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

The hate campaign — it’s “science by insults” revealing the deepest fear of believers

Should David Rose’s children murder him for the sake of the planet?

Welcome to western civilization’s advanced scientific debate. There there are no shades of gray, we can’t discuss whether climate sensitivity is 1, 2,or 3 degrees, and it’s not even about numbers. It’s about whether you are good or evil.

For a religious believer, the worst thing that could happen is a polite conversation. They know (at least on a subconscious level) that they don’t have the answers, and that if skeptics were heard the voters would flee… the only possible answer is to “win” through bully-boy tactics. Unleash the righteous indignation!

David Rose does Daily Mail articles asking dangerous questions about error bars and wanting to know pedantic, unreasonable things like where the scientific data is.  One commenter urged his children to kill him.  Rose has been a journalist for 34 years. He has seen nothing like this vitriol. As he writes below, The Guardian and other newspapers support brutal threats in comments but filter out skeptics.

Climate of Hate: His children are urged to kill him, he’s compared to Adolf Hitler and labelled a ‘denier’ – even though he’s Jewish. Disturbing article reveals what happens if you dare to doubt the Green prophets of doom

  • Journalist David Rose has been labelled a ‘climate change denier’ 
  • Wrote article about scientists covering up data in ‘climategate’ scandal
  • He believes ‘renewable’ sources such as wind and ‘biomass’ are futile 
  • One online commenter urged Mr Rose’s own children to murder him  

The remark about my children killing me was made some months ago, after The Guardian published one of several critiques of my work by its climate activist blogger, Dana Nuccitelli. One of the online commenters posted: ‘In a few years, self-defence is going to be made a valid defence for parricide [killing one's own father], so Rose’s children will have this article to present in their defence at the trial.’

Another commenter compared me to Adolf Hitler. Frankly, I didn’t take either of them too seriously. But last week on Twitter, someone else wrote that he knew where I lived, and posted my personal phone numbers.

Meanwhile, Nuccitelli had written another vehement attack, this time against Matt Ridley, The Times columnist, Tory peer and fellow ‘lukewarmer’. This fresh assault was illustrated by the paper’s editors with a grotesque image of a severed head. One who commented, called ‘Bluecloud’, said: ‘Should that not be Ridley’s severed head in the photo… Why are you deniers so touchy? Mere calls for a beheading evolve [sic] such a strong response in you people. Ask yourself a simple question: Would the world be a better place without Matt Ridley? Need I answer that question?’

In fact, Bluecloud is a Guardian contributor called Gary Evans, who is also a ‘sustainability consultant’ funded by Greenpeace. Ridley complained, but the statements stayed on the website for at least four days. Comments in support of Ridley were removed by the site’s moderators, because they did not ‘abide by our community standards’. In an email to The Guardian’s editor, Alan Rusbridger, Ridley pointed out that a Japanese hostage had just been beheaded by Islamic State.

Language only barely less extreme is now common. In the US, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has written that anyone who denies global warming must be ‘punished in the afterlife… this kind of denial is an almost inconceivable sin’.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.9/10 (135 votes cast)
The hate campaign -- it's "science by insults" revealing the deepest fear of believers, 8.9 out of 10 based on 135 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/k26m2ek

233 comments to The hate campaign — it’s “science by insults” revealing the deepest fear of believers

  • #
    Bulldust

    Ironically it seems it is the supporters of CAGW that are losing their heads.

    770

    • #
      the Griss

      no, no, no..

      they are not losing their heads..

      They are losing their minds. !! :-)

      581

      • #
        the Griss

        ps.. I might add, that this is a far more serious situation for them.

        They actually have to live with their lost minds. !!

        331

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          They have not really lost their minds, they are just buried in a mind field of fear, that they may lose their source of income.

          And who wants “Misguided Climate Change Agitator”, on their CV?

          90

      • #
        turnedoutnice

        It’s Mind over Matter.

        I don’t Mind and they don’t Matter………:o)

        240

        • #
          mikep

          I don’t Mind and they don’t Matter………:o)

          I know that’s said in jest….but the thing is that those of us who prefer a more reasoned and scientific discussion (well done to Jo Nova, Anthony Watts and all for allowing that!) do mind very much about the whole climate change issue and the way science is being dragged through the mud a lot of the time.

          And sadly to the powers that be…they (the believers) do seem to matter!

          170

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Science will take at least two generations, well over fifty years, to recover from this particular episode. That was how long it took for the hypothesis of phlogiston to finally wither away and die.

            And for those who don’t know, phlogiston was a hypothetical chemical that was released during combustion. It was obvious, anybody who attended mass could see it, as the flame, that sat atop each candle in the church.

            It was only the discovery of a new element – oxygen – that could better explain the flame in terms of a chemical reaction – that finally put paid to phlogiston as a hypothesis.

            60

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          As I’ve said before, if the CAGW crowd are foolish enough to physically come after us to do us physical harm, they will go out backwards…

          I hope the clearly understand that.

          Thugs need to be stood up to.

          90

          • #
            john robertson

            Funny that, it has always bemused me; the concerned ones of my personal experience are non tool using citizens.
            They constantly prattle on as to what the productive persons must do, gravitate to government income and most could not survive three days without help.

            Yet they too fantasize about doing violence to those of us who laugh at their fears.
            Here in Canada they also are very opposed to private ownership of firearms.

            So mechanically inept, non hunters wishing to incite violence against all who do not share their belief in the great Gaseous Catastrophe , what could go wrong..for them?

            140

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Surely we are not discussing violence?

            Much better for the practical people who can survive with their own knowledge and resources, to leave the vapourous luvvies to their own devices. Once the coal-fired power stations run out of coal, and the wind dies away, and the sun sets, we can let nature do, what it does best, … recycling.

            50

            • #
              AndrewGriff

              Don’t forget about Uranium, this will keep the the lights on when Gas, Coal and Oli are burnt up.

              00

          • #
            John Brookes

            Mostly, we’ll ignore you. It is what you deserve.

            David Rose is a “climate change denier”? I’d have thought [snip crass] was shorter and more descriptive.

            09

            • #
              Joe V.

              Brooksie is back ! Who was just saying he hadn’t been seen for a while ? Combattive as ever it seems.

              20

            • #
              Winston

              So John,

              Urging David Rose’s children to kill him is just vigorous debate, John? And as a victim of such abuse, your response to David Rose is to pile more abuse upon him. Charming.

              The ol’ “blame the victim” switcheroo, eh Johnny boy. Good to see the standard of your comments and the cogent nature of your opinions hasn’t improved over the hiatus pause sabbatical you’ve been taking from Jo’s blog.

              70

    • #
      KenW

      comes from losing their cool

      110

    • #
      En passant

      Like most people commenting on this site I tend to mock the Nutella’s and Bluecloud fools, but there is a slight problem …
      Less than twenty years ago a worked for company developing GM cereals that would increase the food stocks of the world for the same input. The Dark Greens thought that feeding the world with accelerated genetic modification was evil. One of them murdered the brother of the company Chairman (by mistake as he intended to kill the Chairman).
      Jo, I will understand if this is ‘snipped’, but email me if you want the details.
      Loonies on even innocuous subjects are still dangerous and irrational.

      130

    • #
      aussieguy

      Its actually surprisingly simple: They have not mentally grown up.

      Just observe their behaviour.
      * They think they know how the world works when they really don’t. (The curse of indoctrination).
      * They cannot debate the merits of what they’re promoting. In fact, they will run from a serious discussion. (Have you ever seen Al Gore debate?)
      * They believe they know what’s best for all. (Some even cheer for Communism). They see everyone else as stupid while they themselves are “enlightened”.
      * They believe they are good and anyone who disagrees with them is evil. This allows them to behave really poorly. (Online comments that Jo pointed out shows us this).
      * They throw tantrums when they don’t get their way. (Like a spoiled child at a toy store in Christmas time).
      * Like a child; feelings, emotion, and belief is more important…The delusional and utopian tone they project.
      * They ignore consequences of their actions. Its all about short term. No thinking about long term consequences.
      * They don’t believe and even ignore facts, evidence, analysis, data, etc that doesn’t fit their narrative. In fact, they create their own with dodgy analytical practices.
      * You cannot have an adult conversation with them.
      * When you hold them to account, (they have no choice but to admit fault), they offer non-apologies. Seriously, these people don’t have humility! They can’t and don’t know how to genuinely apologise! To admit fault, means to admit they’re wrong. They can’t be wrong! They are perfect! Their teachers, professors, etc said so! Look, they have a degree! They are “educated”! It is everyone else that is the problem!
      * They cannot convince through reason. They must use force. Whether it be the foul behaviour they display online or the hate they project when they protest. (Has anyone noticed a Climate Change activist is never happy?)
      * They put THEIR ideology ahead of other people. (Sociopathic tendencies?)
      * Common sense is absent. (Their arguments don’t stand “the pub test”. They fall apart with the simply application of logic and academic honesty.)



      When you think about it, all we have to do is point out their poor behaviour and hypocrisy to the general public, and they will be put on the defensive…They have to explain themselves. And if the public doesn’t accept their explanations, they will lose support to their cause. (Which is what’s happening right now. People just don’t care of the “end of the world” chants, as they are fatigued from all that fearmongering that has not played out as claimed).

      120

  • #
    King Geo

    The “CAGW Religious Cult” has its religious zealots who will defend their faith no matter what – they are delusional and can’t be swayed with scientific reasoning – they are pathetic examples of the human race and one wonders if they can deal with the mental trauma of the imminent CGC / LIA destroying their religious belief system within the next decade, with some so deranged that they will no doubt interpret the NEW COLD AS THE NEW HOT.

    CGC = catastrophic global cooling.

    510

    • #
      david milne

      Well, King Geo, you use the insulting terms zealots, delusional, pathetic, deranged against those you wish to criticise for the same sort of behaviour. Doesn’t that put you in the same boat with them? Practise what you preach.

      219

      • #
        King Geo

        Well 36 disagree (so far) with you David M. The “CAGW Religious Cult” has cost the World Economy US$ trillions for zero benefit to mankind so a few “hard hitting adjectives” describing their activities I believe is justified – I look forward to reading what Winston and others have to say about your view.

        140

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        David Milne

        zealot n. a person who shows zeal, to be zealous

        delusional a. having unrealistic beliefs or opinions

        pathetic a. causing or evoking pity, affecting or moving the feelings

        Hardly insulting terms, in normal usage.

        But there again, it is the receptor who chooses how to interpret what they read or hear, and whether or not they should feel insulted by the interpretation that they have chosen.

        I don’t think King Geo can be held responsible for something you have chosen to do.

        121

      • #
        the Griss

        interesting..

        Since when has the use of appropriate descriptive definitions been an issue. ?

        Are we also being cowtowed by political correctmess.

        There are some who cannot abide a bit of minor sledging of trolls, and complain to mummy !!!!.

        I have been constrained by the complaints of one poor sensitive little individual, who I won’t bother naming.

        Either I have the latitude to kick back.. or I’m OUT !!

        Its a Rhett Cooper moment.

        The bosses call !!

        60

      • #
        Winston

        David,

        Your critique would hold a bit more water if King Geo’s disparaging remarks were not so mild and innocuous, nor quite so accurate. As I stated below, the tone of the interaction between alarmists and their critics was set right at the outset by the outrageous abuse by warmistas of anyone who dared question the validity of a tenuous hypothesis. If abuse didn’t work, threats to employment prospects and tenure ensued, ostracising from peers was a natural consequence and derision the norm. Such behaviour on this scale is unprecedented in the history of science, IMHO.

