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

CSIRO wipes out climate division — 350 scientists to go — since it’s “beyond debate” who needs em?

BREAKING BUN FEST: Hysterical. The contradictions in the propaganda are biting back viciously. Isn’t karma a bitch?

If climate change is solved and beyond debate, who needs climate scientists?

CSIRO has announced it will axe 300  to 350 climate jobs, which will “wipe out” the climate division. The head of the CSIRO wants to focus on climate adaption and mitigation instead. Suddenly a lot of Profs who told us the debate was over are squealing that it needs more research. Climate science was “beyond debate” and in need of action, but now we “need to know more about the basic operation of the climate”. Oh the dilemma!

The head of the CSIRO is doing what the Greens say they want — moving beyond the debate and putting more money into adaption and mitigation. Where’s the Greens statement applauding him…?

With up to 350 scientist jobs under fire at maybe $250k per year (including super, admin, and other on-costs), that means there is around $90m at stake.

This is a CSIRO management decision:

“Climate will be all gone, basically,” one senior scientist said before the announcement.

In the email sent out to staff on Thursday morning, CSIRO’s chief executive Larry Marshall indicated that, since climate change had been established, further work in the area would be a reduced priority. — SMH

The CSIRO are just doing the obvious thing after Paris. There is no science debate, they are moving on to “adaption”, and “mitigation”:

CSIRO chief executive Larry Marshall said the changes would see the organisation move away from measuring and monitoring climate change, to instead focus on how to adapt to it.

“It’s inevitable that people who are gifted at measuring and modelling climate may not be the same people who are gifted at figuring out what to do about it how to mitigate it,” he said.

“Some of the climate scientists will be able to make that transition and some won’t.” — ABC

Scientists are tying themselves in knots to explain why it’s appalling that there is a loss of safe, low turnover jobs to study something that is “proven”. Gee, just as well they aren’t coal miners.

Professor Penny Sackett –a  former Australian Chief Scientist who now works for the Climate Change Institute at ANU.

“I am stunned by reports that CSIRO management no longer thinks measuring and understanding climate change is important, innovative or impactful. Paris did not determine whether or not climate change is happening, scientists who generate and study big data did. The big question now, which underlies all climate adaptation work, is ‘How is the climate changing?’”

So we don’t know how the climate is changing? So Penny, when did you mention that all the predictions of floods and droughts and terrible storms were uncertain?

Prof Will Steffen suddenly admits “we” don’t know the basic operation of the climate system:

Professor Will Steffen is an Emeritus Professor at ANU and a Climate Councillor at the Climate Council of Australia.

“This is deeply disturbing news. The impacts of climate change are already being felt around Australia at an increasing rate, and there is more to come. We absolutely need to know more about the basic operation of the climate system — how it is changing and how best can we respond to the climate change challenge.”

Suddenly Prof Steven Sherwood (UNSW) is not so sure we understand the climate:

“Larry Marshall surely has a point about rejuvenating organisations and solving new challenges, but I worry about his statement that there is no further need post-COP21 to understand climate change since we now know it is real.”

Dr Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, Research Fellow at the Climate Change Research Centre UNSW:

“The latest round of job cuts from CSIRO is nothing short of appalling… While we know that the climate is changing because of human activity, we have not simply ‘answered’ that question after the Paris agreement — many more questions remain.”

“… Research in any field does not, and cannot stop after an apparent question has been answered.”

Please readers, dig for comments made by these same people telling us how certain and beyond debate climate science is. There is much fun to be had…

 

h/t Willie Soon.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.2/10 (194 votes cast)
CSIRO wipes out climate division -- 350 scientists to go -- since it's "beyond debate" who needs em?, 9.2 out of 10 based on 194 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/hmd7a3d

328 comments to CSIRO wipes out climate division — 350 scientists to go — since it’s “beyond debate” who needs em?

  • #
    Analitik

    From the email sent out by CSIRO’s chief executive Larry Marshall to inform staff

    “Our climate models are among the best in the world and our measurements honed those models to prove global climate change. That question has been answered”

    http://www.smh.com.au/cqstatic/gmlesz/csirojobcuts.docx

    So there you go – the science has been settled and this is one of the consequences

    1163

    • #
      Analitik

      Yay 1st!

