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

Climate change will hit “Everywhere” harder than “rest of world”

The Prophets of Doom are still at  The Guardian (and the CSIRO)

Climate change will hit Australia harder than rest of world, study shows

The first paragraph contains the word “could”. It’s all a guess based on models they already know are broken:

Australia could be on track for a temperature rise of more than 5C by the end of the century, outstripping the rate of warming experienced by the rest of the world, unless drastic action is taken to slash greenhouse gas emissions, according to the most comprehensive analysis ever produced of the country’s future climate.

But wait, will Australia — a rich, low population country with a temperate climate and surrounded by ocean — really be hit harder than the polar regions, the poor, those closest to rising seas and those living in cyclone zones?

A new website called ClimateChangePredictions is keeping track of the “hardest hit” predictions and can’t find a consensus on this one:

“Rural Australians will be the hardest hitby climate change according to Professor Steve Vanderheiden from the Charles Sturt University (CSU)”

“Sydney’s urban areas to be hit hardest by global warming” — ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Sytem Science

“Climate change is faster and more severe in the Arctic than in most of the rest of the world”

There seems to be consensus in the developed world that Africa will be the hardest hit or most affected region, due to anthropogenic climate change.

Bangladesh is one of the hardest hit nations by the impacts of climate change.

Maldives is the most at-risk country in South Asia from climate change impacts”

“…climate change is likely to have the strongest impact on Scandinavian countries such as Denmark, Norway and Sweden”

Bulgaria, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece are the countries that would be worst affected by global warming, according to a European Union report.”

China’s Poor Farmers Hit Hardest by Climate Change.

Middle East, African Countries to Be Hardest Hit by Climate Change

The environment organization Germanwatch compiled a climate risk index. At the top of the 2011 ranking is Thailand.

Vietnam is likely to be among the countries hardest hit by climate change…

So the real question is, where won’t be “hit hardest” by climate change (apart from Tasmania). Can anyone find a headline saying “Climate Change will benefit ______ region?”

 

Brad R adds in comments that Tom Nelson did an earlier list of a similar kind.

Ian H points out a headline of climate change benefits  Siberian agriculture could benefit from climate change

Jo says: Great! That’s one positive headline on a small site called Environmental Research Web versus 5000 catastrophic headlines in the MSM. Good-o.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.2/10 (121 votes cast)
Climate change will hit "Everywhere" harder than "rest of world", 9.2 out of 10 based on 121 ratings

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

298 comments to Climate change will hit “Everywhere” harder than “rest of world”

  • #
    john karajas

    No wait! Because of a sea water sample newly taken off the East Antarctic Ice Sheet, this area COULD melt dramatically and inundate the planet with a rise in sea water levels. This has to be researched on an URGENT basis. Just give money.

    570

    • #
      aussieguy

      A senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.
      -San Jose Mercury News; 30th June, 1989.


      2015 => We’re still here!

      …And of course, this Noel Brown still works in the circles of the United Nations.
      => http://www.globalpeaceconvention.org/about/96-dr-noel-brown.html

      Just look through his background and notice the pattern. (Useless collection of degrees, academic/intellectual, writes papers/books with ideas that don’t work in the real world, always involved in activist-type organisations, NO scientific background, etc)…He’s an activist with academic credentials; to look like he is someone of authority! Just like all those others I’ve previously looked at in past posts on this website! They are the only ones pushing Climate Change as they are financial beneficiaries of the funding!


      So the general pattern is…
      (1) Make a bold claim.
      (2) Spread it out via compliant news media. (Modern Journalism is a joke now. Actual investigating is a rare activity).
      (3) Pick up cheque from taxpayer via compliant Govt or donations from clueless corporations who wish to pay for their “eco-sins” Receive funding.
      (4) Back to step (1)


      I get it now. Climate Change isn’t about science. Its activism…Where career activists are profitting from the power and money they acquire through exaggerations and fear mongering. Its not about “solving” problems. Its about creating problems, where they are the solution provider. If they drag it out (don’t actually solve anything), it becomes a professional career and an endless income stream!

      You know what would be interesting? If one is able to audit them via the tax office. I am really curious who specifically gives them money and where it really goes.

      660

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        A senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.
        -San Jose Mercury News; 30th June, 1989.

        aussieguy,

        That quote says all that needs to be said.

        You know what would be interesting? If one is able to audit them via the tax office. I am really curious who specifically gives them money and where it really goes.

        And if you can figure out how to make that happen in Australia let me know because I’d like to try the same thing here.

        300

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        I noticed on Monday that one of the commercial channels ( it was one of those useless 6:30pm time slot sensationalist “news” programs )did a special on how the Antarctic ice was melting.

        I was with my intelligent in-laws at the time, ever people who prefer to listen to “authority” figures first always, then argue the point after, and I mentioned to them how that tv show says the ice is melting, however it doenst mention there are active volcanoes under the Antarctic ice….

        Crickets chirping……

        I do think, however, to be fair, they registered the one-sidedness of the report after I had mentioned it.

        However, had I not been there…..

        The problem is if 80-90% of the population arent into science, nor possibly that bright and/or are not schooled in the reality that propaganda has replaced news, they are easy targets.

        260

        • #
          Formerly

          I saw a similar story on Sunrise (my wife has it on in the morning – I do not make a practice of watching!) David Koch was trying to get the scientist to link the melting of a glacier to MMCC but the scientist refused to state that it was as a result of MMCC, saying there is no previous data to compare the current data against.

          50

          • #
            toorightmate

            They would sure get very large if the ice didn’t melt.

            30

            • #
              the Griss

              If Ice didn’t melt, an Ice Age would eventuate very quickly !!

              Then we would be in trouble !!

              40

              • #
                ExWarmist

                Just being a tad pedantic here.

                We are actually in an Ice Age now, we are in an “inter-glacial” period, waiting for the next Glacial period to start. The Glacial periods are the dominant feature of our current ice age lasting approx 70K to 100K years each, while the interglacials are typically approx 12K years.

                So we are due to end soon…ish.

                REF: Quaternary Glaciation

                30

        • #
          Byron

          how the Antarctic ice was melting

          I’ve posted it before but it’s worth repeating I like to quote/reference Zwally et al 2012 ( 49gt a year net gain ) as it preempts the usual alarmist responses of an argumentum ad verecundiam and argumentum ad hominem

          1)”Well that can’t be right , the study must come from somewhere nobody’s ever heard of ”
          It’s from NASA , You have heard of NASA haven’t You ?

          2)”Well that can’t be right , it must come from some climate denier in the pay of big oil ” etc.
          The lead author is Jay Zwally , the guy who said the Arctic would be ice free in 2012

          40

      • #
        john karajas

        THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK:

        “Stark figures but no surprises in updated climate change predictions from CSIRO, Bureau of Meteorology
        Anna Vidot, Wednesday January 28, 2015 – 11:15 EDT
        ABC image
        Paddocks in drought near Dubbo, NSW. The CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology’s updated climate change projections point to warmer and drier average conditions across southern Australian agricultural regions into the future. – ABC
        The CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology say updated climate change predictions confirm what they’ve been saying for years.

        The agencies’ show Australia is on track for increasingly extreme weather as the climate is affected by greenhouse gas emissions.

        Researchers say climate science and modelling has become more sophisticated and detailed since the agencies released their last joint climate change projection study in 2007.

        Senior CSIRO research scientist Kevin Hennessy said the data brought together for the 2015 update provided no surprises.

        “These new projections are consistent with what we said back in 2007,” he said.

        “One of the key findings is that a warmer climate there’ll be more extremely high temperatures and fewer colder temperatures.

        That warming is expected to be more pronounced in inland areas, which miss out on the buffer provided by the oceans.

        Mr Hennessy said Dubbo, in central west New South Wales, currently records about 22 days above 35 degrees each year.

        “By the year 2030 that could increase to between 26 and 37. If we go out to the end of the century, that could be around 49 to 85 days per year if we follow high emissions,” he said.

        The report also confirms earlier projections that rainfall over southern Australia, with the exception of Tasmania, will decrease.

        Mr Hennessy said the amount of evidence pointing to decreasing rainfall from Perth to southern NSW was ‘very clear’.

        “In south-west Western Australia, where there’s already been a warming and a drying, more of that is likely to occur in the future, particularly in winter and spring, where we can see projected [rainfall] decreases by the end of the century of up to 45 per cent of all,” he said.

        But both the ‘direction and magnitude of change’ to rainfall patterns across the Top End remained unclear.

        “Some models suggest an increase in rainfall, some models suggest a decrease,” Mr Hennessy said.

        “We have low confidence in northern Australian rainfall change, because some of the models still grapple with some of the important rainfall-forming processes.”

        That included uncertainty around the impact of tropical cyclone activity on northern rainfall.

        The CSIRO/Bureau of Meteorology report found that the number of tropical cyclones was set to decrease, but cyclones that did form were likely to be more intense.

        Meanwhile, the CSIRO’s Dr Wenju Cai published research in the journal Nature Climate Change this week, showing climate models indicated an increase in the frequency of extreme La Nina events.

        He earlier published research pointing to an increase in extreme El Nino events.

        La Nina typically brings cooler and wetter conditions to eastern Australia, including flooding. El Nino typically results in hotter and drier conditions in the east, including drought.

        Mr Hennessy said the interaction between changes in average climate, and increasing frequency of extreme events, showed Australia needs to work out how it is going to prepare for and manage its climate into the future.

        “These new projections provide an evidence base for an assessment of potential impacts and what we need to do to reduce emissions, so we can slow global warming, and, secondly, adapt and try to manage these changes as they occur,” he said.

        “One of the clear messages from this report is, in addition to warmer conditions with some drying in southern Australia, there’s also going to be an increase in extreme daily rainfall intensity.

        “That, combined with increased evaporation, provides all sorts of different implications for agriculture.

        “You might consider new crop varieties, more efficient irrigation, more flexible farm management and different types of food storage and preservation, early warning systems, so farmers can prepare well in advance, and better emergency response and recovery so we can deal with these events as they occur.”

        Mr Hennessy said the data suggested that at least a 2-degree increase in global average temperatures was unavoidable at this point, and farmers and water managers would have to adapt accordingly.

        “Beyond that, what we do to reduce emissions in the next couple of decades really matters,” he said.

        “If we can change to a path that is relatively low emissions, we will avoid some of the worst impacts.

        “If on the other hand we don’t do much to reduce emissions, we’re looking at a warming of up to 5 degrees in Australia, with significant implications.”
        DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN ISN’T IT?

        40

      • #
        Ian Hill

        A senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.
        -San Jose Mercury News; 30th June, 1989.

        Two things happened – no nation was wiped off the face of the earth and global warming had stopped by 2000, which has to happen before it can “reverse”. Therefore, Dr Brown could claim his prophecy was not untrue. One tiny problem: carbon dioxide had nothing to do with it. Oops!

        50

      • #
        Robert

        They really are a bunch of drama queens aren’t they?

        First, someone needs to show me something that has been “wiped off the face of the earth” since I’m tired of those silly word games. Were it to happen the people would relocate, the land would still be there only submerged, it has happened before and will happen again I suspect. Nations have risen and fallen for numerous reasons over the centuries but whatever happened to them they weren’t “wiped off the face of the earth.”

        Even the dinosaur extinction didn’t cause them to be “wiped off the face of the earth” as their remains are found in the earth and proof of that is in any museum of natural history.

        Grandiose emotional posturing… Like I said, drama queens.

        20

      • #
        albert

        Al Gore said the Arctic wound be ice and bear free by 2005, then as the ice persisted he altered it to 2013 and now, SILENCE ! Why are our children taught this cr*p at school and Uni ?

        30

    • #
      Dennis

      Picnics on the Sydney Harbour ice could become fashionable too

      190

  • #
    Crakar24

    Its a bit like that stand up comedy duo with “Who’s on first” isnt it.

    210

  • #
    janama

    “with a continuing warming world” – “It’s just basic physics”
    These were two quotes from a CSIRO spokesperson I heard on the radio driving home today!

    250

  • #

    97% incompetence. Just what do the competent 3% have to say?

    310

  • #
    Leonard Lane

    More catastrophic and frightening predictions and hype, the more the money rolls in. These predictions will/ or have cover everywhere where money is to be had. To the richest western donors it is Africa, se Asia, Latin America to tug at heartstrings (as they are threatening the lives and livelihood of these same people by tying aid to renewable energy sources, i.e. solar and wind). At the same time these “rich” countries are threatened with disasters in their own countries. A double whammy of wealth to roll into the global warming shysters.

    Have to make hay while the sun shines before the scam finally ends. Meanwhile, in the backrooms of those taxpayer funded institutions the planners are working on the next Marxists plan after global warming to keep the money and the wheels of world governance rolling.

    450

    • #
      King Geo

      “Have to make hay while the sun shines before the scam finally ends” – LL you have hit the nail on the head.

      SC24 is now heading into its 2nd Phase – 5 to 6 years of plummeting “Solar Activity” – but the problem for the “CAGW Religious Cult” is that the next SC (SC25) will be overwhelmed by the impending “Grand Minimum” – there is no stopping this natural event fellow Skeptics – well at least this is what many Solar Physicists are predicting – if anyone should know they should – the reality is that our ally the Sun is going to be our salvation, bring on the next LIA and make a total mockery of the “Warmists” ludicrous “CAGW Doctrine” and deep down they know it, ie “they have to make hay while the sun shines before the scam finally ends”.

      520

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        How do you know that IA will be L?

        100

        • #
          King Geo

          Ted’s question – “How do you know that IA will be L?”

          Because the Solar Physicists say so. The next IA will arrive eventually – perish the thought for our descendants – ~ 100,000 years of shivering cold – spare a thought for those living in Manhattan today with those terrible blizzards – a taste of what is coming, not every so often, but all the time. As you may know, during the last IA, glaciers reached Manhattan during the Wisconsin Glacial Episode – you can find glacial grooves in schist bedrock outcrops in Central Park, not that far from John Lennon’s “Strawberry Fields Memorial”.

          160

          • #
            King Geo

            Ted’s question – “How do you know that IA will be L?”

            Because the Solar Physicists say so. The next IA (Ice Age) will arrive eventually – perish the thought for our descendants – ~ 100,000 years of shivering cold – even today those living in Manhattan are experiencing terrible snow blizzards – a taste of what is coming in the next LIA? As you may know, during the last IA, glaciers reached where Manhattan is now located, during the Wisconsin Glacial Episode – you can find glacial grooves in metamorphic schist bedrock outcrops located in the southern part of Central Park. I visited these outcrops back in late September, 2010.

            81

            • #
              King Geo

              #5.1.1.1. was put under moderation for some time, why I am not sure, but anyway I sent #5.1.1.1.1 after making some changes. It is good to see the moderators are keeping a close eye on our comments – better to be safe than sorry.

              70

            • #
              Phil R

              Not to be nit-picky, but schist by definition (and genesis) is metamorphic. :)

              40

              • #
                King Geo

                I know that Phil R but when # 5.1.1.1 was put under moderation I inserted metamorphic in front of schist in #5.1.1.1.1 suspecting that maybe the moderator misinterpreted schist for another similar sounding word, ie sh…

                After visiting the schist outcrop I then walked to John Lennon’s “Strawberry Fields Memorial” – a very gneiss, I mean nice Memorial.

                90

            • #
              Phil R

              Got it, your last comment did not pop up (for me anyway) until my comment was posted. Been to Central Park but never seen Lennon’s memorial.

              50

              • #

                It was looking like Central Park was going to be under heavy snow today, but the weather apparently fooled the meterologists again. Travel bans were lifted and the snow was far less than the 2 to 3 feet expected. Connecticut and Massechuttes did not fair as well.

                80

      • #
        Manfred

        The glaciers will be grinding and cracking their way down Wall Street and they’ll tell us from their new air con offices in downtown Nairobi Kenya that the ‘adjusted’ data still suggests an underlying trend of ‘global warming’. They will never admit that they were simplistic in analysis or just plain wrong. There is no exit strategy. There only remains the route to diminishing relevance and lessening political credibility. The MSM will quietly slither onto whatever.

