and the “ordianry people” who have seen through the lies. This “class battle” is discussed here.
00
That article was worth a read thanks cohenite!
00
Plimer also warrants a mention as a well-qualified, prominent local skeptic. Did Manne forgot him as well?
[Disclaimer: I’m a geologist working in the oil industry so disregard everything I say]
00
So,Manne, Mann et Al… academic shamanism funded with our money, telling us what to do fer our own good?
Cui bono?
Man in street: So how do you know CO2 causes CAGW?
Man in white coat: I know because I an a scientist.
Man in street: Er..can yer be a little more specific?
Man in white coat: No, serf, yer wouldn’t understand if I told yer.
00
“Robert Manne’s other extraordinary mistake is his failure to appreciate that under no circumstances were the developing countries going to accept a global regime of decarbonisation.”
I think this is a “principal component” of the illusion that Manne and the pantheon of his petty gods think that they are some how the key players in leading the world. It goes to quantifying their arrogance if only to the nearest order of magnitude. Manne et al are out there in mouse rapes elephant territory, all afire with lust for public recognition and so utterly enthralled by their intellectual prowess that they think the elephant of reality is moaning with satisfaction at their efforts. Not so much ratf**ked as mousef**ked, i.e. completely ignored.
Its all a bit sad and tasteless, but you gotta laugh.
[And I did – thankyou -Fly]
00
“The defeat of Malcolm Turnbull as Leader of the Federal Liberal Party by Tony Abbott on 1 December 2009, was an important event in the Anglospherian struggle between the warmists and the sceptics, and in the long term, it means that any attempt to decarbonize Australia on the grounds that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, is bound to fail.”
One of the may depressing things about the whole AGW scam is that we will have, not merely yet another Coalition government, but one led by Tony Abbot.
00
And your nomination is?
00
Prince Charles for Prime Minister of Australia!
He won’t do Australia much good. But following this disastrous Government, Australia is now a basket case anyway, and the rest of the world will love you for it.
00
Fondly as we regard our warmist Prince he’s a sucker for noble cause and like many charming & well meaning people he’s been well suckered by this one.
Indeed it’s their very such nature that makes them so ripe for being swept along my such popular but fallacious causes.
He’s the Prince Warming of this Green fairy tale. Long may he reign, ( like the British weather) if he ever gets their.
00
Not funny, even with the sarc switced on!!!
00
Me.
The Coalition and the ALP are both worthless. They are full of traitors who suck up to the US, Israel, and any Chinese who want to buy a chunk of the country.
The minor parties mostly seem to be nuts.
00
The problem with Labor’s smear campaigns is that they are so overdone one cannot take them seriously. In fact, they have the reverse effect. If Abbott is so loathed, he must be feared, therefore he must be worth a shot. I certainly prefer the untested (Abbott) to the current known (Gillard).
Apart from ripping off the people (don’t forget that Carbon Tax has yet to be introduced another 13 times to equal $350 per tonne by 2050), clamping down on freedom of speech and watching everything we do on the Internet – she does nothing else but threaten people. She’s threatening the states with “a big stick not used lightly”, she’s threatening small business with “1.1 million dollar fine” if they incorrectly pass on the carbon tax, and it’s recently come to light that she got journalists fired for looking into her dodgy past with her married boyfriend and some heavy thieving that took place when she was a partner in a law firm.
Sorry for being off topic, but in answer to RoHa, Gillard is an overbearing bully and I’d rather have Abbott any day. Whatever failings he has, he will not be the dictator Gillard already is.
00
The coming election will be on par with that of 1983, in that Bill Hayden’s infamous “drover’s dog” could lead the Coalition to victory.
It’s not so much Mr Abbott’s election to win as it is to the Australian public wanting to give Julia and her clownocratic ineptocracy the royal heave-ho.
The big hope is that Tony will drop the Coalition’s Direct Action climate policy completely before then. Anyone who calls themselves a skeptic should already be sending letters to Tony et al opposing the policy (I personally have been in contact with Andrew Robb, my local member, and have had several in-depth discussions via email with him on this matter).
