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

Free Forum with David Archibald and Cliff Ollier in Perth Monday next week

The Climate Debate Continues!  

Professor Cliff Ollier, UWA and David Archibald, Author of “Twilight of Abundance”

Jo says: two Perth councils are drafting policies to cope with sea level rise right this minute. Cliff Ollier can set them straight with Rising sea Level Forecast: Fact or Fiction? Archibald’s book is subtitled: “Why Life in the 21st Century Will Be Nasty, Brutish, and Short”. It’s excellent and fascinating. This man does not mince words. What else do you need to know?

Monday 26th May 7pm, Royal Perth Yacht Club, Australia II Drive, Crawley, Perth, more details below.

__________________________________________

Press Release: The 5th Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that coastal properties around Australia are at serious risk of severe damage or destruction from rising global average sea levels. The 5th report has been released in stages during 2013 and 2014.

The report claims that global average sea rise has been 1.7mm per year during the 100 years of the twentieth century. This is regarded as unusually high when compared with the past 2,000 years. Projections for future sea level rise are even higher. If greenhouse gas emissions continue to track at the top ofIPCC scenarios, global average sea levels could rise by nearly 1 metre by year 2100; the suggested range is 0.52m – 0.98m.

The report claims that with a sea level rise of 50 centimetres there will be a 300 fold increase in flooding events meaning that homes, buildings and other infrastructure, that experience flooding’ once in 100 years will be flooded several times a year’. Not only coastal properties will be affected but also those on estuaries and rivers.

“If the IPCC projections are soundly based then coastal property owners are entitled to ask what is being done to identify and mitigate the effect?” said Graeme Wishart, Chairman of the Western Australian Committee of the Council for the National Interest,
today. “The City of Joondalup has released a draft Coastal Planning Policy and the City of Rocking ham is about to do likewise” said Mr Wishart. “The big question is ‘What effect will these and the policies of other Local Government Councils, have on coastal
property values? What restrictions will be placed on further construction or improvements?”

In New South Wales, Coastal Councils have adopted the IPCC projections and caused significant loss of value of homes and properties. The Great Lakes Council has even given approval for a new home to be erected on a beach block with the condition that it be demolished after 20 years because of projected sea level rise.

“Over the years, the IPCC has based its modeling on global warming said Mr Wishart.

There has been no warming for fifteen years or so and some scientists are predicting a serious cooling phase over the next couple of decades.

As Australia is an island continent, surrounded by the oceans, it is in the national interest for there to be an informed debate about the IPCC projected sea level rises, global average temperatures and the consequences for all Australians particularly coastal
property owners and residents. Highly respected WA Scientists Professor Cliff Oilier and Mr David Archibald will address these issues at a Free Public Forum to be held at the Royal Perth Yacht Club, River Room on Monday 26th May at 7.00pm. The public is most welcome.” Said Mr Wishart.
* * * *
Contact- Graeme Wishart 9444 9505 Denis Whitely mob 0430 147049.

Email wacni AT outlook.com

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.2/10 (40 votes cast)
Free Forum with David Archibald and Cliff Ollier in Perth Monday next week, 8.2 out of 10 based on 40 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/qh22kt2

71 comments to Free Forum with David Archibald and Cliff Ollier in Perth Monday next week

  • #
    Popeye

    We’ll know these warmists are serious when they all stop jetting off to their “jollies” and sell up their coastal homes. (A la Flannerfool & Crumbet)!!

    In the interim we (the ordinary taxpayers) will continue to pay the tithes for ZERO gain whatsoever.

    Viv Forbes says it well over at Pickering Post

    Cheers,

    41

  • #
    Alex

    99% of those homes and that infrastructure will be replaced over the next 90 years.
    Each time it is replaced, if sea levels are rising, put the replacements on land a metre higher, or build a little mound a metre high and put it on the mound. Problem solved. Cost – negligible. Number of additional taxpayer-funded bureaucrats required – 0.

    180

  • #
    Richard111

    For global sea level to rise by 1 metre some 400,000 CUBIC KILOMETRES of ice, on land, NOT in the sea, must melt.
    Now work out how much energy is needed to melt that amount of ice. To melt that ice by 2100 and ensure the energy is directed to where the ice is, mostly Antarctica and Greenland, the sun would have to go NOVA!!! NO LIFE WOULD BE ABLE TO SURVICE AN ICE MELT AT THAT RATE.
    Go do the math. It is not difficult.

    90

    • #
      blackadderthe4th

      ‘ the sun would have to go NOVA!!!’, not if/when co2 levels hit the tipping point!

      Co2 tipping point!

      ‘There’s a really interesting paper from the Journal Science…by Stephen Davies, Carnegie Institute Stamford, California, they have asked the question we are all worried about climate change, we are all worried can we rescue the Earth from its fate…but is it already too late or if we make changes now can we turn it around…is it yet game over or not. They approached this in an interesting way what they did, if we take all the energy infrastructure and the traffic and population, we know on Earth at the moment and freeze that in time and therefore let it live out it’s life time because they know coal power station lasts 40 years, a car for about 17 years, people are around 60-70 years, an so on, we know therefore how much co2 that lot is going to produce and they come up with about 500 billion tons co2 between now and 2060, they say that will warm the Earth up by about 1.3C compared to pre-industrial levels when we started to real churn out the co2. That’s about 0.7C hotter than now…what will that do to co2 ultimately though…that means the Earth will stabilize at 430ppm…that will mean we are a lot way short of 450ppm,…the point of no return, when we think the climate will go into positive feedback cycle and the game would be over…in other words it is not the present infrastructure …it’s what we are going to build next so in other words we have to pay particular attention to making sure we roll out carbon free infrastructure, as Stephen Davies explains…’BBC Radio 5.

