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


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

What you don’t know about the climate (Half page advert in The Australian)

Here’s the full copy of a half page advert in The Australian. In a normal world, this would be discussed at conferences, and reported by science reporters in magazines like New Scientist or Scientific American, or on shows like Catalyst. Instead, private citizens have to fork out thousands to pay for an advert. — Jo

WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW ABOUT CLIMATE

The climate cooled for 37 years during the period 1940 to 1976. Books were written expressing alarm. Lowell Ponte’s 1975 book warns: “Global cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for 110,000 years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance: the survival of ourselves, our children, our species.”

We now have a new climate alarm and similar statements are being made. Climate models used by authorities forecast that CO2 emissions will cause dangerous global warming, now referred to as Climate Change.

...

Sources: Various, as described in the “State of the Climate in 2012” in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society1, August 2013.

PSYCHOLOGY, BIAS ERRORS AND CLIMATE

Recent findings in the area of psychology, “Psychology and Economics” by the eminent behavioural economist Prof. Matthew Rabin, University of California, show the prevalence of a number of bias errors when people make decisions. Such errors are relevant for climate scientists in examining the evidence claimed to support the threat of dangerous global warming with rising CO2 levels. The following reviews the importance of two key bias errors referred to by Prof. Rabin in his paper.

The bias error of “there is a misinterpretation that purely random events are too long to be purely random and represent a long term trend”.

  • The Australian Millennium Drought from 1997 to 2010 was misinterpreted as a long term trend as a consequence of Climate Change. This lent support to State Governments over-investing in desalination plants.
  • Research by Professor Sir Samuel Wadham, University of Melbourne of world climate over 100 years, revealed that Australia of all countries has the most variable rainfall. This is not well appreciated by policy makers or investors.

The bias error of “once forming a view people are often inattentive to information contradicting their view. There is the problem of selective scrutiny of evidence”.

A bias problem of “selective scrutiny of evidence” that carbon dioxide emissions drive Climate Change is illustrated by the following:

  • Over the past one million years climate cycles ranging from ice ages to warmer periods have been caused principally by changing levels of energy from the sun, changing planetary alignments and changing ocean currents. These three important climate determinants are not well enough understood to be included in climate models.
  • It is thus not surprising that all temperature predictions by these climate models over the past fifteen years have been inaccurate by a considerable margin. Nor can they explain earlier climate records. It is clear that the models are unable to make reliable climate forecasts.
    The comparison of measurements and prediction in the mid troposphere, at a height of 5 to 15 kilometres, shows the lack of accuracy of climate models (see Graph 1).
  • Ice cores taken from the end of the last Ice Age reveal that temperature rose some 200 years in advance of rising CO2. During that Ice Age much of the Northern Hemisphere had a permanent ice cover and sea levels fell by 120 metres.

More recently, despite rising CO2, there was a cooling of climate for 37 years from 1940 and measurements show no increase in temperature over the past 17 years.

Global warming, with interruptions, has therefore continued since the end of the last Ice Age unrelated to CO2 levels. The 600 million year geological record shows levels of CO2 varied from 200 ppm (0.02%) to 7,000 ppm (0.7%). The significant fall from 7,000 ppm was mainly due to removal of CO2 in marine skeletal material to form vast limestone deposits. At that time the ocean could not have been acid otherwise the limestone would have dissolved.

The present level is near 400 ppm (0.04%) and this could double only if all the known fossil fuel reserves were used but would still be well below past high levels of CO2 which did not cause dangerous warming. Plants evolved in the Cambrian Period when CO2 levels were typically near 5,000 ppm (0.5%) which provides further evidence that past higher levels of CO2 did not cause dangerous global warming.

  • Melting of Arctic ice is commonly referred to as confirming Climate Change caused by CO2 emissions. In 1922 the US Weather Bureau advised in respect of an Arctic ice melt, “Reports all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone.” Subsequently the ice cover returned. There is no evidence rising CO2 has any influence on the historical phenomenon of retreating and advancing of Arctic ice.
  • The IPCC has forecast an acceleration in the rise of ocean levels with rising CO2 to several times the 2 to 3 mm per year measured over the past 100 years associated with the planet continuing to warm since the end of the Little Ice Age in the 19th century. Actual sea levels derived from satellite altimeter measurements by University of Colorado scientists demonstrate no measurable global increase in the rate of annual sea level rise over the period 1993 to 2010.
  • There has been an assumption that the increase in atmospheric CO2 has been due to fossil fuel emissions. In fact as reported in the Journals ‘Science’ and ‘Nature’, forest and peat fires can make a significant contribution to atmospheric CO2 as experienced during the 1997-98 El Nino (“66 ± 24% of the CO2 anomaly” Science 2 Jan. 2004). Because of bias errors, the view that dangerous global warming is caused by CO2 emissions has no basis. There has been the bias of “selective scrutiny of evidence”.

Another bias error is evident with estimates of future atmospheric levels of the greenhouse gas methane (see Graph 2).

The rise in methane levels was associated with leakage from poorly maintained natural gas facilities. This has now been corrected and methane levels are shown in CSIRO published data to fluctuate with the various effects caused by El Ninos. Methane levels based on projections of earlier increases are incorrect and wrongly associated with grazing animals and rice fields.

Methane, Law Dome, 2015

Other research by behavioural economists shows how the employment of the findings from psychology can be used to “nudge” people to do what “choice architects” think would be in people’s best interests. The book “Nudge” by the authors, Thaler & Sunstein, reviews this research.
Referring to CO2, an invisible gas, as carbon, which as soot is a black dirty solid, is a good example of a “nudge” to sway public opinion in favour of reducing CO2 emissions. This is a deception which stands in the way of reason.

There is the “nudge” food quality will fall with increasing atmospheric CO2. This is misleading. A rise in CO2, a plant nutrient, provides for a useful increase in food production. Food quality can decline if there is not a corresponding increase in other essential plant nutrients.
Another “nudge” is the claim that CO2 emissions will cause ocean acidity.

There is no evidence that levels as high as 7,000 ppm of CO2 did or could cause ocean acidity. The ocean is alkaline and contains minerals in solution which constrain lowering of alkalinity with rising CO2.

CONCLUSION

For greenhouse gases there has been a “selective scrutiny of evidence” to support Climate Change alarm. There is no evidence CO2 has determined climate in the past or that it could do so in the future. Just as there was needless alarm over the 37 year cooling from 1940 when CO2 was rising there is now unwarranted public alarm over a threat of dangerous global warming.

Australia should save the $3 billion plus spent annually supporting renewable energy programs. The heavy burden of these costs falls on taxpayers, business and households.

No Australian post-2020 emissions reduction target could be justified unless emission-free energy can be produced at a cost competitive with traditional energy suppliers.

– THE CLIMATE STUDY GROUP

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.0/10 (246 votes cast)
What you don't know about the climate (Half page advert in The Australian), 9.0 out of 10 based on 246 ratings

202 comments to What you don’t know about the climate (Half page advert in The Australian)

  • #
    pat

    major COP21 developments:

    29 Nov: BusinessStandardIndia: Nitin Sethi: US confidential note to select countries sets the terms for talks
    Days ahead of the launch of the Paris talks, the US has confidentially informed select countries of what it believes the important features of the Paris climate change agreement.
    In a ‘non-paper’ shared with select countries, the US has said it wants the successive round of pledges under the proposed Paris agreement to be determined independently by each country and not through a process of international negotiation…
    It has said that the wall of differentiation between developed and developing countries should be done away with consequently doing away with any notion of historical responsibility. Along with it, it wants developing countries to also contribute to the climate funds in future and not just the developed countries as is required for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, under which the Paris agreement is being stitched.
    In the ‘non-paper’ the US has also informed select countries that it wants the long-term goal of the Paris agreement to be defined as the “collectively aiming to achieve climate neutrality over the course of this century” – a controversial term which countries such as Indian have opposed.
    Business Standard reviewed the confidential non-paper shared by the US administration with select countries…READ ALL
    http://wap.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/us-confidential-note-to-select-countries-sets-the-terms-for-talks-115112800680_1.html

    what a joke, Merkel:

    28 Nov: Reuters: John O’Donnell: Germany’s Merkel urges strict, binding goals to tackle climate change
    In her weekly internet podcast on Saturday, Angela Merkel also underscored the long-term importance of coal-fired power for Germany, a country that remains one of the globe’s biggest economies and exporters…
    “We never promised to leave coal behind us in 2020. It stays an important pillar for a longer time,” she said.
    She said that the industrialized countries could develop energy technology that could be used by developing countries…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/28/us-climatechange-summit-merkel-idUSKBN0TH0B820151128

    231

    • #
      turnedoutnice

      Real CO2-AGW is near zero.

      Because Sagan’s aerosol optical physics is wrong, positive feedback in the climate models does not exist.

      They also underestimate low level cloud negative feedback by a factor of ~4.

      As for the rest of the mistakes, in time the Science will correct.

      343

      • #

        Science should be self correcting, except that climate science is far too broken and far too codependent on otherwise unsupportable political agendas for ordinary incremental science to repair it. The keystone failure was the significant over estimation of the sensitivity required to justify the desired IPCC charter. Subsequently canonized by the consensus they built, it led to a cascade of other failures, meanwhile; the IPCC will never get this right because to do so undermines their reason to exist as the media and partisan politics enables their denial by pushing a false narrative and demonizing those who dare to disagree.

        I don’t know how to fix this as science has clearly failed.

        632

      • #

        I had the privilege of taking Sagan’s astronomy course in college and he was more about proving scientific findings then you give him credit for. The feedback error comes from Hansen and Schlesinger, whose foundational climate feedback analysis is based on Bode’s system analysis which assumes a gain element that measures input and feedback to determine how much output to deliver from an unlimited, external source. The climate amplifier is the atmosphere/ocean system which has no such unlimited source of power and consumes the input and feedback power to produce output. This COE constraint remains unrecognized and is why it seems plausible that 3.3 W/m^2 of feedback from only 1 W/m^2 of forcing can be generated to increase surface emissions by the 4.3 W/m^2 required from the presumed 0.8C temperature increase.

        81

        • #
          turnedoutnice

          Sorry to disagree but in their 1960 paper, Sagan (aged 27) and Pollock made three elementary mistakes; thinking surface exitance is a real rather than a potential energy flux, assuming lapse rate is controlled by this ‘heating’ instead of gravity and mucking up Mie theory. Then in 1967 they wrongly assumed that van de Hulst’s empirical ‘lumped parameterisation’ where he scaled backscattered energy data for sols of different droplet sizes, was based solely on Mie Scattering.

          That gives 0.54 maximum hemispherical albedo for non-absorbing clouds. Sagan and Pollock’s expression, adapted by Lacis and Hansen in 1974 and the basis of the climate models, gives 1.0 as the asymptote for high optical depth.

          There are two optical processes. The second is a variation of the rainbow – internal reflection plus percolation physics. The non-existent positive feedback is a direct result of this mistake. The climate models assume >53% more input energy than reality then offset it by another mistake; Kirchhoff’s Law of Radiation plus the incorrect aerosol optical physics to make up the missing ‘Down OLR’ in the atmospheric window.

          You couldn’t make up this level of systemic scientific incompetence by people who made assumptions with no experimental evidence.

          62

          • #

            Mistakes are made by scientists all the time, especially in climate science. My point is that Sagan would have accepted the scientific method as a way to dispute his hypothesis and/or deprecate his assumptions, rather than deny contraindicative science as is the case with consensus climate science.

            Clouds are complicated which has led to many errors arising from misapplied simplifying assumptions, for example, there’s no such thing as a non absorbing cloud. The water and ice in clouds emit power consequential to its temperature and is a broad band absorber of both surface emissions and solar emissions.

            BTW, the concept of climate system feedback wasn’t developed until the mid to late 70′s when Hansen incorrectly applied Bode’s control theory to the climate. Schlesinger ‘fixed’ the Hansen analysis by introducing yet more errors that persist to this day. The models don’t actually assume > 53% more input, but assume significant positive feedback power that materializes literally out of thin air, or more precisely, from powered atmospheric gain per the Hansen/Schlesinger analysis which of course violates COE.

            What do you mean by saying surface exitance is not real? What about the nearly half of surface BB emissions consequential to temperature that pass through the clear-sky without GHG or cloud absorption? Water lifted against gravity is potential energy, but this is returned to the surface as falling rain. Latent heat can be considered potential energy, but this too is returned as rain that’s warmer than it would be otherwise. None of these are radiant effects anyway and have little to do with what the radiant balance must be and only affects how balance is achieved.

            10

            • #
              turnedoutnice

              No-one has ever proved by experiment that surface or atmospheric exitance (‘forcing’ or ‘back radiation’) is a real energy flux. It is in principle easy to do by calorimetry, a simple water trough 1cm deep with IR shielding from one side and convection control by Mylar film.

              BTW; the perennial claim by Climate Alchemists that the meteorological ‘Pyrgeometer’ measures real energy flow is total bunkum. It’s because radiometers measure exitance and the Pyrgeometer converts mostly its internal temperature by the S-B equation to the W/m^2 readout – the Albrecht and Cox equation.

              So, no-one has ever proved bidirectional energy fluxes are real: they are the equivalent in Nature to the Unicorn. This myth pushed by Sagan and Pollock plus their incorrect aerosol optical physics has created this pseudoscience, being disproved daily by real data. The only support comes from bent scientists at NOAA and NASA/GISS, also sadly the BOM and now HADCRUT, altering past temperature readings to pretend we are now living at the hottest ever climate!

              02

              • #

                Trenberth’s quantification of back radiation is indeed broken, largely because he includes a lot of non radiant energy in the radiant balance and this certainly obfuscates reality. None the less, only 239 W/m^2 arrives from the Sun while the surface emits an average of 385 W/m^2 at 287K, thus 385-239 = 146 W/m^2 of additional power must arrive at the surface to offset the extra emissions and this is the only power flux that can be considered ‘back radiation’. The source of this returned power is the combination of emissions from clouds back to the surface and the spontaneous or collision induced re-emissions of absorption band photons from GHG molecules.