        20

  • #

    What’s a “Centre for Excellence”? So often I hear something manipulative and shoddy and it comes out of a “Centre for Excellence”.

    I’m not surprised a Centre for Excellence is most concerned about urban Sydney. One bad coffee harvest in Brazil can really rock that lot.

    440

    • #
      Another Ian

      mosomoso

      January 27, 2015 at 3:47 pm · Reply

      What’s a “Centre for Excellence”? So often I hear something manipulative and shoddy and it comes out of a “Centre for Excellence”.

      It’s like that Quality Assurance that was found not to assure quality

      200

      • #
        Peter Carabot

        Love that one! Quality assurance was invented in Brisbane by Energex, or one of the other various names that they go under, it has nothing to do with “Quality” and all to do with standardizing paperwork. This way every company will put the date in the same precise spot and likewise for the invoice number etc.
        The Girl Friday was having a terrible time finding the details on the Non-Quality-Assured Invoices!!!
        Subsequently it morphed into a monster of a system that was controlling just about everything in an office and required any company that wanted to institute such a system, just to be able to supply Government entities, to appoint another one or two people only to look after and administer the system!!! Great Job creation program, did it do anything else? NO! Just a complete pubic servant system designed to drive every accountant and CEO around the bend, enrich paper sellers, create good profits for photocopier supplier, increase the supply of Valium and bugger all else.

        121

    • #
      Joe V.

      Isn’t such aspirational naming more to do with making its members feel good about themselves while having something to live up to ?

      It will probably fool a few gullible souls, but hopefully it might raise standards too in some small way.

      I shouldn’t think its as effective as naming an institution after some truly great figure though, where there is much less scope for confusion between the being and the aspiring.

      Like the UNSW “We (think we) Are The Greatest” Climate Research Centre vs. the Galileo Movement , for instance.

      70

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        … it might raise standards too in some small way.

        Actually Joe, I have found that the opposite occurs. If you work for a “Centre for Excellence”, the quality of your work is the best it can be, by definition.

        Therefore, there is no incentive to find ways to improve the services you offer. In fact, you can produce garbage in the sure knowledge that the garbage you produce, could not be better garbage.

        110

    • #
      Dennis

      Is that where the 1980s book In Search Of Excellence came from? I received a copy with the cover changed by a comedian colleague who had added: “The Search Continues”.

      80

  • #
    Glen Michel

    Just so predictable and I’ve got to go around and debrief all the freaked out children( and adults). More bullshit from the usual suspects with a melange of flimsy predictions.

    320

  • #
    Brad R

    Some years ago when Tom Nelson compiled a similar list, I observed that the only place that never appears to be “hardest hit” is Russia.

    I haven’t yet seen that it a headline, though.

    310

  • #
    tom0mason

    So all the $billions spent on climate research, and $billions spent on super computers, and $billions spent on very expensive meetings in exotic locations, and all they can say is ‘could’, ‘should’, ‘might’, ‘maybe’, ‘well if’, …etc. Whose $billions are they spending?

    Call that value for money? I don’t.

    Payment by results is the change that is required. I am 100% (+/- 0.0001% error) confident this would improve things – No valid results, no payment!

    No taxation without representation!

    300

  • #
    Pete

    Say, Pa, could ya help scare us up some munny? We only got four trips abroad last year, and research funs are down to $120K…

    300

  • #
    manalive

    The report is financed by ‘the Department of the Environment through the NRM Planning for Climate Change Fund with co-funding from CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology’.
    If their findings are so “robust” why do they find it necessary to have the rider:

    Information at this site:
    is general information provided as part of CSIRO’s statutory role in the dissemination of information relating to scientific and technical matters
    is not professional, scientific, medical, technical or expert advice
    is subject to the usual uncertainties of advanced scientific and technical research
    may not be accurate, current or complete
    is subject to change without notice
    should never be relied on as the basis for doing or failing to do something …
    You accept all risks and responsibility for losses, damages, costs and other consequences resulting directly or indirectly from using this site and any information or material available from it.
    To the maximum permitted by law, CSIRO excludes all liability to any person arising directly or indirectly from using this site and any information or material available from it.

    550

    • #

      They have to say that because in Queensland there is a Professional Engineers Act that requires anyone who provides an engineering service when not registered commits a crimminal offense. Engineering includes thermodynamics, heat& mass transfer, process measurement and control, materials handling etc. Engineering services include design, supervision, and assessment of engineering data (eg rainfall & runoff, wind loading, sealevel and sea surges etc)
      Queensland also has a Public Sector Ethics Act which also comes under the criminal codes. This applies not only to the Public Sector but to Universities & other education establishments funded in part by the government, local government, and to contractors (eg CSIRO and BOM) supplying services to the mentioned establishments mentioned in regulations. Breaches of state laws and regulations are also breaches under the Public Sector Ethics Act.
      It is unfortunate that people like John Cook and the many “green” agitators against CSG, mines on the central coast, etc have not been taken to court. At least they could have been made to tell the truth in court or jailed for perjury. Prof Ian Lowe (past president of ACF) was found to have exaggerated by 13 times in a 2007 law case. He should have been charged with perjury instead he has been allowed to continue to spread lies for “green” politicaal purposes. He could then and since also have been charged with breaches of the Public Sector Ethics Act.

      400

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        Questions over coal seam gas? We haven’t heard the half of it.
        The Case of The Phantom Fracking Chemical:

        The company said the chemical BTEX was found in a sample of flowback water, taken from two of the wells and an above-ground tank.

        But the company said it can categorically state BTEX was not in any of the hydraulic fracturing fluids used in their pilot operation.

        Is AGL fibbing or were they the target of green sabotage? Where is the Poirot of envirocrime?

        160

        • #
          pattoh

          Salted samples?

          90

          • #
            Byron

            Not unheard of for the usual suspects , I believe there was an anti-duck hunting protest a few years back where a number of protected waterfowl which were dumped for the protest were found to have been in a deep freezer for about 9 months prior . Which , apart from the lack of birdshot in the bodies made the protesters claim that They had been shot at the opening of duck season a few days earlier somewhat dubious to say the least .

            30

        • #
          Peter Carabot

          The thought has crossed my mind. Is this BTEX hard to get? If so should be easy to trace back.

          90

        • #
          tom0mason

          Could this just the usual “It’s a chemical so it must be bad” school of journalism? No questions or definition of BTEX or where it could come from appart from the fracking.

          Maybe someone just spilled some petroleum…

          “BTEX is an acronym that stands for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes.[1] These compounds are some of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) found in petroleum derivatives such as petrol (gasoline). Toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes have harmful effects on the central nervous system.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BTEX

          20

          • #
            Byron

            So basically it’s naturally occurring petrochemicals , exactly what You’d expect to be present in natural or coal seam gas deposits so having it turn up in the flowback water is entirely normal .

            30

    • #
      Peter Miller

      “CSIRO’s statutory role in the dissemination of information relating to scientific and technical matters is not professional…………..”

      Well, at least they got that bit right.

      150

  • #
    RB

    I searched for the exact predictions of Arhenius who actually thought that the extra warm would be of benefit to humans 9fend off the coming ice age). Found this gem instead.

    From LessWrong.com who describe themselves as “Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality.”

    They had this to say
    “Knut Ångström criticized Arrhenius’s claim on scientific grounds, giving a different model which predicted no climate change from increased carbon concentrations. My surface impression is that Arrhenius was a much more accomplished scientist than Knut Ångström was. To the extent that this is true, I think that Ångström’s view should be heavily discounted, but I haven’t investigated further. ”

    Angstrom was the one who actually went and measured how much IR energy is absorbed by CO2 compared to water and found that it was a lot less than assumed by Arrhenius. The scientific consensus was that Arrhenius was wrong, and he recalculated a 1.2°C increase for doubling of CO2 from a previous 5-6°C. I notice that our Centre of Excellence has gone back to what Arrhenius thought was wrong.

    370

  • #
    thingadonta

    If they bothered to look at history instead of a computer screen, the Medieval Warm period showed that Central America was one of the few places that experienced widespread drought and famine during warmer temperatures. Funny how nobody mentions this. Most other places actually fare better during warmer periods.

    I suppose there is just not enough money to be made out of Central American governments.

    280

    • #
      RogueElement451

      I think maybe that is not the point , the recently revealed fudging ,manipulation ,extrapolation and just plain old lies about the temperatures in South America , display their willingness to be receivers of global funds as several downtrodden nations cursed by the mostest evah global fraudulence.
      This fits nicely into the Green Agenda of whats mine is mine and whats yours is mine ,so lets distribute the wealth ,er , yours not mine.
      Hey if Africa can get its snout into the pig pail then why not all of those beleaguered Countries South of America?
      Follow the money is always good advice , I expect several other Countries to come out with false charts in order to get to the top of the pecking list, memememememeeeee!
      To be fair you can hardly blame them , they hear what the IPCC are saying , they hear the ravings of various politicians and figure ,this is a seriously easy touch.
      Nero fiddled whilst Rome burnt , every met office on Earth will be fiddling to ensure their share of the global doom bonanza!

      120

  • #
    Skeptik

    Why stop at 5C, make it worthwhile, 10 or even 15C, go the whole hog and hand out suicide pills for the paranoid.

    310

  • #
    Graham Richards

    The ever vigilant climate watcher, the ABC, had a real corker this morning.
    Some timid looking & sounding BOM officer telling us that that the much espoused El Nino weather event, has suddenly turned into the hated La Nina, you know the one that brings rain and good crops not to mention much needed cattle feed.
    And by the way these uninvited La Nina episodes are more dangerous than predicted ones. They can cause severe flooding…..do we have to put up with this crap.

    BOM, it’s called weather and you cannot control it, even with a big tax.
    ABC, it’s so far fetched it sounds as if you good folk make up these stories.

    471

    • #
      RB

      Read that on the ABC site. No mention that large floods in eastern Australia are not unprecedented and happen regularly even if decades apart. Analysis of trees on the banks of the lower Murray suggest a flood with 4 times as much water as the 1956 flood happened when Karl Benz was just still in shorts.

      230

  • #
    toorightmate

    Australia’s average temperature in the next 5 years could increase by 20 degrees.
    Australia’s temperature in the next 5 years could decrease by 79 degrees.
    The temperature on Mars could increase by 500 degrees TOMORROW.

    Why didn’t I take up journalism???
    I am quite adept at it.

    500

  • #
    Bob in Castlemaine

    The most annoying aspect of this vacuous rubbish that continues to emanate from CSIRO, BOM and other leftist dominated government funded institutions is that the ever diminishing number of productively employed Australians forced to fund it via their taxes have less and less say in how the money is spent.

    381

  • #
    James Bradley

    Here on the Southern Tablelands we are lighting up because it’s uncomfortably like winter, yet this time last year we sweltered through the normal 38c for this time of year.

    I can’t help thinking CSIRO/BoM have jumped the gun probably because this year will not end up as the ‘hottest evvvaaaa’ … again, and are trying to add fuel to the fires of discontent that just seems to plague our current government.

    I don’t say anything like conspiracy, but more like lefty buttholes in various agencies taking the opportunity for some cheap shots, I just wish Abbott would stop leading with his chin.

    350

    • #
      el gordo

      CSIRO/BoM don’t recognise cold air outbreaks (CAO).

      130

    • #
      the Griss

      “I just wish Abbott would stop leading with his chin.”

      He’s not just leading with his chin,

      no-one needs to throw a punch at him,

      he’s doing it all to himself !

      171

      • #
        Victor Ramirez

        I disagree. My view is that the MSM is jumping onto and strapping in upon the Left’s hate-all-things-Abbott bandwagon. Even right-wing commentators are joining the chorus of anti-Abbott irrational argument. What Abbott seems to lack is spine, as there’s no problem leading with your chin if its made of stone and your overhand right is devastating. For example, I understand (from a well-positioned insider) that he (privately) admits the folly in windfarms but lacks the courage to rein in MacFarlane and make a stand against the big green blobby cheer squad.

        50

    • #
      ROM

      James Bradley @ # 17

      You to!
      We have had ONE decent hot day this summer where I think it reached 42.7 or thereabouts on the 2nd Jan according to the BOM station at the junction of two large sealed runways out at Horsham’s airfield here in west Vic.

      The rest of the time has been a generally pleasant 26C to about 34 C, very much like autumn here.
      Last couple of days have been downright cold in the mornings.

      Shades of the 1970′s weather at least around here.

      For this 1938 vintage oldster it is very much a case of what that famous American baseball player, Yogi Berra once said ; It’s like deja-vu, all over again.

      180

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      Gas fire has been on up here in the Blue Mountains for the last two days. Hope we are contributing to Gerbal Worming. We could do with some! It’s Summer, for goodness sake!

      160

  • #
    Bob Malloy

    Tim Flannery 2007,

    “So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems.”

    Wenju Cai, of the CSIRO, 2015,

    “Climate change to cause twice as many severe floods in Australia”

    Maybe The Brisbane river will go back to pre 1900 levels, while the Bremer at Ipswich will reach it’s pre 1900 levels while maintaining the 1950 to 2010 frequency of flooding.

    Get it right fellows, if you don’t we plebes will stop believing you. Do they think no one out here has any ability to remember their past failed predictions? Then again our MSM never ask them to explain their ever changing predictions.

    320

    • #
      Lewis P Buckingham

      Right on Bob. I was musing about this apparent dichotomy between the drought predictors and the flood predictors and thought there may be a solution.
      Perhaps they could enter into a dialogue with a view to gaining a ‘consensus’.
      The answer would be neither extremes but business as ‘normal’ in climate, all they need do is widen the error bars and all the predictions will be found to come true.
      Um..just a minute…

      200

      • #
        Dariusz

        Their covering their arses, hedge both ways and you will never be wrong.
        Meanwhile give us more money so we can tell you the same story again in 5 years time. No more flannery mistakes.

        191

  • #
    handjive

    jonova asks:

    “So the real question is, where won’t be “hit hardest” by climate change (apart from Tasmania).

    Can anyone find a headline saying “Climate Change will benefit ______ region?”

    Yes!!?
    ~ ~ ~
    The Guardian, 11 June 2014:
    With a 90% chance of the global weather phenomenon (El Niño) striking this year, impacts both devastating and beneficial will be felt from India to Peru

    “But some regions could benefit, in particular the US, where El Niño is seen as the “great wet hope” whose rains could break the searing drought in the west.”
    ~ ~ ~
    USAtoday, December 5. 2014: California floods during worst drought in 1,200 years

    BBC, December 13, 2014: Mudslides and floods hit southern California

    ktLA, Dec 16, 2014: Flash-Flood Warning Issued for Parts of L.A. County as Storm Pelts Region
    . . .
    But Wait! More record warmth means more flooding (USAtoday)

    Global Warming causes drought AND flood. Simultaneously.

    Guess I couldn’t find any good news.

    230

  • #
    Robert O

    Isn’t New York getting ready for its biggest snowstorm for the year; mere fact not fiction.

    120

    • #
      el gordo

      More importantly, we have a trend.

      “Assuming this storm gets ranked by NOAA as one of the high impact (population affected by snowstorm) snowstorms (likely since the November storm was), we will have had 14 major impact storms this decade (only half over) beating out the 10 in the 1960s and 2000s,” Joseph D’Aleo, CCM (Certified Consulting Meteorologist), told Climate Depot on Monday.’

      110

    • #
      Dariusz

      They already talking about the catastrophic storm, dropping snow from their reports. A few days later they will talk about the catastrophic storm caused by the catastrophic climate change aka GW. Catastrophes everywhere, bring in the suicide pills for the gullible, the celebrities and the money sluts. Thanks for the suggestion SKEPIK.

      70

  • #
    Yonniestone

    I can predict with the utmost certainty that climate change will ‘hit’ our wallets the hardest.

