JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

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



Archives

Weekend Unthreaded

….

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.3/10 (12 votes cast)
Weekend Unthreaded, 8.3 out of 10 based on 12 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/qyk435a

79 comments to Weekend Unthreaded

  • #
    el gordo

    Lukewarmer Stealth

    ‘The Federal Government has lifted a ban on wind farm investment first introduced by former prime minister Tony Abbott.

    ‘Environment Minister Greg Hunt issued new advice to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), requesting a focus on “offshore wind technologies”.

    ‘Under the new mandate, signed by Mr Hunt and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann on December 3, the $10 billion fund will be allowed to invest in wind projects, as long as they incorporate “emerging and innovative” methods.’

    Weatherzone

    91

    • #
      PeterS

      So the scam continues to grow, not diminish despite the apparent increasing skepticism by the public. Not surprised really. China has announced it will introduce their ETS in 2017 covering some 10,000 companies to start with. The scam is growing big time.

      40

    • #
      Raven

      . . requesting a focus on “offshore wind technologies”.

      Offshore you say? What a good idea.
      Let’s install them just off Point Piper.

      20

  • #
    Retired now

    I get tired of MSMs left wing bias.

    What are people’s favourite websites or blogs that give a centrist or right wing version of news or discussion on philosophical ideas?

    Jo, here of course and some of the other climate blogs, but what about other more general blogs?

    Mods, if I’m not to ask for lots of links, just delete this post.

    70

    • #
      Rodzki

      Hi Retired now. My favourites are (besides climate sites):
      Andrew Bolt
      Tim Blair
      Michael Smith News
      Catallaxy Files
      and for an overseas point of view:
      Mark Steyn (US and Canada)
      James Delingpole (UK and Europe)
      The Rebel Media (Canada)

      101

      • #
        TdeF

        From Catalaxxy files..

        Eyebrows were raised after the Turnbull government shifted its stance overnight when Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop signed up to a New Zealand-led declaration at the Paris climate summit backing the use of international carbon markets in tackling climate change.

        Former prime minister Tony Abbott shunned the use of international carbon permits, once saying that: “money that shouldn’t be going offshore into dodgy carbon farms in Equatorial Guinea and Kazakhstan”.

        But in a speech on Wednesday, Ms Bishop said: “We recognise that international carbon markets are a key part of the global effort to reduce emissions”.

        Turnbull will bring in Golman Sachs’ Emissions Trading Scheme. Does anyone doubt it? Does anyone in the Liberal or National Party want this, except Malcolm? Does he have a massive conflict of interest? Has the Liberal party gone mad?

        210

        • #
          TdeF

          Let me be the first to predict the next election will be Julie Bishop vs Tanya Plibersek. A deal was done. Malcolm gets his ETS and heads off to Goldman Sachs and then the UN. Labor will replace Bill Shorten, as they have always done, even with the last two sitting Prime Ministers. Australia is being stitched up by the triumverate who assassinated Abbott. A carbon tax, again. Et tu Bishop.

          141

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Like Turnbull, John Key is also an ex-Trader, and they know a lot of the past and present players.

          It is an exclusive club, with a unique way of of looking at the world.

          30

        • #
          Leigh

          Once an ” investment banker” ………
          I said as much a month ago. Blind Freddy could see as much at what Turnbul is up to.
          His public share portfolio tells you he’ll personally reap the profits of another CO/2 tax or what ever label one chooses.
          I wonder when the nationals will invoke the “in writing” agreement not to change the coalitions global scam policys.
          The Australian people at the last election clearly told these politicians that support the scam that no way known will we support a “breathing tax”.
          But still they persist.
          So where’s that leave us with both partys rolling us over the 44?

          20

    • #
      Matty

      They came seeking concrete steps. The climate movement arel leaving in concrete boots.
      Is it in the way of hysterics who can’t face reality to cover for failure with delusions of success ?

      Rafe Champion wrote a few books on Popperism

      20

    • #
      Catamon

      What are people’s favourite websites or blogs that give a centrist or right wing version of news or discussion on philosophical ideas?

      http://theredandtheblue.org/

      This one is pompous, but fun. :) Gives a bit of an insight ito the RMNJobbie wing of the Libs.