        My journey to skepticism, OTOH, began when I was first privy to the debate when frequenting the Skeptical Science blog. What I witnessed there over a 9-12 month period was the serial bullying of anyone who pointed out holes in the alarmists logic, often in tag team fashion by regulars who seemed to collude in their responses to create an impression of certainty and unity. I also noticed a certain circularity in the chain of logic used in their arguments, a lot of assumptions being made without proper acknowledgement, and the utter intransigence and gang mentality of the regulars who frequented there became ever more obvious as time went by. Far from enlightening, I found the site to be a slick propagandist entity feigning a debate that was rigged and manipulated to create an impression on those who were less discerning of human behaviour than myself.

        The cost of this tragic blind alley in human progress is incalculable, and those who have perpetrated this speculative hypothesis have been misguided, disingenuous, dishonest, and ethically deficient. As such, any complaints of returning in kind that which they have dealt out to others is pathetic to say the least.

        70

        • #
          Carbon500

          Winston: Skeptical Science selectively ignored any points I made that were at odds with their views. It didn’t take long for me to stop bothering with them. Self-appointed experts, but little else.

          20

  • #
    Yonniestone

    To any mature rational person this threatening abusive behavior is both disgusting and disturbing, to the ‘believers’ it’s perfectly justified, you can’t make it any simpler than that when assessing the mental health of both sides.

    I think of it like this, if Joanne Nova or David Evans ever suggested that readers commit violent acts against Warmists etc. there’s no way I’d ever look at this blog let alone comment, would any professional scientist/qualified persons that regularly comment here want to be associated with people that resort to unevolved base human instincts when their arguments are not supported?

    Of course not, which is why the professional skeptic blogs are seen as such a threat to the believers simply for reason of truth, after all the threats, abuse, intimidation is said and done the truth will always persist and this fact drives the weak minded to distraction.

    I recently noted that using the term ‘religion’ for what is more a ‘cult’ when describing the extreme green movement is probably more than insulting for many people, even though I stand as an atheist considering many of the good people I’ve met though out life and followed on this blog that are followers of many mainstream faiths I actually feel regret for using ‘religion’ if it even slightly aligns the green cult with your personal beliefs on creation etc..so sorry about that no offense intended.

    740

  • #
    Peter C

    Someone can’t spell patricide. A Guardian reader?

    231

    • #

      Actually, contrary to the translation supplied, parricide means killing a near relative—it’s agnostic as to whether you commit patricide, matricide, fratricide, sororicide, nepoticide etc. I’m no lawyer but I imagine it also closes the loophole for cousin killers that was famously mentioned by Jaime Lannister.

      121

      • #
        the Griss

        iirc.. “patricide” is father get-rid-of to inherit.

        “parricide”, is any relative you are not fond of. :-)

        130

        • #
          Yonniestone

          “Climicide” is the murder of the scientific method.

          “Mannicide” is the murder of Dendrochronology.

          “Milnicide” is the murder of mirrors.

          “Yonnicide” is the murder of ‘Cide’ killing terms.

          390

          • #
            the Griss

            Yonnie.. you are truly a rude little boy :-)

            But sooooo true !!

            123

          • #

            Oreskicide is the murder of the murderer of 3000 years of the Western concept of knowledge (justified true belief).

            It may or may not constitute homicide, depending on the legal and/or Linnaean situation of gorgons w.r.t. the ability to claim human status.

            170

          • #
            James Bradley

            Yonnie,

            It’s not what you do that defines you, it’s how you do it.

            My preference is ‘alphabetical order’.

            30

          • #
            KenW

            and they’re humor impaired. Never have any fun.

            That’s probably why they hate us the most!

            110

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              The warmists have a joke.

              It goes like this:

              Two skeptics go into a pub, and stand at the bar.

              The barperson asks, “What do you want to drink?”

              the first skeptic says, “I am not sure”.

              The second skeptic says, “Are you sure that you are not sure?”

              The first skeptic says, “No”.

              So they both leave.

              30

    • #
  • #
    scaper...

    SAVAGES!

    160

    • #
      Winston

      If it looks like a Nazi, walks like a Nazi, acts like a Nazi, then it’s a Nazi. Praise be to Godwin.

      In all seriousness, people such as these are attracted to their cause out of sheer misanthropy. It is reflected in their carelessness with the ramifications of their actions, since the deaths of thousands or even millions through enforced poverty are meaningless to them in the face of protecting the sanctity of an inanimate object- ” the planet”.

      These people have no redeeming features whatsoever, they are heartless, careless, wantonly destructive, arrogant, narcissistic, weak, nasty, bigoted, chauvinistic, patronising ingrates who are an affront to their progenitors who scrimped and sacrificed to make the world a better place for them. They stand on the shoulders of giants, only to spit straight back in their faces.

      They are the O’Brien’s of the future- “imagine a boot stamping on a human face- forever”.

      532

      • #
        King Geo

        “These people have no redeeming features whatsoever, they are heartless, careless, wantonly destructive, arrogant, narcissistic, weak, nasty, bigoted, chauvinistic, patronising ingrates who are an affront to their progenitors who scrimped and sacrificed to make the world a better place for them. They stand on the shoulders of giants, only to spit straight back in their faces.”

        Winston – absolutely brilliant description of the “CAGW Religious Cult”. You and James D (yes Delingpole) have a “special” linguistic talent – in fact I think you are better than James D but don’t quote me – thank god you are on the skeptic’s side.

        180

      • #
        Bulldust

        Don’t attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance. There are plenty of useful idiots on the AGW side, who really don’t have a clue. The leaders are the ones to chastise. The Al Gore’s of the world, who preach to the ignorant, usually for their own benefit.

        210

        • #
          Owen Morgan

          I’m not sure where the “leaders” sit on the malice/ignorance seesaw. Here in Britain, we have had a succession of clueless secretaries of state at the moronically named Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC): Ed Miliband, who (saints preserve us) wants to be our next Prime Minister; Chris Huhne, who has a criminal record; Ed Davey, the current incumbent. (If we’re talking about losing Eds, British labour and the libdims have a whole shopping-list of them.)

          None of these three has ever shown any reluctance to make the most obtuse policy decisions imaginable. On that basis and given their refusal to contemplate for one moment any contradictory argument, I’d tend to assume that malice is, in fact, aforethought. Having said that, there is no doubt that not one of the three arrived in the job with a conscientious layman’s understanding of the issues. They had probably never read a single sceptical article, paper, or book.

          Once inside Kafka’s Castle, or DECC, as it’s now known, I doubt if they will ever have heard presented an argument that remotely chipped away at their prejudices. How far would a DECC civil servant’s career progress, if he or she dared to express any lack of faith in the orthodoxy? The ministers lack self-doubt and are surrounded by a self-perpetuating priesthood of True Believers.

          70

        • #
          Craig Loehle

          I have been at environmental protests where someone asked the protesters (in some cases dressed up in a funny costumes) what they were protesting: no clue. Also seen such interviews on TV and blogs. Useful idiots indeed. And then there was CFACT which got people to sign a petition for banning di-hydrogen-monoxide.

          40

          • #
            Owen Morgan

            I remember seeing that CFACT video. It was hilarious, but also terrifying to see how ignorant those supposed apostles of “science” were.

            20

      • #
        KenW

        These people have no redeeming features whatsoever, they are heartless, careless, wantonly destructive, arrogant, narcissistic, weak, nasty, bigoted, chauvinistic, patronising ingrates who are an affront to their progenitors who scrimped and sacrificed to make the world a better place for them. They stand on the shoulders of giants, only to spit straight back in their faces.

        yep. spoilt.

        100

        • #
          tom0mason

          Spoilt, and living well on the hugely lucrative

          Gr€€n Profit$ Of Doom (TH€ fin€$t $u$tainabl€ and R€n€w€b£€ £if€tim€ $ub$idy.)

          90

      • #
        The Backslider

        If it looks like a Nazi, walks like a Nazi, acts like a Nazi, then it’s a Nazi.

        John Cook.

        30

        • #

          Methinks John was flattering himself when he fired up Photoshop that day.

          Does anyone seriously think a specimen like Cook would have survived the eugenics fad of the 30s, let alone in Germany?

          50

          • #
            Greg Cavanagh

            He would have been put to use, as only useful idiots can be so used. At least until his usefulness had run its course.

            20

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            Actually you have a fair point – I think its one thing to be a whining snivelling ingrate on a web page, its another to actually physically have a swing at someone.

            As Maggie T accurately said :

            - “Socialists are very good at spending someone elses money”

            Its a perfect backhander at those who richly often deserve it.

            FYI – I’d never want to cause trouble mentally or physically to anyone. Being a skeptic is a duty to logic and science and truth.

            60

          • #
            Glen Michel

            Certainly would be in Dachau for cooks… Er KooKs

            00

      • #
        Carbon500

        Winston: I’d say first and foremost that they are gullible!

        00

    • #
      the Griss

      Savages,, so true, (about) half of the don’t even shave under their arms. !!

      81

  • #

    Look it really is about Open Society versus Closed Society,
    debate/conjecture/test/refute mebbe, versus ‘Chop off his
    head!’ jest-a-serf.

    230

    • #
      tom0mason

      An outrageous statement like that could get you locked up in some states.

      60

      • #

        Ironic ain’t it tomomason, how so called progressive
        proponents of PC, and 18C limits to free speech, can
        be so intemperate in their C-C-non-PC attack campaigns
        against CAGW-sceptics?

        60

  • #
    Manfred

    As I have remarked before, they betray themselves at every turn. This it seems, above all else, is their solitary consistency.

    170

  • #
    el gordo

    Religious fanaticism is almost impossible to quell, even if the hiatus lasted 30 years (which as you know is climate) they would still believe in global warming. I think its a cargo cult.

    260

    • #
      Peter Carabot

      …doesnt a “Cargo Cult” require a Carbon Burning Plane as a Totem? (PNG)

      80

    • #
      ian hilliar

      Yep, I turned on the radio this morning to check the time, [my watch being in for repairs, ] and got those idiots on ABC interviewing some stooge from the WMO about the recent confirmation of 2014 as the hottest year on record. It doesn’t matter to these people that this is false, they just refuse to look at the data and just keep on parroting their belief systems. Served me right for turning on the ABC, even if only to check the time. Should have turned on the computer instead, but I had to iron some shirts!

      50

  • #
    mmxx

    According to climate scientists, global average temperatures are rising.

    I’m considering realty investment in Greenland to scoop on its previous agricultural potential as a vegetable, grain and fruit growing region.

    170

    • #
      the Griss

      “global average temperatures are rising.”

      NO.

      The Gavin calculated GISS global average temperature is rising.

      A very different fabrication. !

      201

    • #
      RoHa

      Probably a good idea. The way the Antarctic ice is growing, it won’t be long before it covers Australia, and our agriculture will be done for..

      110

      • #
        the Griss

        ummm, probably not in your lifetime RoHa. :-)

        Let’s not panic yet.

        Leave that up to the other guys. !

        70

        • #
          john robertson

          No no panic now, the meme is currently unused by the Wailing Ones, it is only fair to help frightened persons feel justified, the southern Ice Cap growth is “unprecedented”, Australia is doomed..the gullible need to be encouraged to flee the coming Icy Doom.
          Climatism has so freed up the public discourse, knowing it is rubbish is no longer a good reason not to stampede the sheep.
          They love to panic, help them any way we can.

