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

Alan Jones talks climate, Paris. Mainstream scientists caught out by Marohasy in Parliament.

Alan Jones pretty much sums up the situation about Christopher Monckton’s prediction last year about Tony Abbott and Stephen Harper. Listen to Monckton from 40 seconds.

Listen here at 2GB

“They want $100 billion. In a world that’s broke, swimming in debt…” — Alan Jones

“David King was asked whether all the nations of the world were now, in principle, ready to sign their people’s rights away in such a treaty. Yes, but there are two standouts. One is Canada. But don’t worry about Canada. They’ve got an election in the Spring of 2015 and we and the UN will make sure the present government is removed. He was quite blunt about it.

The other hold out is Australia. And Australia we can’t do anything about because Tony Abbott is in office until after the December 2015 conference. So that means you all have to guard Tony Abbott’s back. Because the Turnbull faction, in conjunction with the UN,  will be doing their absolute level best to remove your elected Prime Minister from office before the end of his term and , in particular, before the end of 2015, so that they can get 100% wall-to-wall Marxist agreement. They do not want any stand-outs. And the most likely stand-out at the moment is Australia. So look after him.” — climatescepticsparty

King may have been fantasizing and blowing his own trumpet (the Canadian election was not close). But to openly brag in public about removing a democratic government with UN help is remarkable.

There will be some agreement signed in Paris, for the sake of PR and to keep the gravy flowing. That is guaranteed. The question is, “how much” will that agreement matter? Will it be all show and no teeth? How many billions will the pretend environmentalists and unproductive parasites drag from the world’s middle-class? How much power will they get to interfere with democracies? Will there be a get-out clause?

The Australian BOM, and an actual real debate on global warming

The interview with Jennifer Marohasy about the BOM is introduced around the 7 minute mark. Around the 9 minute mark Jennifer talks about a remarkable meeting called by MP Craig Kelly yesterday at Parliament House on Monday this week. For the first time, people like John Church was forced to do a live debate with people like Bob Carter and Jennifer.

Jennifer described the event in an email. At one point Dennis Jensen pinned down Mark Howden with a question, forcing him to admit that everything he was presenting came from a model rather than direct from data. Straight after that several in the audience left the room. I guess they’d heard enough. Bizarrely, when confronted with a UAH (satellite) graph of temperatures of Australia pausing flat for 17 years, Guldberg dismissed it because he “didn’t know where the data came from” and Howden improbably suggested that combining all the atmospheric layers showed “warming”. Thank goodness Jennifer was there to set them straight! When cornered, establishment scientists flounder because they have been shielded from skeptical questions.

Jennifer Marohasy describes question time during the meeting:

Guldberg attempted to dominate the question time.

 The Chair /Craig Kelly wanted to know about the likely extent of future warming and whether it was realistic to try and keep temperature increases within 2 degree Celsius. Mark Howden proceeded to suggest that with climate change there was going to be a decline in crop production, and showed bar charts suggesting catastrophe.
Before he got very far one of the farmer/politicians in the room interrupted wanted to know the origin of the data.   There were more interruptions from the members and senators, until Dennis Jensen insisted that Howden answer the original question which Dennis suggested came down to whether the data being presented was ‘real’ or is simply ‘model output’.  Howden acknowledged that everything he was presenting was output from computer models.  Several members then got up and left, before he had actually finished his presentation.
The presentation from Brett Hogan followed.  This was an interesting assessment of the future for coal, and how it has helped lift people in China and India out of poverty.  I don’t think he got any questions, and there were certainly no interruptions.
The Chair/Craig Kelly then suggested questions be open for all the presentations, and asked me specifically about the ‘best temperature’ data, and the reliability of future estimates.  I finally got a slide of satellite data up, which I had as a supplementary slide (downloaded from Ken Stewart’s website, much thanks), Guldberg suggested no attention be paid to it because we didn’t know the origin of the data.    When I explained it was latest output from University of Alabama Huntsville, and that the IPCC used the same data, Howden claimed, by way of a long explanation, that when all the data from the satellites is combined, from all the different atmospheric depths, it shows global warming.
I responded that what he had just said was absolute  nonsense: that the satellite data represented lower troposphere temperatures, and the trend was flat, no warming for 17 years.
...

There has been no warming in Australia for 17 years | Graph by Ken Stewart

Credit to MP Craig Kelly for organising this event in response to the one-sided propaganda event promoted by Guldberg, and supported by Greg Hunt. Shame Greg Hunt did not come to hear skeptics.

For those who want more detail. Marohasy explains the background and how her main focus was on real measurements rather than modeled ones:

Yesterday/Tuesday there was a Parliamentary Information Session in Canberra sponsored by the Global Change Institute and the University of Queensland at which many government-funded climate scientists predicted that the end is nigh unless the Australian government signs on to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals at the upcoming COP21 in Paris.  Documentation promoting the event indicated a particular focus on sea level rise, and the presence of Dr John Church, a sea level change expert from CSIRO.

The night before, Monday night, Professor Bob Carter and I were invited to address the Coalitions Environment Committee with three of the alarmists including Dr Church.

It is very significant that a meeting was actually held in Parliament House at which both government-funded alarmists and credentialed independent sceptics were present; this is almost a world first and certainly an Australian first.

The exchanges were at times vigorous, with the alarmists often appealing to the authority of the IPCC, while Professor Carter and I relied on evidence.

In particularly, I emphasized the importance of distinguishing between real historical data as opposed to believing output from computer models that homogenize original measurements.  For example, the tide gauge at Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour indicates that the rate of sea level rise has been in decline for some decades, while the alarmists tend to use remodeled sea level data to suggest an acceleration consistent with anthropogenic global warming theory.   At the meeting on Monday night, Dr Church told the Committee how many metres of sea level rise was expected by 2100 based on output from a computer model, and how much worse it would be if the government didn’t sign on to the Paris accord.

There is a really big difference between what the measurements say, and output from computer models.   My presentation focused on surface temperature data from Rutherglen, and how the Bureau of Meteorology has remodeled this temperature series which shows sustained cooling over the 20th Century, into dramatic global warming.   This is achieved by the Bureau dropping down past temperatures and promulgating these backwards.  For example, at Rutherglen, the Bureau dropped down the actual measured temperatures by 0.57 degree Celsius for all minimum values measured before 1974, by 0.63 for all minimum values measured before 1966, and by 0.49 for all values measured before 1928.  The net change back to the beginning of the record in 1912 is thus 1.69 degrees Celsius, which is huge, particularly considering that the total extent of warming according to the alarmists government-funded IPCC scientists is only about 1 degree over the same time period.

At the meeting I explained how the Bureau adjusts the historical temperature record, including at Rutherglen, essentially COOLNG THE PAST and thus making the present appear hotter.

I explained how the data from entire 104 weather stations that are used to construct the CONTRIVED official temperature trend for Australia are adjusted in this way.  The official name for it is homogenization.

Last year Environment Minister Greg Hunt prevented a proper inquiry into this practice, ostensibly to protect the reputation of the Bureau.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.1/10 (206 votes cast)
Alan Jones talks climate, Paris. Mainstream scientists caught out by Marohasy in Parliament., 9.1 out of 10 based on 206 ratings

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

230 comments to Alan Jones talks climate, Paris. Mainstream scientists caught out by Marohasy in Parliament.

  • #
    Stephan

    You heard it from (non-Lord) Monckton, folks! Abbott’s 2 year run of abysmal polling, policy failure and foot-in-mouth disease which led to his knifing was all a UN conspiracy!!!

    11189

    • #
      AndyG55

      LORD Monckton’s predictions have been proven FAR more accurate than any climate alarmista prediction.

      Spot on actually. 100% accurate ……… rather than 97% wrong.

      1855

    • #
      What class?

      The evidence is right there in front of you. There it is on a golden platter. Learn.
      Won’t happen,will it? You’ll remain a jerk.

      866

    • #
      Aaron M

      Yes, he’s doing a much better job than Flannery, Hoegh-Guldberg, Viner, Stephan etc…

      1043

    • #
      James Bradley

      Stephan,

      Is it still a conspiracy if what is foretold comes to pass?

      581

      • #
        CameronH

        Stephan,
        You should probably look up the difference between a strategy and a conspiracy. There is a long term strategy being run by the leftists/progressives to dilute the power of national governments by passing the authority to make independent decisions over to the bureaucrats at the UN. You will notice nowadays, for example, that any politician or political party who expouses a patriotic attitude or speaks about national pride is aleays labelled far right. You only need to look at the reaction Tony Abbott got when he suggested that we should all get behind Team Australia.

        Many members of the political class seem to like this idea because they feel that the average Australian voters are not capable of or intelligent enough to clearly understand the issues and, therefore, make informed judgements. It also absolves them of any responsibility for unintended consequences. I place Malcolm Turnbull, Greg Hunt, and Julie Bishop and almost all of the MPs in the Labor party, in this category. It was amazing how quickly Bishop was of to the UN and how she was invited to all of the right places to meet the right people in areas that seem to be excluded by our representatives when Tony Abbott was PM.

        Anybody who thinks that handing decision making for our national interests, which are essentially the interests of the Australian citizen, over to a bunch of unelected bureaucrats sitting in an office on the other side of the planet hasn’t been paying attention to the tyranny that comes from uncontrolled, unaccountable, centralized political power.

        621

        • #
          Peter Carabot

          Unfortunately I concur with you! The problem will arise when the “unintelligent populace” will realise that they have been taken for a ride and they will be sick and tired of forking out every single cent they have for the enjoyment of the UN mandarins. I may not be here then, I hope that the revolution that will ensue is successful

          140

      • #
        Stephan

        Totes, James! I foretold that I would forget my coat some day this week, and it did indeed happen – guess it must’ve been that bloody UN agenda 21 water fluoridation mind control!

        226

        • #
          Sean McHugh

          Sounds like a prediction made on past form. Nothing wrong with that – except for the silly lefty waffle at the end.

          40

    • #
      el gordo

      Stephan the important thing, in the Australian context, is that the Turnbull clique doesn’t upset the Coalition.

      I don’t blame a UN conspiracy for the ousting of Abbott anymore than the dudding of Gillard, its post modern politics.

      141

    • #
      Egor TheOne

      Stephan

      Your Horse is Dead, but Still You Flog.

      Just keep Fudging the Facts to Fit your Faith

      You and your CAGW/CACC Brethren will Pitch Fork all of us to economic oblivion based on delusion and fraud:
      http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tS4cpgwchA0/UTFtQLbWa6I/AAAAAAAAMFw/ROiucyYpwXY/s400/co2-temp-rss.jpeg

      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-o74iD4CITOk/U7ezikCMY0I/AAAAAAAAP6U/q2wfE6Y0sZ8/s1600/Screen+Shot+2014-07-05+at+6.11.05+pm.png
      [Egor - edited. See email. - J]

      111

    • #
      Tom

      This sounds like the young Green troll that irregularly empties its bowels at catallaxyfiles.

      111

    • #
      Leo Morgan

      @ Stephan
      When you call Viscount Monkton ‘non-Lord’, you’re not just wrong; you’re demonstrably wrong and foolishly wrong. It takes ten seconds on the net to confirm that Christopher Monkton is Viscount of Brenchley, and that Viscounts are Lords in the British Peerage. So why are you wrong?
      I don’t think it’s because you’re trying to make environmentalists look like gullible loons, though that’s what you succeed in doing.
      It’s not as if you’re the one who originated that foolish deception. Is it that you yourself were misled, just gullibly repeating a falsehood without thinking to check? Or are you intentionally spreading a falsehood with intent to deceive? In which case why? It’s not as if the claim isn’t obviously and foolishly wrong. Is it that you are just hoping to get a rise out of those who are so amusingly earnest as to care about things like truth?
      Similarly, there’s scores of other easily-debunkable falsehoods spread by self-called environmentalists. That the temperature record accurately reflects the past. That climate models accurately foretold the future. That Climategate showed scientists not engaged in scientific malpractice. These are obvious falsehoods, easily debunked by anyone with access to the internet and the moral integrity to look at the evidence presented by both sides. Apart from making environmentalists look like fools, they seem to serve no purpose.
      So I’m left wondering- what on Earth are you thinking?

      571

    • #
      James Bradley

      Stephan,

      Q. When does a conspiracy theory become a real conspiracy?

      A. When alarmists troll-bomb skeptic blog sites, and skeptics are censored off alarmist blog sites.

      361

    • #
      Varys

      why have you said non lord Monckton, when clearly he is a Herditary Peer – infact he is the third Viscount of Brenchley. It does you no service to play the man – it shows you are either ignorant of the facts, or lie to distort the truth- anything said after either woule be considered rubish

      322

    • #
      Mjw

      Supposedly the best educated generation in history and the first to beg governments to tax them more. Cretins.

      270

  • #
    Random Comment

    Minister Hunt should have been at that meeting. In not showing up (and I assume he would have been encouraged to attend) he displays a clear lack of conviction in the policy positions he promotes.

    1151

    • #
      Faye

      I agree Random Comment. Mr Hunt can’t possibly afford to assist the junking of climate change. His whole being is invested in it from university to ministery. All these twerps who live off the boondoggle won’t let truth destroy their lucrative jobs and their reason for being. There would be nothing left.

      560

  • #
    TdeF

    So Lord Monckton’s predictions matched the facts. This is the one thing warmists have never achieved.

    1434

  • #
    ianl8888

    Very entertaining, thank you Jennifer, and having Jones broadcast this stuff to his huge audience adds cream to the entertainment – actual history I think, as is the Parliamentary conference with actual sceptics :) :)

    Is there any chance of Brett Hogan’s section on coal being made public (and unexpurgated) ?

    801

  • #
    gbees

    I fear the horse has bolted now that Abbott is gone and Greg Hunt and Malcolm Turnbull are ready to sign away Australia’s sovereignty at #COP21. My opinion is only a revolt by the people will bring this down. Such an act of giving up 1% of Australia’s GDP to a UN fund by Hunt et al would be tantamount to treason and these politicians cannot be allowed to get away with this. It’s that serious.

    1135

    • #
      LevelGaze

      Hunt is an idiot,a malleable tool.
      MT however is a far more insidious piece of work. Having now reached PM of Australia – a position he’s coveted for many years – he seeks much more personal glory. He’ll sell out our country just to (hopefully in his view) put a world emperor crown on his head.
      Abbott had his faults but Turnbull is our worst dream come true, he should be purged as soon as possible.