      21

    • #
      Xirrad

      A really great webite/youtube channel you should check out is The Corbett Report. Independent journalist James Corbett gives incredibly lucid and educational reports on all current world matters from an apolitical perspective. Highly recommended, especially from a climate skeptic’s perspective.

      10

  • #
    AndyG55

    I have a theory……

    As CO2 has risen, real data shows that many climate variables have actually stabilised.

    Hurricanes down, droughts down… etc etc…

    As CO2 levels have risen, temperatures have flattened to ZERO trend

    heck, everything pretty much benign for several decades….

    Look at Venus.. 97% CO2 and the atmosphere barely changes (percentagewise)

    ——

    So my theory, supported by much data, is that raised CO2 levels actually help stabilise the atmosphere as well as providing a significant increase in the Earth’s biosphere.

    hummm.. thinking…..Maybe its that biosphere that helps stabilise the planet’s atmosphere.

    152

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Like in the Mesozoic?

      Warmth, wet, strong vegatative growth supporting lots of large animals with small brains (Clive Palmer excepted) ?

      51

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        … lots of large animals with small brains …

        And when that experiment failed, Nature tried lots of small animals with large brains, which hasn’t turned out very well either.

        40

  • #

    And while (some) humans fret about global warming, nature just keeps rolling on. Not one of our King Parrots, Rosellas, Kookaburras, Black Cockatoos, Gang Gangs, Wattlebirds, Magpies or any other indicator of catastrophe seems to be concerned, other than if the bird feeder is empty. Given the latter, ensues a cacophony of squawking and flapping until concerns are assuaged.

    191

  • #
    pat

    ***the terrifying word:

    13 Dec: ZeeNews India: AFP: Tears, cheers and selfies as climate pact sealed in Paris
    The mood in the room was celebratory even before the emotional approval of the accord, with broad smiles, back-slapping, hugs and handshakes.
    Former vice president Al Gore, who co-won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on climate change, posed for pictures and selfies with admirers…
    It turned out the negotiators, bleary after two sleepless night spent hammering out the agreement had left a few mistakes in the text. One was a whopper.A key section of the text on emissions-cutting obligations — erroneously — said rich nations “shall” take the lead in undertaking economy-wide absolute emission reduction targets.
    In a complex legal agreement such as the Paris accord, “shall” carries a more onerous level of responsibility. It was supposed to say “should”, which does not have the same binding nature.
    Pascal Canfin, a senior climate advisor at the World Resources Institute, wrote on Twitter the difference could have forced the Paris deal before the US congress for approval.
    For the accord`s boosters, that possibility was ***terrifying as the Republican-dominated legislature would have — with near-certainty — rejected the agreement…
    http://zeenews.india.com/news/eco-news/tears-cheers-and-selfies-as-climate-pact-sealed-in-paris_1833884.html

    80

  • #
    el gordo

    Computer simulations show a strong link between the subtropical ridge (STR) and patterns of intensification which (according to Matt Cawood who spoke to Dr Timbal of BoM) ‘closely match the rise and fall of average global temperatures throughout the 20th Century.’

    And here’s me thinking it had something to do with CO2.

    62

    • #
      Another Ian

      el gordo

      Matt Cawood quoting the BOM

      Did that send your bs meter around to “makers name”?

      42

      • #
        el gordo

        Cawood has a green bias, nevertheless what Timbal said is accurate and because the freelance scribe doesn’t understand the science he missed a scoop.

        This is one of the best kept secrets at BoM, the STR is a prime mover in the system.

        10

    • #
      Leigh

      EG, this closely preceeds the “rise” of global temperatures.
      Coincidence or “rocket science”?

      ““In 2012, we realized that the data offered by NASA was not the same as that offered in 2010.  The data had been altered.  If in 2010 someone had, for instance, looked up the data for Palma de Mallorca, they would have seen a cooling of .0076 degrees.  But in 2012 it suddenly showed a temperature increase of .0074 degrees.  This is not a one-off.” – See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2015/12/12/german-scientist-researchers-fiddling-with-temperature-data/#.dpuf

      41

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    This weekend is a chilly anniversary.
    It is now exactly 6 years since this photo was taken in Copenhagen:
    http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/DENMARK-CLIMATE-SUMMIT/846e80459ce24c8c9f0b79118c2d0b0e/137/0

    I’m just gonna call it as I see it.