      Hopefully the data and manufacturing departments can find some commercial sponsorship.

      Of course the green industry should be able to fund all 200 odd climate scientists since the 3rd way is such a successful business model (along with the subsidies they receive)

      434

      • #
        Mike

        The economic climate has been cooling and it seems it is definitely made by a bunch of anthropogen’s.. We need more ‘economic climate scientists’ for sure. I have a lot of faith in economic climate scientists to model what is burning, how much and where.

        80

      • #
        bit chilly

        surely you mean the data manufacturing department ;) now if only they had used the raw data for a bit longer they may still be in a job.

        100

    • #

      I’ve been waiting for this to happen for some time (Oh the irony). I wonder who will be the first to suggest that the science isn’t settled?

      713

    • #
      James Bradley

      My local facebook alarmist community is in shock!

      One writes: “17th century here we come, back to the future with New Feudalism.”

      Another warns: “The anti-intellectuals war against science is definitely the heretic days again”

      Yet another writhes: “FIRST STEP towards fascisim……?…ATTACK EDUCATED/ SOW DOUBT ABOUT THEIR ABILITIES , get general population off side with educated people DIVIDE & RULE !”

      Something about the last comment is strangely delusional.

      795

      • #
        Yonniestone

        James having pride in your country is now classed as fascism, scientific heresy is simply questioning a hypothesis, and not wanting wanton destroyers of democracy here is racism.

        Never a dull moment when approaching peak stupid.

        665

        • #
          James Bradley

          Oh yeah, I’ve been banned from the local warmy site twice now for simply posting links to NOAA sea level rise trends showing little or no sea level rise in the south Pacific and various other postings questioning the global warming meme.

          864

        • #
          AZ1971

          I don’t think there is such a thing as “peak stupid“. Humans, especially liberals, keep surprising me every day as they continually push that envelope.

          340

      • #
        el gordo

        The brainwashed greenleftoid activists are fairly dumb and delusional, not a healthy mix. The irony burns, they are the fascists and I’ll be sowing doubt every chance I get.

        444

      • #
        richard

        james bradley

        “WRITHES”–lol, sweet pun!!

        10

    • #
      turnedoutnice

      Bwaaaa, Bwaaa, why can’t we be retrained as Imams?

      202

    • #
      Alice Thermopolis

      How interesting.

      Just five years ago,the Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research’s March 2011 Technical Report 036 – much quoted by Professor Garnaut – concluded:

      “the degree to which global warming may have enhanced heavy rainfall in some parts of eastern Australia remains uncertain”. Furthermore, the much promoted “current generation of climate models” gave “no clear guidance” as to whether the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) – one of the most important drivers on the continent’s weather and climate – “will change in response to global warming. Some models have strengthened ENSOs, some weaker, and others exhibit little if any change”(page 14).

      It also has this disclaimer:

      “The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation….CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology (including each of its employees and consultants) excludes all liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other compensation arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it.”

      Source:http://www.cawcr.gov.au/technical-reports/CTR_036.pdf

      110

    • #
      William

      The comments over at the SMH/Fairfax pages are hilarious as the alarmists there are trying to say the science is settled, but it isn’t settled, er but it is settled so there. The convolutions are very amusing.

      131

    • #
      ghl

      Well that will be a large mass of documents that will disappear.

      10

  • #
    James Murphy

    I see Adam Bandt is quoted as saying:
    “…Malcolm Turnbull is an innovation imposter if he allows these reported cuts at CSIRO to go ahead [...] In Paris, the Prime Minister said research and innovation are key to dealing with global warming, yet here at home the Liberal government’s cuts to the CSIRO mean that hundreds of climate scientists could be getting the axe…”

    To me this just shows the depth and profundity of Bandt’s ignorance when it comes to the basic concept of research (and development).

    642

    • #
      gnome

      They didn’t shoot them after all -they can still go on promoting climate science in their new, more lucrative private industry jobs which we were assured they would all be able to get if they ever left the public sector to chase the real money.

      593

    • #
      Mike

      ‘Divide and conquer’. That is what blades of any kind are for. “The axe” is no exception.