      Listen to it in full at:-

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJFWaidKuoU

      120

      • #
        Richard111

        So what? There is no way CO2 in the atmosphere can warm up anything unless the sun is shinning. That energy the CO2 absorbed didn’t reach the ground. A cooling effect. Sort of like an invisible cloud, only it never goes away. :-)

        121

        • #
          tom0mason

          Better yet, put an uncooked chicken in plexiglass (perspex) box that has 5 sides coated in reflective foil, the lid is left clear. Fill, to 100%of the volume of the box with CO2 and seal with the transparent lid.
          Expose the box to sunlight for a few minutes. Now watch as the wonder of CO2 back radiation builds cooking the chicken in a blanket of heat. No power supply needed!
          Ensure that the box is opened and the CO2 vented before the box, and it’s content go critical, and burns BA4 ar5e.

          70

        • #
          blackadderthe4th

          @Richard111
          May 22

          ‘That energy the CO2 absorbed didn’t reach the ground’, not sure what you exactly mean by this? But I’ve come to the conclusion you have not realised the difference between UV and IR. The heat coming from the Sun is UV and co2 is transparent to that heat. But it heats up the ground and is then converted to IR, it is this IR that co2 ‘captures’ as it tries to escape into space and heats up the atmosphere.

          01

      • #
        tom0mason

        Tipping-point!
        Explain how in any NATURAL system, that has many enumerable of feedback mechanisms, does a so called ‘tipping point’ works.
        It is just a crass simplification of a mis-understood system, bogus anti-scientific twaddle.

        90

        • #
          blackadderthe4th

          ‘It is just a crass simplification of a mis-understood system, bogus anti-scientific twaddle’ so why don’t you contact

          ‘Stephen Davies, Carnegie Institute Stamford, California’

          his email is on the web and tell him? I’m sure he will be open to any suggestions you have, if he has the time to waste, about improving his theories! And let us know how you get on!

          09

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            See my comment at 3.1.8.

            You have the wrong Stamford.

            30

          • #
            tom0mason

            Another appeal to authority. Parroting the same line, eh?
            Have you always had no critical thinking? Or was it surgically removed?
            It maybe about time you woke-up and realized that this whole thing is an expensive scam driven and directed by the Green political ambitions to control most peoples lives.

            You wannabe Californian ‘climate worrier’ is again using projection based on broken models. And as highlight in many places -
            A response from the Institute of Physics (Publsihers of Environmental Research Letters) to a UK Times article reporting the suppression of a global warming paper submitted by Dr. Bengtsson.

            “One cannot and should not simply interpret the IPCCs ranges for AR4 or 5 as confidence intervals or pdfs and hence they are not directly comparable to observation based intervals (as e.g. in Otto et al).

            In the same way that one cannot expect a nice fit between observational studies and the CMIP5 models…

            So nature is not doing what the models want.
            Oh, dear so what is broken, our planet, or the models? Can you apply any critical thing to that?

            20

        • #
          the Griss

          In the past the CO2 level has been many times higher than 450ppm.

          The Earth and its plants and other life forms is still here and starting to thrive with the slight increase in CO2 from the subsistence levels of the past many thousands of years.

          There is NO MYTHICAL TIPPING POINT !

          121

        • #
          the Griss

          Ahhhh! the tipping point.

          It was 350ppm… and nothing happened

          It was then 400ppm.. .. and the Earth’s temperature levelled off

          Now the tippling point is 450ppm… seriously ???

          We have a doomsday cult on our hands !!

          Ever moving out the date of our DOOM when the previous DOOMDATE passes with nothing happening.

          131

      • #
        James Bradley

        BA4,

        Tipping point, climate damage, rescue the earth…

        You bunch of sooks are so feaful and frightened that in a real emergency you would freeze like rabbits in a spotlight.

        You proudly scream abuse and take sniper shots to deny others the same right to freedom of speech and the right to have an alternate opinion as you.

        You are cowards that hide in the shadows of anonymity and only jump out briefly to spray mal-formed and immature ideology when you think it’s safe.

        Then you crawl back under your blanket and giggle to all the other spineless, bloated little worms about how brave you are because you think it causes a bit of grief.

        Here’s a bedtime story for you:

        Every night, Lion, king of the jungle, would move through his domain, all the animals would make way out of respect and in return he would pass them by, all except for the monkey.

        The monkey would sit in the tree top way out of reach and heckle the Lion and throw bits of twig and litter when ever he could.

        Lion ignored this and when asked by the other animals why, Lion said “He causes no harm he has no respect for himself and he is merely seeking attention.”

        One night the the monkey became bold and climbed down from his tree and hid in the bushes.

        When Lion walked by the monkey jumped out and roared like another lion. All the other animals laughed, but in the morning all they found on that spot was fur and blood.

        The animals asked Lion why he killed the monkey.

        Lion said “This morning he is just another dead monkey, but last night he was a lion… ”

        BA4, the point to this story is that you’re bored and mischievous with nothing better to do than to wait around for the Centrelink payment and constantly seek approval of your peers by posting alarmist gotchas that you think are in some consequential.

        You like to roar like a lion, but when you’re put on the spot you turn out to be just another dead monkey.

        140

      • #
        sophocles

        C’mon blackadder, apply some common sense!