The more people who write to Tony et al, the more chance we have as a community to finally get rid of this pestilant scam once and for all in Australia.
00
I wrote to Abbott asking him to launch a Royal Commission into the global warming scam. That way the general public get a chance to see that it’s fake, too, and he can wind down green policy without alarming them.
00
As a longtime rusted on or instinctive Liberal Party voter, who would have voted informal if Turnbull was leading the Party, I’m at a loss to understand what conservative voters have against Abbott. Intellectually he is head and shoulders above anyone in either party. I’m pretty sure that is the reason he is not enamoured with ACC or AGW (one, apart from the intricasies of climate science, has to be incredibly dumb or out of touch with their lifetime exposure to the climate to buy that “crap” as Abbott so aptly describes it).
One can only hope that the “greens” in the Liberal Party will see the foolishness of their ways and allow the more intelligent members in the Party to jettison the Party’s present anthropogenic climate change policies aka crap.
00
I’m not sure if that was directed to me Llew, but I will state for the record that I am an avid supporter of Tony in the vast majority of policies. It’s just the ‘Direct Action Plan’ regarding climate change that I disagree with.
Perhaps I gave the wrong impression by categorizing the upcoming election as “not so much Mr Abbott’s to win as it is to the Australian public wanting to give Julia and her clownocratic ineptocracy the royal heave-ho.” It is my sincere belief that Tony Abbott will lead the Coalition to victory over Gillard’s clownocratic ineptocracy in the upcoming election (and in fact did defeat her in the last election, 73 Coalition seats to 72 ALP. It was only the addition of The Green and 3 of the Independants that gave her the 76-74 majority she uses to hold government).
However, I feel it would be wrong to not also acknowledge the overwhelming desire to belt Gillard and the ALP that exists in voterland.
Tony’s win will be due to his ability, not just the “ABG (Anyone But Gillard) sentiment” that currently dominates the minds of voters.
Hope that clears up where I was coming from. 🙂
00
No Brian I gathered that like me you are a bit of an Abbott fan. I noted at least one Abbott “dismisser” on this thread and a few on other threads here. But it is the more general put down he seems to get via the MSM and his supposed unpopularity with conservative voters that I had in mind.
(Mark noted your comment on that “unholy alliance” ,which probably still includes the Editor of the Australian, so if Abbott is going to ditch the “crap” as well as the Carbon Tax he will have a fight on his hands).
00
G’day llew.
It’s not just a matter of the “doctor’s wives” and greens who infest the coalition ranks. The most potent force is that of Big Business. It is them that provide the major impetus and funds for the CAGW monster. The “religion” is good for them and stuff everyone else.
Just recall the times you’ve seen some Business Council suit on the box mouthing weasel words about “certainty” on the carbon dioxide tax. Enough to make anyone spew, they are.
We currently have the worst of all possible political environments in Oz. Big Government, Big Business and Big Unions all in bed together. Keep a close watch on your money and your freedom.
00
Excellent review Ray Evans. As posters here know after Manne’s brief visit on a previous thread, Robert isn’t into logic, proof, or scientific argument or answering reasonable questions. In regard to blocked comments of dissenting views, the few devotees of “The Monthly” are not at all comfortable in being subjected to reasoned debate after being badly burnt when the Editor previously allowed a very good open discussion of the disturbing decision in the Andrew Bolt alleged “racial vilification” case!
00
A player in the scientific debate on Climate Change is Russia.
From No Tricks Zone:
http://notrickszone.com/2012/05/21/scientists-of-the-russian-academy-of-sciences-global-warming-is-coming-to-an-end-return-to-early-1980s-level/
Do not forget Russian scientist Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov, Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory, who has been a speaker at at least one the Heartland NIPCC conferences.
00
Heat doesn’t kill, but cold does. This may be nothing to celebrate.
00
As long as we put our faith in d**kheads and a**holes to run our lives and tell us what we can and can’t do, we have a problem.
People need to lose this irrational faith in government then maybe we’ll see some sense. Until then I foresee one scare campaign after another.
00
As long as they control your money Mike, those “d**kheads and a**holes” will do what they damn well please.