      122

      • #
        Mike

        In my non professional opinion,in it’s best use, a sharp mind (Occams razor) is for dividing truth from hypnosis, suggestibility, lies and so on. In the case of the poor CSIRO scientists, the ones who did not exemplify the AGW mindset were probably the ones who were liberated from the climate science factory farm.

        61

      • #

        ‘Deride and conquer.’ That’s what blogs of any kind are for. This is no exception.

        It’s our sacred civic duty to laugh at the squirming prevarications of our rent-seeking enemy, the Golden Horde of pseudoscience, in its time of distress!

        91

  • #
    Rusty of the West

    That is typical of this ‘holier than thou’ lot. It’s fine for coal miners and construction workers that build these things to lose their jobs based on the lies they peddle but terrible when they lose their job. No taxpayers money should be wasted on this rubbish, we work too hard for it, have to pay too much tax to then have to watch it being wasted so carelessly by the chattering class.

    420

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    It seems this is something they didn’t forecast either.

    1002

  • #
    King Geo

    The “Climate Change Gravy Train” is being derailed, at least at Station CSIRO. The “Department of Climate Adaption” seems a sensible option, that is if it focus’s on adapting to a “cooler climate” once the imminent LIA/GM takes effect next decade.

    433

    • #
      Dennis

      I wonder if BOM management are preparing to retrench their climate change personnel, the ones caught doctoring BOM historical data records in a 2015 inquiry ordered by the Minister?

      131

    • #
      King Geo

      Change of topic. Obama has just announced a US$10 tax on every barrel of oil produced in the USA to fund the transition to clean energy dependence. Well Barack you have just handed the Republicans the 2016 Presidency on a plate – don’t you realize Mr President that this cost will be passed directly onto consumers. Never in my life have I seen “electoral suicide” of this magnitude. Clearly the dumbest USA President ever to take office. Clinton & Sanders Presidency aspirations have been shot to pieces. A free kick for Trump, Cruz or Rubio.

      130

      • #
        Old44

        Great news, now all the people who live in the country where there are no services get to subsidise the the urban communities who have all the facilities.

        51

  • #

    Memo from Professor Flannery:

    Hey, hang on a minute. Hasn’t everything I ever said been proved wrong. I might suggest that of itself proves we need more money and climate people to keep investigating. You know, up until we get it really right!

    I have some more dud predictions if you need proof.

    Tony. Professor Flannery.

    775

    • #
      Ted O'Brien

      Tony, there’s an election coming. This presentation is surely the start of the campaign. Their story will grow along lines already written.

      Without paying careful attention I thought I saw a few spectacular about faces in recent times. I don’t believe them. Leopards don’t change their spots.

      And I don’t believe the warmist movement feels wounded, either, by the continuing buildup of evidence against them. They are shifting the battlefield as a strategy to escape their past lies and errors. It was never more important than now to highlight and attack those past lies and errors.

      Meanwhile, what’s happening at the BOM, where the real weather scientists are supposed to reside?

      172

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Ted O’Brian:

        Yes, there have been a few not quite on message recently. I put it down to conscience/scientific integrity rather than calculated strategy against future change. After all calculating future trends isn’t a real strength for these people, is it?

        There is speculation on Bishop Hill that it is a disguised purge i.e. all out then get the “true believers” back as consultants (so they get more money) and those not quite fervent believers sent to the outer darkness with weeping and lamentations as a warning “toe the line or else”. I think not; it is just a budget cut and one made easy because of their arrogant claim that the science was settled – the very excuse used to get rid of them.
        Whoever it is I feel sorry for them, it is never pleasant to be fired and I speak from experience. At least I had enough ability and flexibility so could get another job**, but most of these going will be struggling to find positions.
        ** the best bit was being offered my old job back at substantially more after they fired the bloke who fired me. But then he turned up there again when his new employer got taken over. I didn’t go back but I could laugh at a funny old world.

        120

        • #
          Ted O'Brien

          Even capitalism is not perfect! Congratulations on your success.