                Be careful about blindly rejecting entire consensus claims as they always contain a kernel of truth and when you reject the entire claim they try and spin is as your ‘denial’ of the tiny truth buried in the noise of obfuscation. Don’t be confused by bogus second law claims that says colder clouds can’t ‘warm’ the surface. By itself, the ‘back radiation’ certainly can’t make the surface warmer than the atmosphere, but when combined with 239 W/m^2 incident solar power, the result is a surface warmer than the atmosphere that contributes to making the surface warmer than it would be without it.

                00

              • #
                turnedoutnice

                I’m an engineer, a simple beast who looks at the facts and the most important is the energy balance. I omit the W/m^2 units.

                1.Heat lost from the surface to the atmosphere must on average equal the mean surface SW thermalisation.

                2. Trenberth 2009 splits this into 17 convection, 80 evapotranspiration and 63 net IR. The latter comprises 40 in the AW, measured by satellites, and 23 in the 16 – 23 micron H2O IR bands, measure by difference of SW in – (17 + 80).

                3. To claim surface exitance is a real energy flux requires experimental proof; there has never been any such proof.

                4. The atmosphere is self-controlling by mechanisms I recently presented in public. The water cycle is a dependent parameter of the thermodynamic system which splits surface temperature control from OLR control.

                5. There is no imaginary energy in the system; for anyone to assert that with no experimental evidence then invent yet more imaginary energy in the opposite direction, as has been done since 1976 in various forms, the core of the IPCC’s modelling farce, is unprofessional.

                10

              • #

                While ‘imaginary’ energy does actually exists, for example as a phase delay between voltage and current, positive imaginary energy is always exactly offset by negative imaginary and this is the basic principle behind resonance. We can’t rule out resonances in the climate system, for example the PDO, so I can’t rule out the possibility of imaginary energy, none the less, it will be irrelevant to the radiant balance because in LTE, the average of any imaginary components must is zero.

                The atmosphere acts to slow down the heat released by the surface and it does this by capturing and recirculating some fraction of surface emissions back to the surface. This recirculated energy is in the form of photons re-emitted by GHG’s and BB radiation from clouds and is a real energy flux that has been measured. Unfortunately temperature measurements conflate photons indicating the temperature of distant matter with molecules in motion indicating the temperature of local matter and this leads to confusion.

                Also confusing to many is that the recirculated energy is old emissions that didn’t make it through the atmosphere the first time and have been temporarily stored in the atmosphere and subsequently returned to the surface. Where the consensus screwed up is thinking that this energy can be returned to the surface over and over again without being replenished by the absorption of additional surface emissions and this is the consequence of a faulty characterization of feedback which infers an external power source supplies this energy.

                Water is simple when you consider the end to end effect. Evaporation, clouds and rain clearly cool the surface (hurricanes are the evidence), thus the net effect of evaporation is slight cooling (negative feedback).

                00

              • #
                turnedoutnice

                Show readers ANY experimental evidence that surface or atmospheric radiant exitance is a real EM energy flux.

                00

              • #
                turnedoutnice

                Show readers ANY experimental evidence that surface or atmospheric radiant exitance is a real EM energy flux.

                00

              • #

                Can you be more specific about what you are referring to as surface and atmospheric exitance? To me this means power exiting from the surface or the top of the atmosphere, but it sounds like you are referring to the difference in downward flux required to make up the difference between the Stefan-Boltzmann emissions of the surface at some average temperature (an immutable requirement of physics) and the power arriving from the Sun. Which specific components do you not believe are actually radiant in nature, that is, comprised of a flux of photons.

                00

              • #

                Perhaps it would help if I explained how I classify the different energy fluxes. All climate related energy fluxes can be classified as either energy transported by photons or energy transported by matter.

                Black body emissions, GHG re-emissions and solar input power are all photon fluxes. Latent heat, convection, rain and thermals are all matter fluxes. In LTE, matter emits the same photon energy that it absorbs, thus the net contribution this matter has on the LTE radiant (photon flux) balance is zero and changes to the LTE balance are all we really care about relative to the long term response to some change. Any effects non radiant fluxes have on the temperature are already accounted for by the temperature and its subsequent black body emissions. The data fits this model exactly as shown here:

                http://joannenova.com.au/2011/01/half-of-the-energy-is-flung-out-to-space-along-with-the-model-projections/

                Note that the factor of 2 emerges from the measured data and is also a requirement of a BB (actually a gray body atmosphere) that absorbs energy across half the area (bottom) that it emits energy from (top/bottom).

                00

    • #
      ScotsmaninUtah

      Pat,
      great post :D

      In a ‘non-paper’ shared with select countries, the US has said it wants the successive round of pledges under the proposed Paris agreement to be determined independently by each country and not through a process of international negotiation.

      It has said that the wall of differentiation between developed and developing countries should be done away with consequently doing away with any notion of historical responsibility

      This is going to really disappoint the heads from the undeveloped countries :o

      140

    • #
      Bulldust

      Apparently Bill Gates is set to unveil a “clean energy” fund at the start of the Parasite Convention (another form of PC):

      http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/microsofts-bill-gates-to-start-multibilliondollar-fund-for-clean-energy-20151128-glacw0.html

      31

    • #
      Glen 42

      O/t, But how much Carbon Dioxide is Required in air at (parts per million)to sustain Human life, as 7000 ppm is sustainable what is the least.In anticipation Thank_you.

      00

      • #

        Not many people have asked that question. I don’t really know.

        Plants need 180ppm to grow so I would humans would be in trouble if an Ice Age struck and CO2 fell back to that. But obviously humans survived at those levels as long as they got enough food.

        As far as health goes, we need a certain CO2 concentration in our blood to help us breathe/respire efficiently. I’m not sure of the details, this site claims to know more:
        http://drsircus.com/medicine/co2-deficiency-symptons-humans/

        “Few people know that a decreased level of carbon dioxide in the blood leads to decreased oxygen supply to the cells in the body including in the brain, heart, kidneys etc. Carbon dioxide (CO2) was found at the end of the 19th century by scientists Bohr and Verigo to be responsible for the bond between oxygen and haemoglobin. If the level of carbon dioxide in the blood is lower than normal, then this leads to difficulties in releasing oxygen from haemoglobin. Hence the Verigo-Bohr law:”

        “With normal breathing the content of carbon dioxide in alveolar air should be 6.5%.”

        Butenko breathing is controversial, but a lot of asthmatics swear it helps them. The aim is to increase CO2 in the lung to reverse the bronchio-constriction…

        61

  • #
    Neville

    Very good advert that must have cost a lot of money. So who are the climate study group? As Jo said this should’ve been available free from the media decades ago and taught in schools.

    554

    • #
      Peter C

      The Climate Study Group seems to be the Lavousier Group.
      http://www.lavoisier.com.au/index.php

      Most of us will be familiar with some of the names of the members.

      61

      • #
        Peter C

        Whoops,

        I can’t spell Lavoisier. My apologies to
        Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier
        http://www.lavoisier.com.au/lavoisier-biography.php

        61

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          It was a very long time ago, but I still remember the shock when in what they now call Year 8 at school I learned that during the French Revolution Lavoisier was sent to the guillotine, with his death warrant noting: “The Country needs no scholars”.

          He was posthumously pardoned. Too late for him!

          It has been for quite a few years now that I have been able to understand what they were on about. I blame Whitlam’s mass reduced education system. Perhaps I should just blame Original Sin.

          40

    • #
      King Geo

      I would have put this half page ad in both Melbournes’s Herald Sun (highest circulation newspaper in Oz) & Sydney’s Daily Telegraph (both newspapers owned by Murdoch’s News Corp). I wouldn’t bother with the Fairfax’s newspapers – they would probably reject the ad so as not to agitate its leftie/greenie readers.

      71

  • #
    pat

    dated a day earlier than the US non-paper article, but based on the contents of the non-paper:

    28 Nov: BusinessStandardIndia: Nitin Sethi: Developed countries are backtracking on their commitments: Ajay Mathur
    Ajay Mathur, member of the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change, director general of the Bureau of Energy Efficiency and India’s principal media interface on the Paris climate change talks, speaks to Nitin Sethi on India’s interests in the negotiations.
    SETHI: Are you indirectly saying that the US is trying to breach the firewall of differentiation and you don’t want that to happen?
    MATHUR: The differentiation was done for a very specific purpose. It was to make differentiation between those who are responsible for historic emissions and those who are not. That calculus and those numbers haven’t really changed. We don’t see why that concept should be swept under the carpet.
    In Copenhagen and Cancun the annexe I countries committed – it is their commitment – that they would enable flows of up to US $100 billion a year annually by 2020. We are nowhere near those numbers. You know the Green Climate Fund numbers. So if we want to have a good chance of 2030 goals be met there would need to be a game-plan as to how this is reached. This is always an urgent issue for us. Not just for Paris, it was urgent in Lima and it was urgent in Warsaw. It will always be urgent. Why? Because a backsliding of commitments has been happening. There has been a backsliding of commitments in mitigation – many countries have not met their targets. There has been a backsliding of commitments in finance. In technology you can’t say there has been backsliding but there is nothing that has happened. So in this context there is an urgency to address the issues in every COP…
    ***SETHI: Indian environment minister Prakash Javadekar has said ‘let us not bring in new phrases and terminology at this time of negotiations’? He refers to phrases like decarbonisation and climate neutral. What do these phrases mean and what are its implications?
    MATHUR: That’s the point, what do they mean? When phrases are introduced at a very late moment they mean different things to different people. The one who introduced it may have one meaning, those who are reading it have a second and then others who want to hijack it to have a completely different meaning. It takes time to all of these phrases to stabilise for all to have at least a similar understanding if not exactly the same meaning. That is why the minister would like that let us focus on the kinds of at least terminology whose meaning we already have. If we start negotiating everything from scratch then two weeks is too short a time…
    ***SETHI: Indian environment minister Prakash Javadekar has said ‘let us not bring in new phrases and terminology at this time of negotiations’? He refers to phrases like decarbonisation and climate neutral. What do these phrases mean and what are its implications?
    MATHUR: That’s the point, what do they mean? When phrases are introduced at a very late moment they mean different things to different people. The one who introduced it may have one meaning, those who are reading it have a second and then others who want to hijack it to have a completely different meaning. It takes time to all of these phrases to stabilise for all to have at least a similar understanding if not exactly the same meaning. That is why the minister would like that let us focus on the kinds of at least terminology whose meaning we already have. If we start negotiating everything from scratch then two weeks is too short a time…READ ALL
    http://wap.business-standard.com/article/opinion/developed-countries-are-backtracking-on-their-commitments-ajay-mathur-115112800226_1.html

    91

  • #
    pat

    apologies for pasting the asterisked paras twice.

    80

  • #
    James Bradley

    “Fanaticism is the only form of willpower to which the weak & irresolute can rise.” – Nietzsche

    National Socialists used this philosophy to rise to power in another and Climate Socialists adopted it in this age.

    362

  • #
    pat

    no leaking as yet as to how India was coerced into agreeing to the CHOGM “message of Commonwealth ambition and determination” for COP21, but presumably semantics played a part:

    29 Nov: AFR: James Chessell: French give ground to US on Paris UN climate negotiations
    French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who is chairing the United Nations “COP21″ conference, appeared over the weekend to give ground to US demands for a so-called hybrid agreement in which some of the carbon reduction goals outlined would be legally binding and others would not.
    Such a concession from the French may be more acceptable to ***India and other emerging economies, which want richer nations to do more to tackle the climate-change problem. But other European countries say such a proposal is not strict enough.
    “The accord needs to be legally binding. It’s not just literature,” Mr Fabius told The Financial Times. “But it will probably have a dual nature. Some of the clauses will be legally binding.”…
    With little room to move on these commitments, Mr Turnbull, who listed recent improvements in photovoltaic solar cells and battery storage as critical advances for the environment, is likely to announce measures at Paris to encourage innovation in green technologies…
    ***Sources said Indian opposition had held up the release of CHOGM’s statement on climate action on Saturday. The statement called for ​a “legally binding agreement” that put the “global community on track towards low-emission and climate-resilient societies and economies”. Poorer countries argue they should not be held financially responsible for cutting greenhouse gas emissions because it is the richer nations that caused the problem in the first place…
    http://www.afr.com/news/policy/climate/french-give-ground-to-us-on-paris-un-climate-negotiations-20151129-glatjg

    71

  • #
    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      By what measure, and by how much?

      10

    • #
      AndyG55

      Averaged RSS, UAH, which are the ONLY reliable consistent records we have…

      On a “Year to end of October” basis, degrees C anomaly

      1998 — 0.582
      2010 — 0.439
      2015 — 0.285

      It is highly unlikely that 2015 will be anywhere near “the hottest heffer”, even in the satellite data.

      And when you consider that most of the first 3/4 of the Holocene + the RWP, and the MWP were WARMER than now.. and claim for “hottest heffer” is pure propaganda LIES..

      almost tantamount to FR**D !!!

      244

      • #
        King Geo

        Well said AndyG55 and good to see you escaped getting gonged with your **. I said that “that word that cannot be said” last year and haven’t used it since but have been so tempted to do so. As we all know the “Theory of AGW” is total nonsense but despite that the FR**D !!! continues. But don’t despair. All will be well. SC26 will save the day. But we have to wait a decade and a half to be proven correct and for the “Warmists” to be judged very harshly. In the meantime more US$trillions will be needlessly squandered but “Judgement Day” will see that those perpetrators will be very harshly dealt with – that is if they are still alive.