          10

      • #
        The Backslider

        This is the thing now. The more that the ice grows and the more snow that falls it’s all due to “climate disruption” caused by that nasty pollutant CO2.

        50

      • #
        The Backslider

        You just wait….. when the next LIA sets in they will find a way to blame it as being due to an unexpected tipping point caused by CO2.

        60

  • #
    Rick Bradford

    Leftism is the politics of rage.

    Because its followers are emotion-driven, and the world isn’t giving them the attention they feel entitled to, they are simply consumed with hatred for the ‘system’ and anyone who stands in their way of smashing it.

    Of course, many of them have learned to hide the extreme feelings, but from time to time the vitriol leaks out and we hear calls for beheading, gassing, or branding of climate skeptics.

    As the victory of the skeptics approaches, this kind of raw hate will only increase, I’m sure.

    411

  • #
    the Griss

    My direct boss is a respected alarmist professor.

    I got him down to “the Precautionary Principle” the other day.

    Then, I KNEW I had won :-)

    461

    • #
      Rick Bradford

      You can never win with these people — they shape-shift and return to the fray.

      Admitting final defeat is too painful for people with such praise-hungry narcissistic ego needs as the Leftists.

      Even when they’re caught red-handed (Gleick, Monbiot, for example) their apologies are always transparent self-justification along the lines of “I made an error of judgment, but only because of my moral outrage at what They are doing.”

      270

    • #
      Bobl

      Well done Griss my boy…. there’s hope for you yet, picking nits with my posts must have been joning your skills!

      I hope you countered the precautionary principle with my lessons for warmists? You know the 13 stupid and deadly consequences of climate action?

      Once they are down to the precautionary principle (which is a moral argument) you need to debase the moral basis for their belief and the deprogramming is complete. For those readers who don’t know.

      1. Given that the population is more than twice the preindustrial population, and growth in crop yields due to CO2 fertilisation is sustaining the food supply for that population, how moral is it to return to the temperature of the depths of the little ice age with a third less CO2 to fertilise crops? Famine from the preindustrial era killed 1/2 the population of Europe, and this is what they want to return to?

      2. How moral is it to convert carbohydrates from being food to fuel rather than sending it as food aid.

      3. You do know that the next best fuel for making electricity after coal is FLOUR? Don’t you?

      4. How Moral is it to kill millions of avains with windmills or incinerate them cruely while alive, or worse still blind the creatures so they starve to death or are undefended from predators.

      5. How moral is it to divert money that could be used to eliminate cancer, aids or malaria , end world hunger, or distribute medicines to millions of vulnerable children to building windmills and solar panels to assuage warmist consciences

      6. Is it better to tackle deaths from cyclones like the one in the Philippines by building windmills in South Australia or by Building Cyclone Shelters in the Philippines

      7. To replace just 1GW of coal plant capacity one must tile at least 20 square km with solar panels, so nothing will live underneath 20 SQUARE km per GW! Hundreds of square km of landscape GONE!

      8. Is is moral that landowners in Africa are being evicted from their lands or murdered to make way for carbon credit earning plantations.

      9. Is it Moral that Grannies and young babies die in Cold places because they can’t afford heating costs doubled by Global Warming action?

      10. How many people is is ok to have die today to “save the planet for the future”

      11. Is it better to litter the landscape with useless windmills and solar farms to control sea level rise or build a sea wall just one brick high in low lying areas.

      12. Is is fair that landowners get to eliminate their energy costs with feed-in tariffs while the subsidy cost is passed on to energy users who can’t afford panels such as renters and thye poor? Who is hurt most by this climate action?

      13. You do know that carbon taxes or ETS systems as efficient as Gillards tax was supposed to be would cost 3 times world GDP per degree mitigation? In terms of actual cost per the actual performance of Gillards tax which cost was $5310 per tonne (Jo?) The cost for 1 degree of mitigation would be more like 600 times world GDP – carbon tax = EPIC FAIL

      110

  • #

    The phrase ‘climate Nuremberg’ seems to serve as a kind of offence-taking Rohrschach, diagnostic as to which “side” expects to end up on the receiving end of the suboptimal catharsis known as ‘victor’s justice.’

    It used to be just us “deniers” who were appalled at the suggested postbellum lynching of our leadership (to the extent that we actually have leaders). But as the chthonic, sh*t-eating worm that is the “climate debate” turns and even the truest True Believalists in the death of all humans start to gird themselves for The Great Disappointment, the standard interpretation has flipped. Now it’s The Scientists™ who unconciously rub their necks and loosen their ties when you say, “my blog is http://www.climatenuremberg.com.”

    Until you point out it’s a joke.

    101

    • #
    • #
      the Griss

      “Until you point out it’s a joke”

      Oh no.. I never realised !!! ;-)

      70

      • #

        Oh, you didn’t?

        Yeah, we’re essentially just kidding. It’s pretty much a joke.

        Nobody’s saying, necessarily, at this point anyway, that Mann, Jones and the various perverts of science who enable them ought to be hanged as inimici humani generis. I don’t think anyone wants that.

        Even though, when you think about it, yeah—OK—sabotaging science is the dictionary definition of a crime against humanity, sure. Which, strictly speaking, is another way of saying an atrocity and an automatic date with the wobbly chair, according to pretty much any moral or legal tradition that would be recognized internationally.

        So, yeah, fine, you could make a case, in that sense (ethically, jurisprudentially or whatever), that people proven to have vandalised science deserve the ultimate penalty civilization can humanely impose on its “enemies”, if that’s what you insist on calling them, and hey: I’m not saying that wouldn’t be a cogent argument, or even that it’s unconvincing or even wrong. I’m sure it’s not.

        But that doesn’t mean it would be right. I think we can all agree this is a no-no. There are just some things that, you know, are just not on.

        So no, I for one don’t actually literally support any kind of climate Nuremberg, no matter how tempting, amusing or whatever such a fantasy is. It’s just idle speculation about what would happen, theoretically, if we lived in a perfectly just world.

        A joke, in other words.

        80

        • #
          the Griss

          “ought to be hanged ”

          nah…

          tarred, feathered.. sent to the back of the dole queue… !

          70

          • #

            You want to force these recently-displaced, hyper-educated but hypo-skilled cult survivors/escapees to look for gainful employment??

            The most vulnerable members of society??

            I think you missed the word “humanely”.

            50

            • #
              the Griss

              ” to look for gainful employment?? “

              hey, a new experience in life for them. :-)

              what could possibly go wrong !

              70

            • #
              OriginalSteve

              One of the reasons I am wary of the CAGHW cultists, is as misdirected and ignorant as they are, they, like Lenins seemingly endless “useful idiots” can, if let off the leash, do real physical harm.

              The othe issue is simply this – if the Establishment are wed to the CAGW fable, then the Establishment has effectievly infinite resources to come after and shut down sceptics.

              If you have a whole bunch of slobbering snarling nihlists who would love to be let off the leash with perfect “arms length” control, then even if we are right and even if we are corerct, the army of nihlists could be another Krystalnacht in the making.

              While we are some way off from that ( book burning hasnt started yet ), if the Establishment are being belted around the cricket pitch by the sceptics, eventually they may decide to up the ante.

              Just a thought…

              40

          • #
            tom0mason

            “tarred, feathered..” with finest Canadian tar, and the feathers collected from the rotting remains found around any modern windmill.

            90

      • #
        C.J.Richards

        Methinks Brad is only ever half joking.

        60

    • #
      James Bradley

      Brad,

      I think I got some of that – somewhere in there is a vague reference to the writings of H.P.Lovecraft.

      I had a boss who regularly used to tug at his shirt collar unconsciously just before he was about to punch portholes in some idiot.

      40

      • #

        James,

        I think I got some of that –

        Showoff. All right, if we’re to believe you’re some kind of lit prodigy, can you give one example of something you “got”?

        somewhere in there is a vague reference to the writings of H.P.Lovecraft.

        Nope.

        I had a boss who regularly used to [..] punch portholes in some idiot.

        Sounds like a man after my own heart. My self-defence argument—which presupposes that idiocy is a form of assault—has gone down well with every magistrate so far, touch wood.

        10

  • #
    the Griss

    David Rose, Matt Ridley…

    seems that if you are a member, and step one inch outside “the fold”…

    the alarmista glitterati seriously pile on.

    that’s truly is cult status stuff…. scientology, etc etc !!!

    A real lesson in how to silence your own brethren !

    131

    • #
      Byron

      That’s typical religious zealotry for You , there’s one thing They hate more than the infidel (sceptic) and that’s the heretic (lukewarmer)

      50

      • #
        Eddie

        The luke warmer seems so reasonable they cannot be just dismissed.
        Like one who has lost the faith, the apostate cannot just be ignored, they must be punished until they recant & repent.

        40

      • #

        Don’t forget the apostate (alarmist who accidentally looks at the evidence for herself)

        00

  • #
    the Griss

    ps.. but they CAN’T silence us !!

    60

    • #
      Glen Michel

      For what it’s worth( a good Steve Stills song) I have found most – if not all alarmists to be morally weak insofaras lacking character.In fact I am contemptuous of them, sorry but that is my experience. Ils ne passerons pas!!

      81

  • #
    bemused

    The climate debate has always been about socialism, another means to control society. It has nothing to do with the environment or anything else.

    160

    • #
      KenW

      It’s not even about socialism. It’s about power.

      Let some UN sponsored bureaucracy actually take charge of something: say regulatory authority over world energy markets. Then we’re in big, big trouble.

      80

  • #
    TdeF

    If there is anyone the Greens hate more than a Denier, it is a Jewish Denier. Israel is the pet hate of all Greens, so the Divestment campaign in Australia and around the world, the anti Semitic rage against chocolates and coffee and Israel. That’s what you get when extremist communists take over the gentle Green movement transforming it into the controlling force in democratic elections around the world. Nice people think they are voting for caring, sensitive politicians. When Australian Green Senator Sarah Hansen Young was asked about the drowning of 1200 men, women and children in the Timor Sea over six years, by far the greatest civilian tragedy in Australia’s history, she said “accidents happen”. Caring. Nice. Green.

    290

  • #
    Athelstan.

    A ‘liberal’ will look at the world and rage because it does not do as it is told, the extreme left would seek to refashion the world into their own imperfect two dimensional model.

    Whereas, a realist looks at the world and thinks, how can I make it better?

    130

    • #
      Robert

      We have a lot of people in the technical/engineering fields who frequent Jo’s and I suspect they will understand this, as will many here who are not specifically in tech/eng type work.

      While “how can I make it better” is a question we often ask ourselves, more often than not the question is “what can I do with what I’ve been given?”

      Adaptation and modification of what has been given us is more “normal” than the average person would suspect. Sometimes it really is better, more often it is just different.

      One of my favorite moments in life is explaining to an engineer that something they designed that “shouldn’t do that” is in fact doing that. Even our projects and creations don’t always do as they are told. Then again, I’ve threatened inanimate machinery with being thrown in the lake or some other means of destruction while working on some malfunctioning item only to have it miraculously fix itself so it is possible they sometimes listen. :P

      190

      • #
        Athelstan.

        A good post, Robert:

        While “how can I make it better” is a question we often ask ourselves, more often than not the question is “what can I do with what I’ve been given?”