        What it doesn’t even attempt to consider is how much of that CO2, over that time, will be absorbed, converted and used by the teeming plant life on land and the teeming plankton in the seas!

        It’s A Pathetic Postulate.

        Let us consider an alternative postulate made in the same `interesting way.’

        Let’s say I water my lemon tree every day with ummm, let’s say about 300 millilitres of a nitrate rich libation applied topically. Over a year, it might receive about 110 litres. It is added at night, so that the sun doesn’t cause it to evaporate.

        Now, the question to be asked, in the same `approach in an interesting way,’ is why, after thirty years (and I concede that thirty years is less than half the seventy years considered), isn’t that lemon tree learning the breaststroke or australian crawl to survive the application of 3300 litres of fluid?

        In a different approach, observation (yes! Real World stuff!) shows:
        1. the lemon tree has tripled in size in terms of the spacial volume it occupies
        2. it produces five times the amount of fruit it did when I started this (direct count of number of bags of lemons given away to neighbours each year which also includes the quantities I eat)
        3. the grass under the tree grows almost twice as fast as the rest of the lawn
        4. the grass under the tree is always greener than the rest of the lawn

        Could it perhaps be that the application of the nitrated fluid has been taken up and used by the plants? There is no swampy feel to the ground under the tree …

        It’s not a case of how much is added at all. It’s all used! It’s a case of how much is used and how fast it’s used!

        I can say, right now, I won’t be at all worried about atmospheric CO2 concentration until after evolution has evolved a herbivore larger than the elephant to consume its products. Because where there are larger browsers, there are larger predators and I don’t want to meet the mammalian equivalent of T-Rex!

        T-Rex evolved to eat the titanosaurs which evolved to eat the forests which were feeding on the 2000 ppm of CO2. See the pattern?

        90

        • #
          sophocles

          It’s a dwarf variety of lemon tree, hence the small volumetric increment over that period of time.

          It’s lemons, though, are delicious!

          40

      • #
        handjive

        Quote BA4:

        they have asked the question we are all worried about climate change, we are all worried can we rescue the Earth from its fate

        Who is this ‘we‘ you speak of, Kemo sabe?

        50

      • #
        bullocky

        ba4.
        Tipping Point(or Refuse Depot): Higher levels of CO2 are due to decaying organic material. It’s where everyone tips their rubbish.
        -
        You’ve been fooled again!
        -
        http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=rubbish+tips+youtube&qpvt=rubbish+tips+youtube&FORM=VQFRML#view=detail&mid=4896C6E6588CC2FF4D3D4896C6E6588CC2FF4D3D

        00

      • #
        James Bradley

        BA4 Analogy:

        If we all rip out our kidneys now we can all go onto dialysis together, now that’s not ideal, it is very expensive and we will have a much diminished quality of life, but hey it will prevent anyone getting kidney stones.

        Cure is worse than the disease.

        Pathetic bunch of dead monkeys.

        70

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        I think that BA4 has been suckered.

        There does not appear to be a Carnegie Institute, at Stamford University, in California, which is what the wording is intended to imply. There is, however a Carnegie Institute, in Stamford Connecticut, which seems to be involved in alternative medicine “research”, but does nothing in regard to climate modelling, or even any real science, for that matter.

        50

        • #
          blackadderthe4th

          ‘a Carnegie Institute, at Stamford University, in California’ , no because it’s ‘Stanford’, which a couple of clicks with professor google would have enlightened you! But regardless you can still email him

          http://www.ess.uci.edu/~sjdavis/cv.html

          01

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            … a Carnegie Institute, at Stamford University, in California’ , no because it’s ‘Stanford’

            You are quite right, but it was you, who said, “Stephen Davies, Carnegie Institute Stamford, California”. I simply picked that up and used it as a direct quotation, which then, by good chance, lead me to Stamford CT.

            But even so, there was no Carnegie Institute for Science at Stanford University, when I was there in the 80′s, and none is mentioned on their current website. So when was it there? Perhaps it is a secret, only known to you?

            There is a teaching research unit located at Menlo Park, which is a Carnegie franchise, but it has nothing to do with the University, as far as I am aware.

            The real Carnegie Institution for Science is based in Washington, and that was where Dr Steven J. Davis worked as a researcher after obtaining his PhD from Stanford University in 2008.

            couple of clicks with professor google would have enlightened you!

            As it would you, had you bothered to to the research I have just done, and in less time than it has taken me to type this, I might add.

            And no, I won’t email him. He is probably busy enough, filling out research grant application forms, on behalf of the University of California at Irvine.

            00

            • #
              blackadderthe4th

              ‘I simply picked that up and used it as a direct quotation’, so you didn’t double check the facts in the vid? That’s about right for you doubters, just accept anything somebody says without doing your own research!

              01

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Blackadder! I am truly shocked! You have actually said something lucid, for once. The medication must be working.

                You are quite right, I didn’t bother with the video. I have looked at some of your videos, and they are as waste of time – mostly propaganda. But in pointing that out, you are totally correct, because I do prefer to do my own research, and that was how I found a document of the places and dates where he has worked, and although he did his PhD at Stanford, he was not at the Carnegie Institution for Science at the same time, which is what you (through the video?) implied in your original comment.

                00

              • #
                blackadderthe4th

                ‘You are quite right, I didn’t bother with the video’ well that’s a surprise is it not? Because they challenge your deeply held mistaken beliefs, what you should do is check, double check then check again! Then perhaps you’ll be able to make a valid judgement!
                [Has it not occurred to you, that people may have watched some of your previous videos, and found them wanting, not only scientifically, but also in terms of their poor propaganda value? -Fly]

                10

      • #
        Safetyguy66

        “Tipping Point”

        More like narcissism point.