      1041

    • #
      Cookster

      I believe in for their support in the recent leadership spill Turnbull made a commitment not to revert to his global warmist preferences as PM. One of the MPs who supported Turnbull in the spill was Dr Dennis Jensen. I don’t think we should be quite so pessimistic what Hunt and Turnbull might sign up to in Paris.

      But what concerns me most about this story is that Greg Hunt didnt bother to turn up? Talk about close minded and ignorant – he seems very willing to swallow what he gets spoon fed by the computer model backed establishment. What is wrong with an open mind Greg? As usual it is the truth that is the loser in this debate.

      490

    • #
      Leigh

      Australia doesn’t seem to get it but once signed, we are locked into international law.
      With trade and financial penaltys applied for breaking those laws made by an unelected body outside the voters control.
      It’s not like Gilland and her useless CO/2 tax where we just change government and remove it.
      Once signed, would it really worry Turnbul if the liberal party again removed him and he faded from politics?
      Our last great allie in Cananda has also sucumbed to the socialist onslaught and will also sign away its sovereign rights to this global warming madness.
      Your 1% “donation” of GDP is appears to be a little ancient.
      Last I read it was closer to 3% that this grubby mob was trying to get its hands on.

      180

  • #
    AndyG55

    Here is another graph using UAH Australia since 2002 (that’s when the effect of the big El Nino finished down here)

    http://postimg.org/image/y49b6a5gv/

    And in this graph of UAH Australia from 1979, you can clear see that there was very little warming from 1979 to 1998.

    Then steep jumps in 1998,2003 and 2010, 2013 but after these jumps there is quite a steep cooling trend until the next jump.

    If the current El Nino does not provide a new jump, the trend will probably continue with steep cooling, and it hasn’t got far to go to get back down to 1979 levels.

    Did I mention that on a “Year to end September” basis, 2015 is 20th out of 37 in the UAH data !!

    392

  • #
    IRFM

    It is rather amusing to see all of the participants arguing over the classic elephant in the room but limiting the discussion to the mouse. The elephant is that 500,000 yrs ago in the case of Greenland and 1,000,000 years ago in Antarctica there was no ice. The climate was hugely different to what is today. No ice but, in the case of Greenland there pine forests representing a temperate climate . For a total of 1,000,000 years there has been a steady removal of water from the overall system now represented by huge ice sheets. These ice sheets have formed with no, repeat no, break in the ice accumulation record. Fears raised by glacial melting are false as a consequence. There have been multiple sea level changes, changes in climate changes in CO2 levels and changes in overall greehouse emissions for the last 1,000,000 years but no changes in the rate of ice accumulation. Until climatologists can reconcile the geology all climate arguments rendered to date for temperature and sea level changes must be erroneous.

    540

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Sorry, but it is more likely that the ice sheet in Antarctica has been around much longer than you say. The estimates for permanent ice vary between 24 and 38 million years ago.
      It doesn’t mean that the ice sheet covered the entire continent as now, and probably didn’t, and the amount will have been getting more and more, as you say.

      60

      • #
        IRFM

        Dating at the ice/pliocene disconformity is actual as recorded in the ice core from NGRIP in Greenland immediately above the interface and projected from Dome C in Antarctica. Dome C represents the oldest section so far drilled even though the full stratigraphic section has yet to be drilled. Correctly there is a concern about bacteria contamination in the preserved environment at the base of Dome C located 40 km from Vostok 1. I for one would be most interested if the complete ice stratigraphic section is fully drilled out and dated. On current ice core datingthe potentially oldest ice on this planet should be at Dome C and come in at about the 1,000,000 BP mark.

        30

  • #
    Mervyn

    The United Nations has been pursing this dream of an international agreement over fossil fuel energy use for many years now. So far, it has failed to achieve such an agreement. This coming Paris Climate Conference is yet another attempt. The thing is that all the cards are stacked in favour of the United Nations because it can keep at this forever until eventually everybody just gives in and signs such an agreement.

    Only two things can stop this in its tracks. First, if political leaders start abandoning the global warming doctrine … people like American presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Dr Ben Carson. Second, if a major scientific breakthrough occurs that exposes the CO2/greenhouse caused catastrophic man-made global warming hypothesis.

    But seeing that it is quite clear the science is irrelevant and the United Nations environmental agenda is not really about the climate but about a redistribution of wealth, ridding the world of capitalism and imposing the ideology of environmentalism, we really only have to hope for one thing … that Donald Trump or Dr Ben Carson becomes the next American President. Under them, ‘green’ will become obsolete because they sure aren’t going to give a dollar from American taxpayers to prop up green projects. Elon Musk’s ‘green’ business will go bust by being deprived of the billions of dollars it presently receives each year from taxpayer funded subsidies.!

    360

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      The funny thing is, people laugh when I suggest a PM could be removed by the king makers because he’s getting in the way of the climate-alamist globalists …but guess what?

      As Yes Minster ( and others ) have sugegsted time and time agian – the main criteria for being PM is being compliant to be told what to do.

      Tony said no, so he went.

      Now we have a left-leaning globalist as PM.

      Democracy? Yeah…. right…..

      As i have said in the past – very few people actual question who puts up the candidates to vote for. Control who you put up, control the agenda, control the govt. Easy.

      140

    • #
      F. Ross

      Mervyn:
      “…Only two things can stop this in its tracks….”

      A third option would be if one or more major countries grow so sick and tired of the UN that they withdraw from that essentially useless entity, the U.N.

      Of course probably none of us will ever live to see that happen but, nonetheless, “…’tis a consummation devoutly to be wished.”

      00

  • #
    michael hart

    How many billions will the pretend environmentalists and unproductive parasites drag from the world’s middle-class?

    Jo, I don’t think they much care who they drag it from.

    But their primary aim is to continue dragging it. That will certainly continue in the short term. Paris will produce some sort of agreement that allows them to continue their global-warming justifications for dragging from their(respective) domestic electorates.

    Countries representing the vast majoity of the 7 Billion people on this planet will agree to continue burning fossil fuels as they see fit, because it is the most economic way for them to improve their lives.

    The greens know this will happen. I derive pleasure from this knowledge, whatever my government may do to me.

    270

  • #
    Ruairi

    Alarmist fanatical zeal,
    Demands that in Paris a deal,
    By all parties be signed,
    With objectors confined,
    In a climate-change-skeptic Bastille.

    411

  • #
    BilB

    Here is an Australian Average Temperature assesment that matches the temperature reality that I have personally experienced.

    https://www.science.org.au/publications/scienceofclimatechange-q-and-a-2015/how

    Considering that Jdnifer Mahorosy’s graph comes from “Ken’s Kingdom”, Jo, where every graph looks pretty much the same and completely at odds with graphic results from science bodies around the world, I am going with the Australian Academy of Science evaluation on Australia’s temperature trends.

    https://kenskingdom.wordpress.com

    Here is how Ken describes himself

    “I’m a retired school principal with a keen interest in a range of topics, the main one at the moment being Global Warming. I have a deep seated scepticism for anything produced by governments, political parties, religious organisations, or big business. I am very wary of any people with strongly held beliefs they hope to foist on others, such as fundamentalists, jihadis, Greenpeace, global warming fanatics, creationists or intelligent design promoters, neo-Nazis.”

    …..that is one hell of a comprehensive source filter. Its pretty clear that Ken is highly selective about the numbers he choses for his graphs, too. I think Jennifer just got a high distinction for gullibility.

    664

    • #

      Congratulations Bill. That’s quite an achievement. Who knew biographies can induce errors in satellites? You should write this up and get it published.

      Could be orbital control via the hobby-inverse-doctorate equation… the ad hom squared effect?

      795

      • #
      • #
        BilB

        Ah, so that is how Ken has achieved his amazingly uniform graphs. He has found an atmospheric altitude that is uniform over time and used that as average temperature being careful to not mention the altitude leaving it to the reader to assume that this is the surface temperature. Seen from Uranus every altitude is as good as the Earth surface temperarure.

        419

        • #

          Classic FUD comment. Careful, your dishonesty is showing Bil. “An atmospheric altitude”? He uses “lower tropospheric temperatures”, which satellite recorded altitude would be better? Exactly.

          The lower trop is supposed to warm the same or more than the surface. Satellites cover all of Australia day and night, they aren’t affected by buildings going up, concrete going down, or airplanes taking off. No one has to smooth, homogenize and adjust their results by 2 whole degrees in order to get the “right” answer. But that’s why you prefer ACORN isn’t it Bil?

          284

          • #
            BilB

            You’ve been found out Jo using information dishonestly. The lower troposphere can be the top of Mount Everest depending on how one uses the definition. If data is not ground level then it should state the elevation. Jennifer Mahorasy was foolish to pull such a stunt at Parliament House just to try and ambush someone for a cheap political point.

            519

            • #
              BilB

              BilB, is there a point here (apart from wasting my time?) — Jo

              So I did a bit more digging and here is the whole story from you know where, but other sources as well.

              “John Christy and Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama published a series of papers starting about 1990 that implied the troposphere was warming at a much slower rate than the surface temperature record and climate models indicated Spencer and Christy (1992). One early version of their data even showed a cooling trend (Christy et al. 1995).


              [SNIP large unattributed and irrelevant quote]

              Here is the revised study that Christy contributed to

              http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/bibliography/related_files/tmlw0602.pdf

              24

              • #
                BilB

                YES THERE IS A POINT HERE, JO. THE POINT IS TO EDUCATE YOU ON THE WHERE THE GRAPH THAT YOU HAVE USED ABOVE IS INCORRECT, AND WHY.

                It has taken me a little while to figure out why that graph is so completely at odds with the ground based observations. But you are determined to create your own graphical results as per the graph just posted.

                Again here is the BOM integrated data overlay

                http://media.bom.gov.au/releases/18/bureau-of-meteorology-media-statement-no-2-climate-records/

                Not a lot of similarity is there?

                By the way I am enjoying Lucia’s pasting of David’s “study”. That is two out of two now.

                Bilb – This appears to be too stupid to post. Unless I’m missing something you are saying that there is a rising trend from 1978- 2014 which *proves* that there is no flat trend from 1998-2014? We are talking about the pause, and the graph you provided shows the same pause as the satellite data you say is “dishonest”. You are wasting my time. As for the BOM ACORN AWAP graph comparison (which is irrelevent to “the pause”). The AWAP line is adjusted too. There is no RAW area averaged temperature. To create the average they blend smooth and infill across hundreds of thousands of sq kilometers. Ask your self why they didn’t pick the best 100 stations and compare raw to adjusted? That would give the game away wouldn’t it? — Jo PS: People who understand the maths know Lucia is totally wrong. I guess that’s why she hides the link back to us eh? And it says a lot about your maths skills, but we knew that anyway…

                12

            • #

              Bill, you are wandering in the desert of the delusional more than usual today.

              Everyone even the IPCC uses LTL satellite and surface trends as interchangeable.
              Here’s the difference between satellite and surface that you are ranting about.
              Australian temperatures, satellite, surface

              PS: By some definitions I hear Mt Everest can be considered to be part of the “surface” of Earth too?

              224

              • #
                BilB

                Indeed they do. They do If the data from various satellites made at different times and with different technological ages is adjusted to make there instrument sets operate as though they were one instrument. It seems to me that Ken’s data source, for him to have achieved the output he has, is not adjusted appropriately.

                You have no idea what you are talking about do you? Ken is using the best latest UAH data. It kills you doesn’t it? clutching at vague excuses as your religion fails. – Jo

                16

              • #
                BilB

                Here is the correct graph. See any similarities?

                http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Satellite_Temperatures.png

                Yep, you still have the wrong time frame. 1997 is not 1980. Numbers are too big for you eh? – Jo

                24

              • #
                BilB

                That’s because there never was a “flat” (as in horizontal) spot. There was a reduction in the rate of increase as there had been several times before, but not this “hiatus” that Denialists love to proclaim.

                The thing you have to answer for though, Jo, is the missing Ice Age. 2015 is nearly finished and the rate of temperature increase is on the rise again, and that is despite this being a period of unusually low sunspots and solar irradiance is dipping down .2 of a watt. So you’ve moved it out to 2017 as Doomsday Cultists tend to do.

                You and David are digging a huge credibility grave for yourselves with this ever more extreme position you are choosing to take.

                Bilb – your denial of the lack of statistically significant warming and the utter failure of climate models is the cultish behaviour (see Von Storch). We just follow the data, and we set the date at 2017 as the likely year mid last year, not this year (shame you are wrong about every single point eh?). David also set an outer bound year in the early 20s and said his model will be falsified (unlike the cult believers who are never ever wrong no matter how many times they fail.) There is an El Nino current. So what? You ignore the long term trends in favor of one season? Your irrational comments are becoming a tedious bore. For your own blood pressure, perhaps you should comment somewhere else? – Jo

                PS: Still no acknowledgement that your graphs from 1978 were a pathetic error on your part? Typical. No integrity.

                23

              • #
                BilB

                2015 was David’s previous prediction, was that a whole year ago, for the beginning of the Ice age plunge. I see you have adopted Tony Abbott’s version of reality.

                Wrong. Put in an exact quote with a link. No more comments will be published until you do. Timewasting bluff. — Jo

                Anyway, all of the BOM published graphs for Australian average temps over time show a .5 degree rise 1978 to 2015, your “BOM” (summer??) graph shows a .175 degree rise over that time frame. One of them is wrong. And your UAH Satellite graph show barely a .1 temperature increase. Every farmer in the country knows that isn’t true.

                [We're talking about "the pause" bill. You graphs and trends back to 1978 are irrelevant. -jo]

                http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/01/090121-earlier-spring.html

                This doesn’t happen because it is getting colder. Even your beloved telegraph believes so

                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/7189104/Spring-is-coming-11-days-earlier-on-average.html

                http://www.alternet.org/environment/spring-coming-earlier-us-thanks-climate-change

                [snip bluster]

                12

              • #
                BilB

                Jo, I’m nof going to wade through your archivd to find a quote you know full well that David made, I googled it instead.

                http://drsircus.com/world-news/global-warming-dead-on-arrival/

                Towards the bottom of this thread is the reference, and even the basis of David’s justification (2004 + 11 = 2015). Once one makes such predictions they are out there and one’s credibility floats or sinks on the outcome. 2015 has now slipped by with no ice age, but David has bought a couple more years with the new deadline of 2017. We’ll see what happens at credibility test point 2.