          It could well be that it is a disguised purge. The presentation of it rings hollow. However, whatever their purpose, if you want to know where the road ahead lies, watch Malcolm Turnbull and his coming cabinet reshuffle. Don’t assume that he is so dopey as to not notice the continuation of “the pause”, which was in its infancy when he was promoting an ETS. And don’t assume that he thought Bob Carter a fool.

          70

          • #
            Oksanna

            Some people are born survivors who flourish in uncertain circumstances. Actually, lawyers thrive on uncertainty. Which is why many some see carbon offsets trading as a potential bonanza, because of the inherent difficulty of measuring and regulating the non-existence of a gas.
            There is a Chinese saying
            隨風倒柳
            suí fēng dǎo liǔ
            lit. a willow that bends with the wind,
            one with no fixed principles (idiom).

            40

      • #
        Leigh

        TO, nothing much is happening at “our BOM’S bunker” (fortress trickery?), just the same old same old.
        I posted this observation over at wattsupwiththat.com yesterday in responce to his post on Dr John Christys senate appearance on the 2nd of February.
        “As a daily example, the temperature log at our local government weather station recorded a top temperature of 28.6C on the 2nd of February.
        By 9am on the 3rd of February, that had rison to 29C.
        At 6am on the 4th that 29.0C is now 29.7!
        And please, enough with the “spikes”.
        Till the methodology of “world’s best secret practice” of exclusively UPWARD adjustments(day and night) is revealed, we have but two options to consider.
        Magic or [snip].
        If anybody else has a better discriptive word , I’d seriously like to hear it.”
        Like I said TO same old same old.

        141

  • #
    Joe

    In the immortal words of “RABZ” from Catalaxy Files:

    Shut It Down! Salt the Earth!

    131

  • #
    el gordo

    ‘After the federal government was so widely criticised under Tony Abbott for frequently calling climate science into question, it is ironic now to make those same climatologists redundant on the basis that their work is done and dusted.’

    Roger Jones / The Conversation

    371

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    To be fair – I have great sympathy if people lose a job. No question.

    That its a loss from promoting The Big Lie of CAGW and the huge money it wastes – that can only be good for science.

    474

  • #
    AndyG55

    Still trying, in vain, to wipe the grin off my face. :-)

    528

  • #
    toorightmate

    Climate is gone.
    It will not be warmer.
    It will not be colder.
    It will simply be gone.

    And we will all have to learn to live in a climateless world.

    Isn’t Will Steffen one of throng who said, “the science is settled”.

    I do hope this is sign of the future (a la Cruz, Craig Kelly, etc).

    284

    • #
      Stephen Richards

      It must be sending shivers down the back of some people at NOAA and NASA GISS. This is likemy what would happen if Cruz won the US election. This could be a year to remember for all the good things the people did.
      Brits to dump the EU, Americans to dump socialism and Aussies to dump CISRO

      172

  • #
    AndyG55

    I think what we need to do is put together a list of “adaptation” ideas to send to CSIRO.

    eg1. A blanket to keep them warm when its cold, but cool them during those hot summer nights. ;-)

    236

  • #
    WayneT

    This would be funny if it wasn’t so sad. For years they argued that the science is settled. Now that jobs are on the line – it isn’t settled! They have finally been caught in their own deceitful web of lies. Good riddance. Maybe they can find a real scientific endevour to pursue that will actually benefit their fellow humans.

    613

  • #
    Rollo

    How big is the team researching gravity at the CSIRO?

    (CNSNews.com) – That climate change is happening and that humans are largely responsible should be as universally accepted as the law of gravity, Secretary of State John Kerry

    273

    • #
      toorightmate

      When John Kerry speaks, it is a very grave situation.

      204

    • #
      KenW

      Somebody let me know when they can model climate as well as they can model gravity.

      193

      • #
        bobl

        Yes
        m x g x h is so elegant isn’t it, and you know it works EVERY TIME. Pity we can’t say that about weather models.

        135

        • #
          bobl

          Ms Anti-science red thumb, how about an actual comment, what is it about mgh – mass x height x G (9.8 m/s/s) that I got wrong to deserve a red thumb. What was it I said that is in ANY WAY inaccurate?. Do Climate models get an acurate answer to 3 decimal places EVERY TIME? No, I thought not.