        You really believe (and its a belief not knowledge) that one person knows exactly when the amount of CO2 will reach a point where some sort of irreversible trend will occur and that they know that point to the day/month/year or even decade??

        Why is this person not a multi billionaire? If it was that easy to model the climate they should have been accurately simulating and predicting the stock market for decades. The stock market is a system with a thousand times less complexity that the climate.

        What you and your ilk are suffering from is commonly known as a delusion.

        31

        • #
          blackadderthe4th

          ‘that they know that point to the day/month/year or even decade??’ and who has ever said that, like! I think you are putting your false projections/assumptions on certain claims.

          00

      • #
        Radical Rodent

        Oh, Lord… you do realise that you are quoting the BBC, do you, BA4? Are you admitting that you believe that seriously dodgy corporation? CO2 tipping point? Has there been any “CO2 tipping point” in history? What about when CO2 was around 4,000ppm (to help you, that is 10 times more than now)? Did the Earth “tip” and fry?

        (Suggested answers, to maintain your credibility: yes; no; rhetorical; no; rhetorical; no.)

        As for rising sea levels: 1.7mm per year (do they seriously expect us to believe that they can measure sea level changes to that accuracy – tip: try measuring that change in level in your bath… while you are in it) works out at 170mm per century, or, in real money, just under 7 inches. At that rate, build your dream beach house a couple of feet above the highest high water (HHW) level; not only will you be safe, but so will your children and your children’s children. That covers all that we are threatened with, I feel.

        10

        • #
          blackadderthe4th

          ‘What about when CO2 was around 4,000ppm’, well what about when levels were 300,000PPM? About a thousand time bigger than your figure and there was even a snowball Earth! But you see there are perfectly explainable reasons, if you look deep enough. Events don’t happen in a vacuum.

          CO2 300,000 ppm but snowball Earth, followed by hot house Earth!

          ‘a puzzle called the faint sun paradox is explained by the warming effect of GHG, mostly co2…but if co2 fell it wouldn’t take much to tip the world into an ice age…a positive feedback leading to more more cooling, more ice, more reflection, until nearly all the world was covered by ice…there is no way the Sun could melt all this ice, even Monckton wouldn’t expect such a thing…but something did…because the Earth turned into a hothouse…geologists say the reason is very simple, the only part of the Earth not covered by ice was warm spots caused by volcanoes…but they did release gases..,co2 under normal conditions this would have reacted with rocks and rainfall and get washed out to sea…but in snowball Earth, there is no rain, no weathering…so the co2 just keeps building up…so you have high co2 levels with glaciers at the equator but this is a dynamic process, it doesn’t stay like this’ Potholer54

          Now see for yourself!

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrm1KXttqDA

          02

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            That movie relies on the single statement that the gasses being produced by volcanos contained carbon dioxide. What were the geological and chemical processes that formed this carbon dioxide, in a very young earth? In fact, where did the oxygen come from?

            And where does continental drift come into the equation?

            10

            • #
              blackadderthe4th

              ‘What were the geological and chemical processes that formed this carbon dioxide’, don’t know. but it’s true, no doubt professor google knows!

              What is producing the warming climate? Is it co2 from volcanoes?

              ‘The rate which volcanoes put co2 in the atmosphere is only 1/10,000ppm co2 per year and over a million years that’s over 100ppm co2, which is huge change that can cause large climate change, but look at the rate humans are changing co2, we are increasing at a rate of 2ppm per year so we are changing things 10,000 times faster than natural process can change it, so humans are in charge of climate change…which has a had relatively stable climate for the last 12,000 years which is going to be now the future climate going to be determined by humans not natural changes. And the other thing is how much co2 was there when Antarctica began to freeze over…about 400ppm, other studies do have higher numbers but the basic point is…we will increase co2 to more than that, we would be heading the planet back to the ice free state…there is no doubt we would producing a different planet…!

              Watch for your self:-

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xNOu4aFGGA

              ‘In fact, where did the oxygen come from?’, that came from very simply organisms, in the early formation of the Earth. which could use the atmosphere at that time and oxygen was a by product, just as well eh?

              00

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          But there was a tipping point. It was filmed in a movie. The trailer for the movie is in this YouTube clip …

          00

          • #
            Heywood

            I am still amused that he thinks we actually watch his linked tripe.

            10

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              I did, and it looks like my Bull paddock does, just before I have to harrow it.

              20

              • #
                Graeme No.3

                Was this from “Earth, the making of a/the planet” from the BBC?

                Can’t be bothered watching anything from BlackBladder, but volcanoes erupting through the ice sounds just like the scene where I stopped viewing the recording and deleted it.

                P.S. BB4 doesn’t seem to be that knowledgeable about the “Climate Science”. Doesn’t he know that in the dogma Volcanoes don’t discharge CO2?
                They put out aerosols only to cause the temperature to be lower than predicted. If they put out CO2 they would cause natural warming, which any climate “scientist” knows doesn’t happen.

                00

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              I doubt I will watch another – waste of pixels.

              00

    • #
      the Griss

      The real problem with CO2 at the moment and for last many thousands of years is that CO2 levels have been at the absolute minimum for existence levels.

      The absolute minimum for life on Earth.

      We are still barely above that minimum.