        122

      • #
        Cookster

        Hmmm, I wonder why you got three thumbs down? Your post seemed perfectly good to me? Some persons dropping in who can’t handle the truth about what unadjusted satellite records reveal about Paris hype?

        92

      • #
        Egor TheOne

        Not almost ! IS !

        00

    • #
      Egor TheOne

      Warcroft , many actually believe what you joke about !

      It’s the Mushroom Syndrome …..Kept in the Dark and fed S**t .

      “2015 Is Set To Be the Warmest Year on Record” = BS

      “How Fast Can We Transition to a Low-Carbon (co2) Energy System?” …We should not transition at all

      What we should be asking is ‘how do we increase our co2′ to 1000-1500 ppmv …. a favorable and net beneficial level , unlike the the BS propaganda being fed to us by the Marxist Media and True B’lver fringe lunatics .

      We need more co2 , not less .

      The only ‘carbon pollution’ is what is emanating from the 40,000 strong BSers attending the CON21 Thieves Cartel !

      Going by this > https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/clip_image002_thumb1.jpg?w=597&h=279 2015 thus far is one of the cooler years among the last 19.
      1998 was the hottest with 2010 2nd and so on with both 2014 and 2015 being cooler than several other recent years .

      Obviously , the CAGW ratbags cannot read simple graphs or just choose to ignore anything that conflicts with their medieval beliefs and /or financial interests are determining such beliefs ( at least publicly expressed beliefs )!

      To many of these learjetting hypocrites , they believe in which way the river of money flows.

      http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/11/19/scientists-declare-un-climate-summit-goals-irrational-based-on-nonsense-leading-us-down-a-false-path/

      31

  • #
    warcroft

    Now on to Paris… we making predictions on the outcome?
    Im willing to go with:
    “We agree to ‘maybe’ think about reaching targets by 20**. But one thing I think we all agree on is we should all come back next year to maybe think about reaching agreements again.”

    But an interesting set up for this year is Obama is leaving so he wants to ram something through. Paris has been the focus of Western terrorist attacks. The last couple of weeks its been decided that terrorism is because of climate change (thanks Charles).
    The TPP is finalised and underway.
    Turnbull is keen as mustard to ram something through too.
    The financial rape of everyone not part of the 0.1% is set to begin.

    200

  • #
    • #
      Peter C

      Good article by Garth Paltridge, setting out what we currently know about NOAA and possible temperature data adjustments particularly in the Karl et al paper which attempted to explain or rebut the current “pause” in Global Warming.

      Lamar Smith, RTex and chairman of the Science and Technology committee of congress is trying to get answers about internal emails by the scientists involved (he seems to have information from a whistleblower) but NOAA is refusing to comply.

      He probably won’t get anything in time to derail the COP 21 in Paris. What is needed now is someone to release the emails over the next few days a la Climategate.

      30

  • #

    This is an excellent advertisement in the Australian newspaper this weekend by the Climate Study Group. Thank goodness someone is doing something like this. A series of TV adds with the main points and figures given would be the next step and would be perfect if they could be organised. On page 21 of the same Australian newspaper publication though, there was a full page article by a professor from the university of NSW with all the unbacked dogma of the climate change brigade. “More extreme weather patterns will result in greater death and destruction from natural disasters” it says, and goes on to blame Hurricane Katrina on climate change! Where is the evidence for this? None given. In fact no hard evidence or references were given in the whole rambling article, just unsubstantiated statements throughout. The article states “Even if not catastrophic in themselves the cumulative impact of rising temperatures, sea levels and more mega droughts on agriculture, fresh water and our energy system could fatally weaken already fragile states contributing to destabilising internal conflicts” etc etc. …….all conjecture and a great push to blame all this on CO2, let alone human activity. The article goes on and on, all highly emotive but not a tiny trace of any evidence given for any of this in the entire article. The advertisement by the Climate Study Group is so honest in its tone compared to this article by one of our University personnel. Really we expect more than this from these institutions.

    301

    • #
      Another Graeme

      A series of TV adds with the main points and figures given would be the next step and would be perfect if they could be organised

      I would happily contribute to this should it be organised. Anyone up for it?

      140

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      Hurricane Katrina? I, an isolated Australian farmer, knew that New Orleans was a disaster waiting to happen. Built on the delta of a great river, it is sinking. The soil on which it was built has not consolidated. The great river deltas depend on silt from seasonal flooding to keep ground level above water level. Raise levees to keep out the floods, and your land sinks below the river.

      Why did the US government not know these things?

      90

  • #
    el gordo

    The UK Met is boasting that 2015 is going to be the hottest year on record in the UK, but then they would say that.

    The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) is still in positive territory and the Denialati is not happy with the weather gods, nevertheless winter is setting in with a vengeance.

    ‘SNOW could fall in parts of Scotland this weekend with temperatures set to plummet and freezing gales of up to 70mph forecast.

    ‘Parts of northern Scotland could see the mercury dip below zero, with the rest of the country likely to experience temperatures close to freezing.’

    Read more: http://www.scotsman.com/news/environment/scotland-s-weather-2ft-of-snow-forecast-1-3960667#ixzz3ssG7vbe6
    Follow us: @TheScotsman on Twitter | TheScotsmanNewspaper on Facebook

    131

    • #
      Chris in Hervey Bay

      I noticed, while watching the news on the Colorado Springs shootings, it is already snowing there, and plenty of it.

      140

    • #
      John F. Hultquist

      That is called Storm Clodagh.

      20

      • #
        Frank Venturi

        John (F. Hultquist) & Dave (in the States) Hi. If you leave out the ’0′
        i.e. ALT + 176 gets the degree symbol.
        But it doesn’t work in this post’s formatting. Try it in a Word doco.
        (I’m using Word 2013) & generic MS keyboard.

        00

  • #
    Mindert Eiting

    The bias error of “once forming a view people are often inattentive to information contradicting their view. There is the problem of selective scrutiny of evidence”.

    If people did not make this error there would be no reason for science. The merit of science resides in the prescriptive rule ‘once forming a theory scientists should be very attentive to information contradicting their theory’. Science proceeds by the elimination of erroneous theories. The complete works by Karl Popper are based on this principle, which can be expressed in two logical facts: (1) a false theory may have true consequences, (2) a true theory cannot have false consequences.

    The bias error is the misunderstanding of (1). People think that confirming evidence proves a theory or makes it more plausible at least. If you are on the country side, you may see the horizon as a big circle around you. Does this make the flat-earth theory more plausible? A false theory is the perfect liar like an oracle is, giving us randomly fifty percent correct predictions and fifty percent wrong. A false theory implies all our sentences and the denials of those, making its correct-score exactly fifty percent. In this respect we should rehabilitate the ancient inhabitants of Crete who were very reliable as they always lied: we only have to put the word ‘not’ before what they said in order to know the truth.

    Climate scientists chose to ignore the evidence effectively falsifying their theory. They ignored it, manipulated it, or invented ad-hoc explanations. By doing this they undermined their own existence. We do not have to pay scientists for results that can also be obtained by tossing a coin.

    170

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      My views over the years.

      1. The Hawke government in 1986 appointed a partisan management to the CSIRO, the first time the chairman had not been a scientist. My View? Crookery afoot!

      2. The full front page headline: “Cows Australia’s biggest source of greenhouse gases!” My View: Crookery afoot! A monstrous lie. One experiment in Tasmania cannot be extrapolated safely across Australia, because the quantity of methane emitted by a cow varies hugely with her diet. And there has been hardly any research anyway.

      3. At the first mention of rising CO2 causing rising temps. My view: Well Arrhenius said that CO2 insulated Earth a long time ago. SO what now?

      4. In the ’90s temps rose dramatically. My View: There might be something in it.

      5. To mid ’00s. Despite protests, Australia’s initial proposal for an ETS intended to tax agriculture’s recycled carbon on the same basis as fossil carbon. There were to be no credits for ag’s carbon sequestration. My View: This was grossly inequitable. Furthermore, it will quickly bankrupt Australia’s livestock industries. Marxist policy! No private management of industry, no matter what the cost. The protests succeed in getting the tax on agriculture set aside, but Julia Gillard’s Carbon Tax was the Trojan Horse by which it could have been reinstated with the stroke of a pen.

      6. From the mid ’00s. The continuing “pause” brings me back to my original view, Crookery Afoot!

      About that “pause”. There is no greater lie than half the truth when used for the purpose of deception. Furthermore, half the truth is difficult to contradict.

      I haven’t done the numbers. But the increase in temps in the ’90s lifted the post ’88 trend well above the long term trend. Without calculating it, I expected the pause would have brought the real temp back to the pre ’88 long term trend line by about 2008. So another 7 years of pause, even if records are being broken by a little bit, would now have the post ’88 trend line fairly close to the long term trend line.

      I would be interested to see it if anyone has done the numbers, how far does the post ’88 trend line now stand from the long term trend line? I use ’88 because that marked the birth of the IPCC, and it’s convenient.

      31

      • #
        Ammonite

        Hello Ted. The difference between the pre-1998 and post-1998 trend in global surface temperature is NOT statistically significant (1998 being the largest measured El-Nino year). There is a lot of this type of analysis at “Open Mind” (eg. https://tamino.wordpress.com/2015/06/19/desperate-for-a-pause/). Be warned. Open Mind rhetoric may not be very palatable to you.

        20

        • #

          In the same vein Ammonite, there would be no statistical difference between the decadal surface trends in the 1870s, 1930s and 1980s. Just ask Phil Jones. Hence all that man-made CO2 made no difference.

          Be warned, basic logic and reason may not very palatable to you. ;- )

          PS: Why would Tamino bother ignoring the satellites and using Ratpac? The satellites would give a better measure of global air temps on a broad scale. The radiosondes are better for separating air temps at different altitudes. But I guess he couldn’t blend the flat 1970s data in with the warming trend after that either… it’s all statistical games. The point that matters about “the pause” is that the models were wrong.

          51

          • #
            Ammonite

            Hello Joanne. My response to Ted O’Brien is solely in reference to his specific trend-line query. There are many statistical analyses on Open Mind other than the single example I linked to. Those interested can follow them up. However… Some Open Mind posters are not shy about using “denier” and this may be offensive to some. My comment is less a commentary on logic and more about personal taste.

            01

        • #
          AndyG55

          “The difference between the pre-1998 and post-1998 trend in global surface temperature is NOT statistically significant “

          And as we all know that the post 1998 trend is basically ZERO….

          … follow your own logic. ;-)

          21

        • #
          AndyG55

          The reality is that the 1998 El Nino was a major climate even, un-forced by CO2, the culmination of which added about 0.26ºC to atmospheric temperatures.

          Apart from that 0.26ºC, the slight warming before the El Nino has been essentially cancelled by the slight cooling after.

          http://s19.postimg.org/ojf5tbz1v/RSS_cancel.jpg

          The current El Nino seems to be only causing a slight bump in the temperatures, so it will be very interesting to watch the drop after it subsides.

          Alarmista will be scrambling back under their rocks with great haste. ;-)

          21

  • #
    maurie

    Obviously all the adults have left the room. We now have a fake Labor appointed PM prepared to accept the very insulting Obumma’s blatant global warming scam & Julie Bishop has chosen to gift much of her highly paid responsibilities to the chair polishers at the UN along with a pile of taxpayer funds. Dangerously lazy politicians of all colours simply look away when Australians are cruelly burned to death in very preventable bush fires. Aside from Victoria where half baked pommies persisted, Australia had learned how to prevent wild fires over a century ago. Obviously pestilent are of more value now than Australian humans. After TA negotiated the best bilateral trade deal that I ever remember his slimy mongrel party members sacked him & appointed an apologist for the terrorists.

    182

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      I haven’t subscribed yet to the criticism of Malcolm Turnbull. When he was promoting AGW the pause was only nine years old. It’s now 17 years old. All of the criticism that I have seen has been based on presumption that he hasn’t changed his views. I continue to hold hope.

      02

      • #
        Cookster

        All of the criticism that I have seen has been based on presumption that he hasn’t changed his views. I continue to hold hope

        Turnbull hasn’t changed his views. His actions as PM are bound by commitments he gave to his party in return for their vote to toss out Tony Abbott. The MP I am watching most closely should Turnbull misbehave at Paris is Dr Dennis Jensen. Jensen was a vocal supporter of Turnbull when he replaced Abbott. Jensen is also the most scientifically qualified person in the Australian Federal Parliament and also an outspoken climate sceptic. Jensen will look a fool if Turnbull betrays him and us at Paris.

        50

  • #
    Martin

    Just as there was needless alarm over the 37 year cooling from 1940 when CO2 was rising there is now unwarranted public alarm over a threat of dangerous global warming.

    That cooling is now is pretty much erased from the modern records. Every time I see a reconstruction, I notice that the cooling is now a ‘hiatus’.

    120

  • #

    Anything to expose the climate change bigots…….always with their signature image of smoke stacks billowing black smoke……depicting CO2, a clear odourless nutrient, as a disgusting black and smoggy pollutant.

    How can anyone believe what they say when they spin deceptive impressions in this way in every one of their articles and news items…….

    302

    • #
      Stan

      Trouble is Robert R lots of people do believe it. Look at the turn out of Australia’s most gullible at the weekend aka the climate change believers. If our leaders and the louder scientists say it, it must be true!!

      00

  • #
    eliza

    http://news.sky.com/story/1596318/poll-growing-doubts-over-climate-change-causes
    uk skeptics double from 12 to 24% in the last few months *sky news TV

    140

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Christiana Figueres, who is leading the UN’s negotiations, told Sky News: “l see more and more political will because every country is realising they are impacted.

      “There is not a single country that has not felt the negative impact of climate change.”

      ——–

      Its been almost two decades since temperatures stopped rising and not a single country has been adversely impacted.