    It doesn’t stop there unfortunately with purses, handbags, bum bags, and even that little tray in the car with loose change will be ‘hit’ also.

    I’ve already experienced the ‘hit’ of climate change with a depressed economy, no work and a collapsing democracy, I believe we need to ‘hit’ back at climate change starting with the major causes, once these causes are eradicated climate change will disappear with wallets etc.. making a full recovery.

    Remember wallets love CO2.

    160

  • #
    pat

    anti-royal one minute, pro-royal the next. whatever suits the agenda:

    27 Jan: Guardian: Fiona Harvey: Prince Charles: global pact on climate change could be Magna Carta for Earth
    Prince of Wales said this year marked potentially the last chance to save the world from the perils of global warming
    He said this year marked potentially the “last chance” to save the world from the perils of global warming, with the Paris conference and the United Nations’ plan to replace the millennium development goals with a new set of sustainable development targets…
    His insistence that 2015 will be a make-or-break year for the climate, and environmental sustainability, were echoed by Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland and now the UN’s special envoy for climate change, charged with bringing nations together for a successful outcome at the Paris conference in December.
    She told the Guardian: “This is the most important year since 1945. In 1945, at the end of the second world war, we got the charter for the United Nations, the international institutions [that embodied it], the Marshall Plan, and a few years later we got the Universal Declaration of Human Rights…
    She added: “This is the most important year of my lifetime, for the sake of future generations and to see intergenerational justice. We cannot miss this opportunity.”…
    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/26/prince-charles-global-pact-climate-change-magna-carta-earth

    28 Jan: Australian: Cheryl Jones: Climate change to cause twice as many severe floods in Australia
    AUSTRALIA and its region will probably be hit by almost twice as many severe floods this century like the ones that devastated southeast Queensland four years ago, according to new research.
    An international team of scientists led by Wenju Cai, of the CSIRO, wanted to find out whether global climate change would affect the frequency of catastrophic flooding caused by extreme episodes of the La Nina weather pattern.
    They found that extreme La Nina phases would occur every 13 years as the planet warmed against a past frequency of only one every 23 years.
    They published their results in the British journal Nature Climate Change today…
    The scientists probed the future with 21 global climate models skilful at simulating extreme La Nina periods in the historical record. The work formed part of the big international science program, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5.
    The team compared the frequency of severe La Nina episodes between 1900 and 1999 with model projections for the frequency in the greenhouse world between 2000 and 2099…
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/climate-change-to-cause-twice-as-many-severe-floods-in-australia/story-e6frg6xf-1227197990872

    CSIRO forecasting La Nina weather patterns to double
    ABC Online-9 hours ago

    Extreme La Nina events set to increase
    ABC Online – ‎9 hours ago‎

    La Niñas on the rise in climate change double whammy
    New Scientist – ‎13 hours ago‎

    Global warming doubles risk of extreme La Nina event, study shows
    Phys.Org – ‎15 hours ago‎

    Global Warming May Lead to More Frequent La Nina Events: Study
    NBCNews.com – ‎15 hours ago‎
    The models don’t predict exactly when all of this will happen…

    130

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Extreme La Nina events set to increase’

      They know nothing, but are prepared to have an educated guess.

      ‘A paper published today in Geophysical Research Letters finds that El Ninos were more common during the frigid Little Ice Age, and conversely, La Ninas were more common during the Medieval and Roman Warm Periods. This finding is the opposite to claims by the IPCC and climate alarmists such as Kevin Trenberth that global warming, if it resumes, will make El Ninos more frequent.’

      Hockey Schtick 2014

      40

      • #
        Safetyguy66

        “but are prepared to have an educated guess.”

        Educated how and by what?

        30

        • #
          el gordo

          I sense the Klimatriat is moving the goal posts. It seems like only yesterday that the MWP and RWP were non events, but now the hiatus has them worried and they are adjusting.

          30

    • #
      Allen Ford

      “The Last Chance to Save The World” is shaping up to challenge “location X will be the hardest hit” in the exaggeration stakes. (I did a google on “last chance to save world from climate change” and got 19,200,000 hits!)

      One of the most prominent of recent times was from Lord Stern in the lead up to the Copenhagen Summit of 2009, trumping HRH by 6 years or so.

      I don’t have the time to chase up the remaining 19,199,999 contenders.

      20

    • #
      Len

      All part of the socialists plan to bring in totalitarianism. Useful idiots abound. Many exist in government organisations such as CSIRO.

      10

  • #

    They have to go flat out to beat up absolutely everything in the lead up to Paris because everything hinges on this:

    ETS

    I know that I’ve rabbitted on for years about this, but this is the whole crux of the matter.

    Read what is at this link. part of it says this: (my bolds)

    Annex II Parties are required to provide financial and technical support

    The method of enforcing this requirement is the introduction of an ETS. The money raised is what will be used for this purpose.

    So, Paris is their last best hope, as has been every meeting since Copenhagen, when they HAD to find a replacement for the time expired Kyoto Protocol, something which has consistently failed.

    The just HAVE to beat up absolutely everything between now and then in order to finally get their way.

    As I have said so often, any ETS is specifically designed only as a revenue raising exercise, and has nothing at all to do with actually lowering CO2 emissions, and all the other GHG’s as well, all of them with (dollar) multipliers from CO2 which has the base number of One.

    Introduce an ETS across those 24 Annex ll Countries and then it’s mission accomplished.

    The U.S. EPA has done the regulatory deed for CO2, and has now regulated Methane, (CO2 X 21) all aimed specifically at the introduction of an ETS, which will probably never get through Congress, but as per the President’s SOTU address, he’ll just do whatever he wants to do with his pen.

    While ever people believe that an ETS is an internal money raising exercise for the Country where it is introduced, it will always have traction.

    That money is specifically for the UN to distribute.

    An ETS CANNOT lower the emissions of CO2, or any other of those GHGs. At every step of the process it imposes dollar values only.

    An ETS is not paid by the emitting entities, because it is structured so those entities pass ALL their costs down to consumers, so it’s paid by the people.

    The only way any ETS can lower emissions is if those emissions cease completely, and there’s no way known any political party in power will shut down those power plants. They will be kicked out of Office so quickly, their feet won’t touch the ground. Those power plants are the greatest source of all emissions. The UN is safe in that knowledge that they won’t shut them down, so they know that there will always be a source of monumentally huge amounts of money, and that’s why the economists and bankers are moving into the Climate area of the UN.

    Because all of this is only aimed at those 24 already most Developed Countries, then they have to make ….. THEM, all the people in those Countries feel guilty for what they have, and to place pressure on their Governments to, umm, look after those poorer Developing Countries, hence the huge campaign to beat up absolutely everything they can.

    It has nothing to do with GHG emissions.

    It’s only (and always has been) about the money.

    Tony.

    460

    • #
      Dennis

      Considering the previous Labor government plan to join the EU ETS with our tax monies and the leftist agenda for a UN based, as former Greens leader Bob Brown explained to a National Press Club luncheon before he left the Senate, “a world parliament” and no sovereign borders, I wonder if the EU ETS agenda is part of that? And recently on ABC 7.30 Report Labor leader Bill Shorten was forced to admit that if Labor is returned to government they will re-introduce a carbon tax as an ETS.

      110

  • #
    mmxx

    The damaging effects of category 4 and 5 cyclones in Australia in recent years have slid off the alarmists scare sheet because there has been a significant decrease in those phenomena.

    Alarmists have also dropped scares about droughts so severe that major east coast urban water storages would receive little or no re-supply from meagre rains. It seems that their climate modelling has now transmogrified the major risk to flooding.

    I’m confused. Presumably the Labor/Green opposition urges us to vote them in again to reinstate the carbon tax to bring climate get back to normal (there’s many a PhD prospect to try to define what is normal).

    Does this mean increased cyclones and new desalination plants to replace the unused, massively costly, corroded ones built during the last drought scare campaigns?

    Rich pickings for climate skeptics are assured for some time to come!

    120

  • #
    Sean McHugh

    Jo,

    I believe there is something in that report that is possibly even more problematic, as it goes to the core of the science. From The Australian today:

    An international team of scientists led by Wenju Cai, of the CSIRO:

    AUSTRALIA and its region will probably be hit by almost twice as many severe floods this century like the ones that devastated southeast Queensland four years ago, according to new research.

    I remember flying back into Australia and seeing that everything looked green. While traveling back from Sydney airport, I heard a report come on the radio when we reached Albion Park Rail. I can’t recall if it was from the CSIRO or the BoM as they are and were as one with Climate Change. The spokesman almost apologised for the fact that we were having drought ending rain and said that it was only temporary and not expect it to continue with any significance. The BoM and the CSIRO were in agreement with Tim Flannery, when he said that the rain we get will no longer fill our dams. These people were actually the cause of the unnecessary devastation in Brisbane.

    I searched for the evidence showing that was the CC thinking back then, the opposite to what they are saying now. This page from Watts Up With That has several earlier quotes from the BoM and the CSIRO. Here’s one that covers both:

    The Age in 2009:

    A three-year collaboration between the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO has confirmed what many scientists long suspected: that the 13-year drought is not just a natural dry stretch but a shift related to climate change…

    ‘’It’s reasonable to say that a lot of the current drought of the last 12 to 13 years is due to ongoing global warming,’’ said the bureau’s Bertrand Timbal.

    ‘’In the minds of a lot of people, the rainfall we had in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s was a benchmark. A lot of our [water and agriculture] planning was done during that time. But we are just not going to have that sort of good rain again as long as the system is warming up.’’…

    These people have no shame.

    290

    • #
      Bob Malloy

      To quote myself @ #19,

      our MSM never ask them to explain their ever changing predictions.

      it’s shameful, the way our news outlets fail their readers!!!

      220

      • #
        Sean McHugh

        Perhaps the news outlets think we won’t remember. Likely they are right. Perhaps they don’t remember themselves. When I was in that car coming back through Albion Park Rail, I advised my colleague to remember the prediction from the radio. It would surprise me if he has.

        Prior to that, whenever CC was being reported or implied, the TV media would show scenes of poor polar bears, ice shelves falling into the ocean and dry, parched and cracked ground (denoting drought). The cracked ground images quickly disappeared. No doubt they will one day be taken out of the archives, dusted off and reused for the same purpose.

        I think it was Hitler who noted that people have very short memories – which he used to his advantage. The population deserves to be duped. They almost beg for it.

        100

      • #
        Dennis

        I was once keen to watch the evening news but now I most often change channels and shake my head over the repetitive garbage they all present, climate change propaganda, attack the government, paid advertisements masquerading as news stories, opposition MPs given time to speak as if they were cabinet ministers, etc. And that is quality when compared to ABC.

        120

      • #
        pattoh

        it’s shameful, the way our news outlets fail their readers!!!

        And the education system as designed ( or borrowed from a “helpful Club of Romer – Rockafeller):-

        Education Queensland is one of their guinea pigs:-

        http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/propagandizing-the-k-12-classroom-to-create-desired-worldviews-for-change-the-new-anti-bias-standards/

        80

    • #
      scaper...

      What happened to the 6-7 cyclones that BOM predicted for this season???

      90

  • #
    handjive

    Tony Abbott’s latest knighthood of Prince Phillip, has a fun part to play out yet.

    Phillip is a “climate consensus rebel’:

    PRINCE PHILIP IS CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER
    http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/08/prince-philip-climate-change-denial/

    Prince Philip Invites Climate Sceptic To Buckingham Palace
    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/prince-philip-invites-climate-sceptic-to-buckingham-palace.html

    Duke of Edinburgh invites climate change heretic David Bellamy to Buckingham Palace
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/9844243/Duke-of-Edinburgh-invites-climate-change-heretic-David-Bellamy-to-Buckingham-Palace.html
    . . .
    The Greens et al have“97% Doomsday” Prince Charles: 100 months to save the world

    100

    • #
      handjive

      Hope a journalist will ask Abbott which one is correct.

      70

    • #
      What class!

      Phil the Greek is the last person in the Western public arena who is totally untouched by political correctness. He’s a living treasure. He deserves all the good awards that can be heaped on him. Unfortunately, he’s a nonagenarian.
      Long live Phil. Good move Tony.

      120

    • #
      TdeF

      Prince Charles made this announcement in March 2009, so it has been 6 years and 11 months, 83 months of his hundred. Charles’ doomsday is then July 2016, so after Paris. The Rapture came and went. So did the Mayan millenium. Maybe Charles is attracted to disasters? He seems to be.

      110

    • #
      Dennis

      The news outlets and others say that the PM made a “captain’s pick” however they fail to say that all Australians have the right to make nominations for Australia Day awards to the committee that now Sir Angus Houston is chairman. It is that committee that chooses the award recipients and it is the Governor General who makes recommendations to the Queen of Australia as her representative here. The behind the news story is that Prime Minister Tony Abbott consulted both men before his nomination was made officially. In my opinion the outcry and spin was a regular Australia Day republican beat up.

      71

      • #
        Dennis

        Furthermore, there is provision for non-Australians to be recommended for a knighthood award and provision for up to four Australians each year chosen from a narrow band of people who have completed many years of public service in high office, and no business people or politicians.

        81

      • #
        Glen Michel

        Abbott has lost it no matter what contrivances are made to support this crazy nomination.Yeah, I agree that Phil speaks his mind – and I appreciate his dismissal of PC, but Abbott has left himself open to further ridicule. Give Morrison or Cormann the ropes!

        43

    • #
      Annie

      For once, yesterday, I looked at The Age online; I very rarely bother. I was truly astonished at The vitriol directed at The Duke of Edinburgh; not to mention Tony Abbott. Here is a man well into his 90s who has supported HM the Queen all these many years. He has carried on working long after most people would have done and has also given us quite a bit of mirth with his distinctly non-politically-correct humour.

      Three cheers for Prince Philip say I!!! :)

      100

      • #
        Dennis

        I just read that Prince Phillip was nominated for and received an Australia Day award when Bob Hawke was the Labor PM. Furthermore that PM Rudd nominated the President of Indonesia and PM Gillard nominated a cricket player from India.

        I do not recall the republicans and their media propaganda machine causing a fuss about the Labor PMs.

        70

  • #
    Another Ian

    ABC radio this afternoon had a “doomier and gloomier” twofer

    A rundown on this CSIRO job and then a “higher and mightier tides” from someone at James Cook U.

    Look for real tidal real estate bargains coming up from the likes of Gore, Flannery et al

    110

  • #
    pat

    Bangladeshis “living in the frontline of climate change” get $375million LOAN from the World Bank:

    27 Jan: Financial Express Bangladesh: $375m World Bank loan to build disaster shelters
    The World Bank (WB) will provide US$375 million in loans to build multipurpose disaster shelters and develop related infrastructure in nine coastal districts of Bangladesh.
    The WB on Monday signed a $375 million financing agreement with the World Bank at the Economic Relations Division (ERD) in Dhaka…
    ***The project will benefit 14 million coastal people living in the frontline of climate change…
    The WB in a statement Monday said the shelters are designed such that they would serve as primary schools during the year and provide safe shelter to local community during natural disasters. The shelters will be able to protect people from high wind speeds and storm surges.
    http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.com/2015/01/27/77982

    re following: are they different $$$ or has $25million been skimmed off already? interestingly, World Bank doesn’t mention “climate change”, “disasters” or anything remotely related to CAGW! & its now 19.5 million primary school students being helped!

    25 Jan: World Bank: Project Signing: Bangladesh receives $400 million to expand recent progress in primary education
    The Government of Bangladesh today signed a $400 million financing agreement with the International Development Association (IDA), the World Bank’s concessional arm, for additional financing of the ongoing Third Primary Education Development Program (PEDP3).
    ***The loan will benefit 19.5 million children in primary school by ensuring quality learning and completion of the primary school cycle…
    Under the additional financing, the World Bank will scale up support for improving primary education from grades 1 to 5. PEDP3 will also continue the rollout of one year of pre-primary education with trained teachers and quality materials, with a focus on public primary schools in disadvantaged areas…
    http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2015/01/25/project-signing-bangladesh-receives-400-million-expand-progress-education

    current pollies will be long gone when Bangladeshis are still paying back such loans.