      During nearly all the period of the development of life on Earth it has been at MUCH HIGHER LEVELS

      The world’s temperatures are also very near the lowest that have been in the whole Holocene period..

      These fools want to stop the Earth getting back to HOW IT SHOULD BE.

      A warmer, more fertile planet, teeming with abundant life.

      40

      • #
        tom0mason

        If only those early UN-IPCC models were anywhere near correct then life would be so much warmer, prosperous, and productive. But as we know the observed world did not comply with the modeled one.

        The hope was nice while it lasted.

        10

  • #
    janama

    OT – you’ve got to love The Onion.

    “At press time, representatives from the world’s leading economies had signaled that they would continue to heavily rely on fossil fuels until they had something more than an overwhelming scientific consensus to go on”

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/scientists-politely-remind-world-that-clean-energy,36086/

    30

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      You have to love the certainty they provide to heavy industry about the ability of renewables to power our economies.

      “We’ve got solar, wind, geothermal—we’re all set to move forward with this stuff whenever everyone else is,” said Dr. Sandra Eakins, adding that researchers are also doing a lot of pretty amazing things with biomass these days.”

      If I was running a steel manufacturing plant I think I would be closing my power account and calling Sandra Eakins to find out how these amazing developments in biomass can power my business at a lower cost than coal or gas. I mean it sounds like totally amazing maaaaan!

      10

  • #
    Wendy

    any chance someone will take video of this for us that can’t make it to the forum? pretty please? :D

    20

  • #
    Newport_Mac

    Hi Jo,
    Sorry for the off topic comment but his remarks are interesting.

    Guest post by Lennart Bengtsson: My view on climate research
    21 May, 2014 | on the Uppsalainitiativet blog

    Chaos and Climate – who knew ; )

    30

  • #
    Trygve Eklund

    Islands and continents:

    Since childhodd at school, I have wondered about the distinction between “island” and “continent”. Strictly speaking, both are surrounded by water, unless you split Eurasia. The definition of the two terms is a social convention, of course, but is always made to appear as some law of nature.

    Not a great matter, this – unless the social constructivist step into the debate.

    30

    • #
      John F. Hultquist

      It is simple. A fellow from the State of GA, USA can set you straight. Islands float and can tip over:
      http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hank-johnson-worries-guam-could-capsize-after-marine-buildup/

      30

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Seven continents: North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Australaia, and Antarctica.

      Australia includes Papua New Guinea and New Zealand, so is not a contiguous land mass. Neither is Asia.

      North and South America are only separated by a man-made structure – the Panama Canal. Africa is only separated from Asia by another man-made structure – the Suez Canal. Europe and Asia are not separated at all.

      Meanwhile, Pacifica, which occupies about 30% of the total surface area of the earth, is not considered a continent at all – go figure.

      For all practical purposes, the distinctions are now immaterial, unless you are sailing a long way, and don’t like using canals.

      10

  • #
    tom0mason

    An islands in the main are where people usually live quiet, peaceful and boring lives.
    Continents are large artificial aggregations of landmass where the people are held in a state of anxiety to ensure conformance to arbitary rules from their elite, and in turn these elites are kept in a state of anxiety to ensure conformance to arbitary international rules by the the ‘global’ elite.

    20

    • #
      tom0mason

      Oops forgot the final line -
      The global elites buy islands to live out quiet, contented, boring lives.

      30

  • #
    sophocles

    This man does not mince words.

    I’ve almost finished reading his book. No, he does not mince words. He’s frighteningly blunt! His book is an excellent read. It will be … an interesting and maybe scary experience to see just how right he may be.

    Now I’m having to think more than just a year ahead, but more like five or more, and that’s hard. I’ve already started lightening ship …

    20

  • #
    the Griss

    Jo, Tell them to make sure that security is tight enough to avoid getting a load of yelling non-entities trying to disrupt the talks.

    That seems to be the totalitarian leftist meme at the moment.. refusing to let people talk by using constant yelling and noise.

    Watch out for the ferals !

    50

    • #
      Richo

      Hi the Griss

      Security probably won’t be an issue because the rent-a-crowd won’t be there because the Alp Broadcasting Commissariat and Lack-a-fax won’t be there as they are worried about the Streisand Effect providing oxygen to the skeptics case.

      10

  • #
    handjive

    Here is a fun topic for the night:

    May 21 2014
    Author of 1975 Newsweek global cooling article, Peter Gwynne, issues partial ‘mea culpa’ —
    It’s time for deniers of human-caused global warming to stop using an old magazine story as ammunition against the consensus of today’s climate scientists.

    Gwynne: ‘I fear that my obituary will be dominated by that single article in Newsweek.’ – The ‘article has reportedly become the most-cited article in Newsweek’s history.’

    Scientist Doug Hoffman responds to Gwynne:
    ‘You didn’t tell the whole story in 1975 because it was not known.
    You are not telling the whole story now, because it is not known.
    Climate science is too crude, too immature to make any of the bombastic claims attributed to it in the media.

    You were part of the problem back then and you remain part of the problem today.
    If you had any integrity you would simply say I was wrong and leave it at that.’
    . . .
    10 green thumbs for Doug Hoffman.
    (Some text from climate depot, with jpg of article, but, only link access supplied is above)

    50

  • #
    Neville

    There are many very recent PR studies on SLR that show that there is little rise and many show a deceleration.
    The IPCC relies on thermal expansion of water to provide about 67% of the increase and Greenland provides about 10%. But the Antarctic provides a deceleration for at least 300 years, so there is ZIP chance of dangerous SLR until at least 2300.
    The latest studies show about 17cm by 2114 or about 7 inches, similar to the 20th century.
    The latest 2014 Leclercque et al Glacier study shows a slowing of retreat since 1950, exactly the opposite of co2 enhanced CAGW. It is all BS and the PR studies back it up.