          73

    • #
      Oksanna

      Flat Earth, faked moon landings, or gravity. The usual chestnuts. Problem is gravity is not as settled as people think. Still an area of prolific, some say black, government research. Anyone else read The Hunt for Zero Point by Jane’s Defense Weekly editor Nick Cook, (2007 Broadway Books)?

      20

  • #
    Glenn

    Prof Will Stefan on you tube, 1 year ago 2014. ” this is part of a longer term upwards trend and we know the physics of why this is occurring.It’s simply because we are stacking more heat in the lower atmosphere”

    Now they don’t know the basic operation of the climate system?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ox06Yav5cv8

    Thanks Glenn! – Jo

    345

    • #
      Senex

      “we are stacking more heat in the lower atmosphere”? How anybody could have taken Prof. Steffen seriously after such an inane statement is beyond me.

      00

  • #
    jollygreenwatchman

    no grinning until it has been determined the real tax payers of Oz won’t have to fork out for massive redundancy payments to csiro cagw gravy trainers who are then rehired the following day to plan mitigations rather than doctor climate records.

    364

    • #
      David Maddison

      Good point jollygreenwatchman, I was about to say the same thing until I saw your comment. The redundancy payments will be very generous and massive, a big burden on the taxpayer or they will simply be rehired as “consultants” at two to three times their former cost.

      132

  • #
    manalive

    This welcome development must send tremors through the various tertiary climate change™ research departments.

    303

    • #

      I did warn a couple of students a few years ago they would cop a hiding in a couple of years. They were studying ‘climate policy’!
      This news is a relief, we might even get some real commercially benefiting science research once again.

      243

      • #
        bobl

        One of the good things is that adaptation is done by engineers rather than environmentalists, so perhaps the act of throwing a few engineers at climate problem might just add a bit of common sense into CSIRO. Especially given that Engineers are formally subject to being sued or gaoled if they kill people.

        234

        • #

          A few thoughts – is it just me or is the 350 number somehow connected with 350.org – the ones who promote blowing up schoolkids if they don’t believe their religion … sorry to be clear the NON-islamic group who …

          And turnbull I am told is a name given to a Scots who literally “turned a bull” that was heading toward the kind and hence he got the name.

          The green bulls have been grabbed and turned!

          113

  • #
    William

    Keep fingers and toes crossed that the BOM is next.
    Oh happy days!

    335

    • #
      toorightmate

      My fingers, toes and eyes are crossed that the next big cut will be THEIR ABC. Let’s have 3,500 gone there instead of a paltry 350.
      In reality, more than double that number would take “sickies” at the CSIRO every day.

      315

  • #
    Leonard Lane

    I think this is a great example of how dangerous is is for scientists to get in bed with politicians. In the climate scientists zeal to convince the politicians that the science was settled, rock solid, supported by 97% of all scientists,etc. the politicians and bureaucrats may finally be believing them and taking action on what the climate scientists swore was true. How ironic that politicians and bureaucrats are convinced and now may move on to fund other things.
    It also illustrates that the truth will always surface in the end. It may seem to take forever, but it does. It also proves what your mother and father probably told you over and over; it is a sin to lie and someday you will pay for your sins.
    Is there evidence that the CSIRO climate science firings are an isolated event for the near future?

    253

  • #
    Sören F

    But it all has this beauty in it, in that the overcertainty started with defining half climatology away, the paleo-side. Then the acknowledged side was overpopulated, the science declared settled, and now finally its ‘lab’ is to be abandoned. Still in other quarters, Holocene paleoclimate works on.

    82

  • #
    el gordo

    ‘We absolutely need to know more about the basic operation of the climate system.’

    Will Steffen

    —–

    Let’s start with the 60 year cycle and work our way back, something is bound to turn up.

    282

  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    It is about 10 years ago when we were told in the UK that “the science is settled”. Since then an enormous amount of money has been wasted on climate “science” and we are no further forward (except there has been no climate change).

    483

  • #
    Yonniestone

    Would’ve been nice to see that $90m going into cancer research, even though CAGW is a cancer on science.