    90

  • #
    TdeF

    This is a mass cyber attack from the Climate Council, an attempt to overwhelm news channels with a flood of disaster stories from incredible scientists like Tim (Giant Extinct Wombat) Flannery and his friends. The fact that Melbourne has had the coldest summer in recent memory, America is freezing and otherwise nothing at all is happening will not deter them, nor the years condemn and at the setting of the scam, we will remember them.

    220

  • #
    • #
      Dariusz

      So does Canada, no brainer on both areas.
      Global warming implies more moisture and hence more rain. Would not be surprised if the currently dry areas such as Sahara, Saudi Arabia and Oz will be also the beneficiaries. Sahara and west Australia were just recently covered with dense forests. Recent dendritic drainage can be seen on radar images as radar can penetrate ground down to approximately 5 metres.
      The Best way is to look at the past. Look for spore-pollen distribution, other fossil record, c14 & beryllium isotopes. Archaeology is doing lots of these for many years now looking at cloth materials, food scraps, diet of the ancients, all of which is deposited like geological layers and hence climate can be reconstructed with a great degree of accuracy.
      The present day sea floor off Western Australia has a submerged and extensive river drainage pattern that goes all the way to Indonesia. The extensive network of these rivers point to a recent wet period. To model which countries are to benefit or loose is not known and only global Palaeogeographic reconstructions of the last say 200,000 years need to be undertaken, just like geologists do (including myself) as part of our regular scientific process. Geologists normally don,t look back to the most recent times unless we have to and hence the discovery of these paleo-rivers in the deserts or submerged rivers that are bigger than the current Amazon drainage, and all happend virtually yesterday, 20,000 years ago during the last glacial period. But hang on, didn’t I just said that more heat generates more wet? And yet this observation points to the opposite?
      The bottom line: we have no idea about the benefits and losses during climate shifts.
      No fear though. To answer this uncertainty let,s spend more money so these usurpers of science could use “coulds and shoulds” in their next report 5 years from now.
      In geology we say “the past is the key to the present” and hence the future. The trouble is that these money sluts rarely venture beyond the Eisenhower era.

      100

      • #
        Annie

        There’s been rain in Dubai recently. It’s not exactly unheard of though. A few years ago I paddled through puddles there…large deep ones that couldn’t drain away quickly as the local drain couldn’t cope.

        30

  • #
    Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia

    Had a look at that new sceptic site ClimateChangePredictions. Lots of chuckles, well written and put together. Those warmists sure know how to hoist themselves with their own petard.

    180

    • #
      TdeF

      Wonderful, ridiculous, absurd and wrong. So wrong. There are books devoted to wrong predictions, but this would fill a book with just Climate Science, a contradictory phrase apparently.

      150

      • #
        Robert O

        I would have said it’s more of an oxymoron.

        80

        • #
          TdeF

          Agreed. This might be an infuriating way to counter the warmists, to speak of Climate Science as an oxymoron, two words which mean the opposite of each other. Who even trusts tomorrow’s forecast let alone the insane concept idea of a tax funded UN supervised government regulated climate? After enduring the absurd manufactured phrase “the Science is ‘in’”, the climate change oxymoron would be a form of revenge.

          60

          • #
            Manfred

            Indeed, it is an oxymoron and should always lie, propped up within inverted commas, as in “climate science.”

            30

  • #
    manalive

    Can anyone find a headline saying “Climate Change will benefit ______ region?”

    The total annual rainfall since 1900 for most areas of Australia has increased, most noticeably in the northwest. The only exception is the SW of Western Australia.
    The report says: “Winter and spring rainfall in southern Australia is projected to decline while changes in other areas are uncertain. For the rest of Australia, natural climate variability will predominate over rainfall trends caused by increasing greenhouse gases until 2030 …
    … However, the projected reduction in average rainfall in south-west Western Australia may be so strong as to weaken this extreme rainfall tendency”.

    So the strong increased rainfall trend in most areas 1900 – 2014 is due to “natural climate variability” and very uncertain to continue but they craftily imply that the apparent decreasing trend in SW WA 1900 – 2014 will continue due to Climate Change™.
    They ignore or wave away any possible beneficial effects but pounce on the putative negatives.
    Incidentally the isohyets for SW WA on the BOM average map look very similar to those on the corresponding map in the Royal Atlas & Gazetteer of Australia 1890 (zooming available on the National Library website), for instance Albany is on ~ 30 inch (762 mm) isohyet compared to ~ 800 mm on the BOM map.

    81

  • #
    liberator

    The Age continues to publish this drivel online without question and I continually ignore it and wont read it. They published three climate scare articles today! I always look at the top five read articles for each section and I’ve not seen any of the climate change articles in the top five lists. That’s despite The Age putting them at the top of each section, Local, National and International sections. I really would love to now where these articles sit in the ‘most read lists. Yeah I know its The Age, but I’m not much better off with the Herald Sun, in fact any paper nowadays seems to be a waste of paper and bandwidth.And their Weatherzone forums ban any discussion of climate change – stick your fingers in your ears and repeat after me “nan anana I can’t hear you…”

    110

  • #
    Bevan

    The account in The Australian titled “Australia hardest hit by climate change” based on a joint CSIRO/Bureau of Meteorology report “New climate change projections for Australia” recounts completely unfounded predictions. It describes studies based on global climate models that have repeatedly been shown to be erroneous. Even worse, the models are based on the IPCC claim that increased atmospheric CO2 concentration causes an increase in global temperature when the CSIRO/BoM own stations plainly show this to be false.

    The two organisations undertake CO2 and temperature measurements at Cape Grim, NW Tasmania, at Macquarie Island and the Antarctic bases of Casey and Mawson. The resulting data is freely available on the Internet.

    Statistical analysis of the data shows that there is no significant correlation between monthly changes in CO2 concentration and temperature. In fact the correlation coefficients are negative in every case meaning that a rise in CO2 would cause a fall in temperature, however the probability result shows the values are not significantly different from zero.

    Further, analysis shows that correlation between annual increments in each variable are, again, not statistically significant, some being negative values, so there is no measurable causal relationship between CO2 and temperature. Hence there is no justification to issue catastrophic climate predictions based on the erroneous IPCC claim.

    However, correlation between the CO2 data and the relevant Satellite lower tropospheric temperature reveals that the annual increment in CO2 concentration is highly correlated with the average satellite temperature for the period concerned with negligible probability that the correlation is zero. This means that the increase in temperature since the last ice age has been driving the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration, not the reverse as the IPCC would have us believe.

    It is sad to see once highly respected Australian institutions sink to such a low level.

    160

    • #
      Robert O

      Bevan, I have yet to see a mathematically valid relationship between Global temperature and CO2 concentration. We
      know that CO2 levels are increasing, but satellite temperature data haven’t risen now for 18 years. Is there any valid basis for the BOM/CSIRO predictions, or is it justification to go to Paris?

      140

      • #
        Bevan

        Robert O, I do not have a formula in mathematical physics describing the relationship between global temperature and CO2 concentration but I do have the results from linear regression applied to historic CO2 concentration records and satellite lower tropospheric temperature.

        For example, at the CSIRO station at Cape Grim, NW Tasmania, the CO2 concentration has increased at the rate of 1.68 ppm per annum for the recording period May 1976 to October 2014. This value is typical of locations all around the world. The correlation coefficient between monthly increments in CO2 and temperature from the nearby Marrawah BoM station was -0.35 with a 83% probability that the correlation is zero. When compared to global satellite temperature the correlation was -0.01 with an 80% probability that the figure is zero. In the case of annual increments, the Marrawah correlation was 0.06 with 19% probability of zero and for satellite temperature the correlation was -0.05 with 32% probability of zero.

        These results clearly show that there is NO causal relationship between changes in both CO2 and temperature. Note that if the negative values were significant it would mean that an increase in CO2 concentration would cause a decrease in temperature.

        By contrast, the correlation between the annual increment in CO2 and corresponding average global (ocean) satellite temperature was 0.64 with negligible probability of the value being zero. The linear regression constant was 1.68 ppm per annum and the X coefficient was 2.26 ppm per annum per degree Celsius (satellite temperature). This means that the annual rate of increase in CO2 concentration would fall to zero when the annual average global ocean satellite lower tropospheric temperature fell to -0.74 degrees C, something that has not happened in the 36 years of satellite recording, the minimum to date being -0.49 degrees C.

        30

  • #
    tom0mason

    I’m indebted to the Bishop for pointing out this new blog about these type of disastrous prediction.

    They also would like your input…

    http://climatechangepredictions.org/category/hardest_hit

    41

  • #
    RoHa

    See, I was right.

    We are doomed, just as I have been saying all along.

    40

  • #
    ROM

    RoHa @ 37

    See, I was right.

    “We are doomed, just as I have been saying all along”.
    ________________
    Corrected; Tick appropiate box

    “See, I was right

    We / are likely to / might / could / be doomed, just as I have been saying all along”.
    ___________________

    Via Brainy Quotes; Predictions.

    Meanwhile a classic line of pure unadulterated BS’ ing chutzpah from one, Al Gore, endlessly gouging all and sundry in his parallel universe.

    “I take no pleasure in the fact that the scientific predictions I’ve relayed to popular audiences turn out to be true“.

    110

  • #
    Sean

    The only thing remarkable about this is that someone thinks it still works. It’s been the same stuff, different day, different location for a decade now. Since climate change is an abstract concept that would not even be observed by ordinary people because of the slow pace of incremental change in highly variable weather patterns, activists need to personalize it to get people to care. In the summer fall of 2009, climate change was going to hit “red” or conservative states in the south and midwest of the USA the hardest. Then just before the COP in Copenhagen, it was going to to cause flooding on the Potomac by Washington DC. You’d think with climate change anxiety peaking in 2007-2009 and waning to the point of even being dropped from questionnaires of things the public worries about, that these activists would try a new tactic. How does that definition of insanity go — doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.

    100

  • #
    BrianJay

    This by John Brignal is the definitive link to everything that is caused by Global Warming

    http://numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm

    60

    • #
      Owen Morgan

      Thanks for the link. I know one of them can’t be true: “Loch Ness monster dead”. According to my computer projections, exhaustively calculated on a state-of-the-art Spectrum ZX80, Nessiesaurs may be on the point of colonising several British reservoirs and will (95% certainty) be running the known universe by 2100 (if they aren’t already).

      I’m pretty sure that’s down to climate change, but I urgently require funding, to permit me to continue my vital research.

      80

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        Is your alter ego named Douglas Adams?

        40

        • #
          Owen Morgan

          Luckily for me, I am, unlike poor Douglas Adams, still alive. I am about 95% sure of that, too (but there can’t be any harm in subsidising pursuing further research, to make sure).

          50

      • #
        the Griss

        Tell me, What do you models say about the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

        How will the Nessiesaurs cope with this entity?

        Will Nessiesaurs mutate to grow wings and fly?

        Enquiring minds need to know this vital model-based information !!

        50

        • #
          Owen Morgan

          When I added the Flying Spaghetti Monster to my model, the Spectrum caught fire and my house burned down, so some short-sighted obervers might suggest that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a major contributor to both global warming and to the amount of carbon in the atmosphere.

          Preliminary research reveals, however, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster itself is an entirely innocent victim of anthropogenic processes. More work is needed.

          20

          • #
            the Griss

            “and to the amount of carbon in the atmosphere”

            I would suggest, in the form of methane ;-)

            “More work is needed.”

            Get that ARC grant written, then. !!

            00

  • #
    Owen Morgan

    This one, quoted by Jo above, is a real classic of the alarmist’s art:

    “…climate change is likely to have the strongest impact on Scandinavian countries such as Denmark, Norway and Sweden”

    The expression “climate change”, as we all know, was invented in the first place to be a one-nightmare-fits-all bit of terminology, enabling any purported (or predicted) climatic development to be blamed on Homo sapiens. Having started off with a phrase which is designedly nebulous, the writer adds the wildly ambiguous “strongest impact”, which could mean absolutely anything. It doesn’t even explain whether “climate change” in Scandinavia is supposed to result in hotter or colder temperatures. Are they going to get more snow, or less snow? Are all those Danish wind-turbines going to be useless because there won’t be any wind, or because there’ll be too much (or just because they exist)? Will there be date-palms in Kirkenes?

    In fact, the only bit of the quoted statement even approaching precision is where the author, presumably for the benefit of the all-important Martian readership, helpfully spells out three of the four Scandinavian countries.

    70

    • #
      Winston

      I’m just so relieved Finland will be safe.

      50

      • #
        RoHa

        But what about Iceland?

        30

        • #
          Owen Morgan

          When Bartharbunga (not the correct spelling, but I don’t know how to do Icelandic characters) erupted, I was rather surprised not to read that it was all caused by global warming, but I may have missed something.

          (I think of Iceland as Nordic, but not as Scandinavian.)

          20

  • #
    ROM

    This following is something you will never find any mention of in the MSM and rarely on the climate blogs.

    Please take a look at the names on this 1998 / 2000 paper. Any climate enthusiast will recognise those names a some of the most prominent names in global warming science;
    And they still have not found that anthropogenic climate signal 15 years and a couple of hundred billion dollars of climate research later
    _____________________

    Estimates of low frequency natural variabilit in near-surface air temperature

    T.P. Barnett
    Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA

    B.D. Santer
    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA

    P.D. Jones
    University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK

    R.S. Bradley
    University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA

    K.R. Briffa
    University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK

    Abstract

    Estimates of the spectrum of natural variability are critical to the problem of detecting an anthropogenic signal in global climate observations.
    Without such information it is impossible to say that current climate change is different or unique from changes that have happened in the past and, therefore, potentially due to man-induced causes.

    We have estimated the spectrum of natural variability from a globally distributed set of palaeo-temperature proxies and compared it with comparable estimates from two long control integrations of coupled general circulation models – the type used to predict anthropogenic change due to greenhouse gases.

    None of the three estimates of the natural variability spectrum agree with each other on the low-frequency, near-global time/space scales.

    Until this dichotomy is resolved, it will be hard to say, with confidence, that an anthropogenic climate signal has or has not been detected.

    150

  • #
  • #

    Finally, an honest website full of psychic predictions (ClimateChangePredictions)! They even have a guy with a little crystal ball!

    Sadly, many of the newer predictions are so far out in the future or have no timeline whatsoever, it’s going to take today’s grandchildren to verify whether the prediction came true. That is the mark of a true psychic, however. Never make predictions that are too specific or occur in your own lifetime whenever possible.

    I note climate science has extreme difficulty with the language—they simply do not understand superlatives. There are tons of predicitions for “hardest hit”, etc. A superlative like “hardest” can only apply to one. Yet they do this all the time. It says to me they have no idea what they are actually writing about. (The word “harder” is what they want—in case any are reading this and don’t know what word would be correct.)

    90

  • #
    Doug Proctor

    You pick up on the conditional “could” of researchers and government spokesmen. That gets translated to “will” in the popular press and mind. A classic bait-and-switch.

    When something “could” happen, there is no comeback, no accountability. When something “will” happen, there is. That’s the rub: keep accountability away and “nobody gets hurt, everybody looks good.”

    If you could get an MSM to publicize this problem of could-will, the generalized anxiety that drives newspaper sales and government rules would fall away. Which would – not could, but would, an action verb – not be in the interests of the MSM or our governors.

    80

  • #
    Shub Niggurath

    Search for ‘ground zero’ in Tom Nelson’s blog – you may be surprised! :)

    http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/03/settled-science-every-place-is-change.html

    80

  • #

    They are all wrong. I will be hit hardest by climate change. :)

    We all have to get my claim in, or we will be compensating everybody else for a problem that has not happened yet – and no signs either, outside of some computer games models.

    150

  • #
    James Bradley

    Australia’ tropical zones must be unique and blessed.