    20

  • #
    pat

    australian academic provides a few laughs:

    20 May: Guardian: North Korea: an unlikely champion in the fight against climate change
    Pyongyang is cooperating with global strategy on climate change, writes Dr Benjamin Habib. The question is, why?
    (Benjamin Habib for The Conversation, part of the North Korea network)
    (Dr Benjamin Habib is a lecturer in politics and international relations at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Australia.)
    North Korea has a record of compliance with its obligations as a party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The obvious question then is why the North Korean government would show such commitment to the international climate change regime, given its belligerent reputation in the strategic realm…
    Like many poor countries, North Korea, where such problems are endemic, is least able to cope with climate change impacts…
    The capacity-building assistance made available via the UNFCCC and related programs boosting planting and harvesting efficiency, building soil fertility and reforestation helps to increase the productive capacity of the agricultural sector and enhance its resilience against climate change.
    The incentives for participation are not confined to agriculture. North Korea is using the UNFCCC as a vehicle for obtaining foreign assistance to upgrade its energy production and transmission infrastructure.
    North Korea’s energy security problem is well documented, revolving around four distinct challenges: supply, generation, power transmission, and secondary usage. Of these four challenges, electricity generation and transmission are the two that can be addressed through the UNFCCC.
    ***Renewable energy may be the most appropriate vehicle for increasing generation capacity because unlike large centralised fossil-fuels, renewables can be scaled locally which reduces their up-front cost.
    For example, a UNDP-sponsored project is installing small-scale wind energy systems at sites across North and South Pyongan Provinces, helping to alleviate energy shortages affecting these areas by decoupling them from reliance on the coal-generated electricity grid…
    Most significantly, renewables offer North Korea considerable scope for technology transfer, infrastructure upgrades and income through the Clean Development Mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol.
    Technology transfers for such projects do not violate the import restrictions of dual-use technologies listed under the UN Security Council sanctions regime against the DPRK. The income potential derives from the carbon credits generated by North Korea’s renewable projects, which can be traded on international carbon markets…
    ***Together, the projects already online in North Korea account for 193,475 carbon credits. At the EU spot price for carbon credits of $5.66/ton (3.36 pounds/ton) as of July 2013, North Korea’s current portfolio of carbon credits are worth a mere $1m per year.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/north-korea-unlikely-champion-fight-against-climate-change?CMP=twt_gu

    LaTrobe: Staff profile – Dr Benjamin Habib. Lecturer
    Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
    School of Social Sciences and Communications
    http://www.latrobe.edu.au/humanities/about/staff/profile?uname=BHabib

    20

    • #

      Again, let’s do the power generation exercise for this Country, here, North Korea.

      North Korea has a population of 25 Million.

      Total Power generation for North Korea is 20TWH.

      This is around the same power that is consumed in Adelaide, which has a population of 1.3 Million people, which is 5.2% of North Korea’s population. It’s the closest I can get here, as Adelaide’s power consumption is even greater than 20TWH.

      Australia, with a population similar to that of North Korea generates 240TWH.

      Do we bring North Koreans up to our standard of living, or go back and join them at their level of power consumption?

      Tony.

      70

  • #
    pat

    Steyer’s good, clean money!

    22 May: Politico: ANDREW RESTUCCIA: Steyer’s PAC targets 7 races for November
    Liberal billionaire Tom Steyer is launching on-the-ground operations to aid Democrats and attack Republicans in seven Senate and gubernatorial races in the midterm elections, all part of his $100 million effort to make climate change a prime campaign issue.
    The former hedge fund executive’s super PAC, NextGen Climate Action, is targeting the Senate races in Colorado, Iowa, Michigan and New Hampshire and the governor’s races in Florida, Maine and Pennsylvania, according to NextGen officials who briefed reporters for the first time Wednesday about the scope of the group’s plans.
    It could become one of the most expensive pro-environment campaigns in U.S. history…
    Steyer’s multistate push will be the biggest test yet of whether Democrats can take advantage of the freewheeling outside spending wrought by Citizens United, which until now has been wielded most prominently by Republican benefactors like industrialists Charles and David Koch. But his involvement will also provoke a furious counterattack from the GOP, which is already lambasting Democrats as hypocrites who curry favor with Steyer yet demonize the Kochs.
    ***The group’s approach will include reaching out to young, female and minority voters most affected by the threat of climate change…
    ***“This is the year, in our view, where we’re able to demonstrate that you can use climate, if you do it well and you do it in a smart way, as a wedge issue to win political races,” (Chris) Lehane (veteran Democratic operative who serves as Steyer’s top political adviser) said…
    But he said he’s taking cues from past political and cultural fights, including the country’s shifts in attitudes about gay marriage and smoking.
    “The one common denominator when you look at all of those is that change occurred once those issues were defined in moral terms, as right versus wrong, and then used within our political system as a wedge issue,” Lehane said.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/steyers-pac-targets-seven-races-for-november-106979.html?hp=l3