        That is what we [well some of us] do, humanity is built for problem solving – some of us like, no, rise to the challenge and there’s the rub of it – if I may say so, sir.

        30

      • #
        Wally

        Us engineers can’t help ourselves. Given a problem we rush to solve it (whilst others around just wail and grumble).

        One of the reasons most engineers are poorly paid (considering that they take science and turn it into useful things instead of talking or grumbling) is that they get their kicks out of solving problems and making new things, instead of money.

        Use engineers don’t usually look out for ourselves very well and suffer in the hip pocket as a consequence.

        80

  • #
    Dave N

    It’s the “we’re saving the world from ourselves, regardless of whether or not we’re wrong, and how much pain we endure in order to do it, so if you don’t believe, you should die” religion. Can that be summed up in a couple of words?

    Seriously: the religion is so fanatical they’re incapable of seeing it for what it is. I note that the MSM falls short (at least from what I’ve seen) of condoning the blatantly public death threats of some alarmists; wonder how long that will last?

    190

    • #
      Bulldust

      Hopefully it will last a while longer … the more ranting they do, the more rational people swing to the sceptical side. No sane person wants to be associated with that kind of behaviour.

      210

    • #
      James Bradley

      Dave N,

      Had a discussion with a co-worker today about global warming.

      He said “the green house affect is caused by carbon monoxide.”

      I said “don’t you mean carbon dioxide?”

      He said “no it’s carbon monoxide.”

      I said “did you do much science?”

      He said “No, but carbon dioxide is the stuff we breathe out and it makes plants grow, so it’s not that, it’s carbon monoxide from like cars and stuff.”

      He’s in his thirties and passed a lot of intelligence, aptitude and psych tests to get where he is, we work together from time to time and I know he is no-man’s fool, he just believes this stuff, it is a religion.

      360

  • #
    Rathnakumar

    Dear Jo,
    And add to this calls for Dr. Soon to be fired by Harvard-Smithsonian for publishing a peer-reviewed article on why climate models run too hot and not disclosing money he did not take!

    200

  • #
    stargazer

    Language only barely less extreme is now common. In the US, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has written that anyone who denies global warming must be ‘punished in the afterlife… this kind of denial is an almost inconceivable sin’.

    So let it be written, so let it be done. – Pharaoh, The Ten Commandments.

    Makes a person wonder if Krugman Has elevated himself to the rank of a god. What with defining what is sin and the subsequent punishment.

    Still, in my bible I read where there will be a time when people will worship the creation more than the creator. Taking the dominion given to man over this earth, as given by God, and elevating the creation to a level higher than man.

    These warmer-mystics are whacked. Can’t even get the theology right, much less the science.

    220

  • #
    albert

    During the Queensland election, ‘GetUp’, ‘save the barrier reef’ and ‘Labor’ people handing out how to vote cards who I spoke to had no knowledge of the operation of ‘la Nina’, the age of the reef and how it was formed and what damages it the most. I had far more knowledge than the people telling me 50% of the reef is destroyed and burned beyond saving. It was the usual story from them, ”all the scientists agree” yet the World Heritage Scientists examined the Reef last year and they’ve said they will return this year.

    With a la Nina, sealevel difference between Peru and Indonesia will be 1 metre and when the system collapses the sealevel returns to normal. None of the Greens, Get Up and Labor know this and mid Pacific Islanders can film sea level rise due to la Nina and NOT global warming. I’ve seen no evidence of people returning to film when sealevel has returned to normal in the mid Pacific

    160

    • #
      TdeF

      To get off a depressing topic, does anyone really understand how sea levels work? A 1 metre difference between Peru and Indonesia is tiny given the radius of the earth of 6371km or 6,371,000 metres. Is the world really so flat? The radius varies from 6378 at the equator and 6357 at the poles, so 21km and at maximum 53km, presumably based on water rather than lumpy bits of dirt. No mountains are 53km high anyway.

      So why isn’t the water 21km-50km deep at the North Pole? Where does the massive summer melt of ice and snow from the US to Alaska and Siberia go? Why doesn’t the sea level rise dramatically with +80C of Global Warming every summer or fall the same every winter? For near closed waterways like the Black sea and Baltic sea, why doesn’t the level rise dramatically? Interesting questions while we busy ourselves measuring sea levels to 0.1mm by satellite.

      90

    • #
      Wayne Job

      Just reading an interesting book called “Times Anvil” written by Richard Morris. English archaeology an over view. Accordingly he states with certainty that 13000 years ago the ocean was 300Ft lower than it is today then rose very rapidly. Evidence in the record also shows that the temperature in England can drop 15C in a decade causing havoc. So the problem of rising sea levels in mm is BS and the odd point something of a degree in temperature change over decades is also moot.

      If the scare mongers had a better view of history and more than one working brain cell they might see reality.

      30

  • #
    TdeF

    The Green left support Global Warming with a ferocity which makes no obvious sense and they have no time for scientific debate. This tells you Global Warming is not about science but part of a worldwide political movement aimed at the destruction of Western society, social cohesion, culture, values and military will. Like Hitler’s partnership with the barons of the Ruhr, it is also about the money. There is often little difference between Hitler’s Brown shirts, Mussolini’s Black Shirts, Stalin’s NKVD and today’s Green activists. No one really cares about dolphins.

    250

  • #
    John Of Cloverdale WA

    Well I brought my sons up right. No chance of them killing me. Being poor geoscientist helps! :-)
    Have a nice evening folks.

    100

  • #
    Sean McHugh

    Disturbing article reveals what happens if you dare to doubt the Green prophets of doom

    The Climate Witnesses don’t want to knock on your door and hand you their magazines; they want to knock down your door and empty their magazines.

    160

  • #
    Alan Moorhouse

    Sounds like “recursive fury” to me.

    70

  • #
    Ruairi

    A bully who thought he was hard,
    Showing others complete disregard,
    Found he wasn’t so tough,
    As he cried out; ‘enough’,
    Being hoist on his own petard.

    140

  • #

    [...] is both a fascist tactic to shut down debate, and an indication of the fundamentally religious nature of the climate “believers.” [...]

    30

  • #
    poitsplace

    This behavior is found in almost all left-leaning forums. They allow abusive remarks and wild, unsupported claims from the left while demanding “peer reviewed articles only” (supporting data is often unacceptable) from anyone that doesn’t agree with the idea that mankind is doomed without immediate action. And if you persist in disagreeing, they brand you a “troll” and ban you. They also quickly ban people that comment on climate (or other topics for which disagreement is forbidden…like radical feminism) if they have new accounts.

    Nathan Allan, one of the main mods of Reddit’s science section began the process long ago, denying it at first and then later openly admitting his systematic attempts to suppress dissent from “deniers” (which includes skeptics) in an interview. Occasionally you could even catch him forgetting he wasn’t in a private thread, colluding with self admitted shills from places like ClimateNexus (Phil Newell).

    Oh, here look at this darling little bit of trash here http://climatenexus.org/about-us/team-bios/phil-newell
    “Phil also leads on our rapid response and denier monitoring work.” WTF!?!?!?!?

    110

  • #
    tom0mason

    The lack of education, critical thinking, and the mass of unknowledge (willfully believing in ignorant fakery) is shown by these outrageous statements.
    It was by such slow deception, constant propaganda, with threats and actual force that the Nazi party got its way in the 1930s.
    I would ask you to look at Professor Bronowski stunning 1973 video ‘The Ascent of Man’ for a realistic look at the human condition. In particular I would ask you to watch Part 11 –’Knowledge or Certainty’ – Physics and the clash of absolute knowledge, the oppressive state, and its misgivings realizing the result of its terrible outcome. Then ask yourself about the ways of today, the absolutism of some scientists and the politics that is being play on majority of people.
    The complete series is available at http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/ascent-of-man/

    Also it is useful to keep in mind this quote -

    No fact in the world is instant, infinitesimal and ultimate, a single mark. There are, I hold, no atomic facts. In the language of science, every fact is a field — a crisscross of implications, those that lead to it and those that lead from it. … We condense the laws around concepts. Science takes its coherence, its intellectual and imaginative strength together, from the concepts at which its laws cross, like knots in a mesh.”

    Science and Human Values (1956, 1965) Professor Jacob Bronowski
    Part 3: “The Sense of Human Dignity”

    From this standpoint reading -
    ¯
    ” ‘In a few years, self-defence is going to be made a valid defence for parricide [killing one's own father], so Rose’s children will have this article to present in their defence at the trial.’”
    ¯
    shows how far this dementia has gone for some weaker minds, and I wonder will more able but deranged thinkers follow this line, thereby giving ground to the politically able fascist. In past time such writing would only be tolerated as the raving of a madman.

    90

  • #

    Not to worry. I’m sure that there’s a Nobel Peace Prize being polished up for Dana Nuccitelli and the likes of Gary Evans.

    The problem with most rational people, especially the cool minds of the infidels heretics, is that they simply ignore stupid comments like Nucci’s and Evans’. The correct response would be to subcontract activists to display the necessary outrage. To threaten legal action as do the alarmists when challenged. It’s luke warmers like Ridley and Rose who mostly rise to challenge; to expose the absurd, the deeply offensive and those who incite or justify violence for “the cause”.

    One cannot tackle those people on a technical basis because that is opaque to the general public. One must deal with them in terms of the societal morality by drawing comparisons with what is acceptable and unacceptable in the boraders society. That’s outside of the comfort zone of many who’ve spent their lives in the technical universe; but it applies equally to those from other insulated worlds such as academia who have difficulty relating to “outsiders” because their social surroundings are very different.

    First; drop the jargon. The “climate crisis” isn’t about science. You’re shouting from a far island if you try to address it scientifically; at any depth. Using jargon or referring to the unfamiliar will lose you an audience. Keep it simple.

    If you must bet technical, explain it in simple terms. Insist that those who challenge you explain their technical points in simple terms. If they can’t, they don’t understand; but never make that a point of your argument because it looks petty; even though it’s valid. Instead, explain what they mean because that shows that you understand it; and then proceed to destroy their argument.

    Remain calm but confident and assertive. Scientific doubt has no place in a political discussion because the audience is expecting certainty.

    130

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    The paper used a severed head photo from (I think) a zombie movie. After a couple of days that photo was removed and a zombie-crowd photo was put in its place. Keep after them and maybe they will put one up of cute puppies and kittens.

    70

  • #
    Paul in Sweden

    I’m looking forward to the grandchildren of the world spinning the wheelchairs of their elderly Global Warming enthusiast relatives laughing and screaming, Grandpa/Grandma is it really true you were once afraid of CO2? ha ha Grandpa/Grandma look here, I’m breathing on you…

    140

    • #
      James Bradley

      Paul,

      Either that or shunting them off to the government run euthenasia clinic before reporing for their weekly issue of soylent green.

      80

  • #
    a happy little debunker

    Nah, not impressed.

    The nature of the polemic has changed.

    It has been exacerbated by blogs, twits and ‘Facebooks’.

    Whilst I have no doubt these are deeply religious believers in their cause, a quick scan through any leftist media will display this same type of vitriol and spite.
    Julia Gillard called their more conservative counterparts ‘nutjobs on the internet’ and whilst the questions asked in that instance were correct, the description is remarkably apt.

    I predominately put my mad scribbling’s to the moderated ABC, as an attempt to bring some conservative view to that leftist ‘love fest’ & to be damn sure I get my ’8 cents a day’.