    I just had a look at the basic average climate data for Darwin and Cape York in the blocks that the BoM have on the web site which includes the total average of data for Darwin from 1941 and Cape York from 18 something or other.

    I can’t see where there have been any catastrophic changes or even any changes much outside of error margins in temperature or rainfall for either of those regions.

    So does that mean catastrophic global climate change doesn’t affect the tropical far north of Australia or is that the equator like a big catastrophic climate neutral zone?

    100

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    A new website called ClimateChangePredictions is keeping track of the “hardest hit” predictions and can’t find a consensus on this one:

    What? No consensus? What will poor old Al Gore do in his declining years? He may have to find a new career. Tragic…

    100

  • #
    john

    Coastal subsidence and relative sea
    level rise

    http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/9/9/091002/pdf/1748-9326_9_9_091002.pdf

    Abstract
    Subsurface fluid-pressure declines caused by pumping of groundwater or hydrocarbons
    can lead to aquifer-system compaction and consequent land subsidence. This subsidence
    can be rapid, as much as 30 cm per year in some instances, and large, totaling more than
    13 m in extreme examples. Thus anthropogenic subsidence may be the dominant
    contributor to relative sea-level rise in coastal environments where subsurface fluids are
    heavily exploited. Maximum observed rates of human-induced subsidence greatly exceed
    the rates of natural subsidence of unconsolidated sediments (∼0.1–1 cmyr−1) and the
    estimated rates of ongoing global sea-level rise (∼0.3 cm yr−1).
    Keywords: subsidence, groundwater, coastal

    50

  • #
    Jaymez

    It is no surprise that the MSM all lead with claims that Australia will be 5.0C hotter by 2090 with little or no qualification that the projections being made were based on already failed models, but even more important and relevant information seems to have not been mentioned in any of the media I have seen or read, and that is the huge variation in temperature projections provided in the report. In CHAPTER 7 PROJECTIONS: ATMOSPHERE AND THE LAND they do actually make it very clear that the projections of future temperature compared to the 1985 – 2005 average varies significantly depending on which of the three model scenarios used:

    “The projected temperature range by 2090 shows larger differences between RCPs, with 0.6 to 1.7 °C for RCP2.6, 1.4 to 2.7 °C for RCP4.5 and 2.8 to 5.1 °C for RCP8.5. Mean warming is projected to be greater than average in inland Australia, and less in coastal areas, particularly in southern coastal areas in winter.”

    This is therefore making a projection of warming from as little as a barely noticeable 0.6C – to a Maximum prediction of 5.1C.

    That is a massive range which completely escaped the media’s attention. All we heard about was the 5.1C increase. Why is that? Because the 5.1C projection was featured in the press release and the executive Summery which is as far as you would expect any enquiring journalist to go. None are about to read the 100 page plus technical report.

    Why is the press release such a marketing document rather than a science document? Because one of the team of editors is Chris Gerbing, “Communication Advisor for the CSIRO, Bureau of Meteorology and DCCEE project delivering climate change projections to Australia’s Natural Resource Management sector.” Chris has an interesting undergraduate degree from Monash: Bachelor of Science(Hons)/Arts, Atmospheric Science & Visual Culture, but it is in his post grad area where he is excelling with a Masters of Arts (Media and Communications), Digital Media Production and Policy from Swinburne.

    His other passion is as Assistant Director Environmental Film Festival Melbourne. We are told “The Environmental Film Festival Melbourne entertains with ground-breaking films, traversing the relationship between humans and their environments”. So the CSIRO are spending an important part of their budget in ‘selling and packaging’ their work for media and public consumption.

    But why did this report seem so obviously ideologically driven, more so I think than the usual scary reports we get from the CSIRO?BOM. I mean they basically lead everywhere with the projection as if it was from a detailed new scientific study, that Australia will warm by 5.1C and be worst hit than anywhere else in the world.

    Then we had quotes from Greens politicians who seemed to be ready with their scary quotes on the 100 page report with leader Christine Milne asking how much more evidence do you need? And saying it was time for the climate deniers like Tony Abbott to get out of the way.

    Well it is interesting to look at the background and connections of the lead scientist and editor of the report, Dr Penny Whetton and the track record of the CSIRO.

    A little research reveals that Dr Penny Whetton lives in Footscray, Victoria with her spouse Janet Rice, a Greens politician and former Mayor of Maribyrnong, and their two sons.

    In 2003, Whetton underwent gender reassignment surgery she was previously Peter Whetton. Greens politician Janet Rice: “We’re a good pair,” she says, “because Penny does the unravelling and understanding and I need to be taking action on it.”

    So there is a definite ‘partnership’ perceived in their household between delivering the CSIRO reports and the Greens Politician taking action on it.

    One wouldn’t think Dr Whetton’s gender reassignment particularly relevant to motivations regarding climate science, but the very strong connection to a Greens politician is extremely relevant because the Greens ideological and political platform is to blame industrialisation for just about every ill the planet faces. There is likely to be a great deal of direct or indirect pressure to produce material supportive of Dr Whetton’s partner’s position on climate change.

    Surely this is a vested interest which should be declared? You can bet the media would be all over a report discounting any concerns about climate change if it was written by the partner of a Liberal politician!

    Interestingly the CSIRO includes Penny Whetton’s name on the page titled ‘Climate scientists share in Nobel Peace Prize’. Stating, ” Dr Penny Whetton – Prize recognition coincides with an increasing desire for information on climate change” http://www.csiro.au/Organisation-Structure/Divisions/Marine–Atmospheric-Research/NobelPeacePrizeWinners.aspx

    The ‘right’ information that is!

    Dr Whetton is a past and current lead author of the UN IPCC climate report but it seems Dr Whetton and the CSIRO have failed to take notice of the press release by the Nobel Prize committee who were forced to advise many scientists claiming to be Nobel Laureates that they are not.

    This claim came from an over enthusiastic letter forwarded by the Chairman of the IPCC who also saw himself as a Nobel Prize recipient. Dr Rajendra Pachauri wrote to past lead authors and contributors to the UN IPCC report process:

    “I have been stunned in a pleasant way with the news of the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for the IPCC.
    “This makes each of you Nobel Laureates and it is my privilege to acknowledge this honour on your behalf. The fact that the IPCC has earned the recognition that this award embodies, is really a tribute to your knowledge, hard work and application,”
    Dr Pachauri said.

    CSIRO Chief Executive, Dr Geoff Garrett, said the award recognised the unstinting professionalism exercised by climate change scientists at CSIRO and other major Australian research institutions in investigating one of the world’s most pressing problems. “It is a great honour for the individuals involved and also reflects well on the dedication with which CSIRO pursues advances in scientific knowledge for humanity as a whole,” Dr Garrett said.

    Dr Whetton’s official CSIRO Nobel Peace Prize image can be seen here: http://www.scienceimage.csiro.au/mediarelease/mr07-204.html

    The CSIRO issued an official press release naming Climate scientists who share in Nobel Peace Prize:

    “Australian scientists who have been leading contributors to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have been recognised for the crucial part they played in the award of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize to the IPCC.”

    Eventually so many scientists who apparently so poorly understood the Nobel Peace Prize process were calling themselves Nobel Laureates that the Nobel committee had to issue a press release. It says the prize was awarded to the IPCC as a whole “and not to any individual associated with the IPCC. Thus it is incorrect to refer to any IPCC official, or scientist who worked on IPCC reports, as a Nobel laureate or Nobel Prize winner.”

    The Nobel Peace Prize was bestowed on Amnesty International in 1977. Eleven years later, it went to UN peacekeeping forces, and in 1999 it went the MSF. If people who used to work for Amnesty, MSF or the UN Peacekeeping forces went around calling themselves Nobel laureates, “we’d dismiss them as insecure egos run amok.”

    The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the UN IPCC not a science honour. It was bestowed on Gore (a politician) and the IPCC because the Nobel committee believes climate change “will increase the danger of war.” Therefore the IPCC are potentially decreasing the danger by alerting the world.

    Yet many Climate scientists have been happy to pedal the impression they were awarded the Nobel prize jointly for their scientific work and Australia’s leading scientific institute is one of the worst offenders, as is the Bureau of Meteorology. You’d think a bunch of scientists would be able to understand the difference between working for an organisation which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and being made a Nobel Laureatte personally. After all, I can’t find a single instance of an Amnesty International worker, a UN Peace Keeper, or a medical or other worker with the MSF ever claiming to be a Nobel laureate publicly or privately.

    But as the Financial Post wrote about this scandal, climate science is known to be fast and loose with the truth.

    “But the climate world resembles the Wild West. Poorly socialized adolescents swagger and bluster, grownups are in short supply, and the sheriffs turn out to be as lawless as everyone else. The Walrus misled its readers because a significant part of the climate community chose to embrace a Nobel fiction. The unadorned truth was door number one. Cringe-worthy exaggeration was door number two. Many IPCC personnel made the wrong call.” http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2012/11/nobel-winners-here-there-everywhere/

    In fact the CSIRO was so enamoured by the Nobel Laureate fallacy that in May 2008 they added a list of all 111 staff who had contributed to the IPCC as ‘The full list of CSIRO researchers (excluding reviewers) who contributed to the work of the IPCC recognised by the award of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.’ http://www.csiro.au/Organisation-Structure/Divisions/Marine–Atmospheric-Research/NobelPeacePrizeWinners.aspx

    You do have to wonder about the quality and scientific accuracy of their work when they can make such a foolish error or fraudulent claim.

    100

  • #

    This one from climatechangepredictions (italics mine)

    Australia’s top intelligence agency believes south-east Asia will be the region worst affected by climate change by 2030, with decreased water flows from the Himalayan glaciers triggering a ”cascade of economic, social and political consequences” The dire outlook was provided by the deputy director of the Office of National Assessments, Heather Smith, in a confidential discussion on the national security implications of climate change with US embassy officials.
    Sydney Morning Herald 16 Dec 2010

    There is me thinking that a prime ability for a job in an intelligence agency was to be up to date with the latest intelligence. Daily Mail 24 Jan 2010

    The claim that Himalayan glaciers are set to disappear by 2035 rests on two 1999 magazine interviews with glaciologist Syed Hasnain, which were then recycled without any further investigation in a 2005 report by the environmental campaign group WWF.

    Hattip Notrickszone

    100

  • #
    Ursus Augustus

    Methinks Sydney’s urban areas will be worst hit by far by the urban heat island effect. “Global warming” will be a second order effect at most.

    90

  • #
    average joe

    It is both disgusting and hypocritical how the same progressives that are so against traditional religions are now caught up in such a frenzy of religious activism under the veil of “science”. Worse, government is FUNDING this religion worldwide! AAaaaaggghhh!!!!

    [Hi Joe. While we understand your sentiments we don't want this primarily science blog to get bogged down in religious debates. - Mod]

    70

    • #
      Matty

      If Climate Science were to register as a religion, couldn’t it get Tax Free status as a charity, but no more Tax Payer handouts ? Wouldn’t that be a test of faith ?

      60

  • #
    Neville

    Yet the RS and NAS tell us that it would take thousands of years to change temp and co2 levels.
    And that’s if we cease all human co2 emissions today. Somebody is telling porkies big time.

    https://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/climate-evidence-causes/question-20/

    60

  • #
    Greg Cavanagh

    How do you “study” something that has not yet happened?

    70

  • #
    eliza

    My advice for Australians, Americans and Europeans that so fondly believe in AGW is to continue to vote in governments that promote AGW so that you end up in total misery and devastation. You deserve it. Im pretty sure knowing human nature, that this is what will happen.

    120

  • #
    janama

    O/T – the Met in the US is now under fire for predicting massive snow storms and high winds over NE US affecting 60 million people only for a mild storm to pass leaving a thin layer of snow and a milder storm than they experienced 10 days ago.
    The head of the Met is backpedaling as fast as he can go according to Harley Carnes on Alan Jones this morning.
    As Harley said “next time I’m coming back as a Meteorologist as you never have to get anything right”

    70

  • #

    Climate change will do no such thing to Australia. At the most the world will see about half a degree of warming by the year 2059 after which there will be nearly 500 years of cooling. There is evidence that planetary orbits regulate natural cycles, and there is physics which proves the IPCC “science” wrong.

    Our growing group of persons qualified in physics has endorsed the physics I have been presenting for years now, and we have compiled evidence in support of the hypothesis (summarized on the “Evidence” page at http://climate-change-theory.com ) whilst also proving from the laws of physics why the IPCC “explanation” of the “33 degrees of warming” is incorrect. I have, as you know, published a book available on Amazon and in that a comprehensive study of 30 years of temperature and precipitation data from three continents that showed that increases in precipitation correlate with lower mean daily maximum and minimum temperatures for inland regions in the tropics in the months when the Sun passed almost directly overhead, Those results and the methodology have also been published in comments on Roy’s blog, but I repeat them below. The locations were separated by precipitation into three groups and the results were …

    Wettest: Max: 30.8°C Min: 20.1°C
    Medium: Max: 33.0°C Min: 21.2°C
    Driest: Max: 35.7°C Min: 21.9°C

    Regarding “models” it is a straight forward calculation to get any planet’s surface temperature. That method can be documented as in the manner of the articles in the Hockey Schtick blog site. That blog site, however, has some errors in their explanation of the energy flows, those errors (as well as PSI and WUWT errors) are documented on our group’s website.

    I remind you that there has been on offer since last May a $5,000 reward for the first in the world to prove the physics and the study to be substantially wrong and to provide a study (based on similar methodology and sample size) which shows water vapor warms to the extent of at least 10 degrees per 1% in the atmosphere, as is implied when the IPCC claims it does most of that “33 degrees of warming” which in fact is not done by back radiation, but is due to the fact that the environmental lapse rate is the state of thermodynamic equilibrium which the Second Law of Thermodynamics says will evolve autonomously. That it does do as molecules exchange PE and KE whilst in motion between collisions. It’s not hard to understand, and is comprehensively explained with diagrams in the book.

    Douglas J Cotton B.Sc (physics), B.A. (economics), Dip.Bus.Admin (Sydney & Macquarie Universities 1963 to 1972)

    60

  • #
    TdeF

    From Graham Lloyd, the environment writer in the Age, more insanity.

    CSIRO Principal research scientist Kevin Hennessy “hot day days will become more frequent and hotter
    Translation…….”the average temperature may not be moving at all or going down but we will be hotter”

    extreme rainfall events across the nation are likely to become more intense even where annual-average rainfall is projected to decline
    Translation…… “We (may) be getting less rain but more of it in a given rainfall.

    “an increase in the number and intensity of extreme rainfall was projected for most regions, but decreases in average rainfall were expected” :
    Translation….. “We (really might) be getting less rain but more of it in a given rainfall.

    droughts were expected to become more frequent and severe in Southern Australia
    Translation…. Impossible. If heavy rain follows a drought and a drought is a lack of rain, we are going to have shorter droughts, more of them. It does raise a serious question about how a drought can possibly be more severe and the minimum length of a drought.

    the oceans will become more acidic
    Translation….. Impossible. A lie. The worlds oceans are alkali. You cannot be both. The only true statement is that they would become less alkali, more neutral, which should be a good thing.

    ocean acidity levels would continue to increase
    Translation….. Impossible. A repeated lie. You cannot increase acidity levels when they are not acid. Acid and alkali are mutually exclusive.

    “.. as the ocean absorbs anthropogenic carbon-dioxide emissions”
    Translation….. Firstly, given that everyone agrees 98% of CO2 is already in the oceans or 50x as much as is in the air and even the IPCC agrees that all CO2 is going into the oceans, the increase will be trivial. Secondly, you also cannot have the CO2 in two places at once. If it goes into the oceans, it is not in the air or there should be a substantial reduction in CO2 in the air, ultimately to the pre industrial levels for example. Lastly if CO2 is actually coming from warmer oceans, CO2 levels should decrease not increase.