      160

  • #
    Leo Morgan

    I’m in the choir, so I enjoy the preaching, but I don’t see it making any new converts.
    Sadly, I can’t see most readers taking the effort to finish it.
    Of course its far easier for me to criticise than to do, but I’ll give the matter some thought and see if I can’t present text that is more compelling.

    60

  • #
    Robert O

    I was just listening to ABC radio discussing climate change and issues of immigration with people calling in. The depth of indoctrination of climate change with average people is incredible with many heading off for the rallies. Apart from one UK film, I yet to hear anything on the ABC which questions the gospel of global warming, now climate change, As Robert R. says always the smokestacks against a setting sun, UK power stations I believe not local ones

    131

    • #
      Manfred

      Robert O, a fine example of ‘bias’ if I may.
      Was the sample of ‘people calling in’ truly representative, or merely a string of climate drones? How do we know? We need to define the selection of ‘average people’ here and we need to define ‘discussion’. We may find were we to look hard enough that the ABC has a unique definition of the word ‘discussion’. Frankly, I think they should be fined for the culpable waste of electricity.

      Rely on MSM outputs at your peril.
      Perhaps they should come with a heath warning or at the very least an entertaining climate ‘trigger warning‘?

      60

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘The depth of indoctrination …’

      The Klimatariat been extremely successful in selling their global warming meme through the MSM and education system. Eric Worrall has a guest post at WUWT on this very subject.

      When global cooling begins to bite we need to round up all those teachers who have been severely brainwashed and send them off to a gulag to enjoy a robust debate

      81

    • #
      ianl8888


      … the smokestacks against a setting sun …

      Not smokestacks but cooling towers, with water vapour as the outflow component

      A smaller coal-fired power station near where I once worked erected a sign on the adjacent highway stating this fact. My straw polls suggested that most people just didn’t register the information, even reading the sign as they drove through the “cloud” but not relating the sign to the cloud

      Of course I gave up. How can you possibly win over that level of duh!!

      90

  • #
    Robk

    The IPCC being set up to investigate anthropogenic greenhouse gasses is bias, clearly rendering it a political body.

    82

    • #

      Investigating is only part of their charter. The meat of their charter is to identify mitigation strategies and coerce governments into implementing them. There’s absolutely nothing in their charter about determining whether or not AGW is significant and CAGW has been presumed since day 1.

      The subtext of their charter was to become the arbiter of what is and what is not climate science based on what they publish in their reports. It’s an embarrassment to science that this conflict of interest has been allowed to fascistically justify CAGW under the presumption that CAGW is a problem where the means towards their ends have been allowed to devolve into misrepresenting science.

      Unfortunately, there’s no warmist scientist brave enough to accept the political consequences of being so wrong for so long.

      132

  • #
    Robk

    The persecuted CO2 is innocent your Honour!

    50

  • #
    Carbon500

    As I never tire of pointing out, it’s time for a new figure to counter the warmist nonsense: 43%, not 97%.
    43% is a quick, easily remembered figure.
    CO2 has risen from 280ppm in the pre-industrial era (prior to 1750AD) to 400ppm today. That’s an increase of 43%,and we’re still here, with no climatic meltdown having occurred.
    To put this into further perspective, 43% of not a lot (O.028 up to 0.0400% of the planet’s gases) isn’t much anyway!

    141

  • #
    michael hart

    Though I wouldn’t wish them on unwilling Australians, those unused desalination plants must be great examples of the folly of global-warming hubris. How often do they get mentioned in local media?

    153

    • #
      michael hart

      I mean, they must look like white elephants?

      152

      • #
        dp

        To make a point, an image of those plants should be included on paper and coined money as a reminder of how worthless money in the hands of bureaucrats really is.

        112

        • #
          Manfred

          They could be used in place of steaming cooling towers with a back drop of the setting sun, and the array of lens filters.

          101

    • #
      StefanL

      The Adelaide desalination plant is necessary insurance. Our reservoirs have a maximum capacity of only one year’s supply and we are heavily dependent upon water from the River Murray. When the next multi-year drought happens and the eastern states hog all the water in the Murray, we will be very glad to have the desal plant.

      82

      • #

        We have a multi billion dollar desalination plant of the Tugun coast (Gold Coast) built by Captain Bligh when she was premier of Queensland. Been there for a few years now, never been used once, a rusting hulk of the coast. And also a very expensive pipeline built from it to Brisbane which has not been and never will be needed as Brisbane’s water supply dams are quite adequate. All built because one man said a few years ago that rainfall would be a thing of the past in eastern Australia.

        70

        • #

          “off” the Tugun Coast (typo)

          20

        • #

          They are not building more desalination plants these days because the latest doctrine is “we are going to have devastating rain storms due to climate change”. The plants in most locations are simply no longer needed because of this new “knowledge”. The change of terms from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” is partly due to the fact that as the years since the building of the desalination plants have gone by it has become obvious there were no predicted permanent droughts, so they needed a new mantra.

          71

      • #
        el gordo

        Stefani I appreciate your situation, but it would be cheaper to run a pipeline from the Ord River because the desalplant only produces expensive water.

        ‘The plant was completed on time and within the original budget ($1.83 billion). It has an estimated operating cost of $130 million per year ($2.5 million per week), when operating at full capacity of 100 GL per annum.’

        wiki

        Apparently Oz has more dam water per head of population than any other country.

        83

        • #
          StefanL

          El Gordo,
          The cost of water piped from northern Australia is just too high. See the report on “Water for the Future — Moving water long distances: Grand schemes or pipe dreams ?”

          Besides, even if the costs were lower, there is always a risk in having your source of water in another jurisdiction.
          I much prefer to have our own desal plant, that we can power with gas from Moomba.

          10

          • #

            Respect your position Stefani, but relying on wind power as it does, South Australia will need all the power it can get without using up precious Moomba gas power by running desalplants if they can help it. More blackouts are on the horizon and desalplants use a lo……tttt of “carbon intensive” power. Think of the extra co2 this will generate. But then this might attract more vegetation in the S A desert which will in turn attract more rainfall, ha

            50

          • #
            el gordo

            Very interesting read, but I question their due diligence.

            ‘Current studies show that local options, such as water conservation, desalination and recycling, cost around $1–2 per thousand litres; a supply from 1500 kilometres (km) away would cost around $5–6 per thousand litres.’

            10

          • #
            gigdiary

            there is always a risk in having your source of water in another jurisdiction

            A bit SA depending on Victoria for electricity..

            20

      • #
        Murray Shaw

        Stefan, SA received all it’s allocated water during the Millenium drought. Even SA irrigators received 100% of their allocations through the drought! with the exception of 2006 when they were reduced to 69p%, this while NSW Murray irrigators were on zero, zilch. Zip. No upstream states were not pilfering SA water. The average flow over Loch 1 at Blanchetown during this period was over 1100ML per day, all thanks to the great work of our forefathers in building the great water storage works within the Basin.

        50

  • #
    sillyfilly

    Why are they banging on about mid-trop temperatures, lower trop or surface data should apply for any indications of warming,
    Their graphs of methane bear no resemblance to CSIRO data from either source which show 700ppb from the start of the CE at Law Dome rising to a current level of 1796ppb at Cape Grim.
    From Richard Lindzen on the 70s cooling saga:
    “the global cooling trend of the 1950s and 1960s led to a minor global cooling hysteria in the 1970s. All that was more or less normal scientific debate, although the cooling hysteria….. There was also a book by the prominent science writer Lowell Ponte (The Cooling) that derided the skeptics and noted the importance of acting in the absence of firm, scientific foundation. There was even a report by the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences reaching its usual ambiguous conclusions. But the scientific community never took the issue to heart, governments ignored it, and with rising global temperatures in the late 1970s the issue more or less died”
    We can thus thank the Lavoisier Group for wasting everybody’s money on this trashy piece of advertising!

    220

  • #

    A point about models.

    When you run a model over and over and average the results what pops out of the noise is the error in the model as the error is constant from run to run. In fact, this is a best practices technique for isolating errors when modeling stochastic systems.

    The error that’s common to all of these models is the assumption of a high sensitivity caused by CO2 emissions!

    80

  • #
    Hank de Carbonel

    This is not the first time I noticed something odd. Whenever the timelines include the 1940′s through 50′s, World War II has no impact! Including the Atomic Bomb!

    Perhaps someone could explain that to me.

    92

    • #
      John F. Hultquist

      Earth doesn’t care.

      Hubris?

      60

    • #
      Radical Rodent

      Quite simple, Hank: no matter how drastic human activity might seem (to humans, anyway), they are utterly trivial on a global scale.

      142

    • #

      The significant above ground testing that followed had no effect either. The nuclear winter effect is hypothesized as the result of the US and Russia setting off their entire arsenals at the same time which is orders of magnitude more than has ever been exploded before. It’s somewhat better accepted that the same kind of effect would happen in the event of a very large volcanic eruption or a large impact event.

      40

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Hank this was covered a while ago here but I can’t find a link, basically the particles from the atomic bombs don’t stay in the atmosphere high enough or long enough to disrupt the earths cycles and give off much of a signal if any, I’d be happy for someone else to elaborate.

      20

  • #
    Ruairi

    The world should learn to beware,
    Of what warmists pluck out of the air,
    As for decades it cooled,
    Before now and fooled,
    The world by a great cooling scare.

    180

  • #
    nc

    Just had to post this from the you can’t make this stuff up dept. BC is British Columbia Canada. issue deicing the plane before joining the carbon trail to Paris for some taxpayer funded Christmas shopping and partying.

    “Christy Clark’s trip to Paris for the United Nations Climate Change Conference got off to a bit of a bumpy start.

    The BC Premier tweeted yesterday morning that the de-icing machine took a bite out of her plane just before takeoff.

    Her press secretary Sam Oliphant says she was re-routed and was set to land in Paris shortly after she was originally expected to arrive.”

    Clark has vowed to promote BC as an environmental leader at the global summit, where she’ll join other premiers and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

    Christy Clark tweeted about plane trouble Saturday morning.

    40

  • #
    Justin de Temps

    La pensée du jour.

    @JunkScience: Paris climate thugs can’t plan next bathroom trip, but want to plan economy for next century. #COP21 #PeoplesClimate https://t.co/FZEd4U1j3e

    91

    • #
      James Murphy

      only 174 protestors arrested at Place de la Republique…
      Throwing bottles (and candles left to commemorate the 130 people killed on Nov 13)

      Francois Hollande is excusing their actions by saying they do not represent the majority…

      350.org and their associated drones are having a little cry and saying that the ban on public protests was designed to hurt them, and only them. – No consideration for the events of November 13…

      130

  • #

    From an article here in NZ this morning.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/europe/74541742/earth-is-a-wilder-warmer-place-since-last-climate-deal-made

    It is chock-a-block with all the alarmist claptrap we’ve ever discussed here, and even quotes Al Gore! No wonder the streets are full of people on a mission to ‘save the planet’.

    Be grateful if Anton would comment on the sentence below. To me it is nonsense. Are they really giving away wind-generated electricity?

    Still, “while the Earth is a lot more dangerous on one side, the technologies are a lot better than they were”, said Jeffrey Sachs, director of Columbia University’s Earth Institute. Solar and wind have come down tremendously in price, so much so that a Texas utility gives away wind-generated electricity at night.

    82

    • #
      Justin de Temps

      When no one is wanting it ;-)

      40

    • #
      ExWarmist

      Hi Fiji Dave, you write…

      No wonder the streets are full of people on a mission to ‘save the planet’.

      Those people in the streets are getting arrested in Paris.

      Ref: From Zerohedge.

      30

      • #

        Yes, it’s a narrow path we tread, eh, Ex Warmist.

        I’ve nothing against people marching (I might want to one day to repeal NZ’s ETS :) ) but hopefully I’d be better informed than people appear to be that are currently marching against climate.

        A sign on one of their placards here read, “Save the Pacific Islands from sinking!”

        Goodness!

        40

        • #

          FijiDave,

          I’m replying to your comment 27 here, so it doesn’t slide down the reply comment list. Where you added this:

          …..so much so that a Texas utility gives away wind-generated electricity at night.

          As shown on any Load Curve for actual power consumption, the time of least consumption is from around 1AM through to around 5.30AM, and that’s around 60 to 65% of Peak consumption. Virtually all of that power is provided by those generators which have to stay operational, the Big Nukes in the U.S. and large scale coal fired power plants. Either way, all the power that they generate is being consumed. As morning arrives and then on through the day, other plants come on line to cater for that increase in demand.

          Typically, wind plants generate their most power during that time. (midnight to around 6AM)

          Because this power is quite literally excess to demand, they virtually cannot sell it as those other monsters sell it so cheap, because it is constantly available. No retailer will purchase the power from those wind plants. Either way, in comparison to the humungous amount of power being consumed in the State of Texas (the Australian total power consumption multiplied by 2.4) then any wind power is so minute as to barely register, not even a blip on the overall total, so it is completely and utterly ignored.

          Now, as to giving it away, yes, that power must be consumed. It’s probably directed out of State or just rolls along the top of the generation total.

          That phrase “giving it away” is a, umm, mendacity. (so the other word won’t get this comment moderated)

          Written into the contract for every renewable power proposal is that the Federal U.S. Government will pay a subsidy, called a PTC (Production Tax Credit) for every Watt of power that the plant generates, no matter when it generates it. Also in that contract is that the State Government also pays a subsidy for every watt of power being generated. So no matter what, the wind power being generated is always drawing money from somewhere. It’s just that the retail onsellers are not buying it. That PTC and State subsidy when combined with what actually IS being sold to the retailers sees every renewable plant making a very healthy profit thank you very much.

          Now, go to this link, which shows the ….. RETAIL price for electricity by State across the U.S. This is the overall cost for the overall mix for all electricity generation.