                [So Dr. Evans made a prediction? Why is his prediction so important to single out for your criticism when predictions by the IPCC, Al Gore, James Hansen and so many others have failed so miserably? But you provided a link, fulfilling Jo's requirement, so I'm approving this and we'll see what readers think of it.] AZ

                [REPLY: That's not a quote from David. Someone misinterpreted his work. That's why you need to quote actual words with a link. - Jo]

                35

              • #
                BilB

                The reason why Davd Evans’ predition differs, AZ, from others is that it was so specific, and that its specific nature was fundamental to the theory that he was putting forward. Going on the many claims here at Jo Nova that the exception breaks the rule, David Evans’ Solar Driving theory is now dead in the water. It has failed by his own abmission. His only option now is to modify the existing theory to being a 13 year solar cycle relationship, and empirically prove the connection, or create a new theory.

                [As I asked already. Quote us exactly and with a link. You're wrong, and your comments are so badly thought out and researched they are fast becoming not worth publishing at all. This is timewasting. - Jo]

                Thd other entity’s theories you mentioned, apart from not being wrong as you claim, are not based on very specific time frames. There is a lot of science that is time specfic (90 minute rem cycles ,spot on) for instance so it is perfectly valid for a theory to operate in finite time frames, but if the theory is dependent on those time frames then the theory fails. Ho useful would a Caesium clock be if its frequency change with the weaher? David Evans had the option of saying, “oops, wrong sunspot cycle, it is really the next one”, but instead he changed the ice age start date by several years to a specfic year.

                Now I have my own thoughts on why he did this, but I am curious as to what your thoughts on the matter are.

                [He hasn't changed his prediction. You just can't read. Jo]

                13

              • #

                BilB submitted this at the top of a different thread to hijack that topic. I’m reporting it here. Apparently he won’t come back. — Jo

                I’m not going to educate on this, Jo, so I’ll take that as a comment ban. That is three out of three Libertarian blog site bans. That is a badge of honour to wear with my Jonovian record thumds down award.

                No, Bill you’ve banned yourself (apparently). All I asked for was a quote and a link to substantiate your claims (something I’m sure you don’t have). All you had to do was provide it, or admit you were wrong. I only said I would hold off comments until you answered the question. Busted, you appear to have no integrity at all. You hardly have to do anything. But perhaps you’ve been so rude in the hope of being banned? Is that it? Your fantasy is to say you were banned by Jo Nova? Bad luck. – Jo PS: You don’t need to “educate” me about what David predicted. I know exactly what he said, which is why I called your bluff. And when you lie about being banned here, don’t forget to say JoNova is so censorious that she “only” published 406 of your comments. Whine about that eh?

                I’ll take the occaisional peek to see if you are actually capable of figuring out how this all works. And I await the scientific journal peer review publication of David’s “theory”. That is going to be entertaining, but I wont be holding my breath.

                Cheers.
                [Goodbye BilB. I doubt that your contribution, or lack thereof, will be missed] Fly

                [Ditto.] AZ

                33

              • #
                Bill

                JO, don’t take his nonsense to heart. We all appreciate that you don’t suffer fools gladly, and nor should you.
                PS, on a personal note, I would greatly appreciate it if you just used his silly Bilb instead of Bill so nobody mistakes a sane and reasonable person for that odious character.

                00

      • #
        Scott L

        I think you will find that the barrackers for the AGW religion like Bilb and Stephan at the top of the post, are suffering from what is known as the Dunning-Kruger effect. In brief “the dumber you are, the lower your ability to know how dumb you are and tend to over estimate your ability”

        (I call them barrackers because just like anyone that follows a team, they wont change their minds regardless of how their team performs they are wedded to that point of view and wont change just like someone who barracks for a particular sporting team.)

        Source: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.64.2655

        Abstract

        People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it. Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test performance and ability. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd. Several analyses linked this miscalibration to deficits in metacognitive skill, or the capacity to distinguish accuracy from error. Paradoxically, improving the skills of participants, and thus increasing their metacognitive competence, helped them recognize the limitations of their abilities. It is one of the essential features of such incompetence that the person so afflicted is incapable of knowing that he is incompetent. To have such knowledge would already be to remedy a good portion of the offense. (Miller, 1993, p. 4) In 1995, McArthur Wheeler walked into two Pittsburgh banks

        174

      • #
        Frank

        Jo,
        I did make my point in one short sentence, the FFUD is on your side

        And you have exactly zero examples. “Congrats”. – Jo

        37

    • #
      Phil R

      BilB,

      Here is an Australian Average Temperature assesment that matches the temperature reality that I have personally experienced.

      You’ve personally experienced 800,000 years of temperature reality? Wow, you are speaking with authority.

      554

      • #
        BilB

        You’re kidding, right Phil R? The only temps that are important are the ones my children and grand children have to live with. Fortunately there is action under way. All it takes is time to get alternative energy machinery up to speed. Did you see in the news that solar and battery cost effectiveness is close to making “off grid” a reality for most Australians. It is all good. No one appreciates the value of this more than Bruce of Newcastle

        429

        • #
          michael hart

          Please just make your mind up, BilB. Would you like to preach about temperatures you are convinced you have experienced, or temperatures you are convinced your descendants are going to experience?

          The “alternative energy machinery” is welcome to get up to any speed it can manage, and I personally wish them God speed. But they really should call back once they have got up to their best speed, and leave the rest of us to get on with our lives in the mean time.

          184

        • #
          AndyG55

          “The only temps that are important are the ones my children and grand children have to live with’

          Then you better buy them some more blankets. !!

          And people should stop wasting time on non-functional, irregular supply technologies and boost the fossil fuel power industry.

          Cheap, Reliable, 24/7/365 Energy, with the massive added bonus of increasing the circulation of plant food, thus helping to feed the world’s increasing population.

          155

        • #
          Bruce of Newcastle

          BilB – As it happens I ran those numbers yesterday. Comes out at 49c/kWh.

          If you want to pay three times what we should be paying, be my guest.

          Then consider the difference between ‘real electricity’ and ‘fake electricity’.
          Heh.

          Indian villagers protest Greenpeace solar grid: ‘We want real electricity, not fake electricity!’ – ‘Coal Trumps Solar in India’

          LOL! This was in green-as-grass SciAm last Monday, which I had to drop my subscription of many years ago as it became unreadable.

          123

          • #
            BilB

            That is an interesting piece BON. I would comment at Catallaxy only that Libertarian (freedom of expression, etc) site has banned me. I’m half banned here, only 50% of my comments get past the nigglers.

            Anyway.

            It is definitely problematic.

            take Kumar’s experience

            “Kumar’s family received one compact fluorescent light bulb and a wall outlet to charge their mobile phone. The power would be free for six months and then cost 70 rupees per month. That comes to about $1, but a steep price tag in a place where poor people earn, on average, the equivalent of about 30 cents per day. Most of Kumar’s neighbors could not afford it.”

            If his situation is typical at the poor end of town how is he going to be able to afford grid electricity which is about 4.9 rupees per Kwhr (depending). So the unaffordable 70 rupees would buy 500 watt hours per day for a month not counting connection fees. However if lighting is the main use for the poor then with LED lights .5 units per day should be sufficient but at the same unaffordable cost ie no gain for the poor.

            The real benefit of the grid (coal or renewable) is for the wealthier people who can then indulge in appliance heaven, and for business. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

            21

            • #
              Bruce of Newcastle

              BilB – Sorry to hear it. I’d've thought Sinc would be more accommodating than that.

              I’ve not been commenting much here at Jo’s, so my apology for replying so tardily.

              As for the content I note there’s a fair movement here for Greens to go off grid. I have no problem with that, even though it probably costs them around 50c/kWh. Its their money, they can use it how they like. But much of the world can’t afford the cheapest electricity, which is coal. Since ECS is well below 1 C/doubling it is unjustified to stop those people from having the benefits we in rich countries have.

              As for me I will choose coal fired power on principle since extra CO2 in the atmosphere acts as an enabler of agriculture, which feeds the hungry.

              00

        • #

          Don’t listen to that selfish BilB character.

          He has no answers.

          All he’s got is the gouging selfish attitude where he expects you and me to pay for his rooftop toys, and his toy AA cell equivalent to run his home.

          His type are happy going off the grid, but just couldn’t care less about the rest of the vast populace of Australia.

          He thinks the answer is to run his home off rooftop solar, but he has no answers whatsoever on what is required to run the rest of Australia.

          BilB and his ilk think that rooftop solar will be the answer.

          But he has no answer to what he hopes to run Sydney with.

          Sydney requires 25TWH of power a year, or 68,500,000KWH a day.

          That’s 4.57 Million times higher than what he consumes in his home. If he has a grid connected rooftop solar system then Sydney consumes 18.27 Million times what he feeds back.

          When you people, BilB think of someone other than yourself, then maybe we might actually stop laughing at you.

          Tony.

          143

          • #
            Bruce of Newcastle

            Tony – BilB has an off-grid system, although he does have a generator for wet weather. We had a long discussion last year. It was fun.

            Basically yes, you can go off grid as the Climate Council said yesterday, but if you do so you won’t have much change from 50 c/kWh. Probably higher in real world experience. I was being as charitable as I could in the original analysis.

            93

    • #
      AndyG55

      If you think you have experience the tripe that you have posted..

      there is no doubt that it is you that is the GULLIBLE one and with a massive imagination to boot.. heavily influenced by who knows what kind of hallucinogen!!!

      ps. Ken shows what could be called a “healthy” scepticism,

      and yes, this is very different from your own cult brain-washing.

      292

    • #
      AndyG55

      As you are obviously only just out of your teens, maybe mid 20′s and yet to reach puberty…

      …here is what you would have actually experienced (other than through your hallucinogens)

      http://postimg.org/image/5tay9oiwf/

      A couple of small jumps around 1998, 2003, 2010.. and basically zero trend otherwise.

      2015 so far in Australia is 20th out of 37 years of satellite data on a year to date basic.

      ie.. just about right on average.

      193

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Plain dopey!

      71

    • #
      Bruce of Newcastle

      The UAH TLT data has been validated using balloon radiosondes. There are thousands of such balloon measurements.

      Furthermore John Church’s own data shows that 2XCO2 is well below 1 C/doubling.

      He and his colleagues found a rise in SST of 0.125 C in 50 years, which they ascribed to humans. Now what does 0.125 C over 50 years mean? Well if you turn it into an implied climate sensitivity the calc is as follows (where 390 and 315 are the respective ppmV CO2 concs at the start and end of the 50 years):

      2XCO2 = 0.125 x log 2 / (log 390 – log 315) = 0.4 C/ doubling of pCO2

      So the SST rise in 50 years is equivalent to a 2XCO2 of only 0.4 C/doubling, which is even smaller than Lindzen’s median number. Harmless.

      253

      • #
        AndyG55

        UAH America also closely matches the COOLING trend of USCRN and US ClimDiv.

        173

        • #
          BilB

          OK, so this is about John Christy and Roy Spencer. The question for John Christy is which atmospheric elevation is he using to make his case. There could be a clue in the Himalayas where observations of physical impact can be made up to 27,000 feet of elevation. There ard winners and losers in this region

          http://e360.yale.edu/feature/as_himalayan_glaciers_melt_two_towns_face_the_fallout/2858/

          ….but there is plenty of evidence that Global Warming is melting Glaciers to a high elevation, but is that all the way to the top of Everest. This article suggests some change but relative stability. Other studies talk about unanticipated change such as an increase of barometric pressure in the troposhere possibly sufficient to make Everest easier to climb.

          The long and the short of it is that for those who intend to live their lives in a high altitude balloon, there may be climate temperature stability for them. But for those who have to live at ground level it is Global Warming as predicted.

          622

          • #
            el gordo

            ‘….but there is plenty of evidence that Global Warming is melting Glaciers to a high elevation,’

            Fair enough, but did you know continental glaciers and maritime glaciers behave differently?

            http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/09/150902102554.htm

            80

          • #
            ian hilliar

            OMG, you quote Yale 360! They formed that assoc to try to prevent atmos CO rising past the “ideal level” of 360ppm! How is that going? You may as well quote from Answers in Genesis!!! Please sop quoting porkies, Bilby, or your nose will be even longer than Pinochio’s.

            144

            • #
              AndyG55

              Is that the big brother of McGibbon’s 350.org ?

              We are now at around 400ppm, and still no warming for 18 or so years, with evidence of a coming cooling trend..

              No tipping point, no nothing !! Just another FARCE !!!

              133

          • #
            AndyG55

            Sure they are Bilge.. ;-)

            https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/clip_image004.png

            Most of those glaciers have been melting a lot longer,

            And under severl melting glaciers they are finding tree stumps, human artifacts etc etc

            But again, Bilge.. don’t let these facts get in the way of one of your propaganda rants. ;-)

            153

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            And meanwhile in the real world:

            Two years ago 10,000 food beasts in Russia were frozen to death in unusual cold.

            The Volgograd Fried Moose Burger chain was forced to close for three months and they couldn’t even dig up enough potatoes to make fries.

            The northern hemisphere has been in this cold winter situation for quite a few years now and everybody in Russia and northern

            USA is putin on their cold weather gear.

            KK

            121

            • #
              TdeF

              Really? As it happens, I was in Volgograd three weeks ago and it was mid 20s, despite the freezing winters. Never heard this story or saw this chain. Having been across Siberia, it is also warm and no snow in summer at up to 60 North. Google is quiet, refrencing only the previous entry. Putin? Son in law? This is a joke, surely. This moose, was his name Mickey?

              40

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                TdeF

                If you read my later posts it is clear that the Burger Chain and the supply source are in different parts of Russia.

                But I must concede that you have hit the moose on the head – perhaps a bad analogy.

                I was a little bit enraged after reading the united nations outline for our futures which Tony put up.

                Verbal diahorea just to gloss over the fact that we are to be enslaved.

                I decided to open up my own branch of the u n here in Australia and put out documents of equal and perhaps even superior quality to those of the old u n in New York.

                As with all stories (CAGW) there has to be at least one true item eg there were 10,000 frozen food beasts two years ago but as you point out the Volgograd Fried Mooseburger Chain is no more.

                It had to close down when the food supply ran out.

                :) KK

                00

          • #
            AndyG55

            And there are massive amounts of evidence that the first 3/4 or so of the Holocene were considerable WARMER than now.

            We are, in fact, still only just above the COLDEST period in the last 10,000 years.

            But you just keep on ignoring these facts.. its what an ignorant person would do.