    • If an 8 degree rise in Greenland average temperatures between the end of glaciation 12000 years ago and the beginning of the Holocene did not wipe out the polar bears, an extra 1.4 degrees won’t kill them.

    • Campaigns to save polar bears and to regulate hunting of them has allowed the bears population to bounce back to 26,000 individuals, with no significant cooling or CO2 cutbacks involved.

    • The fact is that sea ice is not a stable habitat for polar bears, and the extent of sea ice in summer is not the limiting factor in polar bear feeding because they need the most food during Spring. All the action is over by summer.

    Polar Bears need us to get to 350ppm??
    What most Polar Bears really want you to do is lay down and give them an easy meal. They are carnivores.

    Polar bears have never had it so good.
    Correction, most Polar Bears have never had it so good. What this Polar Bear needs us to do is remove the tight tracking collar from her that some heartless scientist has obviously attached so carelessly as to cause bleeding.

    Claiming to save the polar bears while leaving one bleeding in the snow. It’s another data point in support of the theory that the climate crisis raconteurs are motivated mainly by the money not the environment.

    83

  • #

    Let me show you the meaning of the word ….. futility.

    Australia’s total emissions of (all) greenhouse gases comes in at close to 450 Million tons a year.

    Huge eh!

    If Australia was to reduce its emissions to, umm, ….. Zero, you know, nothing, no emissions of CO2 or any equivalent, completely and utterly zero.

    That would be totally and utterly wiped out by China in, umm, 30 weeks.

    210 Days.

    Got that!

    Two hundred and ten days.

    Makes you think, doesn’t it.

    Tony.

    151

    • #
      TdeF

      To be clearer, the increase in China’s CO2 emissions.

      90

    • #
      bobl

      Let me be even more succinct

      Australia’s annual emissions of 450 MT are sucked out by our own vegetation in just 17 days. For the rest of the time (349 days) they are busy feeding on everyone else’s emissions including gaia.

      161

      • #
        mark

        I would love to get a link to the data backing this up. This just shot down every green utterance and stupid boondoggle of the liars party and labour lite.

        51

        • #

          Mark,

          China is bringing on line one new large scale coal fired power plant each week.

          Each new plant will burn around 5 million tons of coal a year, and as one tonne of coal gives an emission of (on average) 2.86 tonnes of CO2, that’s an emissions total from one plant of around 15 million tonnes of CO2 each year.

          If Australia emits around 450 million tonnes of CO2 each year, then that equates to the emissions from 30 of those new coal fired power plants, and, at that rate of one per week, that equates to 30 weeks.

          That’s the Maths for my part of this. As to plants sucking up CO2, I have no links for that.

          (And thanks TdeF, yes, you are correct, the increase in China’s CO2 emissions)

          Tony.

          90

          • #
            mark

            ToOz…agree with you re- “emissions” I am very interested by the CO2 cycle being soo one sided favouring domestic consumption over anthropogenic production here in Oz.

            Love it ABC News Radio just reported their poll on COP21…63% say it is essentially useless!

            30

        • #
          PeterS

          Even if we could prove this is true, it won’t change things. We already have more than enough evidence to show it’s a scam. The ETS scam is coming and there is nothing we can do about it, except fight it in the court rooms. We need a bunch of people with very deep pockets and a heap of very clever lawyers. Even then there is no guarantee but it’s a much better chance of exposing the scam than any other way, except by a majority number of whistle blowers from the scientific community, which is very unlikely to happen as they are not willing to sacrifice their livelihoods for the truth – shame on them.

          40

        • #
          Andrew McRae

          I’ve no idea where bobl pulled those numbers from. Can’t see how bobl can conclude Australia is a net sink of 27% of the world’s industrial emissions. It’s a semi-arid country. Probably he’s counted a seasonal influx as though it were a net figure without counting the seasonal emission.