          Scroll down to Texas. The columns in question here are the first one, the current retail cost which consumers pay for the electricity they consume. Note that here Texan residential homeowners pay 11.72 cents per KWH for their electricity. (Umm, check your own current power bill for what you as an Australian pay for your household electricity, and mine is 25.36 cents per KWH, more than double what Texans pay)

          Also of note, column 3, the cost to the Commercial sector 7.87 cents per KWH, column 5, the cost to the Industry sector at 5.65 cents per KWH, and the second last column, the all sector average of 8.77 cents per KWH, and you can guess from that how cheaply the huge generation entities, Nuclear and coal fired power (who still make a profit) can generate their electricity for sale to the retailers.

          So no, at no stage, ever are those wind plants “giving away” the electricity that they generate.

          Tony.

          Incidentally, while cruising around that EIA site, I noticed that for just that same Month there, August, almost every nuclear power plant in the U.S. was delivering its maximum power. The Capacity Factor for ALL Nuclear power for that Month of August was 98%, and that’s from plants now all of them more than 40 plus years old.
          Comparison for August actual power delivery:
          Nuclear – Nameplate 101,000MW – Actual power delivery 72,500GWH
          Wind – Nameplate 66,000MW – Actual power delivery 13,000GWH

          80

          • #
            Dave in the states

            Where I live in the Rocky Mountains, the wind usually doesn’t blow at night. Early in the morning it will usually be dead still, with a breeze kicking up around 10:00AM. Then about an hour after dark the wind usually quits.

            30

          • #

            A big thank you for that, Tony. It is as I thought, but far more eloquently put than I could manage.

            I think it may have been Einstein that said, “If you can’t explain something, you don’t understand it.” Therefore, I submit that the clarity of your explanation(s) reflects your total grasp of the subject, and it is most helpful.

            However, noting your remark:

            Typically, wind plants generate their most power during that time. (midnight to around 6AM)

            it seems counter intuitive to what my experience here near Motueka, NZ, is where the bulk of the wind mileage occurs during the day. Texas, on the hand may a different kettle of fish…

            I wanted to insert an image, a graph of wind/time, but it’s a bit beyond me at present.

            BTW the cost of my electricity is NZ$0.248 per kW-h.

            30

            • #

              Look at the costing shown at this link. This is for the most recent completed whole Month, October 2015, and lists the wholesale cost for electricity in Australia, the averaged cost which retailers pay for the electricity generated by all the power plants.

              The left hand column for each State is the RRP, the full 24 average, and the second column is for the Peak period 7AM until 10PM.

              Note the States with the largest amount of coal fired power, NSW, Vic, and Qld.

              Note that most of the costs over the full 24 hours for those three States there are around that $35 mark, and that’s the cost per MWH.

              This covers the mix for all power plants.

              However, as 85% plus of the power supplied in those States is coal fired power, then the price is (relatively) close to what is the total just for coal fired power.

              In nearly every case those large scale coal fired power plants can sell their power for around $28 to $30 per MWH.

              That’s 3 cents per KWH, and that makes up less than 12% of your overall power bill, the actual electricity itself.

              Earlier on when I started all this, I was in email contact with someone who actually worked at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant at San Luis Obispo in California.

              He directed me to a website that detailed aspects of the Plant. They were selling their generated electricity into the Californian grid for a tick under one cent per KWH, and still making a healthy profit.

              In 2006, Unit one, (1122MW Nameplate) and between the 18 monthly refuels ran at maximum for the 12 month reporting period and delivered 9,944,983MWH at a Capacity Factor of 101.2%.

              Every wind tower in Australia working at their current Capacity Factor would take nearly 14 Months to deliver that same power delivered from this ONE unit.

              Tony.

              61

  • #
    ExWarmist

    Somewhat OT…

    The tangled webs.

    Rose pointed out that before the terrorist attacks in Paris, the U.S. had not bombed ISIS-controlled oil tankers, to which the former CIA deputy director Michael Morell responded that Barack Obama didn’t order the bombing of ISIS’s oil transportation infrastructure until recently because he was concerned about environmental damage.

    REF: From Zerohedge. (Includes Video with actual quote).

    I.e. You can’t blow up ISIS funding oil tankers because that will cause Climate Change (TM) (as opposed to the oil being sold and burnt…???) and Climate Change (TM) causes terrorists who will use oil to fund their operations – go figure.

    132

  • #
    PeterS

    Since when did the evidence interpreted correctly was ever accepted by the secular scientists most of whom are being paid big bucks for their research, and then announced to the governments of the world the truth about the global warming hoax? I don’t hear the truth being announced at the Paris Climate Conference. On the contrary the scientists are saying the exact opposite. When will the real elephant in the room be exposed; the secular scientists who are either silent or aiding the scam? At least the conference rejected one stupid idea. The conference has declined to take up a recommendation from scientists that they first set a cap on total greenhouse gases as a way to achieve their goal (scam). After all the world leaders (except perhaps Russia and China) know that it is far simpler and more productive to steal more money from us by whacking on new taxes, not only to keep supplying more “thirty pieces of silver” to the scientists but also to try and prevent the debt bomb from exploding. Did I just expose their real scam? Oh I’m so sorry.

    40

  • #
    pat

    29 Nov: UK Express: Jon Austin: GLOBAL COOLING: Decade long ice age predicted as sun ‘hibernates’
    SCIENTISTS claim we are in for a decade-long freeze as the sun slows down solar activity by up to 60 per cent.
    A team of European researchers have unveiled a scientific model showing that the Earth is likely to experience a “mini ice age” from 2030 to 2040 as a result of decreased solar activity.
    Their findings will infuriate environmental campaigners who argue by 2030 we could be facing increased sea levels and flooding due to glacial melt at the poles.
    However, at the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales, Northumbria University professor Valentina Zharkova said fluctuations an 11-year cycle of solar activity the sun goes through would be responsible for a freeze, the like of which has not been experienced since the 1600s.
    From 1645 to 1715 global temperatures dropped due to low solar activity so much that the planet experienced a 70-year ice age known as Maunder Minimum which saw the River Thames in London completely frozen…READ ON
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/616937/GLOBAL-COOLING-Decade-long-ice-age-predicted-as-sun-hibernates

    32

    • #

      The balance between fusion and gravity is very dynamic and nearly all stars exhibit some variability with periods spanning seconds to decades across a wide range of regular and chaotic magnitude changes, and thats only what we can detect. Periodicity on the order of centuries or more can’t be precluded, even for our Sun. We understand how sunspots and solar output are related but there are likely to be unrelated effects with larger periods beyond that which our limited time series of accurate sampling can discern.

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

      30

  • #
    Robk

    There is a real danger that harmful political agendas will have been firmly set in train before the truth of CO2′s innocence is widely accepted.
    None is so blind as those who will not see.

    70

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    One of the Founding CAGW High Priests , Morry the Malthusian Strong has moved on .
    If ever there was a Wizard behind the Curtain , it was this character .
    His direct legacy …The Paris CON21 BSer’s Fiasco !

    He will miss his finest work !
    One of his quotes in particular comes to mind ….”It may become Necessary to Set Mortality Controls”

    One less Mad Malthusian in the world can only be a good thing….Bon Voyage Morry… https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/562828409232171009/WW3H2bwX_400x400.jpeg

    http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2010/01/discovering-maurice-strong/

    http://www.goldenageproject.org.uk/downloads/scientific_paper_on_global_warming.pdf

    52

  • #

    CAGW theory and Climate Alarmism have nothing to do with Science. It is a religion, exactly as Sientology is a religion, it is based on faith and not science. CAGW theory and Alarmism enjoy the same protected status in our society as any other religion. CAGW theory and Alarmism are beyond all Media and Progressives’ criticism.

    50

    • #
      PeterS

      I agree but unfortunately the vast majority of scientists and politicians are either silent or in disagreement with that inconvenient truth. That’s what tends to happen when a religion takes hold and keeps growing as the scientists keep publishing lies in scientific journals.

      43

  • #
    pat

    AUDIO: 13mins24secs: 30 Nov: 2GB: Alan Jones – Lord Christopher Monckton
    Alan talks to the climate change sceptic as the Paris talks get underway
    http://www.2gb.com/article/alan-jones-%E2%80%93-lord-christopher-monckton

    42

    • #
      PeterS

      It’s always interesting to listen to Lord Christopher Monckton. I see that he has now come to my way of thinking that the only way we can win the war against the global warming scam is by investigation and prosecution. It’s about time, but might be too late even if we did find a good supply of money and lawyers.

      32

    • #
      Annie

      A very good broadcast.

      21

  • #
    Bruce

    Does anyone know which edition of the Australian the advert was in? I bought todays (Monday 30th)Australian but couldn’t find it. Was it “The Weekend Australian” or last Friday’s Australian? To me, it’s a milestone to see an advert like this in the MSM and I was hoping to get a hard copy :-(

    30

  • #
    pat

    google translations:

    1min VIDEO:29 Nov: FranceTV: COP21 : violent clashes in Paris
    Violent scuffles broke out between Republic Square several hundred protesters and security forces. Over 200 people were arrested.
    http://www.francetvinfo.fr/meteo/climat/cop21/cop21-violents-heurts-a-paris_1198171.html

    29 Nov: FranceTV: COP21 : more than 200 protesters arrested after clashes with police in Paris
    208 people were arrested, and 174 placed in custody. With the state of emergency, protests are banned in Paris…
    Memorial candles attacks thrown at police
    CRS responded to projectiles by throwing tear gasses. Some protesters , themselves, seized candles deposited at Republic Square in memory of the victims of the November 13, to throw at the police.
    Action strongly condemned by François Hollande, who judges “scandalous”. “This is a disaster, they are thugs who throw projectiles, they have nothing to do with ecology, with COP21,” responded the environmentalist Cecile Duflot. Manuel Valls, he reacted on Twitter.
    “Violence against police Republic Square are unworthy . Respect this place is to respect the memory of the victims.”
    http://www.francetvinfo.fr/meteo/climat/cop21/cop21-une-centaine-de-manifestants-interpelles-apres-des-heurts-avec-la-police-autour-de-la-place-de-la-republique-a-paris_1197985.html

    21

  • #
    pat

    google translation:

    29 Nov: FranceTV: Penguins, placards and smoke : in Paris, activists for the bitter face of climate CRS
    After mobilization in the calm climate activists near the Republic Square, clashes broke out in the afternoon, Sunday, November 29, between far-left militants and the police . The security forces were coming in numbers to try to enforce the ban…
    In fluorescent vests, activists make up a jovial security service, which attempts to ” fill holes” in the chain. Leaning against the facades of buildings, demonstrators brandished placards and flags, when they are not downright out all the stops : required penguins or polar bears. “Obviously we would have preferred to walk with 300,000 people, rather than to be 10,000″ continues Pierre Gineste in a shoulder shrug…
    “One of my son had come to Brussels with 300 people, by bicycle, for COP21. Yesterday morning, they were all sent back to Belgium,” says Patrick 57. “It’s incomprehensible,” he continues. “Why ban gatherings here while accepting to open the Christmas markets?” asks the Belgian living in France. Others cite the arrest of environmental activists…
    But about 15 hours, when the human chain is dispersed, a group of radical protesters shattered the setpoint. Faced with a cordon of CRS, they throw shoes at the security forces, that replicate with smoke. Immediately, the situation tends, while some catch and throw candles and other objects placed at the monument of the square of the the Republic after the attacks.
    All access roads instead are now closed, guarded by dozens of cars of CRS. Protesters blocked inside the smoky room, where a new human chain is formed : this time, to protect the monuments and tributes to the victims. Several hundred people are then checked before the reopening of crossings, at 17 hours…
    http://www.francetvinfo.fr/meteo/climat/cop21/pingouins-pancartes-et-fumigenes-a-paris-les-militants-pour-le-climat-amers-face-aux-crs_1197861.html

    31

  • #
    Brian

    THANK YOU!
    The ABC coverage would have made me explode, otherwise.

    20

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    Alan Jones comes out swinging on the Medieval CAGW Paris CON21 Totalitarians Hajj!
    Guest speaker Lord Monckton tells Alan the latest >>

    http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/142531#mF3t0BVgieDbDSJq.30

    103

  • #
    Dean

    The science is settled, alternate views should not be aired, and retired engineers are to blame.

    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/margaret-wertheim-on-art,-science,-coral-reefs…and-crocheting/6984744

    While disturbing to have such views go almost unchallenged (the announcer did suggest that sometimes mavericks are right, and the consensus wrong, when it came to stomach ulcers – the silence was deafening) you know you are winning the science war when they refuse to argue the science.

    Who knew that fascists like to crochet?

    Jo do you have an overall strategy about how to “market” David’s work on developing an alternative model?

    30

  • #
    pat

    29 Nov: Reuters: ‘No Planet B,’ marchers worldwide tell leaders before U.N. climate summit
    By Megan Rowling and Morag MacKinnon
    In the French capital, where demonstrations were banned by the authorities after attacks by Islamic State militants killed 130 people on Nov. 13, activists laid out more than 20,000 shoes in the Place de la Republique to symbolize absent marchers on the eve of the summit.
    Among the high heels and sandals were a pair of plain black shoes sent by Pope Francis, who has been a vocal advocate for action to prevent dangerous climate change, and jogging shoes from U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
    One activist, dressed in white as an angel with large wings, held a sign saying “coal kills”…
    Riot police used tear gas to disperse about 200 protesters, some of them masked, who responded by hurling rocks and even candles. French President Francois Hollande accused the violent protesters of dishonoring the memory of the dead…
    Around the world, activists marched, dressed as polar bears or penguins at risk from melting ice, or chanted slogans such as “climate justice”.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/29/us-climatechange-summit-demonstrations-idUSKBN0TI00720151129

    31

  • #
    Johnny

    Is it possible to provide a link to the origin of the graph?
    Or to the page that it appears on in the document cited?
    “State of the Climate in 2012” in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society1, August 2013

    I’ve had a look through all 258 pages and the graph doesn’t seem to appear there?

    is it a combination of data sets?
    if so, can you direct me to those?