            103

  • #
    gai

    If they manage to pull off this skimming 1% of the GDP from Western countries expect the Shadow Economy to grow by leaps and bounds. You may be able to skim money off the top via gasoline and other energy taxes but people are going to come up with interesting ways to get around being taxed into the ground.

    Jun. 4, 2013 Shadow Economies Grow as People Flee High Taxes and Stiff Regulations

    Otherwise legal off-the-books economic activity is on the rise again in much of the world, says a new report, with the “shadow economy” comprising huge chunks of many nation’s economies. There’s no need for speculation as to why, say the authors. High taxes and stringent regulations have made it very attractive and even necessary for people to earn their keep and conduct their business out of sight of tax collectors and bureaucrats. Not surprisingly, the report recommends tax reduction and deregulation as keys to getting people back into the official economy where they can contribute to governmental coffers….

    2002 International Monetary Fund Report
    Hiding in the Shadows
    The Growth of the Underground Economy

    ….Shadow Economies

    A factory worker has a second job driving an unlicensed taxi at night; a plumber fixes a broken water pipe for a client, gets paid in cash but doesn’t declare his earnings to the tax collector; a drug dealer brokers a sale with a prospective customer on a street corner. These are all examples of the underground or shadow economy—activities, both legal and illegal, that add up to trillions of dollars a year that take place “off the books,” out of the gaze of taxmen and government statisticians.

    Although crime and shadow economic activities have long been a fact of life—and are now increasing around the world—almost all societies try to control their growth, because of the potentially serious consequences…

    The growth of the shadow economy can set off a destructive cycle. Transactions in the shadow economy escape taxation, thus keeping tax revenues lower than they otherwise would be. If the tax base or tax compliance is eroded, governments may respond by raising tax rates—encouraging a further flight into the shadow economy that further worsens the budget constraints on the public sector

    This increasing problem is known. The reason is known so why do politicians continue down the path that makes the problem worse and worse? Because they have a PLAN. Christiana Figueres, a disciple of Al Gore, is now the Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. She said point blank:

    *************

    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution… democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China is the best model.”

    *************

    Rosa Koire based on her extensive research describes the UN Sustainable Village that is seen as ‘The Solution’ for corralling free humans and completely harnessing their productivity.

    Your government is …in the process of consolidating your output into a more controllable, exploitable channel. The reason you are being misled by your government and told that all of this is good for you, is because there is no profit in managing a mass uprising. It is too disruptive. The markets want you to continue to consume—quietly and obediently. The technology that is being marketed to you is actually being used to condition you to expect to be spied on, and to spy on others. Every totalitarian state in history has relied on data collection….

    The pretty pastel vision of life in a Smart Growth development is a manipulation, a mask. In fact these plans are designed to restrict your freedom of movement and choice.

    Transit villages (formerly known as cities) will be restricted to having only the population that can be supported by food grown within a 100 mile radius (called a ‘food shed’). Food sheds will dictate where you can live and when you can change your residence. Calculations, such as those done recently at Cornell University, will determine how much food can be grown within that area and then the Transit Village population will be limited to the number of people who can be fed by that land….

    If you want to move to that village you will have to apply and wait for an opening.

    The recent crash/depression is world-wide and was engineered to destroy expectations of long-term economic employment. If people have no expectation of long-term employment they cannot plan for the future, and cannot comfortably buy a home and contract for a 30 year mortgage. They cannot create community with long-term neighbors. With long-term employment plummeting there is a shift to a more transient life-style which is more conducive to living in Smart Growth Transit Villages: condominiums and apartments. Private property ownership and financial security will be phased out through excessive regulations and land use restrictions….

    191

    • #
      gai

      Additional links to flesh out what I have said.

      You can see the UN Sustainable Village taking shape, real time in The Demise of Christchurch NZ

      The Cornell Website linked by Rosa Koire about Foodsheds has been taken down. Here is an alternate from Cambridge University Press.

      Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems: Mapping potential foodsheds in New York State by food group: An approach for prioritizing which foods to grow locally

      A You tube of a presentation by Rosa. I found everything she said spot on.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK2sZUs2l_U

      (Note that Rosa is a Democrat Liberal who works on land takings issues in California. A conservative is is NOT.)

      171

      • #
        diogenese2

        I visited Christchurch in 2011 and saw that most of the city had, in fact, survived with (relatively) little damage. Since then I have followed Roger the Surf in his efforts to expose the ideological crime that is being committed against the brave people of this fine city. It is a case study in the “sleep of reason” that is gradually overtaking the “developed” civilised world which, if not checked, will destroy it. It is too late for me to “think of the grandchildren”, it now being up to them, but I can leave them prepared.

        160

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Depressing but true Gai. Something to think about.

      Christiana Figueres has got to be one of the most vacant people imaginable.

      All she has rattling around inside her is the u n mantra of “coral and control”.

      Although she presents physically in startling contrast to our own Julie of the Eye-shadow Bishop they are both

      there mesmerised and thoroughly in love with the Aura of Power and all that the u n can provide them in prestige and immortality.

      GHunt and big Malcolm, big Kev and even M. Trudeau waiting impatiently in the wings for their time to shine.

      Truly sad to see such people with so little honour that they are prepared to sacrifice the work and efforts of many millions

      of decent law abiding slaves to their megalomanic dreams of self importance.

      KK

      171

  • #
    Bob Malloy

    Not strictly on topic, however relates to a consequence of this misuse of science.Origin to close Eraring in 2030s

    ORIGIN Energy intends to shut its Eraring power station some time after 2030 as part of a global climate change agreement the company unveiled on Wednesday.

    Origin’s announcement follows a similar pledge in April this year by its energy-sector competitor AGL, which said it would close its Bayswater, Liddell and Loy Yang power stations by 2050.

    Reports on Wednesday morning predicted that Origin would announce the Eraring closure at that morning’s annual general meeting, but the formal statement did not mention the station by name.

    Instead, Origin announced it had signed up to ‘‘all seven initiatives’’ of a global ‘‘We Mean Business Coalition’’, joining a world-wide coalition of non-government organisations, businesses and institutional investors ‘‘committed to leadership on climate change’’.

    I ask our energy suppliers, after closing your coal fired generators what are your plans for reliable energy supply. You can’t be thick enough to believe renewable sources will meet the nations needs. So is this just a cynical exercise, realising by 2030 this whole scam will be up.

    As for those government scientist mentioned in the article, if there is any justice they should all be serving time in “Gaol, Jail”, or residing in commercial waste bins where they can both sleep and find their sustance.

    170

    • #
      Robert O

      This is to co-incide with Labor’s target of 50% renewable by 2030 isn’t it? So to replace each 500MW generator closed we need about 5 Marcarthur sized windfarms ( 5,500ha. each @ 420 MW), and we still have to put in a 500 MW gas turbine as back-up to cover for the 3/4 of time when the wind doesn’t blow. Why bother with the windfarms and go with the gas turbine, save a lot of cost and bother wouldn’t it!

      120

      • #
        AndyG55

        “and go with the gas turbine, save a lot of cost and bother wouldn’t it!”

        That means Australia would have to start fracking.

        Why go with gas turbines, when we have the world’s best supply of coal. !

        181

        • #
          Robert O

          Andy, it’s difficult to start-up and stop a large heavy steam turbine generator on demand so back-up has to be gas. But as to coal, we produce 11,800 petajoules and export about 10,500 each year. This translates to approx. 2,900,000 GWh for others use for cheap electricity production. Our saving of “greenhouse gases” by going wind or solar is neglible when compared with the coal (carbon dioxide) we export; around 3.3 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of coal. Doesn’t make much sense either.

          62

          • #
            AndyG55

            “so back-up has to be gas.”

            Not if you totally get rid of the wind turbines and solar supply irregularities. :-)

            102

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Good comment Bob.

      I wonder if Tony could work out an estimate of what power costs should be if run as non profit by the government?

      Even at present we are seeing power costs go up to give a huge flush of cash to those in charge and we are being ripped off.

      No doubt much of this loose cash is what allows those in power to strut the world stage and avoid the main target:

      PROVING CHEAP AND ACCESSIBLE POWER TO EVERYBODY.

      KK

      130

    • #

      There’s something in all of this I just fail to comprehend.

      Plans to close down Loy Yang, Bayswater and Liddell, and now Eraring.

      No Loy Yang – No Melbourne.

      No Eraring – No Sydney.

      No Bayswater and Liddell – No Eastern Sea Board.

      Surely there are people who actually know this, and surely they must be advising politicians that is the case.

      Without those four plants, (virtually) all of Australia grinds to a halt. That’s around 30 to 35% of all of Australia’s electrical power, power which actually can supply for 24/7/365.

      You can replace the 68TWH (maybe) with 12,500 wind towers, say 60 to 65 monster wind plants at the rate of 4 or 5 new plants a year, at $2.2 Billion each, but that wind power is only available for 25% to 30% of the time, all going well.

      It’s all well and good to nod your head as a politician, and say well done, but where are they going to get the power from, the real power, power which will actually enable Australia to stay operational.

      Surely they must know this. This is high stakes here.

      Grind Sydney and Melbourne to a halt, and then see what happens. It won’t be very pretty.

      Tony.

      181

      • #

        Just Sydney and Melbourne alone require 50TWH of power a year, and as that is required 24 hours of every day, then that’s the equivalent of 5700MW of 24/7/365 power.

        Not wind power at 25 to 30%. Not Commercial Solar Power at 17 to 20%. Not rooftop soalr power at 13% but something which can deliver at 100%.

        So, while that 5700MW is 100%, then to take into account maintenance down time, you’re looking at 6700MW to 7000MW of actual Nameplate.

        There must be people in positions of decision making who actually know this, surely.

        Tony.

        170

        • #
          gai

          It is the same thing they are doing to the USA Tony.

          They are literally shutting down the east coast.

          http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/CoalRetirementsMap.png

          All I can think of is they want the riots and the destruction of the old cities so they can do the same thing they are doing to Christchurch NZ, building their dream Agenda 21 ‘sustainable’ cities.

          And they do not care how many people die in the transition.

          As Dr. Tim Ball said Overpopulation [is] The Fallacy Behind The Fallacy Of Global Warming So it would seem from the point of view of world leaders a decline in population would be considered a ‘good thing’

          Checkout Forrest Mims on Eric Pianka’s speech. It was almost ten years ago but was so bizarre as to be memorable.
          (wwwDOT)oocities.org/tetrahedronomega/pianka-mims.html

          The worst part was Pianka got a standing ovation for advocating the removal of 90% of the human population.

          90

        • #
          Andy

          This is a repeat of a request made in another thread …

          Hi Tony,

          love your work. This is slightly inline with your comment. I live in Adelaide and they are closing the Port Augusta power station(s) next year along with the dedicated coal mine which supplies them. Could you do a blog on the power issues which will occur from this action (my money is on massive blackouts) e.g. the raw numbers, distribution, etc? For all others South Australia has a very unhealthy reliance on wind with our back-up supplies coming from Victoria (also reliant on wind). Victoria, from my understanding, relies on excesses from the hydro scheme in Tasmania. Happy for you to fill in the gaps Tony.

          Thanks and Regards, Andy (an ex-pusser and kindred spirit).

          Sorry for doing it here but I was unable to find a suitable email address …

          20

          • #

            Andy,

            just a, umm, wry comment here.

            Perhaps you may have noticed that the decision to close down the aging plant at Port Augusta coincided with the completion of the upgraded Victoria/South Australia Interchange, which allowed considerably more power to be imported from Victoria.

            You know, so now SthOz can claim a reduction is its emissions, because those emissions will now be just transferred across to Victoria, and their brown coal plants which will be supplying SthOz.

            So, close Loy Yang, and close South Australia.

            Tony.

            130

            • #
              Andy

              Hi Tony,

              thanks for the note. While I think you are suggesting that SA will still have the same amount of supply available I would seriously wonder what is going to stop our neighbours from literally ‘pulling the plug’ when an unforeseen event interrupts supply in Victoria. I have recently traveled the route from Adelaide to Melbourne and there were whole farms of wind generators just sitting idle. Is the Loy Yang plant capable of carrying the load for two states?

              Anyway at the risk of sounding smitten and certainly no offence meant to those providing quality explanations of the science, your electricity supply posts really hit the mark. Clear and concise.

              Thanks for your input (and thank you Jo for and excellent site),

              Andy

              50

          • #

            Andy, if you really wanted to, perhaps you could leave a comment at my home site, and it only need be a one liner really, and even at my bio link.

            The site owner, (like nearly every site owner in the U.S.) says that all comments MUST go to moderation to be approved.

            If you leave a comment, then, similarly to this site, you must leave a valid email address, and from that comment which is in moderation, I can access that email address and reply to you individually, and privately from there, via email, and then you’ll also have my email address. The site owner and I are the only ones who will ever see your email address, which is not ever published, just the text of your comment alone.

            Link to my Bio

            Tony.

            70

          • #

            I’m not sure if you’ve seen an earlier Post of mine at my home site, from May of 2013, but I’ll include the link any way, just in case, and perhaps some others may wish to read it also.

            Don’t bet on blackouts. There is no politician in his right mind would allow that. In desperation, they would do anything. That’s why that Interchange Upgrade was so imperative.

            Every tiny little plant in the State will be required to run until the situation eased, and it’s happened before, mainly stemming from an earlier decision to close that same plant, and that decision backfired.

            I detail what happened at this Post and found an easy way to track such occasions, and that’s from the AEMO chart of daily power costs, and that link is also at the Post.

            So, while ever they have that available power from Victoria, and the capability to run all those smaller plants, then SthOz will always have power, giving the (false) impression that the State with the most wind power is doing very well thank you for asking.

            Link to Post: Is South Australia’s Wind Power Cheap? Well, No

            Tony.

            60

      • #
        Bob Malloy

        As I mentioned in my original post, closing dates for these plants is between 2030 and 2050. It all looks like a gee up for the greenies to me, this will be their use by dates, replacements will be required anyway. Will we follow Britain with Nuclear or once the scare is done and dusted will we get the super critical HELE coal generators that they should be building now.

        60

      • #
        CameronH

        Tony, I worked in the power industry myself for many years. I spend some of this time in senior management roles within the environmental area and was involved with the ESAA environmental committee for a bit. The management of these companies are aware of the issues but are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Both major parties are virtually indistinguishable in their policies on all of this.