    Even the IPCC agrees all man made CO2 is all going on a trip into the ocean with a half life of 80 years, so problem solved? This is not mentioned. Ultimately CO2 atmospheric levels are set by the forces of nature and equilibrium between the massive oceans containing most of the air and the thin atmosphere above. No activity of man can change this balance except for a very short time.

    Climate Institute chief executive (highest paid employee) John Connor said “pollution reductions and decarbonization of the economy is squarely in Australian’s national Interest”
    Translation…. We should wreck our country financially so that India and China can have a free run with currently more than half the world’s CO2 emissions and increasing each year by more than our entire output. China has promised to look at the problem again in 2030

    90

    • #
      TdeF

      Oh and another get out of jail free statement “changes to Australia’s climate were occurring against a background of high natural variability but the signal was clear”
      Translation… people outside the Climate Science (oxymoron) speciality might think that because temperatures are not increasing and in fact may be going down if they were not adjusted, we inside the Climate Science (oxymoron) special group under the auspices of the IPCC know that they are really going up by the sneaky method of extreme events which do not in fact change the averages.

      So you can have CO2 driven Climate Change temperature increases even with the temperature going down and rainfall decreases even with the rainfall going up! There, he’s finally said it! The corner has been turned. CO2 can produce climate change by increasing extreme events like drought and rain while the average temperatures are unaffected. A masterpiece of semantic rubbish. Now what again is a more severe drought which is shorter?

      70

      • #

        Hi TdeF, maybe this’ll help?
        Anthropogenic means man-made. Man-made means artificial.
        Artificial CO2 and artificial H2O causes artificial global warming or artificial climate change.
        Furthermore, natural CO2 and H2O causes natural plants to grow, but artificial CO2 and H2O only influences artificial plants.

        Computer models work on a virtual reality, so virtual CO2 and H2O affects virtual plants.
        Because of virtual computer models, with virtual rain, we can expect to see more virtual plants and more artificial plants, which will overpower the weaker (highly dependent on real CO2 and H2O), real plants.

        Now artificial rain is much drier than real rain, thus artificial droughts are even drier than real droughts.
        Even the rain that falls won’t fill our rivers and dams (oops, sorry for the plagiarism).
        However, artificial rain will dry out the rivers and dams.

        110

        • #
          TdeF

          So perhaps virtual rain, a sort of rain antimatter. More will fall because of climate change, cancelling out positive or real rain. A whole new branch of imaginary meteorolgy could be born, presumably with imaginary salaries.

          I cannot get over the chutzpah of scientists whose primary prediction was that world temperatures will increase, predictions which have utterly failed but now predict that compensating extreme events are caused somehow by the same CO2. If CO2 does not change temperatures, how exactly does it produce ‘extreme events’?

          It seems there is no longer the need to stick to the facts, there is not any reason to explain the proposed mechanisms. It will happen because a failed computer model says so? That is not science. We are back to the Oracle of Delphi and should use divination from goats entrails.

          80

          • #

            Absolutely TdeF, except that unfortunately the salaries are real and the imaginary meteorology was born over 40 years ago.
            Hang in there my friend. If it weren’t for the insanity, how would we recognize sanity?

            10

    • #
      Victor Ramirez

      I believe that Graham Lloyd writes for The Australian newspaper (a NewsCorp company).

      40

      • #
        TdeF

        Yes. The Australian.

        Absolutely no idea why I wrote the Age. In fact I cannot believe I did. I cancelled my subscription 4 years ago in disgust at their extremely biased reporting on all subjects. The front page was not worth reading, full of opinion, not news. My proof reading need some work.

        It always surprises me that the Australian prints such rubbish from Lloyd, but it is a balanced newspaper and we can respect that. The problem is possibly that Environment Editor, like everyone else, sees more value in reporting disasters than being sceptical. A true scientist or reporter, like most professionals, has to be very wary of believing everything they are told.

        50

        • #
          Victor Ramirez

          He’s likley just doing what too many journalists do these days, which is to report what they are told without confirmation or thorough investigation.

          20

  • #
    Ruairi

    Those warmists who try to deceive,
    The nations of Earth to believe,
    Their country is first,
    To suffer the worst,
    From climate change;must be naive.

    110

  • #
    pat

    back from his Endless Summer hols, ABC’s Trevor Chappell has an endless, nonsensical discussion with his regular guest, CAGW zealot, & self-proclaimed “Earth Doctor” Reese Halter, with almost all callers/texters agreeing with the doom and gloom scenarios:

    28 Jan: ABC Overnights with Trevor Chappell (download)
    with Dr. Reese Halter
    begins 40 mins in, ends 1hr 25 mins: CSIRO/BOM Climate Change report.
    Halter: this is statistical science. 40 computer models, that would be 40. we can expect more fires, more rainfall Tassie, etc…
    Chappell to Halter: what’s connection between CC and population?
    Halter: there’s a direct correlation there…
    Chappell says listener asks hasn’t the world been warming since the ice age?
    Halter: well, yes…but this is all about people. at the end of the day, it’s all about growing food on a regular basis. the ultimate concern is global food security & with elevated CO2 and 8 billion people to feed soon, that’s the tricky question.
    Chappell: how do u make people care?
    Halter: use an analogy. every morning u wake up, feel great. if u stuff up your knee, u r not going to be jumping up. when the natural world around us is giving us everything we need, but then u then experience a storm, or like melbourne u get 2 or 3 major storms as they did in dec and jan, u should be concerned.
    1hr11mins: Halter: a few months ago, UK Minister of Finance and Minister of the Environment(?) gave Australian Govt one of the wildest tongue-lashings i’ve ever heard. said u can’t take all this coal out of the earth without global repercussions…etc
    http://www.abc.net.au/overnights/

    factcheck: George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Elizabeth Truss, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, are nowhere in the story Halter refers to)

    Nov 2014: SMH: UK Tories slam Tony Abbott on climate policy
    Tony Abbott’s stance on global climate change has prompted some scathing criticism from a group of senior British Conservatives…
    The group, including Prime Minister David Cameron’s Minister for Energy and a former Thatcher Minister and chairman of the Conservative Party…
    According to Lord Deben, chairman of the independent Climate Change Commission and a minister in both the Thatcher and Major governments…
    Tim Yeo, chairman of the UK’s parliamentary select committee on energy and climate change and a former environment minister under John Major…
    “If I was Australian, I’d be concerned if my country’s economic future and prosperity became dependent on continued coal export.” …
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/uk-tories-slam-tony-abbott-on-climate-policy-20141121-11qos6.html

    60

    • #
      Bob Malloy

      back from his Endless Summer hols, ABC’s Trevor Chappell has an endless, nonsensical discussion with his regular guest, CAGW zealot, & self-proclaimed “Earth Doctor” Reese Halter, with almost all callers/texters agreeing with the doom and gloom scenarios:

      Once he announced his talking point, prior to his quiz,I bailed. Glad I took some CD’s with me to work. Popped in and out of his show a few times, heard what a lovefest it was and bailed again.

      Interesting thing is not long before he went on hols, he had a lecturer from Newcastle Uni on for a discussion on Fracking, when his guest failed to condemn fracking and some of his callers accused his guest of being a stooge for the fracking industry, in very short order he had a green lobbyist on to condemn Fracking, made his audience most happy. What chance he invites a Bob Carter, Richard Lindzen, John Christy or even a Judith Curry on for a balanced reply?

      No need to answer that question, it’s rhetorical.

      60

  • #
    pat

    hilariously, at the end of Halter, Chappell says a listener thinks Halter sounds like the singer of Dr. Hook, so Chappell plays “Cover of the Rolling Stone” (think of the amount of flying involved before u would get to be on the cover!).
    some excerpts:

    And we’re loved everywhere we go…
    We take all kinds of pills that give us all kind of thrills…
    I got a freaky ole lady name a cocaine Katy
    Who embroiders on my jeans
    I got my poor ole grey haired daddy
    Drivin’ my limousine…

    Chappell followed this with a track by a new Melbourne band he said he liked, called “Heading North”, with lyrics about heading north & visiting Cities where the weather is better!!!

    70

  • #
    Greg Cavanagh

    Indirectly related. I just found this paper which is comprehensive, sensible (mostly) and would be interesting to most here.

    http://www.arr.org.au/revision-projects/project-list/project-19/

    ARR = Australian Rainfall & Runoff

    50

  • #
    Skeptik

    Tasmania is the hardest hit by climate change, look at Bob Brown and Christine Milne.

    150

  • #
    handjive

    What other ‘forecast misses’ should be apologised for?

    SMH: “Meteorologist sorry for ‘big forecast miss’ as New York City dodges blizzard”
    ~ ~ ~

    This one?
    ABC: The State Emergency Service has responded to two dozen calls for assistance in Inverell, after a storm ripped through on Tuesday afternoon.

    Al Gore: “arctic ice free by 2014″?

    Bob Geldof: World to end by 2030?

    I could link a list here that would leave this comment in moderation until 97% climate doomsday.

    One can live in hope that someone. somewhere, can, and finally, does ask.

    90

  • #
    ROM

    My opinion which arguably no doubt, is in the opinion of many, not worth the electrons expended on it

    The Optimistic view point;

    The whole CAGW / green / corrupted climate warming science movement will run out of momentum and money by the end of the decade [ Memo to self ; "Prediction is very difficult , especially about the future" h/t Neils Bohr ] as the public are distracted by far more serious matters.

    Australia due to it’s geopolitical isolation might / could / will be one of the last bastions of the catastrophic global warming ideology.

    The Pessimistic view point;

    1 / The politicals and governments through out the western world are fast running out of money to finance all the completely unaffordable and unessential luxuries plus the numerous what we now regard as essential luxuries that we demand and take as a matter of course. Luxuries that in reality are not essential let alone neccesary to our comfort or existence.
    But we have come to regard those luxuries as our inalienable right to have the governments provide them when we demand them.

    One of those most blatantly exploited luxuries is that of Catastrophic Climate Science, a science that after a quarter of a century of lavish financing and immense diverting of resources from far more worthy science projects has totally failed to provided even just one single identifiable item that can be pointed to as having advanced our living standards and our civilisation in any perceptible way over the last 25 years.

    2 / A couple of weeks ago here on Jo’s blog I suggested that we are perhaps already in a global “World War III”.
    Because no war ever repeats the circumstances of the previous wars, we are just too slow to recognise a new version of a war when it is starting to get under way.
    Europe, the USA, Russia, China, India in particular, Nigeria and West and East Africa are all facing to a greater or lesser degree the prospects of a fundamentalist religion driven global conflict which has no real identifiable lines of combat.
    That fundamentalist religion driven combat is already insidiously penetrating into purely civilian areas in those advanced nations above and has far more impact in those nations than down here in geographically and geo-politically isolated Australia.
    This conflict I would suggest, will soon take precedence for resources and finance far above the demands of non visible, still unproven CAGW ideology in government and the civilian population’s opinions.

    In fact financing of the CAGW science meme may cease almost completely by the end of the decade as the two points above coincide, governments running out of money and the religious fundamentlist conflict increases in it’s impact on civilian’s lives requiring far greater government and societal resources to combat and neutralize.

    3 / Energy;
    If and I suspect that this will occur sooner than later, much larger societal /government / civilian resources have to be found to gear up to counter and combat this increasingly violent fundamentalist driven conflict, there is going to be an absolute requirement for massive amounts of totally reliable energy.

    Already there have been many cyber attacks on the American energy producers computer controlled generating facilities as the availability of energy in the quantities required when required is a fundamental to the fast, rapid production of any war materiel as well as civilian requirements during conflict.

    The so called mis-named “Renewable Energy” simply doesn’t cut the mustard in both the immense public financial resources being devoted to it even as governments run out of money along with the now well demonstrated complete and utter inability and failure of the renewable energy industry to ramp up power if and when required and on demand and in the quantities demanded.
    Hence the absolute requirements for back up power generating capacities equal to around a minimum of 80% of the renewable energy generating capabilities.

    As societal resources become strained by any new conflict such luxuries as idling perfectly good generating facilities solely to cater for a totally unpredictable renewable energy system will become a heavy and totally unacceptable drag on stretched governmental and societal resources.

    By the end of this decade, possibly sooner if this fundamentalist religion driven conflict escalates and it will, most advanced nations will be following the path of the most advanced renewable energy transition policy, that of Germany and it’s now the escalating pull back, trending abandonment of Renewable Energy and go all out on building new technology coal fired and nuclear generating plants just as Germany is now embarking on in new coal fired plants and firing up their closed nuclear reactors again.

    The Optimist again;
    Energy
    A very large number of the 60 years or more old nostrums on the geo-political situation with the western world’s reliance on the vast oil fields of the Arabian Peninsula and the Middle East plus Russia and other highly unpredictably parts of world is being fast overturned;

    If the fundamentalist driven global conflict increases in it’s impact and severity on advanced and western sympathetic nations the Middle eastern oil fields are or were a very vulnerable point and weakness in the west’s armour with large resources having to put in place to ensure continuing access to the vital Middle East oil sources.

    With the development and ever increasing efficiency of the shale fraking process still limited at this time to the Continental USA, the West and east Asian nations, we are in this together, now have the very rapid ability to start exploiting the immense shale deposits that lay under every continent if push came to shove in the Fundamentalist war. The UK for instance has shale deposits that because of their extent and the depth of the shale deposits of some few thousands of feet, might even rival the amounts of extractable shale oil and gas that the USA has.
    The Americans are suggesting they have around 200 years of oil and gas in their deposits at the current rate of consumption.

    The we have the Japanese who are just starting an experimental program to tap the vast deposits of methane hydrates on the egdges of the their continental shelf.
     Another energy source that is both vast and extensive and can be found in the deep ocean waters on the edges of most continental shelves and is near immune to disruption by conflict but which remains to be fully researched before being viable alternative energy source of very large magnitude.

    My opinion again;
    All in all the whole CAGW meme is, I think, heading for a massive collapse as it’s funding and public and therefore political interest dries up in the face of another far more dangerous and potentially societal devastating event and as the possibilities probabilities of an increasingly deadly fundamentalist religion driven war of unknown ferocity and extent and severity start to roll into the collective consciousness of our western public.

    The circumstances that are leading to this collapse are to put it mildly, potentially very severe indeed for our civilisation and for a very significant portion of our global nations let alone for the 1.6 billions of the Islamic faith and the 3 or 4 billions of other peoples in other non islamic nations who will be directly affected by any escalation of this fundamentalist religion driven conflict.

    All that will be left of the global warming ideology will be a small subculture still endlessly and pointlessly arguing about the humanity created catastrophic global warming phenomena which nobody even after 25 years and a couple of hundred billion dollars worth of research can actually point to as a real scientifically proven phenomena.

    120

  • #
    albert

    No doubt the alarmists will be working to tax us to stop the Sun from cooking all the planets in 3-4 billion years

    70

  • #
    pat

    Bob Malloy -

    bailing out was a wise decision.

    funny thing is Reese Halter is basically only on ABC and Huffington Post. and he’s allowed to say anything at all, factual or otherwise.

    Huffington Post Profile: Dr. Reese Halter
    22 Jan: Big Coal Destroys the Great Barrier Reef and Caley Wetlands
    Fifty percent of the Great Barrier reef is dead — that’s a vast area much larger than the size of England…

    16 Jan: Big Oil Destroys the Great Australian Bight
    This deranged ecocide risks killing the remaining critically endangered …
    The Australian continent has been battered by climate disruption…(links to an ABC story headlined: Queensland storms: Wind and rain tears across coastal cities, with more to come)

    1 Jan: The Race to Save our Oceans, Down Under
    The oceans are terribly ill…
    PHOTO CAPTION: Drs Bob Brown and Reese Halter, Yarra River, Melbourne
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-reese-halter/

    April 2014: HuffPo: Reece Halter: Coral Reefs: Going, Going… Gone
    In fact, as much as 80 percent of Caribbean coral reefs are dead. And, in Australia almost three quarters of the largest reef on the globe, the Great Barrier Reef, has died…
    It’s been about 30 years since bleaching was first discovered on Australia’s reefs and today three quarters of the largest reef on the globe is dead…
    Coral reefs are the most valuable marine ecosystems on Earth and climate disruption is killing them, quickly…
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-reese-halter/coral-reefs-going-goinggo_b_5157272.html

    50

  • #
    pat

    as some will know, david attenborough has a new BBC series on The Great Barrier Reef this year, so not surprised to hear Beeb World Sce say yesterday they will be talking this week to some person or other about how 50% of the Reef has been lost in the past 30 years. where does that stat come from?