    I’m keen to dive into the numbers :)

    I will ask – Jo

    10

  • #
    pat

    27 Nov: Scientific American: Matt Ridley: Climate Change Will Not Be Dangerous for a Long Time
    Slower warming than predicted gives the world time to develop better energy technologies
    In 1990 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was predicting that if emissions rose in a “business as usual” way, which they have done, then global average temperature would rise at the rate of about 0.3 degree Celsius per decade (with an uncertainty range of 0.2 to 0.5 degree C per decade). In the 25 years since, temperature has risen at about 0.1 to 0.2 degree C per decade, depending on whether surface or satellite data is used. The IPCC, in its most recent assessment report, lowered its near-term forecast for the global mean surface temperature over the period 2016 to 2035 to just 0.3 to 0.7 degree C above the 1986–2005 level. That is a warming of 0.1 to 0.2 degree C per decade, in all scenarios, including the high-emissions ones.
    At the same time, new studies of climate sensitivity—the amount of warming expected for a doubling of carbon dioxide levels from 0.03 to 0.06 percent in the atmosphere—have suggested that most models are too sensitive…
    Ten years ago the world derived 87 percent of its primary energy from fossil fuels; today, according the widely respected BP statistical review of world energy, the figure is still 87 percent. The decline in nuclear power has been matched by the rise in renewables but the proportion coming from wind and solar is still only 1 percent…
    So we should spend the coming decades stepping up research and development of new energy technologies…
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-will-not-be-dangerous-for-a-long-time/

    almost all the comments are hostile.

    22

  • #
    pat

    28 Nov: CBC: Margo McDiarmid: Climate change could have link with terrorism, UN chief Ban Ki-moon tells CBC
    Social disruption could lead to more ‘terrorist fighters’
    He also warns in an exclusive interview with CBC News of a possible link between climate change and terrorism.
    “When we do not address climate change properly it may also affect many people who are frustrated and who are impacted, then there is some possibility that these young people who [are] jobless and frustrated may join these foreign terrorist fighters,” the UN chief said…
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/climate-change-talks-paris-ban-ki-moon-1.3341598

    28 Nov: CNN: John D. Sutter: Climate Change is a form of terror
    The recent terror attacks are tragic, and many lives will never be the same because of them. They should not be minimized.
    But climate change is another form of terror — and it’s one we’re wreaking on ourselves…
    Knudsen, the running climate scientist, thought about abandoning his Pole to Paris journey because of the terror attacks on November 13. He canceled public events he’d planned in Brussels, and he knows that his arrival in Paris probably will be met with little fanfare. He’d imagined hundreds of people running with him into the French capital. Now he’s not sure whether his arrival, probably later this week, he told me, will be noticed by much of anybody …
    http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/28/opinions/sutter-cop21-paris-preview-two-degrees/

    11

  • #
    AndyG55

    Just a note.. only a bit off topic

    I should have done this simple analysis before.

    Look at the DMI Arctic sea ice chart at this link.

    http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php

    You will see that the current Arctic sea ice level is skirting the -1sd line from the 1979-2000 reference period.

    Now look at where that period is in the AMO (light blue shaded)

    http://s19.postimg.org/eteoqkhpv/Amomeandmi.jpg

    As you can see, we are currently well outside most of the AMO values for that reference period. (blue dot)

    Yet the sea ice level is still only 1sd from the mean !

    It seems that Arctic sea ice is actually doing AMAZINGLY WELL.

    (Not good for the people living up there though)

    52

  • #
    Craig Thomas

    Interestingly, the VF Commodore reached 100,000 sales in 22 months.
    The VF, after 22 months, had managed 55,000.

    Do you suppose….things might be changing…?

    111

    • #
      AndyG55

      Yes.. Commodore saturation point. :-)

      70

    • #
      AndyG55

      Love my old VY Commodore V8 Executive :-)

      71

    • #
      James Murphy

      Without any context, all that tells me is that people aren’t buying as many Holdens.

      If you squint a bit, and tilt your head the right way, you could say that petrol consumption has been sort of vaguely decreasing, more or less, but I don’t know if the number of petrol powered cars has increased or decreased, or if if it’s just that cars have become more fuel efficient, along with changing numbers of vehicles.

      The latest Australian Energy Statistics from the office of the chief economist, available here

      subset from Table K-1:Yearly figures for Unleaded automotive gasoline consumption (in millions of Litres)
      2002-03 -: 18 873
      2003-04 -: 19 962
      2004-05 -: 19 876
      2005-06 -: 19 048
      2006-07 -: 19 251
      2007-08 -: 19 234
      2008-09 -: 18 733
      2009-10 -: 18 645
      2010-11 -: 18 725
      2011-12 -: 18 761
      2012-13 -: 18 660
      2013-14 -: 18 121

      Taken from 2002-03 as that was the first year when leaded petrol was no longer commercially available, and there was a jump in unleaded consumption compared to the previous year

      50

  • #

    THE CLIMATE STUDY GROUP Psychology
    November 28 2015 The Australian Newspaper advertisement page 3
    Background
    In a submission to the Australian Federal Government submission
    The Climate Group submitted Date of submission: Thursday, April 23, 2015
    Submission number: 156 Climate Carbon Emissions. The Facts
    ‘In this review of the scientific evidence underlying the [former] Federal Government’s various emission reduction schemes the Fair Farming Group, whose members are all substantial commercial farming operators, has assessed the evidence for dangerous anthropogenic global warming and examined the hypothesis that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations will cause dangerous climate change’.————————————————————————————————————— My response
    Interestingly the “members of both groups are the same members named! The common leader presents himself “I am an Australian creative thinker who enjoys problem solving and team leadership”.
    At the risk of ignoring my boyhood and Scouts training I would suggest creative thinking really means “poetic license”.
    My peers and I were brought up many decades age “in life, play the ball not the man”. Science discipline demands; dedicate unbiased and irrevocable evidence in a paper/statement/study, else ones reputation lost forever and ever (1)
    The grave un-natural, non science thoughts presented to influence intelligent Australians as presented in “The Australian Newspaper page 3 today November 28 2016 on the eve of UNFCCC COP21 climate change data exchange assembly must be addressed.
    ——————————————————————————————————————-
    The Climate Group added points to support their thoughts to convince APH Canberra
    In the fear that the Government “seeking knowledge” accepted The Climate Group/Fair Farming Group “as irrevocable fact”, I correct the grave misleading points within my established expertise (2)! The correction in part I prepare is in fear the cultured World beyond Australia might think, “We believe anything that is published in a newspaper”!
    The Group (3) wrote in its submission to Canberra;-
    (1) The current level of CO2 is near the lowest on record over the last 500 million years. .And: ‘A higher level of CO2 is especially beneficial to dry farming areas like Australia, where crops are frequently under stress because of insufficient moisture.[a] With more CO2, plant leaves have fewer stomata and lose fewer water molecules per CO2 molecule that diffuses in from the surrounding air. This extra benefit of more CO2 [b] to plants in arid regions shows up very clearly in experiments [c]
    My response Include the a-b-c
    CORRECTION; Six mass extinctions are documented in the fossil record over the past 500 million … during the most extreme episode of volcanism in the past 500 million years. … The eruptions are thought to have produced enough carbon dioxide to warm the Planet degrees with little ice age when the Sun heat blocked –Some warming’s lasting 20million years. (37,000 +qualified science reports)
    [a] insufficient moisture “Farming Groups” et al stripped over the past short period of 450 years historical vegetation, back to now anthropogenic heat reflecting CO2e CH4 emitting deserts.
    [b] The simple first lesson in science is 2-4% of Earths vegetation sequesters CO2 to become soil Soil-Carbon. Too much CO2 crops and life dies!
    [c] What experiments??????
    Clearly the author/s in submission assumed the Government might be seeking weight for expanding emissions and prima fascia the Ministry might lean on the author/s submission as fact. Hopefully on foreign nation reads submissions!

    The Climate Group
    (2) Carbon Dioxide and Atmospheric Temperatures
    ‘There is no geological evidence of extreme or runaway global temperatures in the past when CO2 concentrations have been at higher levels [a] which indicates that the greenhouse impact from increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere was not enhanced by a temperature “feedback” multiplier of 2 to 4 [as assumed in IPCC projections]. [b] Clearly, along with CO2 there are other causes for changes in atmospheric temperature’.[c] To criticize the UNIPCC (inter-governments Panel Climate Change) a hand-picked assembly of global of published scientific experts from across the world who worked for 4+ years to launch Kyoto Protocol would only come from non scientists!
    —————————————————————————————————————–
    My response covering the a,b,c
    [a]2015 – The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research http://www.scar.org/2015 Science Feature: Just a nudge could collapse West Antarctic Ice Sheet .Now; a new model shows just how this juggernaut could unfold. . Brines may support microbial Ecosystems and retain evidence of ancient climate change. … Although global warming is Causing Arctic ice to melt and glaciers around the world to…104,200 entries!
    [b] Short term events everyone knows this especially hot-air!
    [c] The Climate Group supporting evidence is;???????????????????????????????
    ———————————————————————————————————————
    The Climate Group wrote
    (6) The study of Australian climate by Sir Samuel Wadham concluded, that, “nowhere in the world [a] is there such a huge area of pastoral land of such erratic rainfall [b] as this pastoral country of Australia.” The study warns “the immediate effects of violent fluctuations of climate on the development of agriculture are considerable…” The recent 10 year drought (2013) followed by severe floods are symptomatic of these “violent fluctuations” of the Australian climate, which, however, are entirely of natural origin [c].
    My response covering a b c
    It is obvious the Knight has not travelled or worked in the horror interiors of other Nations PRC AU Mongolia ME. Each region suffered the ravages of “modern man” resulting in anthropogenic deserts, drought and poverty beyond belief.
    [a] Seafaring man over past 450 years stripped continents back to barren sand/rock deserts, and records such nations within “developing, Nations in transition or those most stripped “least developed nations”. I guess the Knight “took advice”.
    [b] In my 25 years part time hand research (Mitchell Library Special Editions authorized hand written accounts of European Explorers to inland) Mitchell, Sturt, Oxley, Cunningham Bros et al all reported that if the mass clearing continues; The surface flush water courses’ would gouge deep into the soft soil/clays; the regular rains to catchments would stall and be like Africa unpredictable!
    [c] Such “thoughts” not permitted in science or reports to attempt to change history / geography
    ———————————————————————————————————————The Climate Group published
    (8) Methane
    ‘Recent research shows that the increase in atmospheric methane levels since about 1940 can be explained by the dramatic increase in natural gas (fossil methane) use and leakage from badly managed transmission and distribution systems in the Northern Hemisphere.[a] With the improvement of these systems leakage has been reduced and there has only been a slight methane increase since 1990 – the level has in fact varied with El Nino and La Ninas [b] and methane from grazing animals has not made a measureable contribution [c]
    My response covering abc
    As I arrive at each thought tabled by the “author/s” I remain amazed that a responsible Publisher would Permit such “advertising” allow such mischievous (to be polite) material to reach our youth and public!
    [a] Methane the 2nd “greenhouse gas” before man and still from fermentation of tree droppings rice growing decaying vegetation and modern anthropogenic desert undigested vegetables/fruit. 2025 all parts of the Globe irresponsible Fracking mining erosion land use. Without question global industrialists
    [b]The author short on science geography Earth science La Nina an ocean current from Antarctic ocean flowing at Christmas time to west coast of south Americas maybe occasionally lost off Japan.
    [c] Methane dissolves/decays to CO2 within 4-6 yr

    What the industrialist don’t state The real nasty long life Greenhouse emissions unlike CO2 CH4 they can be captured and disposed at Low cost back to CO2 via stoichiometric hydrogen implosion, CO2 energy CO2.
    The Climate group wrote
    Conclusion by the Climate Study Group and their associate Fair Farming group
    ‘* Atmospheric CO2 is a component of the carbon cycle on which life on earth depends; it is not a threat to the planet, but a vital building block for most ecosystem resources.[a]

    *Mankind is simply returning CO2 to the atmosphere whence it came. The burning of fossil fuels only returns to the atmosphere CO2 that was there in the first place, and which was accommodated without runaway temperature change in the geological past. CO2 is essential
    for nearly all life on earth and thus is not a pollutant at any forecast level in the atmosphere.[b]

    *At present, a historically low level of CO2 is limiting plant growth when more food is required for a growing world population. Australia has the environment and capacity to be a significant
    clean food producer and is already a major exporter of meat and cereals. From the perspective of food production, a carbon tax and an ETS to suppress greenhouse gas emissions are both equally
    counterproductive and inappropriate’. [c]

    *And: ‘The hypothesis that carbon dioxide generated by mankind can cause dangerous global warming lacks compelling evidence. The hypothesis is not sustained. The historical evidence demonstrates reducing CO2 emissions as a precautionary measure will have very little, if any, influence on the timing, direction or extent of climate change’.[d]
    My response include a b c d
    I have 6 year old grandchildren versed in Science TV and Computer science who are offended like me that the Author and associates expect because a lead newspaper publishes its true.