        The government bureaucrats, particularly in the Commonwealth government, in this area as basically hopeless and a bigger bunch of nothings would be hard to find. If the companies do not appear to be toeing the line to some extend a swarm of government environmental drones will be on them like flies on a dog t$%d and make their lives miserable. Having been on the receiving end of one of these drone swarms I can tell you they are not pleasant.

        I would assume that the long term strategy for these companies would be to play along and gouge as much out of the renewable madness as they can while it lasts. At some point it will become obvious that we are in serious trouble. Either a complete collapse of our industrial or agricultural base will appear imminent or lights will start to go out as Coal fired plant ages or maintenance is neglected due to lower profits. It should be realized that the bulk supply price from a coal fired power station is still at about the 3 to 4 cents per kilowatt hour. This hasn’t changed for many years.

        At this point a panic to build any type of reliable power station to prevent a disaster could mean another bucket of poorly controlled tax payer dollars being thrown out there in the same manner that happened with the stimulus packages. Coal fired stations now come in basically standard package plant form and can be erected quite quickly. They are also cheap to run.

        There is a bit of this going on in Germany at the moment. This coming winter should see if they are ahead of the problem on this.

        80

        • #

          Thanks Cameron.

          I notice that both Bayswater and also Mt. Piper have plans already approved for upgrade to USC plants (also now referred to as HELE) at their existing sites.

          I suppose that with all that work already done, even though in abeyance, it wouldn’t be too difficult to make them ready when the time does come that politicians look around and say ….. “what just happened then?” as the power supply looks like failing, and desperately looks for replacement of real power, before their jobs as politicians crash and burn.

          Tony.

          70

          • #
            AndyG55

            That upgrade will almost certainly reduce Australia’s CO2 emissions more than any number of unreliable solar or wind farms would do.

            62

  • #
    diogenese2

    It looks like the effort made in overriding the Australian election and controlling that of Canada, in order to institute global emissions trading has been wasted.
    The current meeting in Berlin, due to finish tomorrow (sorry today to you), but unlikely, is heading for the buffers at a rate of knots. First (Monday) the third world threw out the prepared draft and re-instated their overridden positions. Then (Tuesday) the green blob was excluded in the (vain) hope that removing their baneful presence would allow progress.

    http://www.thegwpf.com/un-climate-conference-locks-out-green-ngos/

    Wednesday the review of 2 days work indicates that no outcome may be expected.

    http://www.thegwpf.com/frustration-mounts-as-time-runs-out-at-un-climate-talks/

    This is the last negotiation before the Paris summit. Since Copenhagen 2009 nobody has ever wished to actually negotiate at a COP, which means at Paris they will have to negotiate everything or nothing. My money is on the latter. If anyone offers 3 to 1 on cancellation bite their hand off.
    Popcorn futures look like Dutch Tulips circa AD 1640.

    140

    • #
      gai

      From GWPF: Frustration Mounts As Time Runs Out At UN Climate Talks

      “…Algeria’s Ahmed Djoghlaf, who co-chairs the forum with Daniel Reifsnyder of the United States, urged diplomats to pull up their sleaves and “engage with your partner”….”

      This is Daniel A. Reifsnyder He is a Lawyer.

      …He served as alternate head of the U.S. delegation in the negotiations from 1991-92 that led to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

      ….He came to the State Department after 10 years with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)….

      …. his Ph.D. in international relations from Tufts University’s Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy in 2014. He holds a J.D. from George Washington University (1981), an M.A. in Russian Area Studies from Georgetown University (1976), and an A.B. in political philosophy from Trinity College (CT) (1972). He studied at the Institut d’Etudes Politiques (Paris) (1970-71) and at Leningrad State University (summer 1974)…

      Well that helps explain NOAA’s matching adjustments to rise in CO2 doesn’t it?

      https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/10/02/co2-drives-ncdc-data-tampering/

      71

  • #
  • #
    handjive

    You need to know who Rachel Kyte is because she is leading the financing of the global climate change initiative and she spoke honestly recently at a Soros-Podesta funded conference at the New Republic, an extremely far-left online publication.

    She is planning for global governance by the U.N. members, governance which will be funded with hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. with side agreements to keep the money flowing in perpetuity, and finally, this new global government will manage the world’s economy and land use.

    Rachel Kyte is World Bank Group Vice President and Special Envoy for Climate Change.

    Ms. Kyte is the leading figure for the World Bank Group in efforts to campaign for an ambitious agreement at the 21st Convention of the Parties of the UNFCC this December and she wants U.S. dollars to fund most of it.

    The ultimate financial goal is one trillion dollars but it is starting at $100 billion.

    > Don’t miss the videos@link of Rachel Kyte explaining what she will do:

    http://www.independentsentinel.com/shocking-revelations-about-the-climate-treaty-arent-simply-alarming/

    100

  • #
  • #
    Klem

    PM Trudeau will travel to Paris and sign anything the UN socialists put in front of his empty little head. He will not have read it, he really won’t have the slightest clue what it will actually mean.

    Then he will jam a carbon tax down Canadas throat within a year. With a full majority, no one can stop him.

    Canadian voters are not too bright.

    200

    • #
      David Maddison

      It looks like Lord Monckton’s prophecy on the removal of the former Canadian and Australian PM’s because they were climate “skeptics” was 100% correct. Of course, both new PM’s are also huge supporters of the expansionist political ideology disguised as a religion that is also destroying Western Civilisation.

      See what he said at https://youtu.be/NG0WcjGHkEw

      150

    • #
      • #
        Klem

        Are you kidding me, we don’t even know if Pierre Trudeau was his actual father.

        70

      • #
        Bill

        The electoral result is a direct result of a sustained (12 year) politicas of fear campaign by the Liberal Party. Since Harper’s first entry into national politics, the LPC has run a consistent campaign of fear against the man. Refer to the endless barrage of fear and attack ads and commentary in the media including the Following: “hidden agenda”, “hates women” “hates minorities”, “american style aircraft carriers”, “soldiers with guns…on our streets… I’m not kidding”, and so many others. The factor in the “ABC” aka “Anyone but conservative” campaign, the “strategic Voting” campaign that told people who to vote for, and of course the constant media refrain of “Stop Harper”.

        We Canadians are only the first to be the target, who’s next?

        BTW, PET’s brat has already committed to signing anything that the parisites come up with.

        10

  • #
    Neville

    The HAD 4 data shows about 0.8 C warming since 1850 and the Concordia UNI study attributes Aussie’s contribution to AGW at 0.006 C since 1800.
    And the Lloyd study found that the average temp deviation over the last 8,000 years is about 1 C per century. So where is the impact from human co2 emissions because we are well behind the natural Holocene trend according to Lloyd’s study.

    150

  • #
    handjive

    Meet John Schellnhuber: climatologist to Pope Francis

    Daydreaming of a world without national sovereignty

    Schellnhuber has also courted controversy with his ideas about how the world could be governed.

    In a short essay called Expanding the Democracy Universe, written in 2013, he advocated for a ‘global democratic society’ to be organised within the framework of the United Nations.

    He outlined a ‘daydream’ of world government including an Earth Constitution, a Global Council and a Planetary Court, where national sovereignty is given up in order to avoid catastrophic climate change.

    ‘While the borders of nation states have become almost irrelevant to global economic players (for instance) after the end of the Cold War, human and natural rights are still confined and dominated by thousands of frontiers,’ he wrote.

    ‘This situation can only be overcome by giving up a good deal of national sovereignty and establishing a true regime of global governance.’

    A memorable encounter with Christopher Monckton

    There was an interfaith meeting in April, in Rome, in the Vatican, and you are there in this beautiful palazzo where the Pontifical Academy resides.

    You have Nobel Prize winners and high representatives of the Orthodox Church, of the Jewish community, and so on, and all of a sudden I discover that Lord Monckton is sitting in the front row,’ he says.

    ‘He was not invited, of course, officially, so he obviously purported to the Swiss guards at the Vatican that he’s a journalist, and so got in.

    But unfortunately just before I started my keynote speech on climate change—and it would have been wonderful to have it commented by Lord Monckton—he was just pulled out of the room by the Swiss guards.

    It was a really funny experience.’

    Friday 25 September, ABC radio, Late Night Live Presented by Phillip Adams.

    70

    • #
      AndyG55

      “‘global democratic society’ ”

      Yet he does not mean “democratic”.. he means un-elected bureaucracy.

      In a global democracy, China and India would rule, and fools like Shellhummer would be a tiny fish in the bottom of a very big barrel.

      111

      • #
        Egor TheOne

        yes , just like the unelected Commissars of the EU and the unelected Marxists of the U.N. ,both with one common objective …..more power and world domination …..The New World Marxist Disorder !

        They already have an official name IPCC …..GOLDMAN AND SACHS OF IT……….Spectre ……where fantasy and delusion begets self proclaimed rulers stealing freedom and money from the rest of us !

        Nigel Farage: tax fraud and tax havens
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBVFpYN0iNo

        Godfrey Bloom, The state is an institution of theft
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucb2iyPI1nE

        [Edit- Egor, everyone please add titles to youtube links. also Not so many CAPS and ! Thanks - J]

        20

      • #
        Len

        Remember that the communists always managed to get Democratic in their state title, eg Peoples’ Democratic Repulic of China, German Democratic Republic. You know that when a Shire CEO uses the term democratic or democracy you can be sure that it will be followed by BS.

        50

  • #
    pat

    Jennifer Marohasy & Bob Carter in Parliament. how amazing. hope much more detail will be forthcoming.

    the excellent Nitin Sethi:

    22 Oct: Business Standard India: Nitin Sethi: Second Paris climate change agreement draft inflates up
    In the discussions on finance that were held in one spin-off meeting, the key issue of a roadmap for ratcheting up delivery of funds by developed countries remained stuck, as the European Union suggested the matter should be taken up by the ministers and was too difficult to be dealt with at the level of negotiators. It suggested that the negotiators should deal only with ***lesser substantial questions, such as institutional mechanisms for climate finance. Before that, the US reiterated their long-standing position that public funds were expected to be a small portion of the $100 billion that the developed world is required to provide annually starting 2020…
    Several negotiators Business Standard spoke to in the developing world teams confirmed that the spin-off groups were not being productive with all sides bringing back proposals, ideas and insertions that had been crunched down when the co-chairs presented the first draft of the Paris agreement before this round of meeting in Bonn. “At the moment, the text is expanding in all spin-off groups. Developed countries are bringing back ideas that they know are absolutely unacceptable. It’s almost as if they are reacting to the fact that G77+China was able to put back on table their agenda which the co-chairs had wiped clean in the first draft (of the Paris agreement),” said a head of delegation from the G77+China group not willing to be named.
    Outside the spin-off groups, India criticised a report from the OECD, which claimed that more than $60 billion funds had been committed well ahead of the 2020 deadline for the $100 billion. ***Indian negotiators questioned how loans and existing overseas development assistance could be defined as “new and additional funds”. Earlier decisions of the UNFCCC have required that the developed countries provide new and additional funds and not green-wash existing donations or loans and market investments as part of the climate funds…
    ***The US and many developed countries see the deepening low-carbon technology markets due to the new pledges by developing countries as a market opportunity…
    The US special envoy, Todd Stern, on Tuesday, had told the US senate: “No one is in a better position than the US to win big in the multi trillion dollar 21st century market for low carbon energy innovation.”
    An Indian negotiator said as part of this push the US has also asked for long-term low-carbon plans from all countries to provide certainty and signal to their industry…
    http://wap.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/second-paris-climate-change-agreement-draft-inflates-up-115102101224_1.html

    30

    • #
      ianl8888


      Jennifer Marohasy & Bob Carter in Parliament. how amazing. hope much more detail will be forthcoming

      All of the detail, I hope

      Craig Kelly MP (who, it seems, convened this historic meeting) will have to wear cavlar around Turnbull now. The CAGW crowd are privately very peeved indeed, I would think, and the various academic experts who supply the quotes for political kerb-stops must be almost beyond apoplexy

      There is no possibility of Fairfax/ABC outlets reporting this of course, but Alan Jones did (yes, I heard him grit his teeth when he used the word “coal”) – I’m amazed that a demagogue would do something I actually agree with

      91

  • #
    pat

    compare Nitin Sethi’s reporting to Nell’s NPR piece!

    btw what’s with the alcohol analogies? first we had World Bank Rachel Kyte’s Heineken ad reference, now this?
    am surprised the PC brigade haven’t been asked to express outrage over such references causing offense to anti-alcohol States!

    21 Oct: NPR: Nell GreenfieldBoyce: How U.N. Climate Negotiations Are Like Splitting A Bar Tab
    “It’s like all these countries have been at the bar drinking for the afternoon, or for the day, or just showed up recently,” says Andrew Jones, co-director of Climate Interactive, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C. “And some people showed up in the morning, and some people just showed up 10 minutes earlier. And then the bill comes.”
    The U.N. talks aren’t about drinking beer, but rather burning fossil fuels. And although there’s no literal bill, there is a price to pay. Just like with your friends, everyone is supposed to chip in their fair share…
    What countries does Hare (Bill Hare, head of Climate Analytics, Germany) think are like drinking buddies who haven’t put in enough?
    “Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand,” he says. “Russia as well, actually, could afford to do a lot more than they’re doing.”
    He thinks China and the European Union have pledged an OK amount.
    “The U.S. is a bit like that guy who always was a bit slow to pay at the bar and then somehow got a few negative messages from their mates,” says Hare, “and then starts to say, ‘OK look, right — now it’s time to catch up a bit, and I’m going to buy a round here and a round there.’”…
    “Some countries are beginning to feel like they’re standing outside a very noisy bar looking for a taxi to get home and some drunken people wander out into the street and get aggressive and push them around,” Hare says…
    http://www.npr.org/2015/10/21/450331377/how-u-n-climate-negotiations-are-like-splitting-a-bar-tab

    20

    • #
      gai

      And since I am a non Drinker and the Designated drive why in heck should I ‘split the bill’ when you are already riding IN MY CAR***?

      ***Car = technology that the USA is already transferring to other countries.

      50

  • #
    BobK

    “…Several members then got up and left…”. I wonder, how many people were in the audience, and who they were – MPs, Senators? Crossbenchers?

    30

  • #
    Peter OBrien

    Readers might like to read my take on the curious silence of Coalition MPs on ‘climate change’ as published in Quadrant Online:

    http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2015/10/climate-change-mute-conservatives/

    30

  • #
    Frank

    I’d love to hear Allan’s views on medical research, evolution,biology, space exploration, etc. He’s such a font of wisdom, I wouldn’t know what to do without his guidance.