What are you going to do about it?
00
As a newby to this blog but a long time viewer i have learnt a lot about the climate science and what the information means and certainly the personalities that drive the science,so it was interesting to hear a interview this morning on ABC brisbane with Lord Lawton about the continuing need for carbon abatement blah blah , and pushing the geological conference here in brisbane.With the blog comment and info from this site,it was absolutely clear that the deniers werent winning but no effort was produced to counter his comments.So I can now see the approach that for this time how the Abc is following the well laid path.It is sad but also enlighting
00
Sorry the interview was with lord ronald Oxburgh former head of shell in britain,politician and dare I say warmist.What i found most disturbing was that global warming action was akin to taking out car insurance(just in case).But the propaganda goes on.
00
I’m sure you refer to Lord Oxburgh who was appointed by the University of East Anglia to chair the investigation into the scientific aspects of the Climategate scandal and predictably gave the Climatic Research Unit a clean Bill of health. In James Delingpole’s book Watermelons… that appointment was likened to putting Dracula in charge of the blood bank.
As well as having financial interests in the carbon trading and wind farm industries, Lord Oxburgh is Director and Vice Chairman of Globe International (Global Legislators Organisation for a Balanced Environment). This is a worldwide network which lobbies governments to take more drastic action on climate change and other environmental issues.
But I’m sure all that was disclosed during the interview.
00
Sonny @13 makes a very valid point: “While the MSM alarmist machine keeps dolling out the koolaid we have won nothing. Less so if we think we have.”
Just as before all the various warmist junkets; ie., Copenhagen, Cancun, Rio etc., Gillard’s propaganda “independent” organisations, Climate Commission, CSIRO, BoM, ABC, all the other taxpayer-funded climate gurus and institutions, plus the Department of Climate Change and sycophantic alleged “journalists” of the tame-stream media, will be ramping up the worst of the already re-hashed “climate change/CAGW” scares from now until the election!
Meanwhile, the James Hansen-involved “tipping-points” nightmarish scenario is to be given new legs in the next big scare campaign.
“New global production to premiere October 2013”
August 03, 2012 11:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time
“LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)–The Weather Channel Companies announced today that it is the U.S. partner on the global production of “Tipping Points,” a landmark TV series that will explore the emerging tipping points of our changing climate system that have recently drawn concern from scientific communities worldwide for their fragile and near-crisis state. The groundbreaking docu-series will follow a group of pre-eminent scientists as they venture off the grid to explore the perilous tipping points making our weather systems more extreme and unpredictable.
“Tipping Points” will feature several of the most critical examples, including the collapse of the Greenland ice sheet, total melting of the Himalayan icecap glaciers, dieback of the Amazon rainforest, shutdown of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation, and the rapid melt of the Permafrost in Siberia.” Six hour-long episodes are planned.
Follow the links from http://www.icecap.us/ for full details.
As forewarned is fore-armed perhaps some of the talent we have amongst posters here could pre-empt their efforts by assembling the facts about these areas as they now stand?
00
An excellent essay by Ray Evans, however I feel it may miss one important point about Robert Manne’s petulant whining. Manne is not really bemoaning the impending success of the skeptics over the global warming hoax out of any genuine concern for the environment. He is moaning because it has finally dawned on him how much the left has invested in this hoax, and how permanent the record of their shameless advocacy is in the age of the internet. They have gambled and lost badly. In the age of the Internet, when it comes to credibility and trust, they were gambling everything.
Robert Manne fabricates reasons for the success of sceptics that protect his ego, but ignores the reasons he and his ilk failed. They failed because the empirical evidence does not support the post normal pseudo science of global warming. They also failed because they did not know who their opposition was. Some may have thought that believers just used the language of vilification to silence sceptics, intimidate the undecided and influence the uninformed. Robert Manne makes it clear that the alarmists believed their own propaganda. He still appears to have no idea who sceptics are, what motivates them or indeed what the tradition scientific method is.