    For this I am repeatedly pilloried as a racist, bigot, hatemonger and have had veiled death threats.

    To be sure, the most egregious examples are to found at ‘our ABC’ in any thread containing the magic words ‘climate change’ – where an overwhelming number wish re-education via ‘specialised facilities’ or would like to see the introduction of ‘ecocide trials’ – whereby dissenters are punished.

    Worst of all – have had others use my somewhat unique screen-name to spout arguments I neither condone nor see merit in.

    All this at a moderated site, with a clear set of rules of behaviour.

    Take those rules away and this is the polemic we now have.

    For shame, Jo, I have seen this type of behaviour (somewhat mollified) in some mad scribbling’s at this site.

    So where did this come from?

    I would observe that over time my mad scribbling’s have become more nuanced & whilst I have always been able to write as I speak – my written language skills have significantly improved via the repeated use of these skills.

    These people lack the written language skills to counter a reasoned argument.
    It is far easier to flick out a piece of nasty vitriol than to understand and respond.
    It is the Mob from ancient Rome in action.

    Should we be surprised (in any way) that the Mob calls for blood? No, not really.

    71

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Should we be surprised (in any way) that the Mob calls for blood? No, not really.

      It is but one small step from calling for blood to spilling it. Does anyone doubt that war is upon us?

      70

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘Does anyone doubt that war is upon us?’

        Sir, sir…. war is not in sight.

        Let’s not forget that the pseudo leftist scum (PLS) running CC disinformation are not all that tough, just emotionally stressed because they think the right side of politics is pure evil and bereft of grandchildren. Words can hurt but they are not life threatening.

        This war of words will come to an end eventually and as the victor we should be magnanimous.

        51

        • #

          Gordo,

          Yes, the PLS deserve clement magnanimity—that is, the chance for parole after serving a sentence of humilation in line with community expectations—but it would be unforgivable of us to forgive their puppetmasters, the PSS.

          Ever.

          00

    • #
      Winston

      The rules of engagement have been exclusively set by alarmists, who have tried to bully their way through with their desired narrative from the get go.

      For them to now whinge that some words are laced with a tincture of venom is more than a tad precious of them, especially considering they are ramping up the implied threats of violence the more their belief system is challenged by small insignificant things called facts and observations – both of which conspire to undermine the validity of their arguments, literally as we speak.

      70

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘The rules of engagement have been exclusively set by alarmists’

        That’s true, amongst friends and family discussions can be quite heated because they have clearly been brainwashed. I’m talking about the rank and file who have swallowed the propaganda.

        The Klimatariat, politicians and journalists involved in this monstrous scam will fall back on the Precautionary Principle to save their necks, so we’ll have to resort to ridicule if we are to unseat them.

        ‘small insignificant things called facts and observations’

        On a background of rising CO2 a dip in temperatures should see the facade crumble, but that would be like looking into a rear view mirror. More exciting witnessing the tipping point in real time, so that we can confront the enemy with something substantial beforehand.

        20

    • #

      Happy little Debunker. I just tried to send you an email but it didn’t go. Can you email me joanne AT joannenova.com.au. Thanks. I would really appreciate it if we can get in touch.

      00

      • #
        a happy little debunker

        Hi Jo,

        Can be contacted via my workplace email – as updated.

        I hope, I can help!

        Thanks. Email sent. _ jo

        00

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      I was about to make essentially the same comment as #33.1 when I saw the lead in to it handed to me on a silver platter by comment #33.

      The race hustlers here are a good example of how thing go. For years the language escalated, one step at a time and then, in the Watts district of Los Angeles a trigger was reached and an entire neighborhood began a self destructive rampage that you can now look up in the history books if you don’t believe me. Search on Watts riots for a lot more articles. It was all set off by a routine traffic stop on August 11, 1965 — “The six days of racially fueled violence and unrest resulted in 34 deaths, 1,032 injuries, 3,438 arrests, and over $40 million in property damage.” It was repeated again in 1992.

      It went on festering again for a time and then erupted in violence in Ferguson Missouri last year. Threats against police are still going on as are demonstrations around the country.

      None of it is justified by fact. All of it is stirred up by agitators, provocateurs who want the strife so they can line their pockets and stand in front of their mirrors every evening as they brush their worthless teeth, pat themselves on the back and proclaim what big men they are. The events in Ferguson are now driven from the White House where the biggest race hustler of all time, Al Sharpton, is now advisor to the president on the issue of race.

      The parallel is obvious and dangerous to ignore. Words easily erupt into action to carry out the intent of the words. Need I mention how easily Adolf Hitler whipped up an entire nation into supporting him? He wrote a book telling the world what he intended to do. He could not have climbed out of his playpen without the willing support of thousands of Germans. Need I point out how many generations of European, Australian and American children have been subject to the indoctrination going on in our schools?

      Obama wrote a book in which he outlined his intent in no uncertain terms. He then campaigned using those same intentions as justification for voting for him. The government in the UK is openly working to implement the UN’s agenda for the word.

      Does anyone doubt that we’re in a war? Can you seriously doubt that the current situation won’t result in violence? I DON’T THINK SO!

      PLEASE! Words have consequences. They are not harmless nothings that you can throw around for fun like blowing off the fluff from a Dandelion gone to seed and watching it float lightly away for amusement on a summer afternoon.

      10

      • #
        Sane Canadian

        Not a war, just a minor social bump being led by a group of self interested, manipulative crooks supported by fools who don’t bother to do any thinking for themselves (relying on the media to spoon feed them predigested pap).

        00

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          I hope you’re right and I’m wrong. But I don’t want to find out which of us is right. Yet I fear that we’ll both soon know what happens. I give it just a few more years to unfold.

          Pray that sanity prevails.

          00

  • #
    Gbees

    In the late 1930s the totalitarians resided in the govt. today they reside in NGOs like Greenpeace and the supportive media like the Guardian. What exactly is the Guardian the guardian of? It’s certainly not we the people.

    100

  • #

    “the only possible answer is to “win” through bully-boy tactics. Unleash the righteous indignation!”
    Looks a bit like a cult deprogramming phase on a very large scale. The daft nasty outbursts could be the beginning of a mass awakening to the scam. Deep inside these people know they are going to far and that none of the predictions came true. So I say it means they are close to snapping out of it.

    42

    • #
      ianl8888


      So I say it means they are close to snapping out of it

      Not a hope

      50

      • #

        “Not a hope”
        I think most will continue to get worse before they get better. The Snap could be like an emotional breakdown as reality hits them after some of their worst is displayed. Others would hold the cult flag high all the way to a CO2 deprived world of death and starvation without ever waking up.

        40

  • #

    Mr Rose is up against the people who conceived or consented to the idea of harvesting and shredding American forests, loading them on boats, keeping them from dangerously fermenting with nitrogen, then transporting them to a coal rich site in England to be incinerated for power. They are the same sort of people who sat by fascinated in Davos and listened to Al Gore declare that extreme climate events had increased a hundred fold in recent decades. The same sort of people who thought that Timmy’s Geothermia might be worth punting the odd million or hundred million. Or this.

    So parricide is not actually such a big step for some Guardian readers and editors.

    150

    • #

      Wonder If they could just gift that wave generator to a local scrapper. Get rid of all the high level managment costs and just gift it to a little guy who cam make a few bob if he gets to take it all without goverment hinderance or difficult deadlines.

      60

      • #

        Seems nobody will touch the rustbucket. Of course, Oceanlinx execs and contractors have touched a few bob, and Deloitte know how to touch. Big Green may well be in the pay of Big Receiver.

        Some optimist has calculated the cost of dismantling wind turbines at 15% of manufacture and installation. But that’s without all the concrete bases and wiring (and without the cascading euros and boundless enthusiasm of installation). Junking those suckers really is going to be a global nightmare.

        Still, at the end of all the green solution trails we’ll always have…Deloitte!

        80

        • #
          ROM

          On wind turbine dismantling and disposal; Can’t find it now but sometime ago came across a recycling compnaies site which was recycling wind turbine blades.
          The life of a turbine given by that recycling company was around a maximum of 20 years which puts paid to all those claims of 25 or 30 year turbine lives from the wind industry.

          On disposal of wind turbine blades;

          THE SCOTSMAN;

          Wind turbine rotor blades destined for landfill

          [ quoted ]

          Rotor blades from hundreds of wind turbines in Scotland could end up being buried in the ground at the end of their working life, according to a report from council officials.

          Because blades are constructed from complex materials, they are more difficult and expensive to recycle than other parts of a turbine.

          Now an official report into the decommissioning of turbines has warned that rotors could be destined for landfill when they are no longer useful.

          The report, for Aberdeenshire Council’s Garioch area planning committee, which met in Inverurie yesterday, also highlights that there is no UK or European legislation that relates specifically to disposal or recycling of redundant turbines.

          The document, written by council planning officer Paul Duthie, refers to a Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) report published in the summer and the Scottish Government’s web-based renewables advice for onshore wind turbines.

          It warns that the number of turbines approved, their limited lifespan and increasing opportunities to replace older models with more efficient types, could lead to a rise in the number needing to be decommissioned.

          Opponents of wind farms say the revelation is further proof turbines should not be built.

          “We have said all along that this industry isn’t environmentally friendly,” said Derek Ross, a campaigner against the proposed Brown Muir wind farm near Elgin, in Moray. He said wind farm projects failed to be “green”, highlighting reliance on using materials from overseas, extraction of peat from the ground, the potential burial of rotors and the visual impact.

          Another campaigner from Moray, George Herraghty, of Lhanbryde, said: “A total of 150 tonnes of coal are burned during the manufacture of turbine parts – 250 if it’s offshore.”

          Mr Herraghty added: “Most Scottish politicians seemed to have been bamboozled by the propaganda [from] the wind farm industry. These companies look at our countryside and just see empty space. However, places such as the Highlands are our most valuable asset, as well as being very delicate ecosystems.”

          There are currently very limited options for recycling rotor blades, which are generally made from fibre-reinforced polymer composites. Mechanical shredding and thermal processing techniques are costly, leaving landfill as the most cost-effective solution.
          ______________
          &

          Broken Wind Turbine Blades Create Mountainous Waste Problem

          [ quoted ]

          Ultra-green Denmark admits it has no idea what to with a worrisome mountain of old and broken wind turbine blades. The composite material can’t be recycled.

          In a story from Denmark’s leading business newspaper Dagbladet Børsen (June 10, 2011) experts warn, “As the wind becomes a central part of energy supply, a huge waste problem is growing with similar speed.”

          Windy Scandinavia has hit this unanticipated hurdle because a key material in constructing wind turbines, carbon fiber composite, cannot be recycled and is fast filling landfills or else is being burned creating toxic emissions. The report admits, “a gigantic mountain of scrap blades is building up.”

          Tom Løgstrup Andersen from Risø DTU, a senior development engineer who has spent two decades researching fiberglass composites admits, “When a turbine is operating, it produces green energy. But when it is worn, it is suddenly a problem. There exists no concrete solution to reusing blades from wind turbines.”

          Poor Planning, Poor Technology Defeats Renewables Goal

          Denmark has 6,000 wind turbines serving a population of 5.3 million and when the wind conditions are just right wind produces around 19 percent of its electricity. Yet despite huge financial investment no conventional power plant has yet been shut down while Danish electricity costs to consumers are the highest in Europe, according to research by energy researcher, Dr. Vic Mason.