          There is evidence which, combined with some generous/reasonable sounding assumptions, does point towards Australia being a net sink of CO2. This was discussed a few weeks ago when I asked basically the same question and got an interesting and informative reply from a front-line researcher in the field.
          But quantifying the continental contribution to the nearest 10Mt/y CO2 would be impossible.

          00

    • #
      Peter C

      Makes you think, doesn’t it.

      It makes me think Tony, but apparently Turnbull, Hunt and Bishop do not think about it!

      100

    • #
      Leigh

      Tony, how many new plants is India bringing online in the next decade to service their growing demands?
      Is Germany commissioning any more than the dozen or so up to 2020 to compensate their shutting down their nuclear generation?

      20

  • #
    Kenneth Richard

    It appears the science is settled.

    —–
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1816860.stm
    2002: “[I]ncreasing levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere will slow the Earth’s rotation.”

    —–
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11555
    2007: “Global warming will make Earth spin faster”

    —–
    http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/dec/11/climate-change-longer-days-glaciers-north-south-pole
    2015: “[W]ater from shrinking glaciers slows Earth’s rotation”

    —–
    http://www.livescience.com/53071-melting-glaciers-change-earth-spin.html
    2015: “Earth May Spin Faster as Glaciers Melt”

    180

  • #
    Dariusz

    196 countries or the whole world signs 31 page rag and my job looking for oil is redundant by mid 2050. I will be almost certainty dead by then, but my son will have to live in the carbon free society, a cross between present day Uganda and Tibet. 100 billion$ per year since 2020 to poorest countries is pledged. No amount of our gas bagging, feeling logical and scientific will turn humanity from this global madness.
    The mother Gaia behaviour can only save us now. Never in the human history we have experienced what is currently happening now. The Cold War nukes is nothing compared to madness of the 21st century man (and woman). Madness of 20th century resulting in more that 150 mln dead is nothing what awaits us. Just like in 1930 democracies were powerless watching the rise of fascism and communism. People knew that they will die and yet they were powerless to stop it. Once again global human madness rises its ugly head adorned this time with the green shade that was transformed from black and red.
    Once again I retreat into myself to avoid going mad. My best friend is not anyone or anything around me. My best friend is my brain, experience and knowledge that I will carry for the rest of my life.

    170

  • #
    CalUKGR

    Paris CoP 2015: Agreement on Fairies and Unicorns Reached

    Everyone agreed to meet in Paris to solve the dangers of fairies and unicorns. This meeting, set up to address the threats posed by fairies and unicorns, was called the Conference of the Parties (CoP). The CoP – comprised of representatives from all the world’s various governments (and many unelected representatives from self-interested charities) – has been meeting for 25 years now, on and off, each time to discuss the threats posed by fairies and unicorns. In almost 30 years of extremely well funded research, a scientific consensus that fairies and unicorns do exist and are actually potentially catastrophically dangerous to mankind has emerged. Unfortunately, nobody yet has ever seen or has ever been able to scientifically identify any fairy or unicorn anywhere in the world.

    After two weeks of talking about the dangers that fairies and unicorns pose – even though, to date, there is no scientific evidence whatsoever that faeries and unicorns have ever directly or indirectly caused anyone any harm at all – all the delegates to the meeting agreed that the dangers posed by still imaginary fairies and unicorns is real and that urgent action is needed to deal with the threat, should these imaginary faeries and unicorns ever actually appear and start making trouble.

    All the delegates at the Paris CoP decided that the best way to fight fairies and unicorns would be to tax the world’s population to try and make it so that the danger of faeries and unicorns ever appearing and threatening anyone, especially smaller, poorer nations, is averted, or at the very least mitigated. The CoP agreed, therefore, that it would collect $100billion every year from now on – mostly from the world’s richer nations who are, after some discussion, believed to be the most responsible for encouraging the likelihood of an attack by fairies and unicorns.

    The $100billion that the CoP has voted for itself to receive every year will come from taxpayers living and working in the world’s richest nations (but not all of them, especially not those in Asia and the Middle East who are, CoP says, not as responsible for making fairies and unicorns a real threat to humanity as are countries in western Europe and North America) – this will be money collected mostly from ordinary people who are just trying to earn a living, feed their families , etc, and most of whom would have had no idea whether fairies and unicorns even existed or not, had the Media Party, who are very firm believers in both fairies and unicorns, not told them. Every day, in every way.