    [a] Gases are used as insulation. CO2 natural levels (before modern Man) allowed the sunlight and heat to reach Earth! Too little and we cook along with all life. Too much build up then the suns heat bounces into space.
    [b] Clearly the Author/s again without verifiable irrevocable science data assumed you are without education common-sense. Without modern-man Earth with the exception of volcanoes emitting NOX to the atmosphere via the Sun’s radiation becoming essential Nitrogen for all living matter to breathe, nature and cycle maintained equilibrium. Nature at the moment is trying to adjust to return mass CO2 back as carbon to the soil.
    [c] Now clearly the Author/s and associates clearly prove they have zero knowledge of the CO2-C cycles. 96% of Earths vegetation takes biomass Carbon from the soil not atmosphere. Google et al “CO2 increase adverse to leaf photosynthesis”. Following mass volcanic eruptions the small array of C4 vegetation that sequesters CO2 and via root manure the soil soil-carbon and element secured CO2 in Earth not CO2 above Earth!
    [d] The following graph the data from an array of expert sources replicating similar to below!
    —————————————————————————————————————
    My summary
    The Global emitting industries supporting UNFCCC Kyoto goal; lowering CO2 are committed to offsetting their CO2e emissions. They are committed to pay the UN Secretary $20.00 tonne CO2 to offset their emissions. Equally serious Nations, Members of UNFCCC in concert with UN SG multi Billions of dollars to lower CO2 build-up! UK, USA, EU, PRC, AU ME report they have 20-60 years of soil to grow food. UN report 40% of soil loss.

    PRC is applying the following science protocol to lower CO2 desertification drought poverty.
    Well planned science-nature based lowering CO2 adds to nations economies

    UN science reports anthropogenic CO2 build up has reached annual 40,000,000,000 tonnes CO2 build up in need to be sequestered back as C (Carbon carbon-soil) The protocol
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbI8YZmBP8g

    With many decades involvement in land land-use, UN panels, advising Nations in business opportunities of Climate Change, leading teaching reversing 200million hectares of desert to
    Grow soil soil-carbon lowering 8billion Tonnes CO2 all must be based on science fact,

    Based on established science/nature lowering the CO2e (equivalent [the anthropogenic gases] reversing the build-up is the greatest business opportunity and responsibility of all time!
    The following are signatures to the Government submission
    The Climate Study Group; and The Fair Farming Group common directors
    John Chambers BCom, MBA, CA, FAICD, FFin;
    Andrew Miller BBus;
    Richard Morgan AM BSc (Ag), BCom, FAIAST (Convenor);
    Bob Officer AM BAgSc, MAgEc (UNE), MBA, PhD (Chicago), FASSA, SFFin;
    Mark Rayner BSc (Hons), ChemEng (UNSW), FTSE, FAusIMM, FIEA, FAICD;
    Graham Sellars-Jones BCom
    Consultant to the Group, Australian physicist Tom Quirk MSc, MA, DPhil (Oxon), SMP (Harv).
    End; without prejudice Robert Vincin leading in lowering CO2 to grow soil soil-carbon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbI8YZmBP8g

    215

  • #
    itsnotco2

    It sounds like each country represented in Paris will just be making a “pledge” regarding their own emissions, so why there has to be such an expensive conference I don’t know. At least with pledges, countries can drop out one by one in the future when physicists confirm that force fields like gravity form an autonomous temperature gradient, so there’s no “33 degrees of warming” to be done mostly by water vapor making rain forests 50 degrees hotter. The temperature gradient is already proven to exist with experiments with centrifugal force, so we’re getting there, because gravity acts in the same way on molecules between collisions.

    30

  • #
    pat

    29 Nov: AP: CLIMATE COUNTDOWN: Gates sparks multinational plan to spend billions on clean energy tech
    By SYLVIE CORBET, KARL RITTER and SETH BORENSTEIN
    Microsoft founder and philanthropist Bill Gates, President Barack Obama and French President Francois Hollande will launch a joint initiative on Monday after a diplomatic push in recent weeks ahead of the Paris climate conference.
    A key goal is to bring down the cost of cleaner energy. At least 19 governments and 28 leading world investors, including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, billionaires George Soros and Saudi Prince Alaweed bin Talal, and Jack Ma of China’s Alibaba, have signed on so far…
    The business leaders are making their pledges conditional on governments also pledging more money, said a former U.S. government official who is familiar with the plan…
    The money would focus on research and development of technologies such as energy storage, which could make better use of clean power from wind and solar regardless of the vagaries of weather…
    It also remains to be seen how much of this money will involve repackaging old promises, and whether the future funding will be approved in U.S. or other budgets…
    http://www.startribune.com/calm-before-the-storm-as-paris-prepares-for-climate-summit/357837541/

    29 Nov: Motley Fool: Travis Hoium: Why Growth Is the Enemy of Solar Stocks
    It may sound strange, but growth has led to the downfall of most stocks in the solar industry.
    But time after time, the companies that grow the fastest have been abysmal investments. Suntech Power, LDK Solar, Yingli Green Energy, and SunEdison are just a few of the former industry highfliers that have gone from darling status to bankruptcy, or that teeter on the verge of financial insolvency. They also provide a similar story of growth, debt, and massive losses that couldn’t be overcome by even more growth…
    Debt isn’t necessarily a bad thing for growth companies, but solar is different than most industries. Falling costs create a larger market for the solar industry, but they also create challenges in making enough money to pay off debt…
    Growth seems like it would be a big advantage in the solar industry, but too often it’s been a road to ruin for both companies and investors. Using debt to fund growth built on falling costs and the volatility of businesses built on financial engineering have played a major role in the demise of some of the industry’s biggest players…
    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/11/29/why-growth-is-the-enemy-of-solar-stocks.aspx

    21

  • #
    pat

    29 Nov: Financial Times: India seen as obstacle to meaningful climate deal in Paris
    Victor Mallet in New Delhi
    India’s vulnerability to changes in the climate makes it all the more extraordinary that its government is seen as an obstacle to a successful deal, just as previous administrations were accused of obstructing world trade negotiations.
    Two weeks ago in Turkey, India blocked efforts by the G20 countries to prepare for an ambitious climate accord. John Kerry, US secretary of state, recently praised China but expressed concern about the “challenge” of India and its desire to burn more dirty coal for electricity…
    President Barack Obama is to meet President Xi Jinping of China and Narendra Modi, the Indian prime minister, in Paris on Monday to try to ensure a successful summit, and Mr Modi has already promised co-operation. “We need power but we will not create problems for the world,” said the Indian prime minister…
    In 2012, its annual per capita carbon dioxide emissions were just 1.6 tonnes per person, compared with 16.4 tonnes per person for the US and 7.1 tonnes per person for China. By 2030 its emissions will still amount to only about 5 tonnes per person per year — half the level in China…
    India does not deny that its greenhouse gas emissions will increase dramatically in absolute terms — from 1.48bn tonnes of CO2 equivalent annually in 2005 to more than 7bn in 2030 — but says that is because of a growing population and the need to provide electricity to the 300m Indians who lack it today, and the requirement for new coal-fired power stations to supplement other sources of electricity. Half of India’s extra emissions are expected to come from coal.
    An acceptable deal — “just” and “equitable” are the words used by India — would have to give India the “carbon space” to develop as other countries did before it. “Either we remain poor or you need to tell us a paradigm by which people can have a better quality of life with lower energy use,” says Mr Mathur…
    The sticking point is more likely to be India’s insistence that signatories reaffirm a pledge of $100bn a year in financial flows from rich countries to poor ones from 2020…
    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/bfb36a16-94e5-11e5-bd82-c1fb87bef7af.html#axzz3svzePhPz

    31

  • #
    pat

    30 Nov: Asian Age: Pawan Bali: India questions OECD climate fund report
    Economic affairs secretary Shaktikanta Das said here that at the recent Lima World Bank/IMF meetings, India had raised questions on the correctness of the recent Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development report that claimed that significant progress had already been made on a road map for $100 billion annually in climate-change financing by 2020.
    The Prime Minister expressed his views in his foreword to a discussion paper titled “Climate Change Finance, Analysis of a Recent OECD Report: Some Credible Facts Needed” prepared by the Climate Change Finance Unit, Department of Economic Affairs.
    The secretary said the conclusion of the review by the unit is that the “OECD report appears to have overstated progress … paper suggests that much more work has to be done. We need to establish more credible, accurate, and verifiable numbers on the true size of the mobilisation of climate change finance commitments and flows from developed to developing countries.”…
    The study by the OECD, along with the Climate Policy Initiative in October, had claimed that rich nations spurred $61.8 billion in public and private funds in 2014 to help poor countries combat and adapt to climate change…
    However, the paper prepared by India said OECD numbers “were derived on self-reported basis from self-interested players, and open to ‘gaming’ and exaggeration”. “Meaningful independent verification was impossible since only aggregate numbers were reported — with lack of transparency. No serious consultations were done with the developing countries themselves,” it said.
    The discussion paper said there “are some issues as to why there was so much rush to produce a document with inflated numbers, what has been termed as ‘green-washing’ of finance”, It added: “At this time, the actual cross-border flows from 17 special climate funds since their inception are some $2.2 billion. This was reported by relatively independent and credible sources as disbursements of climate change finance from developed to developing countries. This is far from the $100 billion a year goal.”
    http://www.asianage.com/india/india-questions-oecd-climate-fund-report-565

    31

  • #
    pat

    29 Nov: Politico: Oren Cass: Why the Paris climate deal is meaningless
    (Oren Cass is a Manhattan Institute senior fellow)
    But the more seriously you take the need to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, the angrier you should be about the plan for Paris. With so much political capital and so many legacies staked to achieving an “agreement” — any agreement — negotiators have opted to pursue one worth less than…well, certainly less than the cost of a two-week summit in a glamorous European capital…
    In fact, emissions reductions are barely on the table at all. Instead, the talks are rigged to ensure an agreement is reached regardless of how little action countries plan to take. The developing world, projected to account for four-fifths of all carbon-dioxide emissions this century, will earn applause for what amounts to a promise to stay on their pre-existing trajectory of emissions-intensive growth.
    Here’s how the game works…ETC
    After all this, the final submissions are not enforceable, and carry no consequences beyond “shame” for noncompliance — a fact bizarrely taken for granted by all involved…
    And therein lies the sticking point on which negotiations actually center: “climate finance.”…
    The issue will dominate the Paris talks. The INDCs covering actual emissions reductions are subjective, discretionary, and thus essentially unnegotiable. Not so the cash. Developing countries are expecting more than $100 billion in annual funds from this agreement or they will walk away…
    An echo chamber of activist groups and media outlets stands ready to rubber-stamp the final agreement as “historic,” validating the vast reservoirs of political capital spent on the exercise…
    From a political perspective, perhaps this outcome represents “victory” for environmental activists launching their next fundraising campaign or for a president building his “legacy.”…
    The climate negotiators have no clothes. If making that observation and refusing to go along causes some embarrassment, those parading around naked have only themselves to blame.
    http://www.politico.eu/article/paris-climate-deal-is-meaningless-cop21-emissions-china-obama/

    41

  • #
    Sunray

    Thank you Jo, the World Media, particularly ours, is a treacherous disgrace.

    60

    • #
      ianl8888

      Well, yes – but the MSM is not really the problem

      The issue comes down to WHY do the bulk of the populace believe whatever the MSM tells them to … 10 contradictory things before breakfast, no problem

      My answer to that question is that most people refuse to believe that they could be lied to like that, and lied to so consistently. The rarely spoken defence is: “Why would they lie to us ?”

      Understanding that still presents no resolution to the issue, of course. Lord Waffle knows this as well as anyone, so he disseminates absolute waffle for the MSM and does treachery to the public in private. Just watch the views of people he now appoints to various key bureaucratic and quango positions. There is absolutely no stopping it

      The public are to be taxed, managed and manipulated, never represented

      40

      • #
        Dennis

        Ian, a good example of people accepting deception is the PM Gillard speech under the cover of Parliamentary privilege, alleging that Opposition Leader Abbott was a misogynist. She was cheered by her feminists fans and other, many ABC and other media.

        The truth is that it was a complete fabrication, in fact it was a second-hand spin doctor marketing style hyperbole and puffery deception that the creator, UK Labour Spin Doctor John McTiernan who worked for Gillard Labor after being brought to Australia on a 457 Visa, had first used against the UK Opposition Leader David Cameron, now PM Cameron.

        McTiernan wrote Gillard’s speech and they rehoused it together to achieve maximum drama and impact. A man creation and the women cheered her for making his speech.

        Many Australians swallowed the lies and continue to believe what they were told.

        41

      • #
        Yonniestone

        I observe another factor is at work concerning people ‘believing’, over the years I’ve managed to teach some people to take a sceptical alternate view of what is presented as facts through the MSM and internet, very often the person quickly develops a BS filter and can successfully research for alternate answers.

        What happens next is very common also, the person will admit to knowing other explanations are there but it’s simply too much to be burdened with as they have a life to live, I can understand this mindset as we all engage in that pursuit of happiness in some form and one person cannot heal the world, but I consider the major issues that definitely will hinder that persons pursuit should be considered very important.

        40

      • #
        Sunray

        Thank you.

        40

    • #
      Dennis

      I think we are dealing with an octopus … Advertising as news. It’s very skilfully done.

      The methods of seducing the media, the ingenuity of the spin has reached the point where we, as a general public, have never been lied to by such sophisticated means as now.

      John le Carre

      50

  • #
    pat

    plenty of people will be feeling cynical about a GLOBAL WARMING summit:

    UK weather: Britain braced for 20 INCHES of snow as forecasters …
    Mirror.co.uk-20 hours ago

    30 Nov: UK Express: Nathan Rao: MONTH OF SNOW AND STORMS set to batter Britain in run up to Christmas
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/622946/HEAVY-SNOW-FORECAST-Storm-Clodagh-month-rain-wind-Christmas-weather

    28 Nov: UK Mirror: Chris Richards: UK weather: Incredible ‘winter wonderland’ NASA photo shows huge storm bringing weeks of snow to Britain
    This incredible NASA photo shows the huge storm about to engulf Britain in two weeks of snow…
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/uk-weather-incredible-winter-wonderland-6917853

    29 Nov: Accuweather: Snow to Blanket Areas From Denver to Minneapolis Early This Week
    The new round of winterlike precipitation could hinder back-to-work and school activities for millions in part of the north-central United States…

    31

  • #
    Owen Morgan

    I am not convinced by the usefulness of this advertisement. What did it actually do to grab attention? The alarmists rely on people’s having a desperately short attention span. They put a preposterous, scare-mongering statistic in the headline, with a Polar Bear on an ice floe just below. If the verbiage south of the Polar Bear is in Breton, most people won’t even notice.