    22 May: Bloomberg: Toluse Olorunnipa: Alabama’s Climate Change Deniers Refuse to Save the State
    Even as the federal government’s new National Climate Assessment cautions that storm surges may one day leave coastal communities such as Mobile under as much as 25 feet of water, state leaders persist in saying global warming is a sham and resist spending money to prepare for it. Trip Pittman, a Republican state senator who represents Baldwin County on the east side of Mobile Bay, calls federal research on climate change“bad science” and “fear-mongering.” Spending millions based on such predictions doesn’t make sense, he says. “What are the costs of us going on these crusades, these environmental crusades?”says Pittman. “We’ve elevated environmentalism into some kind of religion.” …
    As chairman of the state senate’s education budget committee, Pittman directed money to the University of Alabama in Huntsville to fund research by John Christy, a climate scientist who has testified before Congress denouncing claims of man-made climate change. Christy, who is also Alabama’s official climatologist, says it isn’t worth fretting over. “We count the tornadoes, we count hurricanes,” he says. “None of those are increasing. Floods are not increasing.”Governor Robert Bentley, who didn’t respond to requests for comment, hasn’t taken a strong position on climate change, allowing the majority of legislators who deny it’s a problem to take the lead on the issue…
    Global warming “scares the heck out of me,” says Tricia Kerr, a 30-year resident of Dauphin Island. “The island doesn’t drain very well,” she says while working at the Sand Box, a gift shop she owns. “The island is saturated.” The Transportation Department study says surges from future hurricanes will submerge“nearly all” of the barrier island, where residents reach houses on stilts by a single two-lane road a few feet above sea level. About 50 miles east, April flooding washed out roads in Perdido Beach. Mayor Patsy Parker, a member of President Obama’s State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, says she’s starting to believe climate change is causing weather anomalies in her community of 598 residents, including a recent rainfall that produced a tidal flood of about six feet. “We have to pay attention now,” she says…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-22/alabama-s-climate-change-deniers-refuse-to-save-the-state.html?cmpid=yhoo

    20

  • #
  • #
    pat

    22 May: UK Telegraph: Emily Gosden: Fracking planned for Tory heartlands as report reveals billions of barrels of shale oil in southern England
    Report to show vast potential for shale oil in the South as ministers unveil planned law change to allow fracking under homes without owners’ permission
    Vast areas of southern England will on Friday be identified by the Government as targets for fracking, with ministers also announcing that energy companies will be allowed to frack under homes without owners’ permission.
    A British Geological Survey study of the South, spanning from Wiltshire to Kent and including the South Downs National Park, will be published, mapping out the likely location of billions of barrels of shale oil.
    Ministers are also preparing to publish controversial plans to change the laws of trespass to give energy companies an automatic right to frack beneath homes and private land – even if owners object.
    They hope that the introduction of fracking to Britain will spark an energy revolution which will drive down household bills as has happened in America.
    Both announcements come on the day results of the local elections are revealed, leading to claims that the Government is attempting to bury controversial news…
    In a blow for Michael Fallon, the energy minister who will unveil the plans, the chairman of his own constituency party said he did not think he could support fracking under homes without owners’ consent.
    Gary Williamson, chairman of Sevenoaks Conservative Association – which lies within the BGS study area – said he would be “uneasy” about the plan because “an Englishman’s home has always been his castle”…
    The report will be controversial because it includes most of the South Downs National Park and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The National Trust has called for fracking to be banned in National Parks, while Tory peer Lord Howell – the Chancellor’s father-in-law – has claimed fracking should not take place in the South and would lose thousands of Tory votes…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/fracking/10850529/Fracking-planned-for-Tory-heartlands-as-report-reveals-billions-of-barrels-of-shale-oil-in-southern-England.html

    will the above “billions” need to be revised eventually?

    22 May: Bloomberg: EIA Cuts Monterey Shale Estimates on Extraction Challenges
    By Naureen S. Malik and Zain Shauk
    The Energy Information Administration slashed its estimate of recoverable reserves from California’s Monterey Shale by 96 percent, saying oil from the largest U.S. formation will be harder to extract than previously anticipated.
    “Not all reserves are created equal,” EIA AdministratorAdam Sieminski told reporters at the Financial Times and Energy Intelligence Oil & Gas Summit in New York today. “It just turned out it’s harder to frack that reserve and get it out of the ground.”
    The Monterey Shale is now estimated to hold 600 million barrels of recoverable oil, down from a 2012 projection of 13.7 billion barrels, John Staub, a liquid fuels analyst for the EIA, said in a phone interview…
    “This downgrade fundamentally changes the risk-reward calculation when it comes to unconventional oil development in our state,” Jayni Foley Hein, executive director of the Berkeley Center for Law, Energy and the Environment, said in a statement from the group CAFrackFacts. “Given that the industry’s promised economic benefits are not likely to materialize, the state should take a hard look at the impacts that oil development has on public health, safety and the environment.”
    The revised figures come from new evidence accumulated by the EIA and the U.S. Geological Survey, Sieminski said.Occidental Petroleum Corp. (OXY), based in Los Angeles, controls 2.3 million acres in California — an area 12 times the size of New York City — including vast portions of the Monterey Shale that have so far frustrated attempts to extract commercial quantities of crude.
    The company announced in February plans to spin California operations off into a separate publicly traded company, a move likely hastened by poor results in the Monterey, said Leo Mariani, an Austin, Texas-based analyst for RBC Capital Markets…
    “They’ve certainly made comments that it wasn’t working out like they thought and they weren’t getting the economics and returns that they had once hoped for,” said Mariani, who rates the company at the equivalent of a hold. “Certainly several years ago there was a lot of hope for these assets.” Occidental referred questions on the revised reserves estimate to the Western States Petroleum Association.
    “What is lost in the conversation, at times, is the fact that all the oil is still there and we always have believed and continue to believe that the members of our association possess all the necessary experience and knowledge to figure out how to unlock that,” Tupper Hull, a spokesman for the group, said in a phone interview. “When that happens, no one knows.” …
    The EIA revised the Monterey estimate before, dropping it from 15.4 billion barrels to 13.7 billion in 2012.
    New production methods may eventually unlock the formation and make it possible to economically extract the resources, Sieminski said. “The rock is there, the technology isn’t there.”
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-21/eia-cuts-monterey-shale-estimates-on-extraction-challenges-1-..html