    364

    • #
      AndyG55

      Before it got taken over by the leftist bureaucrats, CSIRO had a aim to research things that could be useful for farmer, medicine etc etc. That might have a commercial application.

      So quite useful things came out of CSIRO in the past when it was run by actual scientists.

      They were very silly to let themselves get side-tracked and into the climate charade, which could never be anything but UNPRODUCTIVE and pointless.. a money sink with no endpoint.

      A re-boot is definitely needed.

      496

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Correct Andy, apologies to the early CSIRO and the good work undertaken by those scientists, when growing up they were viewed typical of Australia punching well above it’s weight.

        414

    • #
      Dennis

      What about assisting the one in every eight Australian citizens now living in poverty, and many homeless including many children?

      61

  • #
    manalive

    What is there left for Climate Change™ ‘scientists’ to do?
    Dream up ever more improbable ad hoc hypotheses as to why the av. global temperature hasn’t followed the models and has been in near stasis for over eighteen years concurrent with the substantial increase in human CO2 emissions.

    253

    • #
      gigdiary

      Dream up ever more improbable ad hoc hypotheses as to why the av. global temperature hasn’t followed the models…with the substantial increase in human CO2 emissions.

      Well, if it’s not CO2 driving the temperature, it must be something else that humans are doing. Otherwise, we’ll be out of a job. Oh, we already are :( sarc/

      121

  • #

    All climate science is settled, but some climate science is more settled than other climate science. Or something like that.

    Better try again. Climate science is settled for unused desals, Timmy’s Geothermia, the Illawarra wave generator and South Australian money shredders. But it’s unsettled for CSIRO funding and employment.

    Got it?

    323

  • #
    Bob

    Oh, my! That’s a lot of scientists out of work. However, why does Australia need 350 climate scientists when there is only one climate? It’s the same thing here in the US. All the government is doing is supporting thousands of scientists who would be otherwise unemployable, simply because there’s no rational need for thousands of climate scientists.

    Any time government gets involved with science, by definition you have the politicization of science. Reference the KoolAid warmists at NOAA in the USA. They have now been caught diddling the data. It seems to me that a few clerks could replace the lot of them. That way the data would stop changing.

    354

  • #

    Logic of a situation of their own making.
    Oh what a tangled web we weave when claiming
    the science settled, no need for more research
    dollars$$$from the long suffering public purse.

    242

  • #

    A telling phrase:

    scientists who generate and study big data

    An apt simile for “generate” in this case is “fabricate”; because a great deal of data is made up using assumptions about how the world operates; according to the models. Data that do not fit can be “adjusted” (or ignored).

    Such is what is “taught” in science labs at universities as acceptable practice; because if your lab results aren’t right, you can fail. Not so much a matter of Kriging where missing data are replaced by expected results; as Finagling by e.g. pretending that any measurements were at one end of the uncertainty scale.

    Sometimes those things are done because all problems look like a nail to the researcher without an understanding of the appropriate use of a hammer, but a hammer is all that they recognize in their toolbox.

    You can tell, IMHO, that universities are “broken” when they offer ethics courses.

    404

  • #
    ExWarmist

    Mitigation/Adaption?

    They might have to hire some Engineers – Heaven forbid!

    293

  • #
    RB

    Alas, the government trough, I knew it well.

    Some expert’s reaction to Paris

    Dr Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, DECRA research fellow at the Climate Change Research Centre on the changing nature of heatwaves.

    “December 12 2015 marks a momentous day in the battle against climate change. Leaders from both developed and developing nations have agreed to limit global warming to 2C above pre-industrial levels, and if possible, limit it to 1.5C.

    There are of course some grey areas around how this will be achieved – for example, current pledges in greenhouse gas reductions will only limit warming to 2.7-3C by 2100.

    Well got it down to a precision of ±0.15°C and will not admit that the accuracy still needs a bit of work, so off to the dole queue.

    –Thanks RB :- ) Jo

    342

    • #
      RB

      I should add the irony that Bjorn Lomborg would have been more suitable in estimating the effects of the policies on global temperatures by 2100, the “science” part being already done in the program MAGICC.