    That’s the problem here. People won’t be drawn into the text, excellent as it is, if there is nothing to attract their attention in the first place.

    40

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Congratulations to Owen for being skeptical about the worth of the advertisement, along with Johnny and Leo Morgan.
      It would have been more impressive if any of you had found fault with the substance of the article rather than the style.

      There are at least three gross errors in the advertisement, but after 166 comments nobody has noticed them. If it isn’t bullet-proof, if it isn’t perfect, it will only be exploited for its weaknesses and all the true parts will be ignored. Only when there is no error in the argument can there be any hope of the warmists being forced to tackle the central issues head-on. The Lavoisier Group is handing more ammunition to the warmists with every fallacy they write.
      However, on balance, I guesstimate they have fired more ammunition effectively than they’ve given away, so it’s not a total loss.

      Actually not even our regular warmist has noticed these three errors yet, but given time even the donkey should catch on.

      10

  • #
    Dennis

    Lies, fabrications, character assassinations, reputational rapes, point scoring, axe grinding, sneering, smearing and generalised weaselling have become standard fare in the media.

    Paul Sheehan
    Author
    The Electronic Whorehouse

    40

  • #
    Jim

    Thanks Jo for a great posting. The Advert. should be required reading in every school and centre of learning, every lunchroom and office throughout the country.

    41

  • #
    pat

    28 Nov: LA Times: Shelby Grad: California freeze: Minus-11 degrees in Sierra amid snow and ice
    A deep freeze in California’s Sierra is continuing, with one spot east of Redding recording minus-11 degrees…
    A series of winter storms have dumped large amounts of snow in the Sierra, with some places receiving more than 20 inches. The NWS said another storm could move in by Thursday…
    A freeze warning was in place in the Sacramento Valley for Sunday. Officials warned residents to protect outdoor plants and pipes…
    http://www.latimes.com/local/weather/la-me-ln-california-freeze-sierras-20151128-story.html

    29 Nov: Climatedepot: Marc Morano: Skeptical Climate Documentary Set to Rock UN Climate Summit – ‘Climate Hustle’ To Have Red Carpet Premiere in Paris
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: President Obama & World Leaders to Be Greeted By New Film Debuting in Paris
    Gala Paris red carpet premiere for new “Climate Hustle” skeptical documentary
    Cinema du Pantheon, December 7, 7:30 PM
    (Sorbonne, Paris) CFACT will hold the world premiere of its long-awaited Climate Hustle skeptical documentary film at an invitation-only red carpet event in Paris during the UN’s COP 21 international summit on climate change.
    Featuring interviews and comments from more than 30 renowned scientists and climate experts, Climate Hustle lays out compelling evidence that devastates the global warming scare. Film host Marc Morano, founder and publisher of CFACT’s award-winning Climate Depot news and information service, leads viewers on a fact-finding and often times hilarious journey through the propaganda-laced world of “climate change” claims…
    David Rothbard, CFACT president and executive producer of the film says, “Climate Hustle is the most important climate documentary since Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Gore’s film kicked off a decade of scaremongering junk science. CFACT’s film debunks the scare and clears the way for a return to sound science and rational debate.”
    Nationally syndicated columnist Cal Thomas calls Climate Hustle “tremendous” and says “anyone who still believes in ‘climate change’ after watching this film needs the type of reprogramming given to cult members.”
    Climate Hustle, a production of CFACT, was fully funded by the support of roughly 1,500 citizen supporters. More information is available at http://www.ClimateHustle.com/press
    http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/11/29/skeptical-climate-documentary-set-to-rock-un-climate-summit-film-to-have-red-carpet-premiere-in-paris/

    41

  • #
    pat

    29 Nov: Politico: White House reins in expectations for Paris
    A deal is likely to come from the climate summit, but it won’t lend itself to heroic narratives.
    By Edward-Isaac Dovere and Andrew Restuccia; Sara Stefanini contributed to this report.
    The White House’s dilemma: making it seem big enough to match the time and legacy aspirations he has invested in it…
    Even the best-case scenario won’t make sense to most people — there’s no easy headline or heroic narrative to be had in a patchwork of nonbinding pledges by 200 nations that may or may not eventually limit the rise in global temperatures to around 2 degrees Celsius…
    Aides are already dialing down expectations…
    “If you believe that we really have to do something quickly, it’s going to be a disappointment probably,” said Harlan Watson, who was a U.S. climate diplomat during the George W. Bush administration. But he added, “You’re talking about turning around the whole global economy. That’s going to take some time.”
    And White House staffers aren’t even sure how much they’ll want to be talking about the climate talks at all…
    But developing countries like India could derail the agreement if wealthy nations don’t fork over enough money to help them transition off coal. Activists worry that fossil-fuel-dependent nations like Saudi Arabia could sabotage the deal. And island nations might demand a level of ambition on which other countries aren’t prepared to deliver.
    “We have this opportunity,” (Todd) Stern said. “We have this moment.”
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/climate-change-paris-conference-216225

    42

  • #
    pat

    re the Bill Gates/George Soros etc group – AP: CLIMATE COUNTDOWN: Gates sparks multinational plan to spend billions on clean energy tech – see comment #51 above:

    the full team includes Bezos, Branson etc etc:

    Breakthrough Energy Coalition – Who we are
    http://www.breakthroughenergycoalition.com/en/who.html?/#/jeff-bezos

    41

  • #
    pat

    30 Nov: news.com.au: Turnbull to boost climate investment
    By Paul Osborne, AAP Senior Political Writer,
    (OPENING LINE)Malcolm Turnbull ***faces pressure to consider an emissions trading scheme, as he is poised to pledge a doubling of investment in clean energy technology…
    However, a Climate Change Authority draft report cast doubt on the target and called for an ETS to be considered…
    Acting chairman Stuart Allinson said it was time to take a fresh look at all climate policy “including the various forms of emissions trading schemes”…
    http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/no-perfect-deal-from-climate-summit-hunt/news-story/76e9a5cb036255a4157e5975f170a975

    “faces pressure” for an ETS from this guy!

    The Wheeler Centre: Stuart Allinson
    Stuart is a co-founder and director of Exigency, an independent, specialist energy and carbon market advisory firm. He is a member of the Coalition Advisory Council on Climate Policy.
    Stuart has a broad-based energy and utilities background, ranging from oil and gas exploration and production to incentive-based economic regulation, primarily in European markets…
    He emigrated to Australia in 1997 to consult on various energy market reforms and corporatisations. Stuart left Ernst & Young in 2003, to establish Exigency, through which he has continued to provide specialist advice and strategic consulting to clients in the area of energy and carbon policy…

    appointed to the Climate Authority by ex-Goldman Sachs Turnbull:

    7 Oct: ReutersCarbonPulse: Australia’s Turnbull govt names new Climate Change Authority chair
    The new board members are:
    Stuart Allinson, CEO of BidEnergy, etc

    30 Nov: Sky News: ETS must be part of a ‘policy toolkit’
    An emissions trading scheme needs to be part of a fresh look at policies to cut carbon pollution, the Climate Change Authority says…
    An ETS could take the form of cap and trade, baseline and credit and emissions intensity schemes, alongside other policies such as support for renewable energy and energy efficiency, mandatory emissions standards and low emissions technology…
    http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics/federal/2015/11/30/ets-must-be-part-of-a–policy-toolkit-.html

    unbelievable.

    31

  • #
    Tig

    Was the advert in ThE Australian today, 30 Nov? I bought one specially but couldn’t see it.

    Sorry. I should have said The Weekend Australian. – Jo

    10

  • #
    pat

    30 Nov: UK Express: Oli Smith: Global warming FARCE: Overwhelming majority of Britons think climate change is FAKE
    MORE than four in five Britons are not convinced global warming is taking place – as nearly 150 world leaders prepare to spend hundreds of BILLIONS of pounds to cut emissions.
    A staggering 85% of Britons questioned remain skeptical when it comes to climate change, according to Express.co.uk polls results revealed on the eve of the biggest environmental summit ever organised.
    After 14,491 votes were cast in a number of questions, 12,421 pledged their scepticism about climate change, with answers ranging from being undecided to firm denial global warming is happening…
    One question to voters found only six per cent agreed when asked whether humans definitely cause climate change.
    The majority – 51 per cent – said any change in temperatures were down to “the sun and changing cycles” rather than fossil fuels…ETC
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/622910/Global-warming-farce-majority-Britons-climate-change-fake-UN-summit

    51

  • #
    redress

    Just a question Jo as to where the advert was run in the Australian…..
    was it only in the online paper or was it also in the print version????
    because if it was also to run in the print version, it did not appear in my copy.

    10

  • #
    David Maddison

    The real tragedy of Hurricane Katrina was the failure if the authorities to properly build or manage the flood management infrastructure. Had that been properly done there would not have been a disaster.

    30

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Given the attitude that lets New Orleans call itself, “The Big Easy,” I think they would have manufactured a complaint if thee wasn’t a real one. Corruption there is legion and has been the subject of more than one expose done on TV and even the subject of several movies.

      The mayor, Ray Nagan, was hiding in his office closet (well, his office anyway) during all the Katrina trouble and made not even a pretense of leadership. Yet after the thing was supposedly over, he was elected mayor again. But of course, everything that “went wrong” was Bush’s fault. A better example of a total screwup by local officials who, let’s face it, had the first response load squarely on their backs because they were there and were the only ones who could act immediately. They were not prepared, hid and ran from the responsibility and yet it was Bush who got the finger pointed at him for FEMA’s inability to be there the day before the rains came and the water rose to prevent it all with some kind of Federal Black Magic.

      What can you do with such a city?

      Some people get what they bring on themselves and New Orleans during Katrina is a classic example.

      20

  • #
    pat

    politicians control the climate…and we all believe in CAGW:

    30 Nov: ABC 7.30 Report: ‘Robust’ review system needed for global emissions targets: Kevin Rudd
    KEVIN RUDD, FORMER PRIME MINISTER: Well Leigh, I think going into Copenhagen we had perhaps a three or four out of 10 prospect of success. Perhaps this time it’s more like six or seven out of 10 and the core reason is the posture of two or three of the major global players has now changed. Key among those is of course China, which has now embraced its own national and global responsibilities. The United States is also more proactive than it was in 2009, but there’s still a question mark about the posture to be adopted by India. So for those reasons, I think we are in a different space to that which we confronted back in ’09.
    LEIGH SALES: Lots to unpack there, but first of all, why has China become more cooperative in this area?
    KEVIN RUDD: Well the key reason for that is China has deduced from its own national self-interest point of view that a combination of carbon pollution in its major cities is unacceptable to the Chinese people, and on top of that, they recognise the emerging impacts of climate change, also from carbon pollution, the impact on their watertable, the impact more broadly on the availability of water supply in northern China, etc. So for national interest reasons, China’s position has changed 180 degrees…
    KEVIN RUDD: Well India now is a significant emitter, but if we look at the trajectory out for the next 15 years, it’ll be much more so…
    At the same time, we can’t say to the Indian people, “Stay in poverty.” That’s just unacceptable and unjust. The global effort, through research and development, but also other forms of direct assistance to our friends in India, must be for them to enable this industrial transformation of their economy in a much less carbon intensive way and a much more clean energy way than has been the case either for China or the rest of us from the West…
    If you put together all the commitments that have been made by people so far and did the mathematics, you end up still with a temperature increased by century’s end of between 2.6 to 3.4 degrees. That’s still far too high. So what you need therefore built into this Paris agreement is a regular review mechanism, say five years, whereby the parties come back and review their commitments with the object of enhancing them and I hope and believe that that will be part of this Paris agreement…
    ***But I think the science is now disseminating. It’s no longer seen as some sort of Western conspiracy. The planet doesn’t lie. The Earth doesn’t lie. What we spoke about robustly in the science in 2009 in Australia is now not partially accepted around the world, but virtually universally accepted and therefore people are seeing the consequences in their own countries of not acting…
    http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4362996.htm

    00

  • #
    pat

    so easy for ABC to allow Rudd to spout rubbish about people universally accepting the CAGW nonsense, when ABC has not reported:

    27 Nov: BBC: Matt McGrath: COP21: Public support for tough climate deal ‘declines’
    Public support for a strong global deal on climate change has declined, according to a poll carried out in 20 countries.
    Only four now have majorities in favour of their governments setting ambitious targets at a global conference in Paris.
    In a similar poll before the Copenhagen meeting in 2009, eight countries had majorities favouring tough action.
    The poll has been provided to the BBC by research group GlobeScan…
    The findings will make sober reading for global political leaders, who will gather in Paris next week for the start of the United Nations climate conference, known as COP21…
    The number rating climate change as a very serious issue in richer countries declined significantly from 2009, while support for strong action at the Paris conference has only grown in three of the 20 countries polled…
    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34900474

    Australian MSM is toxic..across the board.

    10

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    When has reason ever prevailed over fanaticism?

    20

  • #
    Simon

    Climate models usually estimate surface temperatures.
    You do realise that satellites measure radiance? Temperature is a proxy estimate that has to be calibrated. Why aren’t actual surface temperatures included (GISS,HadCRUT4 etc)? Weather balloons don’t measure surface temperatures either (duh). You are comparing apples with oranges with pears.
    You do realise that the sun was dimmer and the continents were different in the Cambrian?
    Great cherry-picking:
    ‘No measurable global increase in the rate of annual sea level rise over the period 1993 to 2010.’
    ‘… measurements show no increase in temperature over the past 17 years.’
    which is false if you include 2015 data.

    10

  • #

    What date did this appear in The Australian?

    00