    20

  • #
    pat

    ***Tristan throws “dysfunctional” Govts in “Africa and other developing countries” under the bus for the sake of taxpayer-subsidised “guinea pig” Rio & other Big Miners! will ABC/Fairfax declare him “racist”?

    22 May: Business Spectator: Tristan Edis: Rio Tinto agrees to be the off-grid solar guinea pig
    Ingenero in conjuction with First Solar will build a 1.7 megawatt solar PV project to serve Rio Tinto’s remote Weipa bauxite mining operation and associated town.
    This will subsequently be expanded in a second stage to a total of 6.7 MW with some energy storage technology included (design of the energy storage component is yet to be determined). The project will be built with almost half the capital cost covered by support from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, which is slated to be shut down by the Federal Government…
    So what, you might ask? Last year Australia installed around 850 MW of solar PV and the year prior they installed over 1000 MW…
    The first 1.7 MW stage of the project is expected to offset 20 per cent of existing diesel-generated electricity, during the middle of the day. The second stage with energy storage included is expected to be able to generate 100 per cent of Weipa’s needs in the middle of the day, completely supplanting diesel use with sunlight…
    What does a piddling 1.7 MW, or even 6.7 MW, matter?
    Africa is why…
    And this project is certainly aimed at breaking open that market in the short term…
    Why don’t these people have electricity? Well, it’s not for absence of coal or hydro or oil…
    And the World Bank has been very willing to lend countries money to help rollout electricity supply…
    Coal, hydro and even gas-fired power aren’t that cheap unless you can build the power plants at large scale of several hundred megawatts…
    ***This kind of scale and organisation can’t be supported by the quality of governance in place in much of Africa and indeed across a large proportion of the developing world.
    Contrary to the rantings of Bjorn Lomborg and the Minerals Council that an obsession with renewable energy will leave Africa in the dark, it may offer a more realistic and faster route to electrification.
    ***This is because renewable energy technology – and in particular solar PV – with its smaller, more modular scale, could allow communities in Africa and other developing countries to bypass dysfunctional governments in order to gain electricity…
    In reality there are myriad solar-diesel hybrid systems out there that demonstrate that reliability is not an issue. According to Curtis (First Solar’s vice president of business development for the Asia-Pacific, Jack Curtis), he believes that you could have solar PV systems supplying up to 70 per cent of load without any issues over power reliability and without any need for battery storage.
    But no mining company has so far been keen to be the guinea pig.
    This project is expected to finally put those concerns to rest. Especially given that Rio Tinto, one of the biggest and most respected miners in the world, is the customer. Also, you can’t get much more mission critical than having solar supply 100 per cent of electrical load in the middle of the day…
    In addition he said that he would be “very, very surprised” if this solar project was a one-off for Rio Tinto.
    I found this optimism quite surprising given that $11.3 million of the $23.4 million project has been funded from government money via ARENA, which is slated to be closed down…
    In the end the economics will become too compelling in his view…
    http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2014/5/22/solar-energy/rio-tinto-agrees-be-grid-solar-guinea-pig

    20

  • #

    Ross May 23, 2014 at 10:16 am · Reply

    Are the times changing somewhat ? Who would believe the Washington Post would print a piece like this ??
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/05/08/the-insiders-five-reasons-voters-dont-believe-the-white-house-about-global-warming.

    patience: THe Alamists are way over the hill! Time to get up your wagon selling Alarmist burgers, with your choice of sauce, Can you imagine the profit from a burger, made from the nearby roasting, and barbecuing of a notible Anthropogenic arrogant academic. Sorry if your pets and children throw up!

    20

  • #
  • #
    pat

    a lesson for La Trobe’s Benjamin Habib!

    Local Government Secretary, Eric Pickles in a pickle of sorts:

    19 May: UK Telegraph: Matthew Holehouse: Eric Pickles, minister for darkness, overruled on street lights
    Police order streetlights in Essex back on after crime wave, after Pickles claimed darkness deters burglars
    Eric Pickles faces embarrassment after police ordered street lights to be switched back on in his constituency, weeks after he insisted darkening streets cuts crime…
    It comes weeks after Mr Pickles, the Communities Secretary, said he “loves” having street lights turned off and claimed the darkness deters burglars because they like “ambient light”.
    Two thirds of councils have dimmed or switched off street lights in order to save money…
    Mr Pickles last month defended the policy to angered Conservative councillors in nearby Basildon, saying the council had been “immensely brave”.
    “In a time when we are on the cusp with regards to our electricity supply, we can’t have lights burning all night on the off chance someone wants to get out and do aerobics at 3am.
    “I love it because I am economy-minded. It’s saving a phenomenal amount of money, it’s decreased crime because burglars love ambient lighting, it’s nice to see the night sky and, as someone who lives in a main street that has had its lights cut off, I can get a good night’s sleep,” he said…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10840210/Eric-Pickles-minister-for-darkness-overruled-on-street-lights.html

    00