    Poorer nations, who the CoP think are probably more vulnerable to fairy and unicorn attack than richer nations, will get the majority of the $100billion collected every year. They will be asked to use the money to protect themselves from anticipated fairy and unicorn attacks – although nobody is yet sure how best this could be done.

    To date, nobody has ever proved the existence in any scientific paper, anywhere, ever, of either fairies or unicorns.

    230

  • #
    Peter C

    John Cook Interviews Marc Marano/ Post Normal Scientist
    https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/john-cookint.mp3

    John Cook interviewed Marc Marano in Paris last week. Marc Marano was there to promote the film “Climate Hustle”. I do not know why John Cook was there. I hope he paid is own expenses, but I doubt it.

    I will save you the trouble of listening to the audio of the interview, because it takes almost an hour. In my view Marc Marano should not have agreed to give the interview because Cook will edit it for his own purposes. Marano did anticipate that and made his own audio recording (for the record)but it will not work.

    Topics were; Cooks 97% consensus paper, the temperature record, polar ice, glaciers, storms and droughts. Marano took a few questions from an audience (which were hard to hear).

    Marano was trying to be forceful, controversial and reasonable at the same time. He raised his voice often, which did not sound rational. Cook answered some of Marano’s questions and seemed measured in his responses. It was not a debate, but I would none-the -less give it to Cook

    The Question in my mind at the end was; how does one understand the mentality of John Cook? Cook has a BSci in astrophysics, has veered into Science Journalism (he created the website SkepticalScience.com, which won the 2011 Australian Museum Eureka Prize for the Advancement of Climate Change Knowledge) and is currently completing a PHD in cognitive Psychology.

    That is a significant academic record. It is implied that Cook can think for himself, and I am sure that he does. But his thoughts seem skewed for a scientist.

    For instance;
    Cook seemed unfazed by Marano’s criticism of his 97% consensus paper. We all know that this was achieved by a remarkable selection bias. However Cook seems to be proud of his work and quotes other equally bad papers in support.

    In relation to Climate Change Cook maintains that one should weigh the totality of the evidence. However he is vague about what he regards as the significant evidence. If I was thinking about all the evidence (eg polar bears, butterflies, polar ice, storms etc.), I would consider each of these evidential points, one by one. If most of them seemed proven, or at least persuasive, I might be an alarmist myself. However Cook does not seem to be concerned to do that. Instead he says that there a lot of alarmist messages and taken in total they are persuasive.

    So how does he come to have such a skewed idea of the scientific method, especially given his academic training? Could it be that the bBchelors course in Atrophysics is somehow to blame?

    Astrophysics might be a special case in scientific education, because over the past century speculation about things has been rewarded with Nobel prizes and general adulation. Speculative ideas are regarded as Science, long before empirical observations come along to lend support. It all starts with Edwin Hubble and the Big Bang! An unexpected observation ( red shift of the observed spectra of distant galaxies) was spun into an expanding universe, formed at a creation point in the past known as the Big Bang. Fred Hoyle thought that was ridiculous and actually coined the phrase “BIG BANG” to parody the concept and it has stuck. Since then we have had black holes, inflation, strings theory and parallel universes; all discussed initially as interesting ideas and then adopted as Astrophysical dogma, but without passing any empirical testing. Science nerds earnestly explain to us skeptiacl and uncomprehending mortals how it all works.

    Is that how Post Normal Science started and morphed into the Climate Change monster?

    81

  • #
    Peter

    I am still angry of the criticism of Tony Abbott, especially on this web site. How would every one appreciate him, and everything he stood for now feel.

    50

    • #
      handjive

      Peter.
      Apologies if anything I said contributed to your anger.

      For me, Abbott vacillated on Doomsday Global Warming.

      Abbott still seems undecided, neither calling it crap, nor calling out the UN-IPCC agenda.

      Sure, Abbott fiddled around the edges, closing a few green boondoggles, “axed the tax” and such, but, pointless.

      And so, like the Doomsday Global Warming scare he refuses to call out, he is yesterday’s news.

      But, that is just meh.