    26

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Let’s be frank about this, frank.

      We really don’t care what you think frank.

      KK

      61

    • #
      AndyG55

      “I wouldn’t know what to do without his guidance.”

      Poor Frank. yes we know you need someone’s guidance..

      No thoughts of your own.

      Thus is your life.

      42

      • #
        Frank

        Dear Andy,

        Can you spot sarcasm ?
        My point is that you skeptics follow the ignorant views of the unqualified while claiming to play scientists.

        Love
        Frank

        And your point is that you have no point. Mere bluster. – Jo

        32

        • #
          Frank

          Jo,
          I dont need to provide examples or evidence, its all out there in the real world but you dont like it because of some perceived agenda. Instead, you cling onto the ‘evidence. of the semi-scientists, weather presenters or shock jocks. Its not me you need to convince Jo , try the scientific community.

          32

          • #

            Your words, right back at you: “I dont need to provide examples or evidence, its all out there in the real world but you dont like it because of some perceived agenda. Instead, you cling onto the ‘consensus of the b-grade scientists, greenpeace and green industry paid shills. Its not me you need to convince Frank , try the scientific community (48% of meteorologists don’t believe. 67% of geos and engineers don’t either)”. — Jo

            23

            • #
              Frank

              You call all the major scientific establishments B grade because you dont like bad news. Are all the other disciplines B grade too when you agree with them ?, you have it both ways. Saying they’re all corrupted gives you hero status everytime they knock you back
              Your scientific community of engineers , geos , biologists , mathematicians are poorly equiped to understand climate science, they’re irrelevant authorities, would you get medical advice from them or go to your doctor ?.
              Thats why you dont get anywhere out there and have to live in the ether throwing stones.

              12

              • #

                Phil Jones, climate science guru on linear trends: “I’m not adept enough (totally inept) with excel to do this now as no-one who knows how to is here.”

                Ivar Gievar, skeptic: … shared one of the 1973 physics awards “for their experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in semiconductors and superconductors, respectively”.

                Frank, the skeptics are the ones who got A’s at university. They understand the scientific method.

                Quote me when you claim I say something. You are just making things up.

                31

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                I’ll be very frank with you frank.

                I think you have overstayed your welcome and maybe need to justify why your comments, that are simply abuse, should not be screened.

                If you ever do say something valuable then the comment can be placed here for all to witness the extraordinary event.

                In the event that you continue writing abuse we will no longer see it.

                We do like visitors because it keeps us aware of the sad state of public affairs and the effect it has on impressionable young minds.

                The feedback we get from interaction with “visitors” often helps to show the poor education currently available in Australia

                and explains why so many younger people with high school subjects such as “Maths in Space” and “Science in Space” are so

                easily led by people smarter than them.

                KK

                22

              • #
                Frank

                JO @ 25.2.1.1.1
                More irrelevant authorities ,avoidance of main issues and simplistic reversal of accusation. I’m still surprised at your efforts to engage with me, obviously no relevant scientists bother because you’re not really interested in the truth. Your efforts are better put to use in publishing something useful – but oh , I forgot, they’re all in a global cabal to fudge the data.

                03

              • #

                I used your bluster and baseless words right back at you Mr Frank-who-doesn’t-need-evidence.

                The only difference is that I have evidence and you don’t:
                http://joannenova.com.au/2012/10/man-made-global-warming-disproved/

                Your projection of your own failures, and religious hate is becoming a tedious bore. You are “this close” to being filtered direct to spam.

                30

              • #
                AndyG55

                Frankly, Frank.. you are NOTHING but empty rhetoric and BS.

                Please try something else.. like maybe some FACTS.. just for once, hey ;-)

                31

        • #
          AndyG55

          YAWN.

          So.. no evidence, just more meaningless bluster.

          You keep under-whelming us, Frankie-boi. !

          43

        • #
          AndyG55

          There is a saying that “sarcasm is the lowest form of wit”

          And you don’t even do sarcasm well. !

          43

  • #
    PeterS

    The interview with Marohasy clearly proves the mainstream scientists of the world are colluding with the AGW scammers. How revealing. This is why it has always been an uphill battle, which we’ve lost. The question now is how do we re-group to fight the next battle? The only way I see we can bring down the curtain in the Wizard of Oz of climate change alarmism is to take it to the courts. I honestly do not see any other way. Politicians are against the truth, our public education system is against the truth, mainstream scientists are against the truth, so that leaves us with the lawyers as our last hope, unfortunately. How ironic.

    81

    • #
      ianl8888

      No, Courts and Judges cannot be trusted in these circumstances (nor, I suspect, at the best of times). The US Supreme Court, with one activist judge granting the EPA enormous power, demonstrates this

      The Alan Jones interview is more instructive. Jones hammered the money angle ($100m per annum to the UN). Given his audience is mostly suburban, and the suburban populace hate their tax money being spent on O/S jaunts they can’t see, the meeja thrust offers the best chance of causing Turnbull to tone it down. He won’t drop it, of course, but he may be forced to soften it

      Turnbull’s narcissism does not yet encompass losing the 2016 election

      102

      • #
        PeterS

        A high court judge was extremely critical of Al Gore’s documentary on the Inconvenient Truth. I do realize the chances are slim, but at the moment there is nothing else, other than to see the scam run its course so it can hit the public hard enough to wake them up. I prefer not to wait that long and use all available options.

        40

  • #
    grahamd

    How important these posts of jo’s are, in constantly informing us; some information we are aware of, so much not of course.
    This post, mentions the perennial dooms day merchants, Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg
    But, our veteran of underwater legend Ben Cropp, has ridiculed those claims, that a major global bleaching event will impact the Great Barrier Reef early next year. http://www.cairnspost.com.au/business/scientists-scaremongering-with-forecast-reef-bleaching-event/story-fnpqqgx0-1227576228372
    So we have a very interesting study.
    Ocean Acidification and Warming (Effects on Corals: Field Studies) — Summary
    Last updated 14 October 2015.
    http://www.co2science.org/subject/o/summaries/acidwarmcoralsfield.php
    But, very the illuminating point is within the references or attributions, and so who does appear other than….
    Hoegh-Guldberg, O. 1999. Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral
    reefs. Marine and Freshwater Research 50: 839-866.
    Now progressing from that, other links I /we must share.
    What a contribution has been made by the Fund Manager David Herro, in…
    http://www.thegwpf.com/fund-manager-david-herro-criticises-corporate-climate-appeasers/#sthash.cGUYxo1a.dpuf

    The first time I have heard this expression pop science used?
    We can only hope that bubble pops shortly, and we do revert back to real verifiable science.
    Yet another link – this information has been and is being forwarded to our politicians.
    It is unlikely those readers on jo’s blog, if unaware, will need any encouragement to follow it
    2015-10-20-c19-Patrick Moore: Should We Celebrate CO2 (Video)
    I would urge you to watch this Patrick Moore presentation; it is very revealing, and this coupled with our own Dr David Evans work, will lead to a better understanding of the science behind the critical roll CO2.plays in the planets ultimate survival. A brilliant presentation, it does certainly demonstrate, just how valuable our carbon resources are; we need to maintain a high level of CO2 in our atmosphere, not reduce it.
    The 2015 Annual GWPF Lecture, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, London 14 October 2015
    YouTube Link
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0Z5FdwWw_c

    41

  • #
    Anne Easby

    Julie Bishop seems to be driving this agenda just as much as Malcolm Turnbull, Greg Hunt and the UN. Bishop has gone a long way from speaking at the anti carbon tax rallies with Jo Nova in Perth, to an acolyte of the UN. She seems to forget that it’s the people of Australia who pay her wages, not the shadowy bureaucrats from Brussels. Now that Stephen Harper is gone, the way is clear for the UN to get it’s global agreement. And there is a consensus with the Turnbull Government now they have joined at the hips with Labor and the Greens.

    Thank goodness for one decent Liberal MP, Craig Kelly, MP for Hughes, for throwing a spanner in the works when he invited Jennifer Marohasy and Bob Carter. Yes, he will have a target on his back, but it’s up to his branches and members to protect him from the Turnbull faction. And where is Dr Dennis Jensen on this? I’ve seen nothing from him post Turnbull coup.

    Greg Hunt in lockstep with Labor and the Greens in what is a return to the time when Malcolm Turnbull sided with Kevin Rudd to introduce an ETS. It ended badly for Turnbull then, and don’t be surprised if conservatives make him pay at the ballot box in 2016. Unfortunately, it may be too late for Australia if Bishop/Turnbull commit Australia to the UN deal that will see us pay 1% of GDP or $16 billion to the corrupt UN.

    I don’t think Warren Truss understands the implications of signing COP21 or that the Nationals’ written agreement with Turnbull covers the Paris Climate Change Agreement. With the Paris meeting now only weeks away, we need to apply more pressure on Truss, as well as Bishop and Turnbull: they do not have a mandate to sign Australia up to any binding UN Treaty, no matter what they may believe.

    120

  • #
    Hat Rack

    So Australia is ready to donate $15-20 Billon to the UN but refuses to spend one cent on any sort of proper due diligence?

    Unbelievable!

    110

  • #
    John Robertson

    So the UN wants 1% of GDP to finance their corrupt circus.
    What happens if GDP goes negative?
    will the UN pay?
    here in Canada 60 % of voters chose the takers way.
    So if the makers go on strike for a year is the resulting GDP real or pure fantasy?
    Not much point producing more when you will get to keep even less, but the fools and bandits cannot figure this out.

    60

    • #
      gai

      John, That is why I mentioned the Shadow Economy. As decent jobs are off-shored people find other ways to earn a living and thanks to the internet they are well aware that the government is the one who saw to it they lost their jobs. If they are grubbing for a buck do you think they are interested in paying the government $$$ when it was the government who screwed them out of a job and a home? And then turned around and gave the banks taxpayer money?

      Heck even the Unions in the USA, the biggest supporter of the Democrats, are looking at supporting Trump!

      Labor unions giving serious thought to endorsing Trump

      This headline you would never have seen ten years ago.
      Normally the bitterest of enemies, labor unions and the Tea Party are reaching out to each other to defeat President Obama’s trade agenda.

      The American Labor Unions were not happy about the WTO or Clinton bringing China into the WTO.

      April 12, 2000 — Unions Prepare to Hit the Street in Washington

      American labor unions, worried that the world economy is destroying many good jobs, are descending on Washington to mount street demonstrations against a China trade bill and to lend support to students, environmentalists and religious groups protesting globalization.

      The aggressive effort comes as labor’s leadership has hardened its opposition to liberalized trade, and its ties with the Clinton administration have frayed. President Clinton’s trade policies have done serious damage to American workers, they argue, adding that all new trade initiatives should be rejected unless they seek to improve working conditions around the world.

      Capitalizing on last year’s anti-trade demonstrations in Seattle, union leaders have also forged alliances with some environmental and student groups gathered this week in Washington to protest against actions of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The ”blue-green” alliance is unusual for labor, which until five years ago largely avoided ties with such groups….

      A lot of Blue collar types are finally figuring out the Democrats are NOT their friends and most think CAGW is bovine feces.

      60

      • #
        Manfred

        The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

        The ‘globalisation’ of trade into ‘borderless’ trade blocks is one key feature of the UN post-2015 millennium goals aka. ‘The Agenda’ and another clear step in the direction of one-world-governance, which our ‘local’ governments appear keen to sign up to.

        Unwittingly or otherwise, the ‘locals’ are in step with the orchestration of their own political demise and loss of sovereignty to the bureaucratic eco-elites in NY. I am recurrently astonished that upon drawing attention to this in quarters where one might expect a measure of response, and providing relevant links and documentation, it garners about as much interest as watching grass grow.

        It is fascinating watching groups from either end of the political spectrum come together to resist that which could render them all irrelevant.

        40

  • #
    Brian

    Thanks so much, Jennifer & Jo! This kind of thing is truly appreciated!

    60

  • #
    pat

    from Craig Kelly’s FB page: It’s a shame that we didn’t have a video camera to record it.

    a shame indeed.

    (google translation)
    21 Oct: Le Figaro: Ten MPs are supporting the weather presenter Philippe Verdier
    The MP for the Drôme, Hervé Mariton, suspects the president of France Televisions crimes of opinion, reports the weekly Current Values…
    In an open letter, several elected officials including former President of the National Assembly, Bernard Accoyer, castigating “the threats Philippe Verdier” qualified “incomprehensible”…
    Threats ” that undermine freedom of opinion and expression”, are alarmed elected…
    “It does not appear that Philippe Verdier has abused its copyright freedom. If you were to punish any journalist speaking on a sharp and polemical tone, you may disarm much of your editorial, “they ironically. Hervé Mariton and his colleagues believe that “may not agree with some of the views of Philippe Verdier” but they assure, “we nevertheless find it very useful to distinguish méteo and climate, to denounce the risks instrumentalisation of the weather, to describe the packaging and the ulterior motives that accompany the preparation of COP 21 ( the climate conference to be held in December in Paris ; ed) “…
    They launch Delphine Ernotte: “The environmental policy, like any policy, can not be imposed by force, the single thought and political correctness.” “The words of Philippe Verdier does not violate in any way the laws of Republic it enriches the exchange and helps to sustain democracy. We do not believe that there is, in its approach, anything that justifies the stigma and punishment, ” they note again.
    http://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/le-scan/coulisses/2015/10/21/25006-20151021ARTFIG00433-dix-parlementaires-apportent-leur-soutien-au-presentateur-meteo-philippe-verdier.php

    41

  • #
    Rick Will

    The review panel report on BoM data homogenisation was quite clear that the adjustments were all one way, which works to cool past temperatures. See figure 4.1 on page 17:
    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/documents/2015_TAF_report.pdf
    The text waffles about the data being more closely aligned after 1960 when there were more stations but all adjustments prior to that were one way and, from the start of the record before 1920 to the the mid 1960s, the adjustment neatly covers a 0.25C trend o give that period an upward slope to fit in with the warming from 1970 till mid 1990. It would be more difficult to tune model parameters to show cooling trend while CO2 was rising than to homogenise the records to have the trend match the models.

    This is a case where there is so much belief in the models and confidence in their output that little regard is given to the diligence and knowledge of past weather station observers who are no longer around to defend their data sets. This practice of homogenisation displays the incredible arrogance of the current authorities controlling the BoM – “Our models are obviously right so those mostly deceased observers are obviously wrong”. The real interesting factor is that they were all WRONG in the same direction but got less wrong by the 1960s. ALL collaborating, by snail mail I guess, to record temperatures higher than their instruments displayed.