    Nov 2014: Guardian: Oliver Milman: Coalition bid to strip Tasmanian forests of world heritage cover ‘disappointing’
    A separate study also released on Monday, by the Places You Love alliance, a coalition of 42 Australian environment groups, showed worrying deteriorations on a number of health and conservation fronts.
    The report’s findings include:
    Since 1985 more than half the Great Barrier Reef’s coral has been lost, with remaining coral cover predicted to be lost with two degrees of warming through climate change…
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/09/coalition-bid-to-strip-tasmanian-forests-of-world-heritage-cover-disappointing

    PlacesYouLove Alliance Team
    Glen Klatovsky – Director
    He has held senior leadership roles in many of Australia’s largest environmental organisations.
    Glen was National Campaigner for The Wilderness Society, leading the campaign to stop a gas hub at James Price Point. Glen was the Carbon Business Manager for Greening Australia. He was also Director, Advocacy for WWF-Australia. Glen has also consulted extensively on climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies, carbon business development, environmental advocacy and project/program development…
    Asren Pugh – Movement Building Program Manager
    He grew up going to forest blockades as part of the North East Forest Alliance campaigns in NSW. Asren has over 13 years’ experience as a union and community organiser and campaigner. He was Assistant Secretary of the Australian Services Union in NSW…
    Asren also implemented community organising campaigns in Chicago and Indianapolis in the United States with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the Association of Community Organisations for Reform Now (ACORN)…
    Mike Roache – Vision2025 Program Manager
    Mike is an environmental scientist and is currently the science advisor at The Wilderness Society…
    He was previously WWF-Australia’s National Threatened Species Program Manager…
    Jess Kendall – Communications Manager
    Jess has ten years’ experience in public sector policy, communications leadership and public affairs. She has worked as a speechwriter, media adviser and stakeholder specialist for a number of federal government agencies…
    http://www.placesyoulove.org/who-we-are/our-team/

    50

  • #
    pat

    27 Jan: Guardian: Sarah Laskow: Snow looks pretty. But climate change and the storms it triggers are dangerous
    Yet, as you may have noticed or read, it’s been snowing on the east coast of the United States – a lot. And that too is the result of what we call “global warming”.
    It seems to be counterintuitive…
    Snow days used to be welcome fun. But because winters are getting warmer, average snowfall over a whole season is often down. And whatever snow does fall often melts more quickly than it did in the past. So, even after a massive snow fall, we don’t get much time to enjoy its pleasures – digging out igloos once the storm has passed, pretending we’re Laura Ingalls Wilder and trying to make maple candy in the snow, sledding down that one big hill…
    We call this “climate change” now, instead of global warming, because the phenomenon is so full of contradictions. A warmer average temperature doesn’t mean that snow will disappear instantly; a warm winter can still have a record snow storm and beaches are in danger in the winter, too.
    The reality of climate change is that it doesn’t stop just because winter comes…
    (Sarah Laskow has written about energy and the environment for Grist, the American Prospect, Salon, Reuters, and other publications)
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/27/snowstorms-climate-change-dangerous

    30

  • #
    pat

    Roston just as silly as Laskow at the Guardian. ends with a Yale-Anthony Leiserowitz-inspired joke (remember the call for some CC comedy), which is pretty pathetic:

    6 Jan: Bloomberg/Businessweek: Eric Roston: Yep, Climate Change Is Still Causing Insane Storms
    Forecasters are projecting “crippling snowfall amounts and life-threatening blizzard conditions” throughout the Northeast. They may as well toss in a 100 percent likelihood of jokes from American conservative media about how snow invalidates the idea of global warming.
    Cue headlines, such as these early hits from the Drudge Report, about the “’Snowiest decade’ on record…,” with a link to the conservative website Climate Depot. Or this FLASHBACK NYT: ‘The end of snow?’ headline, which points with irony to a New York Times piece from February about what warming is doing to winter sports. The strategy here, which has been effective for years, is to sow confusion by pointing out superficial contradictions within a complex topic…
    The most authoritative body of climate scientists reinforced in late 2013 that global warming is “unequivocal” and it’s at least 95 percent likely that human emissions are “the dominant cause.” That’s about as close as scientists come, philosophically, to certainty…
    Most moderate Republicans — 62 percent — understand that global warming is happening, according to a poll this month from the ***Yale Project on Climate Change Communication…
    But as public opinion catches up with well-documented science, more and more Americans are understanding that this is — oof — snow joke.
    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2015-01-27/northeastern-blizzard-elicits-time-tested-conservative-responses-on-climate-change

    Yale again!

    27 Jan: Reuters: On climate change, ‘not a scientist’ not enough for some U.S. Republicans
    By Valerie Volcovici and Amanda Becker
    Attempts to strike a softer tone will collide with entrenched resistance, primarily from the donor network in the orbit of billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, who oppose any attempt to regulate the oil, gas and chemical industries that are the backbone of their empire.
    Conservative political advocacy groups supported by the Kochs plan to spend $889 million in 2016, the Washington Post said on Monday.
    Those pushing the party to adopt a more palatable message on the environment say it is possible to stake out environmental positions that can appeal to young and independent voters without offending the party’s free-market, anti-regulation base…
    The search for a new message on climate change is driven by electoral math.
    While leaders of the Republican-controlled Congress have vowed to block regulations to control carbon emissions, a poll by ***Yale University earlier this month found that 56 percent of Republicans support regulating climate-warming greenhouse gases…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/27/us-usa-politics-climatechange-insight-idUSKBN0L00D620150127

    30

  • #
    liberator

    Trouble is with the MSM continuing to publish all of these AGW studies without ever publishing the other studies that show the opposite, the general public are lead to believe we’re all doomed. They wont get off their backsides and do some fact checking for themselves and visit sites like this, WWWT et.al. to see there are some challenging arguments. Why doesn’t the majority of the MSM publish the counter science from the peer reviwed scientific process?

    80

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … the general public are lead to believe we’re all doomed.

      Well, we are all doomed – if we are to take the depth of intellectual fire-power, evident in the “Climate-only-ever-changes-for-the-worse” fraternity, as being any any sort of indicator of homo sapiens in general.

      50

  • #
    manalive

    Climate change will hit Australia harder than rest of world, study shows …

    It appears Australia has benefited more than most from changes in vegetative cover due to CO2 fertilisation between 1982 and 2010 (Donohue et al., 2013 GRL) (via Roy Spencer).

    60

  • #

    This obsession with considering global, all-inclusive, net impacts on the planet as a whole is a classic denier cherrypick anyway.

    05

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      It reads like /sarc. But I can’t be sure…

      21

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        It is probably something quite ineffable.

        31

        • #

          probably something quite ineffable

          Then we’re all effed, as even you can’t bring yourself to deny anymore (upthread) Rereke, if in somewhat less pungent terms. (Excuse my Anglo-Saxon, moderators.)

          Speaking of which, as a science communications science consultant I’m often asked by my clients whether I recommend they start swearing at the public.

          On the one hand, focus groups tell us that the use of a torrent of exasperated expletives would “humanize” climate scientists, bring them “down to earth” and make them seem like “someone you could have a pint with,” thus breaking the traditional paradigm of scientist as font of authority, “speaking down” to the muggles.

          So we obviously wouldn’t want that. On the other hand, could it at least help to convey a sense of urgency and get muggles off their ani? Who can say?

          29

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            Could you translate that for us into English, or even Australian or if nothing else USA lingo?

            KK

            60

            • #

              probably something quite ineffable

              Then we’re all effed, or as even you admit (upthread) Rereke, “we are all doomed.” (Excuse my Anglo-Saxon, moderators.)

              Speaking of which, as a science communications science consultant I’m often asked by my clients whether they should just start swearing at the public.

              On one hand, focus groups tell us that if climate scientists used a torrent of exasperated expletives it would help to “humanize” them, bring them “down to earth” and make them seem “like someone you could have a pint with”—thus breaking the traditional paradigm of scientist as font of authority who “speaks down” to the muggles.

              We obviously don’t want to do that. On the other hand, is it possible that dropping a few choice C-bombs could at least convey a sorely-lacking sense of urgency, and perhaps get muggles off their ani at last?

              Who can say? You lot aren’t qualified to, so take it as a rhetorical question.

              15

              • #
                the Griss

                Seriously, what a load of meaningless twaddle !!

                Have you got ANYTHING to back up your irrational religious belief, mindless twerp.?

                50

              • #
                the Griss

                “You lot aren’t qualified to”

                Actually.. many of the regulars here have degrees or higher in relevant subjects.

                This is why we find visits from non-entities like you so amusing :-)

                40

          • #
            Dariusz

            “science communications science consultant”?
            If you get paid for communicating you must be paid by zombies. Learn your English first, then learn how to construct a thought process. I guess if you advise government, labor or the kilmaradtchiks nobody would notice.
            Pity that I have to pay tax for a dribble like you.

            20

    • #
      the Griss

      “This obsession with considering global”

      Oh.. so it NOT global.

      Just local, UHI, adjustments, polar smear, volcanics etc..

      Well yes.. we know that.

      Thanks for the confirmation, communicator (roflmao) !!!

      40

  • #

    Greg,

    if I could count on one finger the number of times an amateur “citizen scientist” has interrupted a legitimate researcher to ask some variant of, “yes but what about TOTAL polar bear numbers?” or “but what about all the glaciers that AREN’T retreating?” or “yes but how do those predicted deaths from heat waves compare to the lives saved by milder winters,” I’d be rich. Maybe not Exxon-funded denialist-blogger rich, but certainly better off than a middle-class Professor of Global Change. When will you people learn that scientists—practitioners of the use of observation and measurement to PROVE one’s beliefs—are *selective*?

    /dead serious. Struggle to think of anything more serious than this topic, frankly.

    09

    • #
      Carbon500

      Brad Keyes: you seem to be giving scientists the status of deities – those who may not be questioned.
      Any member of the public is entitled to ask why fortunes are being spent on the alleged dangerous man-made global warming. They’re entitled to ask why the fractional temperature changes we see are deemed dangerous. There’s many a person new to a discipline that comes to it and asks all sorts of questions, some of them can indeed awkward – and a good thing too. Fresh thinking is important. When I was doing work for my Ph.D. a retired family friend whose career had been in senior management and who also ran his own business was asking questions about my work. He understood the concepts very rapidly, yet had no background in molecular biology, bacteriology, or immunology.
      I’m heartily sick of seeing the words ‘cherry pick’. Until the climate change issue came around, I’d never seen this term used in scientific discussions. The truth is that usually this refers to an inconsistency which those of a warmist persuasion would rather hadn’t been raised!

      80

      • #

        Carbon500,

        I will ignore your inflammatory name and answer your implicit question as calmly as I can (as is my personal policy at Climate Nuremberg).

        Do I encourage skepticism?

        Absolutely!

        Honest skepticism is great.

        Many scientists ask me how to tell skepticism from denial.

        I like to share with them my simple algorithm:

        if someone asks you about the science, that’s skepticism. If you answer and they still don’t believe the science, that’s denial.

        Let me know if you have any other implicit questions.

        Brad

        16

        • #

          Sorry, I should have clarified:

          by “the science” I mean “the facts,” notably “the scientific fact that a carbon tax of $50/tonne or higher is all that stands between us and the literal death of the entire planet.”

          (Such abbreviations are, of course, understood without explanation by those of us active in the field, but I often forget that outsiders can be less literate in the science.)

          18

          • #
            the Griss

            ““the scientific fact that a carbon tax of $50/tonne or higher is all that stands between us and the literal death of the entire planet.”’

            What a total and absolute load of GARBAGE.

            You have NO facts to back that up.

            80

        • #
          the Griss

          “Let me know if you have any other implicit questions.’

          Yes, which climate trough do you swill from ?

          70

        • #

          Dariousz: If I make up a bunch of official sounding equations and present that as science, you’d believe me? If you protest the equations look made up, you’re a denier? Got it. Seems better yet if I create a model and call it “Reality”, you HAVE to believe me, don’t you? What a marvelous world your science is—anyone can create science by getting together and voting on the outcome and make up models to back up their models. Wow.

          Real polar bear researchers do not beleive the polar bear is in danger, just the alarmists. Real being the ones that count more than one non-moving bear from an airplane and extrapolate to extinct in one easy step.

          30

          • #

            Sheri,

            The fact that you’re lecturing Dariusz, and not Brad Keyes, is funnier than anything I’ve written in this thread!

            00

            • #

              Okay, Brad, apparently my funny dectector is as broken as climate models. Why should I be lecturing you and not Dariusz? I can lecture you both if you like. (Please define “lecture”—it gets used to describe various comments and I don’t understand the difference between commenting and lecturing. I used it because you did—trying to relate to the speaker and all that psychological nonsense, you know. This whole blog is a giant lecture, then, right? If it were say, a sarcastic blog, then it wouldn’t be lecture? Just a bit of fun with the insanity of language and attempting communicate in a nameless, faceless world. Wait, I may have answered my own question—I need to lecture you both.)

              00

    • #
      Dariusz

      In the last 25 years a number polar bears have increased so much on Spitsbergen that people can,t walk outside without the fear of being eaten. As a result, they carry guns for self-defence.

      Without the carbon you would not be alive! You have this in your body and breath out co2 every 3 to 4 seconds.
      We are living on co2 starved planet in the inter-glacial period with minor warming that lasted some 10,000 years.
      Trust me I am geologist that reconstruct climate for breakfast and I have been doing this for more 30 years.
      You welcome sceptics and critical thought, and yet what you say betrays your poor understanding and just one point of view.
      You also asked for questions.
      Question 1 : how do you explain no GW in the last 18 years according to satellite data (the unbiased source of temp) when we pumped 10-12% co2 into the atmosphere during the same time.
      Q2: do you know the earth endured warmer temperature for most of the geological history with no or minimum ice at polar regions?
      Q3: do you know that co2 was ~20% in the atmosphere some 3.5 billion years ago and water did not boil, but in fact was life giving to the tidal stromatolites that we can still admire along the coast of Western Australia?

      00

      • #

        Dariusz, because I agree with everything you’ve written and I acknowledge and agree with your strong feelings on this subject, could I please advise you that Brad Keyes was satarizing (ridiculing) the global warmists scam.
        His statements were of course, completely ridiculous, and in so doing, caused many to respond.
        Brad is not a scientific communications science consultant. He is someone who makes fun of those who claim to be.

        40

        • #
          Dariusz

          Confused I must away. If this so I apologise but these are not trivial matters and Under the normal circumstances I would laugh. The truth of the matter is that these issues are beyond jokes and are deadly serious.

          10

          • #

            Dariusz,

            I regret (but can’t do much about the fact) that you feel certain topics are off-limits to humor. To quote a great German who’s often maligned by association with Fascists, but who dreamed of shooting anti-Semites: “it is not by wrath that one kills, but by laughter.”

            00

        • #
          the Griss

          Yep,

          I admit it, he got me !! LOL !!

          20

    • #
      Glen Michel

      You’re a loony

      10

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      Brad, you appear to be in awe of yourself.

      And yes, most commenters here are engineers, scientists, or PhD’s of something or other. You calling yourself a science communications science consultant tells me more than you think it does.

      Also, calling the general public “muggles” also reveals your lack of perspective of the who is in the audience listening to you.