      21

  • #
    Ian Hill

    Rest in Peace John Bannon, former SA Labor Premier, marathon runner and gentleman.

    It was a privilege to be a running contemporary and you were always just one of the boys.

    60

  • #
    John Bell

    I just wish we had more of a climate paparazzi to watch some big greens and their lifestyles, I see too little of that, how much carbon they use and all, their kids and cars and homes and airplane use. that would make them quiet down.

    30

  • #
    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The article from The Rebel, that you quote, actually misses the point, and does so by a country mile. The Rebel article talks about ISIS, and then actually quotes another article about ISIL.

      The quoted article from the Arab Center for Research & Policy Studies gets the name of the group right – “Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)”. ISIL being one faction in a civil war, that is all about reestabishing a Caliphate in the geographical area at the eastern end of the Mediteranian. It is all about geography and not that concerned about religeon.

      But the main article still insists on confusing that with “ISIS”, which is a terrorist group, of no fixed abode, which is all about religeon, and the promotion of one form of Islam.

      Just because the first three letters are the same, does not mean that the organisations or purposes are related. In fact, when it comes to Syria, ISIL is also fighting ISIS, as is the US.

      And whereas Obama is intent on removing Asad, the Russians view Asad as a tool, and will support him, in his civil war against ISIL.

      Why do journalists not get taught geography and history and the ways in which they are interrelated, any more?

      80

      • #
        Peter C

        Thanks Rereke,,

        I thought ISIS and ISIL were the same. Obviously what I read and hear in the press helped create the confusion.

        40

  • #
    Don B

    It has been more than two weeks since the last installment of the new solar-climate model series, and I am worried. Did Paris disrupt the sequence? Has a flaw been discovered? Does David have a bad cold? My level of Tip Jar contributions does not qualify me to demand the next article…right now!

    Maybe if we all visited the tip jar, everything would be OK. :)

    61

  • #
  • #
    Robber

    COUNTDOWN to CATASTROPHE.
    Climate change is set to pass the milestone of 1C of warming since pre-industrial times by the end of 2015, representing “uncharted territory” according to The Guardian.
    So we are just 0.5 degrees away from doom and damnation as the governments of 196 countries have declared 1.5 degree rise will have us on the precipice.
    Anyone like to start a sweep predicting when we will exceed the new target? Or perhaps one of the betting agencies will let punters place their bets.
    Will the current El Nino tip us over the edge?

    The UK Met Office says: Over the period 1901-2010 global mean sea level rose by around 20cm and has been rising by about 3mm a year since the early 1990s. If we consider emission pathways that aim to limit warming to 2°C, then we have seen only about one-third of the eventual sea level rise that could be realised by 2100.
    When will the refugees from Kirabati start arriving? According to one knowledgeable source: “In the low-lying Pacific atolls of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati rising sea levels have made every high tide a dangerous event. Regular floods wash through villages causing damage to houses, killing crops and poisoning drinking water”. (The Guardian)

    Australia certainly won’t be able to accept refugees, because according to our weather bureau:
    – Frequency of extreme weather has changed, with more extreme heat and fewer cool extremes
    – Extreme fire weather has increased, and the fire season has lengthened
    – Australian temperatures are projected to continue to increase, with more extremely hot days and fewer extremely cool days
    – Average rainfall in southern Australia is projected to decrease, and heavy rainfall is projected to increase over most parts of Australia
    – Sea-level rise and ocean acidification are projected to continue

    With atmospheric CO2 levels increasing at about 2 parts per million per year, it should be easy for one of the myriad of climate scientists to run those expensive models one more time and tell us all exactly when we will reach the catastrophic number, especially now that we have all those promises/commitments confirmed in Paris.

    51

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Robber:
      If you take the (ever being) adjusted GISS figures we probably passed that level on Dec. 12, but we won’t know that until the adjustments just before COP22.

      If you take the satellite figures of 0.3℃ rise in 36 years and linearly extrapolate that, the “Global temperature” will rise 0.29℃ by 2050 and by 0.7℃ by 2100.
      That would be rather stupid with so many variables in the climate, esp. a cooling sun, reverse of the Pacific Oscillation etc. but it is as accurate as any other figure. Bear in mind that there is still no evidence that CO2 causes warming and the UN-IPCC figures are based on a much higher sensitivity than can be justified and is being discreditted with every passing year.