          Turbine blades routinely exceed 60 meters in length and nearly all are manufactured from thermoset plastics that cannot be recycled once their useful life has expired. The special plastic is the only material currently known that meets reliability standards due to their relatively high strength and low weight properties.

          Dr. Mason cites evidence that many small turbines have collapsed in close proximity to human dwellings [1; 2; 3], and recently two big Danish wind turbines lost blades and scattered sharp pieces of glass fiber up to 500 meters from the tower base in high winds [4.]. Similar events have also been reported in Sweden, northern England and Scotland [5.]. Blade failure can be lethal and catastrophic as shown by video footage.

          Indeed, the death toll from wind turbines in recent decades is huge when compared with nuclear accidents. In 2008 in the U.S. alone there were 41 worker fatalities and 16 non-worker deaths.
          [ / ]

          100

          • #
            Geoffrey Cousens

            Hell yes,ROM.The fact that these monstrosities cost more”energy”than they will ever produce is a constant thorn in the side of their advocates.I remember a Huff.Post article to which I pointed this out,in a comment and was quickly judged a”dangerous”denier.As for how to to safely dispose of of this junk,as with the nasty,new light bulbs,a serious question is raised.

            80

          • #
            Eliza Doodle

            ” Wind turbines destined for landfill ”

            and the sooner the better.

            50

  • #
    J Martin

    Rose should make a complaint to the police, incitement to murder or commit a felony can carry a lengthy sentence.

    30

  • #

    Catastrophism – belief in an imminent catastrophe – is a moral slippery slope. If you truly believe the world is on the brink of destruction, no crime is unacceptable to prevent such a disaster.

    110

    • #
      Geoffrey Cousens

      Eric,do take the time to read Velikovsky.

      10

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Velikovsky was popular reading in the 1960s. And 70s.Ridiculed in some sections of mainstream science, but well worth reading ” worlds in collision” ” Ages in Chaos” I could never make up my mind between gradualism and catastrophism,though it’s no doubt a combination of both?So there!

      10

      • #
        Gary in Erko

        I enjoy his all encompassing grand visions and his great ability to lift evidence from any likely source of any kind. I just like his style of thinking and don’t care a jot whether he’s right or wrong. It’s fun letting your mind run along his tracks.

        40

  • #
    pat

    naturally, this paper has been published by Nature!

    3 Feb: The Conversation: Overcoming the social barriers to climate consensus
    by Ana-Maria Bliuc, Lecturer in Behavioural Studies and Politics at Monash University and
    Craig McGarty, Professor at University of Western Sydney
    (Disclosure Statement: Ana-Maria Bliuc receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).
    Craig McGarty has received funding from the Australian Research Council and from the Young and Well Cooperative Research Centre. He makes regular donations to the Wilderness Society and is a member of the National Tertiary Education Union.)
    It can be tempting to think that people who disagree with you are mad, bad or simply stupid. However, not only are such judgements usually wrong, but telling people that they are stupid is unlikely to convince them of the merit of your own view…
    Despite there being a near consensus in the scientific community that the primary driver of climate change is anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, and that we need to cut those emissions if we’re to keep global warming to a minimum, the public remains divided on the issue.
    This division seems to run deeper in certain countries, such as US and Australia, where there are many vocal sceptics of the notion that climate change is caused by human activity…
    But we think it is more accurate to think of them as belonging to social groups that are working to achieve opposed policy objectives.
    This latter view is often used to understand the division between pro-Life and pro-Choice stances in the abortion debate, for example…
    In a paper published today, we took a similar perspective on the climate change debate in the US. What we found is that people’s attitudes in favour of action against climate change, or attitudes to the contrary, are predicted by three inter-related dimensions.
    The first is a sense of identification with their own group. Secondly there is a perception that their group is likely to succeed in its collective efforts – what we call “group efficacy”. And finally, they tend to have feelings of anger towards their perceived opposition…
    Ridicule is only likely to strengthen scepticism and therefore increase sceptics’ determination to act in support of their groups’ cause…
    http://theconversation.com/overcoming-the-social-barriers-to-climate-consensus-36889

    2 Feb: Nature: Public division about climate change rooted in conflicting socio-political identities
    Ana-Maria Bliuc, Craig McGarty, Emma F. Thomas, Girish Lala, Mariette Berndsen & RoseAnne Misajon
    Of the climate science papers that take a position on the issue, 97% agree that climate change is caused by humans, but less than half of the US population shares this belief…
    http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2507.html

    40

  • #
    ROM

    Remember this from the Guardian, the Canberra Times and numerous other MSM’s;
    ______________________

    Tuesday 7th June 2011;

    Australian climate scientists receive death threats

    [ quoted ]
    A number of Australia’s leading climate scientists have been moved into safer accommodation after receiving death threats, in a further escalation of the country’s increasingly febrile carbon price debate.

    The revelation of the death threats follows a week of bitter exchanges between the government and the opposition in the wake of a pro-carbon price TV advert featuring actor Cate Blanchett.

    The Australia National University (ANU) in Canberra said that it has moved a number of its climate scientists to a secure facility after they received a large number of threatening emails and phone calls.

    Ian Young, ANU’s vice-chancellor, told ABC national radio that the threats had worsened in recent weeks.

    “Obviously climate research is an emotive issue at the present time,” he said.

    “These are issues where we should have a logical public debate and it’s completely intolerable that people be subjected to this sort of abuse and to threats like this.

    “I think it is totally outrageous and the vast majority of Australians would think it is totally unacceptable for anybody in society to be subjected to this sort of behaviour.”
    [ / ]

    _________________

    And then this from Media Watch on the Guardian and the ABC’s and other media outlets publishing of these so called “death threats against climate scientists”

    21′st May 2012

    Media coverage of death threats examined

    [ quoted variously ]

    Media Watch eyes climate death threat claims

    After triggering a global news event with reports about death threats against climate scientists, the ABC and Fairfax Media are under investigation by Media Watch after a central plank supporting their reports was found to be non-existent.

    — The Weekend Australian, 12th May, 2012
    &

    However, it seems to have been because of those ABC reports, that an enterprising blogger called Simon Turnill put in an Freedom of Information request for…

    … emails, transcripts of telephone calls or messages that contain abuse, threats to kill and/or threats of harm to the recipient

    — ‘I’ and Australian National University [2012] AICmr 12, Decision and reasons for decision of Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim, 26th April, 2012

    …that were sent to six researchers in the ANU’s Climate Change Institute…

    … within the last six months.

    — ‘I’ and Australian National University [2012] AICmr 12, Decision and reasons for decision of Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim, 26th April, 2012

    It took nearly a year, and an appeal to the privacy commissioner, before eleven emails were released. In explaining his decision, the Privacy Commissioner found that

    10 of the … emails, do not contain threats to kill or threats of harm. These documents contain abuse in the sense that they contain insulting and offensive language.

    — ‘I’ and Australian National University [2012] AICmr 12, Decision and reasons for decision of Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim, 26th April, 2012
    ________________________

    & ETC;

    And now the Guardian itself after all the invective and a monstrous media beat up against skeptics over supposed death threats to Australian climate scientists only a couple of years ago, death threats which subsequently were proven to never have existed and were an invention of a couple of climate alarmist scientists aided and abetted by the bigoted MSM , now quite deliberately publishes death threat letters and letters promoting patricide against skeptics.

    This from the extraordinarily hypocritical Guardian which likes to promote itself as a supposedly major and responsible media outlet but instead demonstrates it’s complete bigotry, it’s viciousness, it’s hatred and total lack of any semblence of responsible morality or ethics as a media outlet.

    140

  • #
    pat

    2 Feb: CarbonBrief: Mat Hope: Newspapers’ skeptic views persisted in ‘Climategate’ aftermath, study shows
    UK newspapers include skeptic viewpoints in a significant proportion of climate change coverage, even when there is questionable editorial justification to do so, a new study suggests.
    The likelihood of reading climate skeptic views is also significantly affected by which newspaper you read, the study shows, with some newspapers including skeptic voices in as many as four times the number of articles of their competitors.
    The research by James Painter from the ***Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism and Neil Gavin from Liverpool University’s department of politics, published in the Environmental Communication journal, concludes that such reporting can dampen public concern about climate change, and reduce the impetus for politicians to take action to tackle climate change…
    The issue is whether newspapers fairly represent climate science, and correctly inform the public, Painter says. He elaborates:
    “It’s fine to have a plurality of voices, but readers need to get a clear idea as to the extent outlier sceptical views found in some opinion pieces represent mainstream science, and what are the arguments or evidence that would put into question their views.”…
    http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/02/newspapers-skeptic-views-persisted-in-climategate-aftermath-study-shows/

    you will want to read ALL of the following by these two POLITICAL characters. looking at the paltry number of so-called sceptical articles, it’s clear even this number is too much for them to bear:

    PDF: 23 pages: 2 Feb: Climate Skepticism in British Newspapers, 2007–2011
    James Painter & Neil T. Gavin Published online: 27 Jan 2015.
    (James Painter is Director of the Journalism Fellowship Programme in the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Neil T. Gavin is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Politics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.)

    ***But in the specific area of climate change there is also some doubt about whether the press is able to communicate the complexities of climate science accurately (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2007)…

    (Graph 2007)
    Total Number of climate change articles 1,270
    Number with skeptics 94
    (Graph 2009-2010)
    Total Number of climate change articles 1,558
    Number with skeptics 339
    (Graph 2010-2011)
    Total Number of climate change articles 395
    Number with skeptics 79
    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/17524032.2014.995193

    50

  • #
  • #
    pat

    it would be interesting to know if this appeared in the Print edition:

    30 Jan: WaPo: Lori Montgomery: Is the Pentagon hyping climate change? Here, take a look.
    Let’s face it: Climate change can be a murky thing, hard to see and touch in the here and now. Except for some melting icecaps and vanishing species, it’s more future threat than current crisis.
    So when the folks at the Pentagon went looking for photos to illustrate how global warming is “already beginning” to affect their 7,000 facilities, they must have been thrilled to discover an alarming image (above, far right) of a four-story building that collapsed when the permafrost melted right out from under it on a military base in Alaska.
    There’s just one problem with that photo, which appears on the cover of the “adaptation roadmap” the Pentagon issued last fall: The building is not on a military base. It’s not even in Alaska.
    It’s in Russia.
    Moreover, the collapse of the building, a block of flats above the Arctic Circle in Russia’s eastern reaches, had nothing to do with climate change, according to the photographer, Vladimir E. Romanovsky, a geophysicist at the Permafrost Laboratory at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. “It’s not global warming; it’s bad maintenance,” Romanovsky said in a telephone interview. “For the whole winter, there was hot water leaking in the basement.”
    Pentagon officials were mortified when we here at the Energy and Environment blog alerted them to the photo’s provenance. They quickly swapped it out for an admittedly less dramatic shot of an Alaska roadway buckled by degraded permafrost (top far right in photo below)…
    Problem solved! Except that the photo isn’t the only instance of Pentagon climate hype. READ ON…
    ***READ COMMENTS BY Hjhanna…
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/01/30/is-the-pentagon-hyping-climate-change-here-take-a-look/

    40

  • #
    Ken

    Thank goodness for the internet. It’s an uphill battle fighting the alarmists, but just think how many people would still be unaware of the lies and fraudulent data if web sites like this didn’t exist and their only source of information about climate was “An Inconvenient Truth”, their local newspaper, and the evening news.