It is said that people are angriest with others when they are angry with themselves. The SS Leftardula was on route to the port of Fabia and Robert Manne was not just a fellow traveller but a paid up member of the crew. The voyage was taking years, but when a sleek new ship, the SS Global Warming, appeared along side, Manne was one of those that recommended swapping ships so as to reach the port of Fabia faster. The SS Global Warming has struck the iceberg of truth and is sinking fast. There would be more survivors if they had not removed the lifeboats to make room for more socialist baggage. The problem with socialist baggage is none of it flies far without the aid of a fan and only some of it floats. Like so many “influential intellectuals” of the left, Robert Manne is going down with the ship. All who would crew the SS Biocrisis and the SS Sustainability are going down too, so there is little hope of rescue. This I believe is what Robert Manne is really moaning about.
00
The best laid plans of mice and manne…
Sequel to Steinbeck’s ‘The Grapes of Wrath’… ‘Of Mice and Manne.’
00
Is that a typo … surely it should be ‘of Mike and Manne’? ;¬)
00
72 hours ago the good doctor (for a doctor he is) graced us with His Presence, and derided us for not having read His article. He also asserted that “denialists hunt in packs” (one wonders, as others raised at the time, does the idea that denialist form a pack make it a ‘consensus’?)
Despite the pleading
(prayers?)of the masses…. err, I mean ‘pack’… the good doctor (for a doctor he is) still has not graced us with His Presence to rebutt the points raised in response to his article.One does sincerely hope that we do not have to wait 72 hours (or more) for the good professor to comment on this review and the points it raises.
One also hopes that the good professor will deign to respond to the points raised in that other thread by we mere mortals, so that He may enlighten us with The Truth of CAGW; to teach us of the the ways of the eco-pure, thus turning us away from our wicked ‘Scorched Earth’ ways…..
00
The guy is a professor in politics.. Not if this were about politics, he might be worth a passing read, but SERIOUSLY !!!
I what should be a purely scientific field, the guy is basically a non-entity.
The fact he and his type seem to want to get involved shows that this is all mostly a political scam, because if it was purely scientific, it would have been over, and gone, dusted, many many moons ago.
00
Completely agree Andy.
I find it somewhat telling that his behaviour on this blog is much like that of many of the other warmista adherants…. drive-by commenting.
Very few stick around to ‘debate’ the issue with people here… fewer still actually engage in the ‘debate’, as opposed to just throwing up links to articles and believeing that should be enough to silence the ‘deniers’.
00
Even that post was more a “please pay to read my crap” post.. as if !!
certainly nothing to do with anything worthwhile bothering with.
00
Jo,
How do I send you an article on this. It is 6Mb
00
Sorry, to be a bit off topic here Jo but, I just had a revealation. The NBN and Carbon Tax are the same policy. It’s about the energy tracking and control grid.
Judging by the list of government initiatives as ‘benefits’ for the NBN it looks like the technocratic trifector for the Agenda 21 pimps. This is hidden in plain sight.
1. Digital Economy: Know what we buy and where we buy our stuff.
2. Smart Grid: Know what appliances we use and when we use them.
3. Managed Motorways: Know where we travel and how we get there.
BTW, I got my commercial energy bill last week. I’m in Sydney and took no pleasure in my rate jumping 70% after the strt of the carbon tax. Yes, 70% overnight folks, that is not a misprint. I don’t know what the residential rate increases are but if you think this won’t affect our economy then, enjoy the Kool Aid while you can.
00
[…] Jo Nova Share this:PrintEmailMoreStumbleUponTwitterFacebookDiggRedditLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. This entry was posted in Climate Change and tagged activist propaganda, climate activists, climate hysteria, dioxycarbophobia, weather superstition. Bookmark the permalink. ← Robert Bradley Jr.: Energy Freedom Bus Tour: Hitting the Open Road for Consumers, Taxpayers, and Common Sense […]
00
Waffle,
Yes, but for your own protection, the start of the carbon tax, and the 70% increase in your commercial energy bill are TOTALLY unrelated, isn’t that right? … Isn’t it?
00
It probably is Rereke but the RET(Renewable Energy Target)that our electricity suppliers have had to insigate over the last few years definitely isn’t
00