      In reality we are likely to see cooling over the next 25 or more years which will discredit the scam. Our only hope here is to minimise the damage to Australia. Regretably our politicians aren’t listening. Despite poll after poll showing that voters aren’t interested they persist in throwing away money on this scam. Short of an unlikely revolution the best action we can take is NOT to vote directly for the major parties, and direct your preferences to the one that suits you better. That cuts off the payment per vote which is paid out for first preference votes only. If enough people do this the organisational wing of the Party will be very upset and quickly let those in parliament know.

      31

  • #
    AndyG55

    Cricket.. where the heck is that black line going ??

    http://s19.postimg.org/3ldvc63lf/dmiedc14.jpg

    30

  • #
    AndyG55

    Roy Spencer gives a nice “round-up” of the climate conference.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/12/paris-pow-wow-heap-good/#comments

    21

  • #
    Rocky

    MENS SHEDs

    I have been to two Mens Sheds so far and both are sadly for me not a good place

    .
    Shed One

    In a Church
    Run by Church Elders Cliquey Inbred

    Few Outsiders

    The Leader kept badgering me to get back to work

    . Not exactly a sweatshop but unpleasant.
    .

    Shed Two

    In A Community Centre

    Run by a “FOREMAN” [had all the makings of a standover person in a workshop in days gone]

    FOREMAN to me :What are you doing ? This needs making now for the Community Centre.

    Noise. Could Not Hear Myself Think Let Alone Hear Anyone Else.

    Getting Close to a Sweatshop.

    Both had smoko right on the dot of 10AM

    Both had serious health and safety issues.

    One Shed A Group Of Men sat at Smoko ate their biscuit drunk their tea/coffee and DID NOT SAY A WORD.

    20

    • #
      Annie

      A lot depends om the leadership and group dynamics. The nearest one to us is purpose-built and has some very good people in the group. My OH has been there a few times although isn’t an actual member.

      10

    • #
      Hat Rack

      Annies’ comment is on the money. Have been a member of the local mens shed for about 3 years now and really enjoy it. Some blokes (particularly former office workers) like playing with machinery and some of us just like sitting around with a cup of tea and telling lies.

      Keep looking Rocky. You will find one that suits you.

      20

  • #
    handjive

    The ABC get wise.

    If anyone saw this interview on ABC breakfast this morning about wind farms, Greg Hunt was asked about the nice day.

    Hunt responded, that is was a beautiful day, not a breathe of wind.

    It was the next question at the end, but has been cut.

    Those who saw it will know …

    10

  • #
    Greg Cavanagh

    An interesting document regarding energy storage.

    http://homework.uoregon.edu/pub/class/hc441/storage.html

    10

  • #
    • #
      PeterPetrum

      The Guardian and the Twitterati have missed the point. It is nothing to do with racist stereotypes, but with the fact that the $100!billion Green Climate Fund will do nothing to help people in poverty to improve their lot by giving them solar panels. I am reminded of the people in an Indian village who were given solar panels by Greenpeace, in a publicity stunt, who found out how totally iuseless they were by both day and night and who demanded of the minister that came to “launch” the program that they be put on the grid. They were, and the solar panels now just keep the sun off the roof structures.

      20

  • #
  • #
    Roy Hogue

    It’s a little bit late for the weekend but I don’t know where else to put this. So here’s one that’s got to be a record of some kind.

    If you think you’ve seen harsh weather try this on for size.

    In Lufkin Texas, high winds blew cars of a freight train right off a trestle onto the roadway below.

    Even considering that the cars shown in the video appear to be empty, they weigh many tons each and those particular cars have a lower profile as well so I would probably have discounted any prediction of wind strong enough to do that but for the video and accompanying explanation to document it. Thankfully it wasn’t a passenger train and nothing was under the trestle when it happened.

    It goes to show that Murphy had it right, “If something can go wrong, it will.” There’s always a counter counter measure you didn’t count on. No pun intended. ;-)

    20

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      There’s nothing said about any other damage but I’ve got to suspect wind that strong didn’t leave other things untouched.