    60

  • #
    Ted O'Brien.

    “mere calls for a beheading..” Mere? Really?

    In Sydney in September 2012 a protest gathering by people of Islamic faith was hijacked by a rioting group of jihadists displaying placards calling for people to be beheaded. (“Behead those who insult The Prophet”.) Some of those rioters were visitors from Britain.

    Those placards were unprecedented in Australian experience. Yet the ABC’s 7:30 Report made the visiting British “cleric” on whose apparent behalf the riot was staged their primary commentator after the event.

    Just a few months later a British soldier was randomly murdered by beheading in London. After those “mere” placards had been displayed.

    There is a connection.

    The right to free speech becomes the crime of incitement to commit a crime if the speech leads to a crime.

    30

  • #
    The Backslider

    OT – they have found Trenberth’s missing heat!!!

    Between 2006 and 2013, ocean waters shallower than 500 metres warmed by 0.005 degrees per year, while between 500 and 2000m the ocean warmed by 0.002 degrees per year. While seemingly tiny, John Church, a sea level researcher at CSIRO and one of the study’s authors, said these numbers “represent a huge amount of heat”.

    https://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/2/3/science-environment/study-ocean-depths-heating-steadily-despite-surface-slowdown

    50

    • #
      the Griss

      ummm.. so they measured a 0.035C difference 7 years in the top 500m,

      with how many buoys, and how far apart ????

      And furthermore, were able to measure a change of 0.014C between 500m and 2000m

      Seriously ?? !!!!

      The error on each reading would be more than that change!!!

      110

      • #
        Matty

        Exactly. What a ‘huge amount’ of BS.

        60

      • #
        The Backslider

        But but….. John Church said that these numbers “represent a huge amount of heat” !!!!!

        30

        • #
          the Griss

          I think he meant, “a huge amount of hot air”

          I mean, if you have a storm in a tea cup, its likely to generate a bit of hot air, isn’t it. ;-)

          Insignificant and unmeasurable.

          40

    • #
      Glen Michel

      I KNEW that they were going to find it one day,Reminds me of a Casteneda book about finding his lost car under a very small rock.Too much Peyote!

      10

  • #
    Geoffrey Cousens

    The Guardian are,indeed,murdering free speech.Commenting as Geoff the toff I am forewarned of “moderation”prior to any publication.I made a grand total of two comments last year,one of which received 16 up ticks at last look.Amusing,I thought.Now it is so jumpy most of anything I send in is deemed unsuitable outright or after about 10 minutes they work out”the underlying theme” and make it vanish.Boring indeed.

    70

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      I have had a similar experience….we have to just keep plugging away…..I think spenduing time with gen Y’s and Gen Z’s is also important -t hey will be the next batch of descision makers and need to be aware there is 2 sides to the argument.

      40

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Hi Geoffrey, my local Fairfax paper in Ballarat, rural Victoria has run a letter to the editor with a fairly typical rant about “Climate change deniers”, while this is nothing new in current Australian media the absence of a comments section is suspiciously absent, why? because shortly after posting it a comment was made by a CAGW skeptic that was informative and non threatening, I then added a similar comment in support and even complimented the paper for posting it, the comments were taken down shortly after with the comments function removed.

      No moderation just a wiping out of existence, once again the modus operandi of the intolerant boorish left prevails.

      40

  • #
    pat

    another GOOD billionaire!

    2 Feb: Gizmodo Science: Luke Hopewell: Elon Musk On Why We Need A Carbon Tax
    Billionaire Elon Musk has a few things on the boil at the moment… Needless to say, he’s a real-life billionaire/genius/playboy/philanthropist. At a recent press conference, he was asked if governments should put a price on carbon, and his answer is incredibly sensible.
    When asked by a journalist in January about his thoughts on a carbon tax, Musk had this to say:
    “I do think it’s extremely important we establish a carbon tax. This is a carbon tax that would apply to all carbon-producing entities. From electricity-generation from hydrocarbons through to production of gasoline and consumption of gasoline. I think that will actually increase the price of electricity — that is to say the electricity coming from hydrocarbons — and it will increase the price of gasoline, but I think this is important because right now we’re consuming this extremely valuable common good which is the carbon capacity of the oceans and atmosphere. We’re not paying anything for that consumption.
    “It’s like having a garbage pile in your street and nobody’s paying for it. The garbage gets higher and higher, and eventually terrible things happen, so it’s just very important to put a price [on carbon emissions]. If somebody’s dumping chemicals in the atmosphere you need to pay for it.”…
    During the tenure of the previous Labor government, Australia was on the list of countries with a carbon price in place, however the legislation was repealed following the Coalition’s rise to power.
    In a speech to the National Press Club yesterday, Prime Minister Tony Abbott pledged that he wouldn’t resurrect the carbon tax, adding that it’s still a policy of his Labor counterpart, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten should Labor win the next Federal election.
    Is Australia on the wrong side of history when it comes to pricing carbon? Give us your thoughts in the comments.
    (TURNBULL GETS A SHOUT IN THE COMMENTS FOR BEING AT TESLA THIS WEEK)
    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/02/elon-musk-on-why-we-need-a-carbon-tax

    Gizmodo’s Luke links to the above on his twitter feed as: “Everyone’s favourite billionaire, genius, playboy, philanthropist @elonmusk on why the we need a carbon tax”

    Luke links to a pile of things in his article, but NOT to the alleged January interview with Musk that he quotes. i’ve searched & searched and cannot find it online.

    also on his twitter feed, Gizmodo’s Luke Hopewell links to former ABC’s Mark Di Stefano’s “unbiased” Buzzfeed report on the PM’s NPC speech. CHECK IT OUT:

    2 Feb: Buzzfeed: Mark Di Stefano: 15 Things That Most Definitely Happened At Tony Abbott’s “D-Day Speech”
    “Is it on?”
    http://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/15-things-that-most-definitely-happened-at-tony-abbotts-d-da#.iimvxZ5y7

    btw in November Di Stefano was interviewed by ABC “about the latest happenings in the twittersphere” in his new role as a Buzzfeed reporter. incestuous what?

    check out both guys twitter feeds to see what professional reporters they are…not:

    50

  • #
    pat

    2 Feb: RTCC: Megan Darby: One fifth of proposed EU fund investment high carbon, high risk
    Money for coal, roads and airports will hurt climate goals warn analysts at UK environmental consultancy E3G
    European countries have put forward more than €1 trillion worth of projects for funding under the “Juncker Plan” to stimulate the economy.
    They are in competition for a projected €315 billion available under European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker’s flagship scheme, which aims to create more than a million jobs. One fifth of this pipeline by value is in high carbon sectors including coal, oil and airports, analysis by London-based environmental consultancy E3G reveals…
    Poland put 31 coal projects on its wish list, including the €5 billion Gubin lignite mine and power plant. Even the UK, which typically presents itself as a green leader in Europe, has put forward a £1 billion underground coal gasification project…
    Estonia put forward shale oil extraction projects totalling €5 billion and Greece proposed gas pipelines worth nearly €10 billion. Three quarters of the high carbon options were in transport, with Portugal and Slovakia proposing airport upgrades and several countries proposing roadworks…
    Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria have proposed more than twice as much investment in oil and gas (€11 billion) as in energy saving measures (€5.2 billion). These include gas power generation projects as well as pipelines to diversify supplies…
    http://www.rtcc.org/2015/02/02/one-fifth-of-proposed-eu-fund-investment-high-carbon-high-risk/

    ***how sweet is the language of bureaucrats?

    2 Feb: RTCC: Sophie Yeo: UN targets draft of Paris climate deal by 13 February
    The co-chairs of the UN climate talks have told diplomats that they must finalise the draft version of a 2015 Paris deal this February. Diplomats from around the world will meet in Geneva 8-13 February for the first time since Lima, where they crafted a sprawling 38-page text laying out the various options for the landmark UN deal. It is the last time they meet before May, by which time UN rules dictate that the draft version of the negotiating text must be available. This allows time for the text to be translated from English into the five other UN languages before the Paris summit in December…
    The newly appointed co-chairs – Ahmed Djoghlaf from Algeria and Dan Reifsnyder from the US – issued a “scenario note”, which lays out instructions to delegates ahead of the talks. The group responsible for drafting the text will be expected to work until 8pm every day to turn the document into something “streamlined, concise, manageable and negotiable”.
    “To this end, the contact group will be tasked to streamline language and eliminate redundancies and duplications, better present alternatives and divergences, and clarify, to the extent possible, proposals and concepts,” said the co-chairs…
    ***Among the most ambitious options is a target to commit to net zero emissions by 2050…
    Despite four years of preparation, the timing is tight.“In just six days, the co-chairs need to provide a draft text that has enough confidence and trust of the different parties across the board to have acceptance to be the basis of the negotiations,” Hmaidan told RTCC.“They need to keep it at a manageable size, coherent and very concise, as much as possible, at the same time as getting approval for it. It’s a very tough balancing act.”The session is crucial, he added, because the Paris text will not be legal unless the draft is completed by May.
    http://www.rtcc.org/2015/01/30/pressure-on-to-finish-draft-paris-climate-deal-in-february/

    10

    • #
      Joe V.

      ” 2 Feb: RTCC: Sophie Yeo: UN targets draft of Paris climate deal by 13 February ”
      Friday the 13th. What could possibly go wrong ?

      10

  • #
    Wombat

    I’ve never seen such grotesque corruption of science in all my 71 years. Believers calling for the execution of people who have the temerity to question their religious conviction! As if the truth of a scientific proposition can be established by murdering everybody who doubts it!
    What the bloody hell has happened to the world?

    70

  • #
    pat

    trust RTCC to pick up the nonsense report, which was obviously written in the hope of another hot Australian Open, which failed to materialise. never waste a CAGW report, i guess, but don’t mention this year’s temperatures!

    2 Feb: RTCC: Megan Darby: Sport issued with climate warning at Australian Open
    Rising temperatures threaten future of Australian sport, say researchers amid tennis tournament
    PHOTO CAPTION: Players Henri Leconte, Mark Woodforde, Mark Philippoussis and Todd Woodbridge under the hot sun of 2014′s Australian Open
    A Climate Institute report urged both elite and community clubs to do more to protect the health of players and fans…
    Andrew Demetriou, former CEO of the Australian Football League, called for urgent emissions cuts to avoid unmanageable climate impacts.“We can’t afford to stay on the sidelines on this issue,” he said in the report’s foreword…
    http://www.rtcc.org/2015/01/30/sport-issued-with-climate-warning-at-australian-open/

    30

  • #
    Gary in Erko

    I hope you all realise your names are being listed. When the time is right we’ll all be lined up for a ritual mass beheading. Drowning witches stopped violent storms and crop failures. It will work again to stave off climate change – get rid of all those who cloud the aether with “wrong thoughts”. Discussion about it is scheduled for next week’s Q&A on the ABC.

    50

  • #
    DOUBTINGDAVE

    If alarmist cult worshippers really want to punish us nonbelievers they should go for enforced relocation,ordering all sceptics to go and live in areas where they believe extra heat will be felt the most such as california ,florida ,the mediterranian and australia etc.Meanwhile all the faithfull and their families can be rewarded for their pious dedication to the one true faith by being protected from dangerous warming when they relocate to Greenland and reestablish the lost viking colonies.I know which side i’d rather be on

    60

  • #
    el gordo

    O/T

    Dennis Jensen for PM

    20

    • #
      Tony of South Yarra

      G’day. el g.