    62

  • #
    pat

    very lengthy…very funny. previous Climathon weeks are linked at the bottom of the article. it would be great if some English website could make an arrangement to translate the pieces accurately…meanwhile, some translated excerpts courtesy of google:

    21 Oct: Contrepoints: Climathon, week 42: the finest dark hours
    by Benoît Rittaud. (et le jury du Climathon)
    CHECK THE “1984″ ACCOMPANYING PHOTO
    With the dismissal of Philippe Verdier foreseen for non-compliant climatically opinion, France Télévisions has probably made ​​a date for a future victory Climathon. Meanwhile the joy of seeing a reporter public service fired for writing a book, competitors rushed at the chance to shine, indulging in a denunciation campaign we had no view from the finest hours the last century.
    It is in this beautiful record that is needed our winner, we appointed…
    Audrey Garric. This journalist who officiates the justly celebrated pages “Planet” World licks his chops to advance the idea that one of his colleagues soon finds himself on the floor. His denunciation letter to the Kommandantur heartfelt tweet shows a remarkable mood of fraternal solidarity in line with the required submission to the powers that be at the approach of the COP21…
    Informing colleagues is the surest sign of good moral climate . Audrey Garric all hope will be rewarded appropriately by power, that very few critics countless (probably unmanned by lobbies ) that his tweet received will be delivered appropriately to climate justice…
    Given the tepid enthusiasm shown by our fellow citizens to approach the COP21, the media are starting to fear disaster. We must find the culprits! After the lynching Philippe Verdier as an aperitif, the media are now taking in the IPCC itself. They seem so amazed to discover that his summaries to the attention of policy makers are all simply incomprehensible and lacking in clarity! Belated conscience, because it took a publication in a scientific journal, the journal Nature Climate Change, the tip of the finger. So far, neither policymakers in question nor journalists were particularly moved by not understanding these summaries. Syndrome “without Latin, Mass annoys us,” surely … Le Monde and shows an angry “even Einstein’s texts are more clear than those of the IPCC,” which of course could seriously undermine the search for a agreement to the COP21…
    Marisol Touraine digs a furrow in a new registry already explored but which always surprise us: climate feminism. It thus claims that the COP21 gives priority to women “who are on the frontlines of climate change,” no one learns much about the exact causes of this genresque discrimination. Must we bring out actions to protect women who bear the brunt of the ravages of climate change? Nay! It calls for that women monopolize the right places “involved, at the highest level, in decision-making” and the “projects led by women are considered a priority in the financial means that will be released in Paris.” Of course, it has no words strong enough to vilify the infamous conservative countries that have not wanted to integrate this fundamental issue in the agreement. Even when one is lucky to have such progressive in control…
    http://www.contrepoints.org/2015/10/21/226152-climathon-semaine-42-les-plus-belles-heures-sombres

    20

  • #
    pat

    21 Oct: ClimateChangeNews: Ed King: Paris climate deal unlikely to need Senate approval, says US envoy
    Todd Stern tells Capitol Hill committee new UN climate deal will be crafted under existing treaties, bypassing requirements for lawmaker approval
    Republicans will be fuming. The rest of the world may breathe a little easier. The US Senate is unlikely to have a veto over a proposed global climate deal…
    Stern was speaking during an interrogation by Senators on Capitol Hill (LINK), a venue with distinctly mixed views on the UN and efforts to crack down on greenhouse gas emissions…
    Due to a row on Capitol Hill only one Republican – the chair Senator Barrasso – asked any hostile questions. The rest were from Democrats broadly sympathetic to climate action…
    Still, climate sceptics are having some success in DC. Billions of dollars promised for the UN-backed Green Climate Fund are already in stasis due to opposition on Capitol Hill…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/10/21/paris-climate-deal-unlikely-to-need-senate-approval-says-us-envoy/?utm_content=buffere1499&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

    US SenateCommittee on Foreign Relations:2015 Paris International Climate Negotiations: Examining the Economic and Environmental Impacts
    Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy
    Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2015
    Download Testimony
    http://www.foreign.senate.gov/hearings/2015-paris-international-climate-negotiations-examining-the-economic-and-environmental-impacts_102015p

    20

  • #
    pat

    21 Oct: ClimateChangeNews: Alex Pashley: Japan bucks trend as G7 quits coal
    Bloc seen phasing out dirty fuel driven by United States, but Japan remains stubborn advocate says report
    The Group of Seven (G7) saw a clear swing away from its reliance on the high-polluting fuel between 2009 and 2014, according to a report by UK-based think tank E3G on Wednesday.
    Though that’s with one exception: Japan.
    As others slim their coal fleets, the Asian member is planning 48 new plants and approving export credits to fund other carbon-intensive ventures in the developing world…
    The US, with a coal fleet twice the size of other G7 members combined, was praised for retiring coal plants and withdrawing support for new ones overseas without carbon-capture technology.
    The Obama administration’s clean power plan places stringent curb on coal station emissions, and backs clean energy investments…
    Developing countries fixed on poverty reduction are ramping up coal power as a cheap source of electricity.
    2,177 were in the planning stages according to a March report by Coal Swarm. With average lifespans of 40 years, that locks in a whole lot more carbon-intensive development that cooks the planet.
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/10/21/japan-bucks-trend-as-g7-quits-coal/

    reminder:

    15 Oct: WaPo: Joby Warrick: U.S. exports its greenhouse-gas emissions — as coal. Profitable coal.
    Yet each year, nearly half a billion tons of this U.S.-owned fuel are hauled from the region’s vast strip mines and millions of tons are shipped overseas for other countries to burn. Government and industry reports predict a surge in exports of Powder River coal over the next decade…
    While boasting of pollution cuts at home, the United States is facilitating the sale of large quantities of government-owned coal abroad.
    “We’re a fossil-fuel-exporting super­power that goes around lecturing the rest of the world about cutting emissions,” said Paul Bledsoe, who was an adviser on climate during the Clinton administration…
    Coal accounts for 40 percent of the electricity produced globally — and more in China and India…
    Yet, the government continues issuing new leases for Powder River coal, in ever greater quantities. The Interior Department is finalizing leases for 2.5 billion tons of Powder River coal, and agency documents released earlier this year propose making an additional 10 billion tons available for mining — and, potentially exporting — over the next 25 to 30 years…
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/us-exports-its-greenhouse-gas-emissions–as-coal-profitable-coal/2015/10/08/05711c92-65fc-11e5-bdb6-6861f4521205_story.html

    10

  • #
    pat

    read all:

    22 Oct: ReutersCarbonPulse: Mike Szabo:Concerns raised over sustainability of California’s carbon market revenues
    Concerns over the sustainability of California’s cap-and-trade revenues have been raised by companies vying to build trains for the state’s proposed 800-mile high-speed rail network.
    German-headquartered multinational Siemens submitted an expression of interest last month over the $68 billion project to link San Francisco and Los Angeles by bullet train, but in it the company suggested that leveraging long-term financing using California’s carbon market could be difficult due to allowance auction proceeds being a relatively novel and somewhat untested concept…
    “The market feels uncertain on legislative/regulatory questions like duration and how to assess potential procedural inconsistency related to the auctions held. Especially in this early phase of such a promising program, we see it as beneficial to hold off on long-term monetization to avoid underselling (both in regard of volume and pricing) this great funding source for the project.”…
    Siemens’ concerns are echoed by other companies that could compete for the contract, including Kiewit, John Laing Group, OHL Group, Plenery Group and Cintra, according to Reuters.
    California has forecast that carbon revenues will cover around a quarter of the project, but the state is counting on the private sector to stump up as much as $35.5 billion, more than half of the estimated cost of what could turn out to be the most expensive US public works project ever.
    Siemens offered some possibly solutions to the issue, including: READ ON
    http://carbon-pulse.com/concerns-raised-over-sustainability-of-californias-carbon-market-revenues/

    10

  • #
    Windy

    The Canadian election WAS close, until Leadnow used a strategic voting campaign financed by American globalizers convinced low infos to shift their vote from NDP to Liberal. Otherwise, the likely outcome was a three way race with Stephen Harper holding the most seats and likely to form a minority or coalition government. Barack Obama organizers were also on the ground-in Canada-working for the Liberals!!

    Thanks for the local information. – Jo

    110

  • #
    pat

    22 Oct: The Conversation: Farewell to Lomborg – what did the episode teach us?
    by David Holmes, Senior Lecturer, Communications and Media Studies, Monash University
    Flinders’ vice-chancellor Colin Stirling only found out from (Minister Simon) Birmingham on Wednesday morning.
    Stirling subsequently posted a statement on Flinders’ website. The statement said he was:
    “… disappointed that the federal government has chosen to withdraw funding for a possible high-level research collaboration with the Copenhagen Consensus Centre.”
    Reasserting that he was pleased with the principled stance that Flinders had taken, Stirling declared:
    “Universities should be places for contesting controversial issues without fear or favour – and Flinders has shown itself to be a champion of this notion, displaying fortitude, vision, and independence. We will continue to seek research opportunities that invite the robust, critical thinking for which we’re renowned.”…
    Whether or not the Turnbull government had re-examined Lomborg’s past operations before pulling the funding is not known. But it is likely that the highly successful ***social media campaign against both Lomborg and Flinders management played a key role in the decision. The Australian Youth Climate Coalition had gathered more than 7000 signatures against the funding…
    While Liberal senator Cory Bernardi took to Twitter to condemn the decision as “a pathetic sop to leftist bullying”, the new Turnbull ministry is likely heeding the power of social media in a way that the Abbott government never did. Tony Abbott infamously referred to social media as “electronic graffiti”…
    Turnbull, ***a successful Twitter user, understands the difference between a genuine community campaign conducted on social media and the operation of trolls who serve quite narrow interests on both the left and right of politics…
    Part of the problem for Lomborg is that he has become a victim of his own PR and an easy target for those feeling disempowered by climate change. When they hear Lomborg tell audiences that the net impact of global warming from 1900 to 2050 will be a positive one, without any regard for committing the next 2000 years to hell on earth, people get angry…
    https://theconversation.com/farewell-to-lomborg-what-did-the-episode-teach-us-49540
    comment by Chris Harper
    “Farewell to Lomborg – what did the episode teach us?”
    That’s easy. It taught us how intolerant modern progressive academia has become to those who question their dogma in any way.
    Lomborg is a supporter of the CAGW hypothesis, like most here, but raised questions about the most appropriate way limited resources should be utilised to be most effective in promoting human end environmental welfare. That he departed from the progressive dogma led to abuse, vilification and constant gross misrepresentation across academia and the progressive media, not least in the pages of this journal.
    It is appalling that the academy is now so terrified of being challenged that it must work to shut down those who question the groupthink opinions.

    30

    • #
      Random Comment

      According to The Australian newspaper, Christopher Pyne withdrew the funding in the few days between Turnbull toppling Abbott and the new cabinet being announced. Perhaps he did so to protect Birmingham from having to be involved and the decision gets little airtime as when it becomes public (ie. when Flinders Uni is informed) Pyne is no longer responsible for the Education portfolio.

      40

  • #
    jim2

    Here in the US, the rich Republican donors are trying to force Republicans in the House to accept Paul Ryan as Speaker. The vast majority of grass roots conservatives do not want Ryan because he is strongly for open borders and immigration – even more so than now. So much for them being OUR representatives. The only hope is a unified kernel of conservatives in the House. They have enough votes to block someone from becoming Speaker. I just don’t know how much sway the rich donors have over them.

    40

  • #
    John Falting

    There is an easy answer to all this, and I hope the someone from the Nationals reads this, they effectively hold the balance of power, they have an agreement that TA policies wont change, think its time for the Nat’s to withdraw support, what’s the worst that could happen, a snap election, wouldn’t hurt the Nat’s, there voters aren’t green, labour greens would be caught out, either don’t go to Paris or thier support is gone.

    50

    • #
      Bob Malloy

      “what’s the worst that could happen”

      If twisted-cow gets his way on climate change the NATS won’t be needed to get things through parliament, The greens and labor will carry the day.

      30

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘…think its time for the Nat’s to withdraw support …’

      Too early, plenty of time before the next election.

      Warning: Labor and Libs are wooing the Greens and the worst that could happen is that the Nats become a rump.

      00

  • #
    pat

    Xinhua gives space to Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko. don’t back down. derail Paris, because you will only be losers in the CAGW scam:

    22 Oct: Global Post: Xinhua: Developing countries urge developed ones to meet obligations in Paris climate agreement
    Nozipho Mxakato-Diseko, the chairperson of the “G77 and China” which represents 134 developing countries, reminded in a statement that under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the developed countries are obliged to provide finance resources, technology transfer and capacity building to all developing countries to assist them address the challenges of climate change.
    Such obligations also apply in the Paris climate agreement, she said, “This is a legal obligation under the Convention. It is neither ‘aid’ nor ‘charity’, nor is it the same as development assistance.”
    “We find ourselves confronted with a simplistic narrative that suggests that ‘the world has changed since the UNFCCC was adopted in 1992′ due to the dramatic economic development gains of some of our members and hence that it is time to expand the pool of so-called ‘donors’ of climate ‘aid’ and to narrow the list of those eligible to receive this ‘support’ to only the ‘poorest of the poor’”, Mxakato-Diseko said…
    “This narrative serves narrow national interests of developed countries and says little about reality. If the world has really changed so much, we ask why it is that after all these decades all our members remain developing countries with little or no voice in global decision-making processes and institutions?”…
    For them, addressing climate change is not about economic competitiveness or making profits from renewable energies, but a more fundamental issue of human development and environmental protection.
    “The reality is that developing countries require climate financial resources, technology transfer and capacity building both now and far into the future, in some case just to survive – let alone make the transition to the ‘low carbon economy’,” Mxakato-Diseko said.
    However, all too often the developing countries have had to respond to crises without the assistance of developed countries by using their own scarce domestic resources or with voluntary help from fellow developing countries.
    ***”The provision of financial resources, technology transfer and development and capacity building, is central to the Paris Agreement,” said the chairperson…
    http://www.globalpost.com/article/6673038/2015/10/21/developing-countries-urge-developed-ones-meet-obligations-paris-climate

    10

  • #
    RB

    We seem to think that the average temperature readings at the one station (let alone a global collection) amount to something other than a poor indicator of how the local climate is changing. We assume that the mean of local min and max measurements is a random distribution around a value determined by the regional climate. If it was a perfect normal distribution, then the mean and the median would be the same.