      21

  • #

    Greg,

    if I could count on one finger the number of times an amateur “citizen scientist” has interrupted a legitimate researcher to ask some variant of, “yes but what about total polar bear numbers?” or “but what about all the glaciers that aren’t retreating?” or “yes but how do those predicted deaths from heat waves compare to the lives saved by milder winters,” I’d be rich. Maybe not Exxon-funded-blogger rich, but certainly better off than the average middle-class Professor of Global Change who comprises the backbone of this lucky country. When will you people grasp that proper scientists—peer-legitimized practitioners of the use of observation and measurement to prove one’s beliefs—are inherently selective?

    /dead serious; struggling to think of any topic less worthy of sarcasm, frankly.

    09

  • #

    Oops, sorry for double-posting, and for accidentally making the second one less offensive! ;-)

    Pls disregard!

    17

    • #
      Dave

      Brad,

      Thanks for you link in your name

      I was looking for a Climate Scientist that told us (truck drivers & farmers) we had no faecking idea about anything.
      Your website says:

      “Science communication is hard, because the majority of the public is incapable of understanding anything about science”

      That’s the one statement I wanted from you.

      I know nothing
      I shouldn’t ask any questions
      If I do – I’m a dummy
      An incapable group of public that I am a part of.

      Brad, I’ll print off your comments and give them to all my friends, family and fellow workers.

      It’s gold, Brad, your disdain for the majority of the public.

      Hopefully you will comment more
      Everyday it becomes more obvious of your superior hatred of all not of your ilk.
      Your attitude is not even of disdain, it’s pitiful

      Dave

      110

      • #

        Dave,

        happy to help. I always did like the answer Former Gillard Government Chief Climate Commissioner Panasonic Sustainability Professor Timothy Flannery gave in an interview I covered for Nuremberg—from memory, it was along these lines:

        Q: “Why is the public taking so long to agree with the consensus?”

        Prof Flannery: “Well, historically people have always been prey to fallacious arguments.”

        Let me know if I can help clear up anything else.

        It’s what we science communicators live to do!

        110

        • #
          the Griss

          “Well, historically people have always been prey to fallacious arguments”

          Yep, many have fallen for the climate change SCAM.

          Did you fall for it, or are you part of the scam?

          91

        • #
          the Griss

          “Let me know if I can help clear up anything else”

          No help needed, we have you pinned exactly. !

          91

        • #
          Robert

          If you were a “science communicator” you would understand that consensus has nothing to do with science and never has.

          Flannery was correct though, what he wasn’t telling people is that the fallacious arguments were his. Obviously you fell for them.

          60

        • #
          Dariusz

          Nuremberg, last time was there drunk beer and stood where Adolf was standing during his manifestations. Julia and flannery like Hiller are demagogues. They are in the fine company with your presence not exempted.

          40

          • #

            Dariusz,

            Thanks for putting me in such august company but the embarrassing truth is I get terribly nervous when addressing a stadium full of hate-cultists. My hands get so sweaty I can barely adjust the microphone.

            So, no, I really don’t think I’m cut out to do what Flannery does.

            12

    • #
      the Griss

      Climate Nuremberg looks more like SkS for kindy students.

      What a self-righteous prat !!

      Seem Brad has very little idea about real science.

      A non-entity in the thinking world.

      81

      • #

        The,

        You don’t seem to have read our About page, in which we clearly express our ambition to provide a site like SkS, but for adults.

        09

        • #
          GM

          I haven’t seen Climate Nuremburg before, must have a good read. I remember you from Deltoid Brad, I really liked your style! :)

          21

          • #

            Thanks GM, for your kind words!

            Yes, it’s long been my contention that Dave Roberts at Grist was right: at the end of a hectic day, what we all need is a sort of Climate Nuremberg [NB spelling]! But he was crucified for saying it. And it was a cruelly ironic crucifixion if you ask me, because he’d done nothing wrong. :-(

            Thanks again

            06

            • #
              Glen Michel

              Nürnberg to you!

              20

            • #

              Wow. I get an up:down ratio of -6∞ votes… for thanking someone for a compliment?

              Tough room!

              Next time you’re about to press the downwards-facing thumb [trivia: this was originally the signal to spare a defeated gladiator], take a long hard look into your soul and ask yourself, who are you really downvoting?

              00

              • #
                GM

                Am I missing something here? Haven’t people actually read Brad’s blog, or Deltoid???

                10

              • #
                GM

                Whoops, I see further down the penny’s dropped. Do yourselves a favour and go read Brad’s thread at Deltoid, it’s a great read.

                10

        • #
          the Griss

          You haven’t succeeded.

          A long, long way to go until you graduate from primary school level.

          91

        • #
          the Griss

          When your scientific knowledge is basically zero..

          …of course you find science communication hard..

          81

        • #
          the Griss

          Seriously Brad, as a “science communicator” you are doing a pretty darn poor job.

          In several posts, you haven’t communicated one single bit of science. ???

          Empty posts of meaningless rhetoric..

          Thus is the climate science meme !!!

          81

        • #
          the Griss

          LOL..

          Ok Brad, It’s late, I’m tired.. You fooled me. Well done. :-)

          It seems Brad may be a satirical writer, who is actually on our side.

          If you read his pages, it can ONLY be satire. !

          I apologise for getting up your nose, Brad.

          I should read further. :-)

          —-

          From Brad’s site..

          Do people actually take this site seriously?

          Yes, but not to the extent we’d hoped.

          We’ve analysed the comment threads by tone and it turns out only about 80% of our visitors seem to believe this is an honest-to-god, alarmist website.

          You’re kidding. How could anybody read this stuff with a straight face?”

          50

          • #
          • #

            PS I don’t know who keeps downvoting you—it wasn’t me; I thought your rebuttals were rather good.

            21

            • #
              the Griss

              I have a few “followers” who I may have upset a bit in the past.. (diddums)

              They still hang on my every word ;-)

              60

            • #
              the Griss

              Anyway, as we all know..

              Climate trolls have a fondness for making facile, broad-brush generalisations, and will blithely do so with or without a single scholarly reference to substantiate them.

              Climate trolls aren’t very good at critical reasoning.

              And that is basically what you have been doing.

              Easy mistake to make. ;-)

              41

          • #
            Byron

            it can ONLY be satire

            ,

            Given the quality of some past posts by resident trolls it’s a very fine line between the warmist version of reality and satire .

            50

          • #
            Robert

            Me too. I just woke up.

            40

          • #
            Yonniestone

            Sorry guys at #77.1.1.1.1 I should’ve been more concise about remembering Brad, I thought ‘where do I know that name from?’ it was pretty funny though. :)

            30

      • #

        A non-entity in the thinking world.

        Sure, I suppose so. In the thinking world. Wherever that is.

        On Earth though, I’m kind of a big deal ;-)

        00

  • #
    ROM

    Brad Keyes
    January 28, 2015 at 5:17 pm ·

    If sarcasm is undermining respect for the science, then that’s a viable legislative option.

    Of course as you feel so strongly about the questioning of climate scientists and want to get serious about stopping that activity you could take up the demand of that Greenpeace catastrophic global warming believing yobbo of a few days ago and threaten to behead those citizen scientist questioners if they didn’t stop doubting and questioning those pure and above questioning climate warming scientists and their climate warming science.

    That might stop them!

    70

    • #

      I condemned those beheading calls at the time, and I condemn them now. As tempting as it sometimes is to blurt out what we’re all thinking, that way PR disaster lies. Have we learned nothing since No Pressuregate? Such intemperate outbursts serve only to feed into the hands of denihilist rhetoricians by confirming every stereotype about us: haha, look at those krazee Greens, who clearly chose the color of their flag as an homage to the Islamic caliphate and not to the plant world they fear and loathe and seek to starve by cutting carbon dioxide emissions. Haha, let’s laugh at the Greens.

      We’re victims of enough hate speech as it is, thanks very much (as I wrote in a very disappointed email to Bluecloud).

      17

      • #

        As I asked Bluecloud: how many gaffes will it take before we on the side of the science learn there’s such a thing as too much honesty?

        19

        • #
          ROM

          My post @ #82 is in reply to Brad Keyes post @ # 83

          20

        • #
          the Griss

          “how many gaffes will it take before we on the side of the science”

          Climate Science™ will never be on the side of science..

          It has been one big gaffe right from its inception..

          .. and they just keep going !

          A sort of NON-science. !

          31

        • #
          Annie

          Well…thanks for a burst of totally disbelieving laughter. “Too much honesty”…..Ha ha ha ha!

          20

        • #
          the Griss

          “we on the side of science scam learn there’s such a thing as too much honesty?

          How about just one little bit of honesty for a start.?

          You can do it… you can do it.. come on, at least try !!!!!

          Nope.. nothing, nada…. zip !!

          How many of your feet do you have in your mouth at the moment?! :-)

          30

        • #
          Byron

          Nice work Brad , excellent satire and , like all good satire , frighteningly close to the truth

          11

      • #
        Dariusz

        No one is laughing at the greens. They are the new age communist and ruling with labor almost bankrupted the country. Julia was part of that. The worse PM in history of Australia. The greens believe in global government with no private rights. Because of GW crap the value of an average person is less than zero unless you Bob brown or Milne.
        I would recognise them anywhere as I have lived through their paradise for 20 years under communism.

        40

  • #
    Glen Michel

    The writings on the wall.End of this temporal thread and all that musings……… and hopefully a Risorgimento at some stage that will progress our common humanity.Not Socialist conformity though.Let us prosper under individual thought.

    30

  • #
  • #
    ROM

    Ah ! So the subject of beheading the questioners and doubters has already been discussed with the original proposer Gary “Bluecloud” Evans.

    I’m sure there are a LOT of people out there not all of them very taken with the beheading suggestion including the national intelligence authorities, who might be VERY interested in that development as well as who is involved.

    40

  • #
    ROM

    Seems like there was some confusing post swapping going on after posts had been posted in their chronological sequence probably when somebody’s post or a couple of posts came out of moderation.
    .

    In Brad Keyes post @ 79.1 he condemns the beheading calls by Gary “Bluecloud” Evans not because the whole concept of beheading an unbeliever because their beliefs don’t coincide with the beheading proposer, a stance that is nothing less than pure unmitigated evil personified , but instead he astonishingly condemns Gary “Bluecloud” Evans beheading proposal Because It Is Bad Publicity for the greens.

    One could draw further unfortunate conclusions from Brad Keyes stance on that but I will let others draw their own conclusions.

    What Brad Keyes is ultimately proposing here is a wholesale restriction on the questioning of any climate scientists which we assume means those scientists whose opinions on the climate coincide with Brad Keyes and Greenpeace’s opinion on the climate.

    No doubt scientists openly skeptical of any of Keyes or Greenpeaces climate beliefs will be open to severe questioning or more likely, severe censure and loss of position.. 

    So Keyes and his “comrades” in Greenpeace [ "comrades" and the connotations arising from that word are used deliberately in this case ] intend to be the judge , jury and executioner on what science and which scientists will be the ultimate authorities on what will be acceptable climate science conforming to the appropiate requirements of Greenpeace and it’s climate activists.
    That is the underlying premise of Keyes proposals to prevent questioning of climate scientists,
    Of course in the nature of any such bureaucratic legislative proposals this will invariably be extended later to prevent any questioning of any climate alarmist science and of the activities of climate alarmist activists

    For science communication consultant, Keyes seems to be remarkably ignorant of the probable consequences of his proposal.

    So for a complete and parallel past historical event which has occurred in almost identical circumstances previously and with disastrous outcomes for both science and for many, many good scientists and for even more unfortunate and innocent individuals.

    Here is the historical example that in actual outcomes almost identically parallels the probable outcomes of Keye’s proposal to prevent any questioning of climate scientists which will entail the establishment of an all powerful science overlord to ensure conformity with the prevailing climate catastrophe orthodoxy as spelt out by the alarmists and climate activists of Greenpeace
    __________________________

    Trofim Lysenko

    Trofim Lysenko was a Soviet biologist and agronomist who rejected the research of Gregor Mendel, which was then and is now considered a basic foundation of genetics. Instead Lysenko pursued what was called “socialist genetics,” politicized science that made him the favorite scientist of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin.

    In 1927 Lysenko reported a stunning breakthrough, describing a new method to fertilize fields without the use of fertilizers or minerals, using a process called vernalization, in which germinating seeds are exposed to low temperatures under conditions allowing scientists to control the plant’s flowering time.

    Vernalization is a proven biological phenomenon, but Lysenko’s methodology was the opposite of the scientific method — he designed his research to reach pre-ordained results, and by habit and policy he ignored any results which did not advance his theories. He claimed that the process of vernalization could be inherited in plants, and reported experiments that supposedly yielded healthy, robust pea plants even in the dead of winter, in subsequent generations of plants untreated by vernalization. In the impoverished and frequently frozen Soviet Union, Lysenko’s falsified findings were trumpeted widely in state-owned media, and he was portrayed as a hero of the Soviet state.

    Lysenko was placed in charge of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences, overseeing the Soviet Union’s entire research program dedicated to increasing crop yields. His methods were mandated on collectivized farms across the Soviet Union and throughout the USSR’s international sphere of influence, and played a key role in repeated famines that left many millions of Soviet citizens dead and mired research in the Soviet Union for decades.

    Under the Soviet system all science was funded by the state, which meant that so long as Lysenko remained in Stalin’s good graces it was career suicide for any scientist to dispute him. Few did, and Lysenko’s opponents were frequently sent to the gulag. Science textbooks were rewritten, with Lysenko’s work replacing what he called “alien foreign bourgeois biology”. Even after Stalin’s death and denunciation by Nikita Khrushchev, Lysenko maintained his position at the apex of Soviet science until the mid-1960s.

    70

  • #
    Tim

    Of course Australia will be hit hardest by the dreaded ‘Climate Armageddon’. Australia’s PM is a skeptic and so his voters must be targeted via the presstitute media to unseat him.

    30

    • #

      Not to mention that Australia is the world capital of sarcasm—which has been identified as the emotion diametrically opposite to science.

      12

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        If you’re supposed to be a satirist, could you at least make that more obvious? Now I don’t know if you’re a believer pretending to be an authority, or making fun of them by pretending to be them.

        You’re either two faced, self-conflicted, or some other nasty work. Either way, I don’t appreciate your style. State your mind and keep it forward and honest please. None of this good cop / bad cop business.

        31

        • #

          If you’re supposed to be a satirist, could you at least make that more obvious?

          No.

          Now I don’t know if you’re a believer pretending to be an authority, or making fun of them by pretending to be them.

          Um, well, if I’m supposed to be a satirist then which do you think is more likely, Greg?

          You’re either two faced, self-conflicted, or some other nasty word.

          Like “satirist”?

          State your mind and keep it forward and honest please.

          Er, that would make parody a bit difficult, I’m afraid. ‘Even more difficult’ I should say.

          None of this good cop / bad cop business.

          A.k.a. ‘this satire/parody business.’ Yes, you’ve made your feelings explicit enough, cheers. At least Dariusz has good personal reasons for being in no laughing mood whenever the climate movement topic comes up. What’s your excuse Greg?

          00

  • #
    albert

    I’ve spent years over the Outback when the Summer was really ‘angry’, 50 degrees all over Australia is IMPOSSIBLE, it would break the records of the 1920′s and 1930′s and is unknown in our past

    10

  • #

    If you don’t laugh at them often and out loud … you are missing all the fun .. exposing their collectivism and stupidity is a pleasure and a perfectly healthy use of your time … after all … why should these fear mongering minions have all the attention … they sure as hell cannot be having much fun … thanks for this … reality check.

    10

  • #
    Ms Smith

    Of course the prophets of doom would say “Climate change will hit Australia harder than rest of world.” After all, Australia, Tony Abbott is one of the last countries not yet willing to commit to the climate change scare, propaganda machine. That’s why Tony Abbott has to be dethroned as Pm by December, before the 2015 Paris Climate Change conference. Tony Abbott is obstructing the NWO’s planned agenda. Getting all countries to sign the Climate Change agreement will be binding and non-negotiable.

    00