      10

    • #
      Tony of South Yarra

      The other place wouldn’t tolerate heretics. At least you can be heard here, even though you’re now in the majority.

      20

      • #
        Tony of South Yarra

        I’m continuing to chip away at the alarmists, although my latest thing is anti-”catlick” bigotry, from you-know-who.

        20

        • #
          el gordo

          I still drop into Trash every day to catch you in action. I miss the robustness and of course our art classes, life just isn’t the same.

          Got a chuckle from your swipe at bigotry.

          Reb offered you the chance to do a post, what about a brief climate change satire?

          Splatter could do it with alacrity, but would the editor give it a run?

          00

  • #
    ExWarmist

    How many people have a need for Prophecy?

    The MMGW Cult has effectively co-opted needs for Prophecy and Significance in the population.

    20

  • #
    pat

    NITV cable channel is repeating Liz Courtney’s “The Tipping Points” series, which they ran last year. the one on Africa has just ended:

    The Tipping Points premiers at CLIMATE WEEK NEW YORK!
    The Tipping Points a 6 x 1 hour series on Climate Change by Australian director Liz Courtney was selected to PREVIEW at Climate Week in New York on Thursday 26th September. Following the opening remarks by Mayor Bloomberg, Liz hosted a 1 hour session called Climate Conversations with leading climate scientists from around the world…
    Key broadcasters include: NITV, NBC Universal/The Weather Channel, The Knowledge Network, TV Ontario, VTR Belgium, VPRO Holland, The ARD Group, ***The Australian Network, Discovery Europe and ARTE
    http://www.thetippingpoints.com/news-2/
    (Scientists featured include Prof. Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Dr. Steve Rintoul, CSIRO, and Dr Erik van Sebille, UNSW)

    ***The Australian Network is ABC Australia Plus TV is Australia’s international television service, available via satellite throughout the Pacific and online worldwide.
    This service includes material from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and other agencies…
    By providing audiences in Asia and the Pacific with the best of Australian content, Australia Plus explains the culture, life and society of Australia, as well as curating the best content from a variety of media partners in Asia and the Pacific to showcase the best of the region in multiple languages.

    10

  • #
    pat

    from the Tipping Points documentary website:

    ‘THE TIPPING POINT CRISIS is based on the research of Professor Tim Lenton at the University of Exeter, who has identified 12 dangerous “Tipping Points”‘

    reminder:

    2009: WWF: The Tipping Points Report was commissioned jointly by Allianz, a leading global financial service provider, and WWF, a leading global environmental NGO…
    Authors: Prof. Tim Lenton, UEA/Tyndall Centre (Tipping points, science, outcomes and research focus)…

    if u search “tim lenton” on WUWT, u will find a thread on the above report.

    more on Director, Liz Courtney:

    LinkedIn: Liz Courtney
    Education: Monash University
    Over the last two years she has produced and directed one of the largest series on climate change “The Tipping Points” working with leading scientists, NASA, IPCC, and Earth’s Survival…
    Last year Liz accepted an invitation from President Clinton’s Climate Week to preview her series The Tipping Points at the opening event in New York, and since then has met with Al Gore, Dr Patchauri(sic) and many government officials in her drive to give Youth a VOICE for the future
    Tenacious and dedicated, Liz has worked on multi- broadcaster deals, met with heads of state, spoken at functions across the globe, and built the respect of NASA, NOAA, IPCC and more…
    The group has made a number of global programs including: Earth’s Survival, The Tipping Points, Oceans, the Last Frontier and Cool School Antarctica…
    http://au.linkedin.com/pub/liz-courtney/19/429/727

    it would be good to know exactly who funded the obviously very expensive “Tipping Points” series.

    10

  • #
    pat

    Australia’s Sustainability in Business Conference & Exhibition 7-8 October 2014, Melbourne
    Contributor: Liz Courtney, Documentary Maker
    Liz Courtney previously Joint Managing Director Cartwright William’s…
    Her life ambition has shifted to provide paradigm shifting knowledge and tools to effect global change
    She is currently working with business partner ***Tonia Port on the introduction of a SUSTAINABLE BRAND INDEX, a type of system to provide the consumer with the tools to voice their ratings and their vested interest in brands reducing their carbon footprint and being rewarded for – a win win scenario…
    http://www.australiansustainability.com.au/en/Contributors/442282/Liz-Courtney

    Big Tobacco, Unilever!

    About FirstLight Advertising: Senior Team
    ***TONIA PORT- Strategic Planning director
    Previous positions;
    Marketing Manager – Coca Cola and Diet Coke Australasia.
    Brand Strategist and Senior Marketing Manager for Unilever Australia.
    Director – Evolve Group Pty Limited…
    PETER PRICE – MANAGING DIRECTOR
    A “born to be” advertising professional, who has worked in multi national ad agencies in Johannesburg, London and Sydney on brands such as: BMW, Firestone, Benson and Hedges, General Motors, etc…
    http://www.firstlight.com.au/about.html

    Big Oil, etc!

    Liz Courtney, Marketing Communications Strategist, The Evolve Group
    With over 20 years experience in Australia and overseas markets, formerly General Manager of Cartwright Williams, Australia’s No 1 Integrated Marketing Communication Agency and also partner in Cartwright Williams, which sold in 1998 to Leo Burnetts USA, Liz recently took 40 young people from 15 countries to Antarctica to see Climate Change through the eyes of Generation Y in Antarctica…
    Liz has broad experience in; Marketing Communications; Direct Marketing, Promotional Marketing, Database, E- Marketing, Advertising, Trade Marketing, Public Relations and cross media. Brand communication work has included; ANZ Direct, American Express, Australia Poker League, BOC Gases, BHP, BP Oil … 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment … Shell Australia…Pepsi, etc.
    http://www.abn.org.au/contributors/liz-courtney/

    follow the money.

    20

  • #
    pat

    unsurprisingly, partly-taxpayer-funded SBS has the Tipping Points videos available online:

    SBS Video On Demand: S1 Ep4 The Tipping Points — Africa Droughts And Floods
    Aired on 3 February 2015 on NITV
    http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/215759939887/The-Tipping-Points-Africa-Droughts-And-Floods

    note it says S1 – meaning series 1 – so it would seem eventually there’ll be a series 2 to cover Tim Lenton’s other 6 Tipping Points??? episodes 2 & 3 are also available on the SBS On Demand site, episode 1 availability has expired.

    amused, but not surprised, to find the “Tipping Points” meme in this Harvard Business Review piece, from a business perspective! check the 18 comments. WUWT even gets a mention:

    Sept 2014: Harvard Business Review: Andrew Winston: Two Forces Moving Business Closer to Climate Action
    This week, CEOs and world leaders met at the UN to talk climate…
    It’s a perfect storm bringing us to two important ***tipping points: one of belief and commitment to action, and one of economics…
    In June, former U.S. Treasury Secretaries Paulson and Rubin joined New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in issuing the Risky Business Report…
    In July, General Mills — nobody’s idea of a radical company — expanded the pro-climate lobbying group BICEP beyond the usual suspects …
    Last week, “The Better Growth, Better Climate” report from the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate exploded the myth that we have to choose between building a prosperous, expanding economy and doing it in a way that protects our shared home and resource base (also called the planet).
    This week, an important coalition of coalitions, We Mean Business, launched with its own report and commitment by large organizations to recognize the reality of climate science and the ability to act on it. One exciting offshoot of We Mean Business, called RE100 launched as well, with Swiss Re, Mars, IKEA, and others making the bold commitment to use 100% renewable energy. (Disclosure: I’m on the steering committee of RE100 this group working to bring in corporate members.)…
    This week, the World Bank, representing a group of 73 countries and 1,000 businesses — including many of the world’s largest — issued their own commitment to pricing carbon.
    The cherry on top of the sundae this week was the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation — a $900 million pool of money that originally came from oil fortunes — announcing it would divest itself from fossil fuel companies…
    This is all representative of the first ***tipping point: The large-scale commitment and belief in climate action in the private sector. If it’s not clear by now, this is no longer a fringe movement in business. The CEO leaders of the parade, like Richard Branson and Unilever’s Paul Polman, took the stage at The Climate Group’s climate week launch event in New York on Monday. Polman implored the world’s governments to stop heeding those companies, presumably the fossil fuel giants, with enormous political influence: “Don’t just listen to the few voices getting disproportionate air time, but to the majority of business now — they’re asking for a price on carbon, and more support for cleaner technologies and efficiencies.”…
    This is the second ***tipping point that will really drive action: The economics behind a clean economy shift are very strong…
    Bringing the voice of the people and business in line is another ***tipping point we need to foment…
    The ***tipping points the business community is hitting are critical, but we need a society-wide movement, working together without creating unhelpful divisions…
    (Andrew Winston is the co-author of the best-seller Green to Gold and the author of Green Recovery. His new book, The Big Pivot, was released in April. He advises some of the world’s biggest companies on environmental strategy)
    https://hbr.org/2014/09/two-forces-moving-business-closer-to-climate-action/

    00

  • #
    Tristan

    Breaking news: Over-excited members on both sides of polarising debate say unkind things about other side.

    Submit it to the Onion.

    I do not endorse snarl words, threats, blanket statements, accusations of impropiety or hyperbolic sentiments from those who accept the science of climate change or those who deny it. I do my best to avoid them myself. Your mileage may vary, and on this site, it often does. :)

    10

  • #
    Paul Vaughan

    “Welcome to western civilization’s advanced scientific debate. [...] we can’t discuss [...] It’s about whether you are good or evil.”

    Mindset 101:

    It’s about inspiration (for lefties). These are artsy people. If they had enough money to give raises to reliable workers, they would instead spend the money decorating the workplace. Thinking a rational conversation with them will inspire them to change their thinking isn’t helpful. Their thought process prioritizes other criteria. It’s irrational to think a rational conversation with them is an efficient path to conflict resolution. Quite the contrary — (it will just unwisely drain us). Please rethink strategy and choose an efficient path given how they actually are (as opposed to how you think they should idealistically be — i.e. never mind idealism, opt for pragmatism…) It may be disappointing to realize this, but let’s not waste precious time & energy on dreamy idealism when we can opt to be more tactical & practical.

    20

    • #
      Tristan

      Lefties are artsy?

      Sciency as well it seems

      Thanks Tristan. That’s very useful to know :- ) – Jo

      00

      • #
        Joe V.

        It used to be only Arts degrees you could get with just waffle.

        20

        • #
          Joe V.

          ( That’s not to say there aren’t some brilliant Arts graduates out there, but I know a few Engineers who went for just one Arts course to make up their numbers and couldn’t believe how easy it was, while this dumb cluck went for Physics. )

          20

      • #
        Tristan

        No probs Jo, you can use it as further ‘evidence’ in your ‘post-normal science’ rhetoric. ;)

        00

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Said as if the Huffington Post is reliable enough to trust what it publishes.

          The real problem is still that consensus means nothing in science. The real problem is that evidence of warming is not evidence that CO2 did it. The real problem is that accurate data shows that there has been no warming since 2001. The real problem is that you cannot show an empirical link between CO2 and anything except increased plant growth.

          00

  • #
    Ross Stacey

    How much science is there in the latest campaign by AVAAZ. They have an article by David Plait proving the Arctic ice is melting at Slate.com. Also showing how much methane is bubbling to the surface due to increased temperature of the ocean.

    10