    What if, as is the case, the measurements were imperfect with at least one value for each month incorrectly entered or missing? We also have a minimums that are affected by humidity so minimums are skewed. A very warm night shows up as much higher temperatures but a very cool night has water condensing and keeping temperatures up.

    Wouldn’t the median be less affected?

    I ask because I downloaded the minimum temperatures for Rutherglen from BOM and found the moving median of 365 days (date corresponds to the 182nd date). There is too much missing data in the 60s so ignore that period. The rest shows a pretty stable climate.

    http://s5.postimg.org/acshpqp2f/Rutherglen.jpg

    31

  • #
  • #
    Kent Bayley

    The problem with the skeptics is that they want to be right whereas those of us who believe there is a problem want to be wrong. Whenever I see Moncton’s name I immediately switch off as he is nothing but a buffoon. If he is your flagship human then there is no credibility with skeptics. Just lets use some common sense here for a moment. Mankind is ruining the earth everywhere you look and there are far too many of us on the planet. The outcome of man is greed, stupidity and destruction overlaid with wars and the like. What on earth do you think is going to happen to this planet because of man. Something will change and something is probably quite close and the planet is warming because of man. You see that would be consistent with all the data and its a trend we all know and most of all its a fact.

    310

    • #

      Kent, greed and stupidity are everywhere, including in the $300 billion renewables industry, and the $176 billion carbon trading market. There’s a lot of money for those who believe, and almost nothing for those who don’t. (They get sacked, moved sideways, called names, and are subject to bizarre protests of “emotional disgust” at universities). And you’re wrong about believers — those who get on the news don’t want to be wrong at all. Indeed they’re so scared of the public seeing through their grand bluff, they call critics names and run like cowards from public debate. Witchdoctors have been profiting from false scares since time began. This is no different.

      There are a lot of greedy people using fake concern for the environment to line their pockets. If they cared about the environment, they’d care about the cheapest and best way to reduce CO2. Instead they want the scandalous failures — wind, solar and trading schemes — but that’s where the money is.

      Conversely, most skeptics are volunteers and have no vested interest in this debate. We are truly independent. Despite our angelic and untouchable intentions you can’t solve this by analyzing motivations. If CO2 has a big impact the only way to know is in the data — from satellites, radiosondes, thermometers, corals, sediments etc etc. And that’s what we look at. And that’s why I changed my mind.

      It’s cost us thousands to fight this battle, but I’ve met remarkable people. We personally know Christopher Monckton quite well, and he’s an outstanding man. The “buffoon” act, the peerage (which is real) is bait that fools the media into interviews where he canes them. He is as sharp as a tack, despite decades of debilitating health issues. He hates to see cheats win, and so do I.

      113

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘… those of us who believe there is a problem want to be wrong.’

      I don’t believe you.

      60

    • #
      AndyG55

      “Mankind is ruining the earth everywhere you look ”

      Yep, those horrendous wind turbine sure are a blight on the environment.

      CO2 on the other hand, is plant food and enhances the world’s plant life.

      Did you know that the only warming in the whole of the satellite temperature data is the non-human force 1998 El Nino. That is what the data tells us.

      Apart from that El Nino, which added about 0.26C to the lower atmosphere, the planet has not warmed in the whole 37 years of the satellite data, so man cannot be to blame for a warming that does not exist.

      http://woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1979/plot/rss/from:2001.2/trend/plot/rss/from:1979/to:1996/trend/plot/rss/from:2001.2/trend/offset:-.26

      Lord Monckton is totally correct when he says that there has been no warming for about 18 and a half years. Just because you don’t like his message, and refuse to face reality, doesn’t make him buffoon, it make you the buffoon.

      53

    • #
      AndyG55

      “those of us who believe there is a problem want to be wrong.”

      And are achieving it admirably.. well done. :-)

      52

    • #
      John Robertson

      Mankind is ruining the earth everywhere you look….
      And where have you looked?
      Perhaps if you escape the confines of your urban environment you might be able to see.
      You do know you can throw every human on earth into the Grand Canyon and not fill it?
      Nor fill Lake Superior?
      Who decides on too many people?
      You?
      The UN?
      Or do you just see too many of the “wrong” people?
      I am leaning more to full blown denial of Global Warming being any kind of problem.
      Here in Northern Canada I am rooting for it.
      Try a global map, look to the empty quarters, where a few degrees improvement in growing days would benefit millions of people.
      I’m beginning to think flamethrowers are the logical conclusion, liberate the trapped CO2 energize your plant world.

      61

      • #
        Ross

        John

        The statistic I like re population is that you could everyone on earth a 1/4 acre section ( plot for the Aussies)in Australia and there would still be a large part of Queensland spare.

        20

      • #
        AndyG55

        Those you advocate population reduction, like Dr Suzuki does, should lead by example! ;-)

        32

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘The problem with the skeptics is that they want to be right …’

      As seen in the David Evans lectures, we are searching for answers on the complexity of the system.

      Some of us believe temperatures should fall naturally in the coming decade, which would come as a death blow to everything you believe in.

      There is no need for alarm, the situation is well in hand, Bob Carter has a Plan B.

      30

  • #
  • #
    kent Bayley

    Thank you for your courteous response Joanne. We don’t agree on some things but may well agree on others. Just take note of the response to my comment and see how your fellow skeptics insist on denigrating anyone who dares to have another view. More shrill buffoons who do not serve you well. If you check the NASA site you will see that CO2 in the atmosphere is incredibly high by historical standards. http://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/ Now lets apply common sense again. With levels like this that have an exponential affect what do you think it will do the earths atmosphere. If you are indeed a sincere climate skeptic you should venture an opinion. If we wait for all the data it may be too late. Simple really. Regarding Moncton i have seen him on the news and he hates being questioned by scientists and well educated people and unfortunately and with due respect as an ambassador he is a waste of space. I wonder who has been paying him……I wonder, do you know.

    39

    • #
      AndyG55

      You were the first to use the word “buffoon”… don’t be such a hypocritical a cry-baby.

      Climate scientists HATE being questioned by Lord Monckton. They run from him.

      CO2 is NOT high, it is actually incredible low, just above base level for plant existence.

      Historically , it has been 10 to 20 times higher. http://www.ajsonline.org/content/301/2/182/F8.large.jpg

      And even IPCC don’t say that CO2 has an exponential effect. So again.. you are just WRONG !!

      74

    • #

      kent Bayley. where you mention this:

      ….. you will see that CO2 in the atmosphere is incredibly high by historical standards

      There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example:

      During the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.5 times higher than today.

      The highest concentrations of CO2 during all of the Paleozoic Era occurred during the Cambrian Period, nearly 7000 ppm — about 17.5 times higher than today.

      The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods during the Paleozoic Era when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 11 times higher than today– 4400 ppm.

      You’ll read what you want to believe, and when pointed out that you may be wrong, all you have is a response based upon personal feelings.

      Tony.

      82

      • #
        ianl8888

        Cretaceous – ~10,000ppm

        But it is good to see you examining geological records and sorting out the deep time-line :) :)

        You are right, of course, Bayley is clueless about “historical” periods. Asking him to define historical periods simply invites the retort: “Since records began” … meaningless of itself, since then the definition of “record” needs to cleared; proxies, thermometers, balloons, satellites and so on all front up for recognition. Some people also claim projected computer numbers as “records” (!)

        61

      • #
        Gee Aye

        Tony that was the biggest “so what” answer you’ve even given.

        Best to say nothing sometimes

        15

    • #
      AndyG55

      Plant life ceases to grow much below 250 ppm, and stops completely, and dies at 180ppm.

      Now look at the CO2 link you posted and please do try to understand that it actually shows borderline plant life for some 400,000 years..

      It drops to 180ppm, and everything starts to die, releasing CO2 back into the atmosphere, at 280ppm, plants start to grow a bit, sucking the CO2 back down. You get a classic zig-zag survival chart.

      What humans have actually done by releasing a small amount of the accidentally sequestered CO2 is save the planet from extinction.

      Be VERY GRATEFUL of that FACT !!

      63

    • #
      AndyG55

      “Just take note of the response to my comment”

      My response at #45.3 to your comment, was totally factual.

      My only rudeness was to turn YOUR rudeness back on you.

      Stop taking the “holier than thou” façade, its demeaning to you.

      52

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Well doesn’t Khent have a way with words?

      Too bad he comes off as a master manipulator:

      (well the attempt was good but in the wrong place on this site; better off trying to manipulate Crikey.com where there are no scientists or thinkers).

      Sorry that should be wannabe master manipulator.

      Look at his knowledge of science; obviously a graduate of the university at SkS.

      He draws on the dreaded “exponential” effect of CO2 without realising it is working against his idea.

      In reality it means that for relatively large (humungous in greenie speak) increases in total CO2 there will

      be microscopic increases in the ground origin IR absorbed by said “dangerous” CO2 gas.

      Dude. The CO2 bandwidth is already absorbing nearly all of the ground IR and extra absorptive capacity will be like somebody with

      a 10 litre bucket trying to scoop a few drops from the bottom of an empty bathtub.

      The only thing that would make the air hotter is if we get more sunlight.

      Ever noticed how cold it gets when the Sun goes to bed for a few hours?

      KK

      61

    • #
      Frank

      Kent,
      Its amazing how much attention someone with persistence and a maths degree like Momckton gets when he plays climate scientist. And I mean attention inthe the media ,which is his his prime outlet apart from tha odious Heartland institute, the real scientists gave up any rational discussion with him long ago. I’ve noticed that less qualified a skeptic is the more vocal they are, seems science is a secondary issue.

      38

      • #
        AndyG55

        “seems science is a secondary issue.”

        Certainly is for you..

        No, make that the least important issue for you.. irrelevant to you.

        You have not produced one iota of any science in you many mindless rantings on this site.

        82

  • #
    Mjw

    Guldberg attempted to dominate the question time.

    Typical of the Left, when you have nothing to say, keep talking.

    30

  • #
    kent Bayley

    Thank you to all of you who tell me emphatically that I am wrong…….really. No science there. This type of lecture and combined herd mentality serves to position at least some of you skeptics as hysterical. I asked a simple question about what do the skeptics think will happen to the earths atmosphere as co2 levels continue to rise and no answers. The reason is because without using your unequivocal data argument you cant answer which shows the nonsense present on this skeptics site. I provided a link to a NASA graph and no one comments. I’m leaving this blog now as I came to reasonably esquire if there was an intelligent forum but there isn’t. Its just essentially a site for mindless commentary worshiping an idle you have come to believe in absolutely as though possessed by a primitive spirit. Your own myopia is terrifying as it goes way beyond just opinion. As far as I can see with the exception of Joanne who was civil, the rest are not worth listening too. Sound familiar?

    18

    • #
      AndyG55

      “No science there.”

      Yes, we are well aware you have no science.

      Your feeble attempts to put forward any actual facts have been thoroughly routed.

      All you have is your own brain-washed rhetoric.

      You have nothing. Good bye, until you get an education.

      And your link was commented on and destroyed in #47.3

      72

    • #
      AndyG55

      “I came to reasonably esquire”

      No you didn’t.. your very first comment was full of lies, and sliming of a person far more worthy than you will ever be.

      82

    • #
      AndyG55

      ” I asked a simple question about what do the skeptics think will happen to the earths atmosphere as co2 levels continue to rise “

      The biosphere will continue to expand, to the benefit of all life on this green CARBON-BASED planet.

      There is NO proof that anything else will happen.

      In the whole 37 years of satellite temperature data, there is absolutely NO CO2 WARMING SIGNATURE

      81

    • #
      Vlad the Impaler

      Hi Kent,

      I’m a little late to the party, here, but scrolling through the comments, your question was answered, along with the actual science of climate. Tony pointed out the geological record, and the lack of correspondence between CO2 concentration(s) and global temperature. Further to his point about the Ordovician/Silurian glacial event, there was a geological period called the Cryogenian, with some three major glacial pulses (multi-million year long episodes), at a time when carbon dioxide concentrations were measured in percents, not ppm. My reference for this is GTS 2004 and 2012; the geological community has developed vetted methods of estimating paleotemperature(s) as well as other parameters of the ancient physical environment. That’s the real climate science! Climate is and has changed throughout all of geological time. The change(s) taking place over a few centuries are neither unusual, nor extreme, nor human-caused.

      The alarmists among us want desperately to be right. Those of us who have studied the matter in depth, have found their cherished beliefs to be severely wrong. You could benefit from spending more time here, and other places, where the ‘science’ of ‘climate change’ is exposed for the fraud that it is.

      Regards,

      Vlad

      51

      • #
        ianl8888


        … vetted methods of estimating paleotemperature(s) …

        By coincidence of timing, I once found myself at morning tea during a large-scale geological conference listening to a quite heated discussion between several CSIRO personnel, some of whom were geologists with others as environmentalists

        The proxy measures of paleotemperatures became a discussion point in a moving target argument. The environmentalists’ view of these proxies was that they were irrelevant as other factors are now contemporaneously different (ie. Evan’s partial differential equation point)

        So when the opposition insists that empirical evidence is irrelevant for comparison purposes, one simply turns to enjoying the morning tea

        20

  • #
    Harry Twinotter

    Has anyone got a link to the UAH data set for the Australian continent?

    I am wondering about the confidence intervals.

    26

    • #
      AndyG55

      “Has anyone got a link to the UAH data set for the Australian continent?”

      Yes.

      71

    • #
      AndyG55

      Just for you Harry. (Up to date as of end of September)

      http://postimg.org/image/ayyhofvvz/

      As you can see, basically no warming from 1979-1997.

      Then distinct steps around 1998, 2003 and 2009 and 2013, with quite steep cooling after each those steps.

      The current El Nino doesn’t appear to be having much effect at all, so if the current short term cooling trend continues for a few more months, we will pretty soon have a zero trend over the whole 37 years of the UAH satellite data.

      I hope that helps. :-)

      72

    • #
      Harry Twinotter

      So no one has a link to the data set then – that will make it hard to check it for accuracy and to calculate the confidence intervals.

      05

      • #
        AndyG55

        The fact that you don’t know where to find it highlights your ignorance and inability to do basic research unless spoon-fed by the climate botherers.

        I have the link.. Find it for yourself.

        20