      20

  • #
    Rod Stuart

    I am in an argument again and am looking for a rebuttal to the concept that “With or without climate change, what we are doing to the planet is unsustainable. We have to clean up our act, one way or another for one reason or another. Climate change is just one way of (over)simplifying the mess we are creating, so that fundamentalist brains can grasp that we have a problem. ”

    I recall a list of things which compare the world today with the world of the 18th century. At that time large cities like London and Paris had open sewers, rampant disease, Horse manure several feet thick, foul air etc. I think it was a post on here or on WUWT. Does anyone have it bookmarked? If I point out that “sustainability” is just code for Agenda 21, I’ll get another blast about conspiracy theories and such.

    Thanks.

    30

    • #
      Robber

      See Lavoisier website article Back to the 19th century

      20

      • #
        Rod Stuart

        Thanks, Robber.
        I hadn’t looked at the Lavoisier Group recently, but there is some great information there.
        I recall seeing a clear concise list of things that dispel the idea that “mankind is raping and pillaging the planet”.
        It included such things as the fact that Europe in general and England in particular was becoming denuded of trees that people used for fuel to keep warm until coal came on the scene.
        The accumulation of horse manure in the streets of big cities until the horseless carriage was born.
        A comparison of life expectancy, spread of disease etc.
        I recall seeing it but I just can’t remember where.

        30

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Rod.
      Clarify the debating point more precisely before debating it.
      When they say “we” are they talking about western civilization specifically, or humanity in general?
      Most importantly, what is their definition of “sustainable”? What process, what material, and for how long? e.g. If we run 100% solar power for 1000 years but then the Holocene ends and the world becomes very overcast and we lose all electricity, does that mean our plan was unsustainable? Point out that sustainability is contingent upon particular facts and assumptions, and ultimately every process on Earth is unsustainable in the face of the sun going supernova.

      If their argument is that “we” are not doing enough to meet some particular absolute standard, you will score nothing by making a relative argument that life is better now than it was in the past. The two main strategies have to be to argue either that 1) their standard is unnecessarily narrow/strict, or 2) their standard has already been met.
      The latter option is unlikely, as they are demanding sustainability and western civilisation’s current energy, reproduction, and environmental practices are in fact unsustainable. (Where I take “X is sustainable” to mean that X can run for at least 8000 years, the time since the Laurentide ice sheet completely melted.)

      Questioning the value of sustainability itself will probably not get you far. The mantra here is “To fail to plan is to plan to fail”. Try to show a counter-example where luck and simplicity is enough. The horseshoe crab is one of the oldest species still in existence, as there are extremely similar fossils from 450 million years ago. That is a successful species, yet it is incapable of planning or deliberate self-control. Is that how simple an animal has to be to live sustainably? Is it worth being unsustainable to “live fast and die young” as a species while accomplishing things no other animal has ever done? Also show that extinction is normal in nature, long-lived species are the exception.
      Maybe this is enough to cast doubt on sustainability. But you will have to argue that minimizing side-effects on other species is important or you will be poking too many pooches too soon.

      Your best option may be to agree with them that sustainability is okay, but illustrate the type of world you would want to sustain isn’t the same as their brand of Utopia. Then question their urgency or method of achieving sustainability. Why is it urgent? If sustainability is inevitable for long term survival then you shouldn’t need to force anyone into it, they’ll reach it at their own pace automatically just by following self-interest.

      Best of luck.

      20

    • #
      Wayne Job

      I remember reading Benjamin Franklins diary, he visited England and could not believe the foulness of London with the streets 3ft deep in horse crap.
      The streets in American cities were cleaned every day.

      00

  • #
    Bartender

    Hmmm, are you prepared to give up your gas cooker to save the planet!!!

    Climate deal ‘signals end to gas cookers’: They’ll have to be phased out to meet new targets, experts claim

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3358616/Climate-deal-signals-end-gas-cookers-ll-phased-meet-new-targets-experts-claim.html#ixzz3uRFWjqj7
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06r3wc3
    Jeremy discusses giving up gas cookers after the Paris climate change talks, the Shetland Pony Grand National, unhealthy lorry drivers and the last Brit to leave Guantanamo Bay.

    10