      233

  • #
    Brett

    star commentFrom here –> http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-debate-must-stick-to-the-science-professor-20131025-2w76n.html

    ”We would certainly prefer that this debate be elevated to the real scientific facts as are reported in the scientific literature and as are assessed very competently by the IPCC, the CSIRO and the Bureau [of Meteorology] and the scientists we rely on,” Professor Steffen said.

    ”We’d like to see a debate in this country that gets beyond these futile arguments about the science, which have been settled for decades in the scientific literature, and get on with the real debate about what is really the best way forward with dealing with the problem.

    ”So, yes, it is frustrating having to go back again and again and again and talk about what the science actually says.”

    The announcement today would seem like CSIRO is doing exactly what Will was after.

    Excellent find thanks Brett! – Jo

    421

  • #
    Yonniestone

    Just found a new activist site raising awareness for declining warmist bureaucracy……350.borg.

    264

  • #
    Popeye26

    Absolutely HILARIOUS!!!!

    This is going to be SO good watching these w..kers back track on their “proven” hypothesis and watch them roll themselves up into little balls trying to prolong their tenures.

    I also note: “would see the organisation move away from measuring and monitoring climate change, to instead focus on how to adapt to it”

    Let me correct that: “would see the organisation move away from measuring and monitoring climate change adjusting temperatures, to instead focus on how to adapt to it focusing on how to extend our time with our snots in the trough.

    How about a many criminal charges followed by many trials by jury, followed by many long jail terms – bunch of charlatans (well, most of them anyway)!

    Cheers,

    395

    • #
      Popeye26

      Sorry – was meant to be snouts in the trough not snots.

      Aaah – doesn’t matter anyway – com si com sa, – lol

      Cheers,

      232

  • #
    Chris in Hervey Bay

    No problem for the redundant scientists from the CSIRO.
    Swing over to the skeptic side and collect your cheque from BIG OIL, like the rest of us.

    492

  • #
    ianl8888

    Lord Waffle will save them …

    That’s the whole point of CSIRO chief Larry Marshall releasing the press announcement – so Waffle can have a photo op while saving the planet

    162

  • #
    Matty

    This is just outstanding. Halle – bloody – lujah. And not a leg to stand on. I think it’s called gazumped??

    212

  • #
    scaper...

    I wonder if BOM is next…

    194

  • #
    John R Walker

    Hoisted by their own petard!

    152

  • #
    KenW

    I’m not familiar with the SMH, but the indignation over there seems worthy of the Guardian.
    Love it.

    212

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      That’s because the SMH and the Guardian preach to the same congregation. Usually about the coming hellfire and the need to repent and change (other) people’s lifestyle.

      162

  • #
    King Geo

    “BREAKING BUN FEST: Hysterical. The contradictions in the propaganda are biting back viciously. Isn’t karma a bitch?”

    Reminds of that hit song “Karma Chameleon” (1983) by Culture Club. Boy, I mean “By George” that was a good video of a paddle steamer steaming aimlessly down the Mississippi, but unlike the Climate Change Gravy Train, it didn’t sink.

    71

  • #

    And they all rolled over and one fell out…

    There is one characteristic which is a hallmark of climate extremists – they haven’t a clue. They don’t know what the climate is doing, they don’t have any real idea about science, and (as it now seems) – the only thing I could give them credit for they’ve failed at – as they hadn’t a clue how to keep their snouts in the trough of public money.

    Of course, if I were cynical, what I’d suggest is that the real scientists who understand (that they don’t understand) the climate are starting to say this openly – which is not going down at all well with the real troughers in the “mitigation” and “eco-claptrap” areas who don’t care to hear from the real scientists that there is no doomsday coming.

    303

  • #

    In one fell swoop, Dr Christy showed the rest of them all up as charlatans, in his latest testimony. Just brilliant … Dr Christy’s House Testimony, this week.

    303

    • #
      Dave

      Thanks Tom

      Good link!

      112

      • #
        Captain Dave

        Yes, very good. I just sent a copy of it to our Canadian Minister of the Environment and Climate Change.

        91

    • #
      el gordo

      The satellites and balloons are in sync, its only the adjusted ground stations that fail to fit reality.

      60

    • #
      Bob

      Important points from that:

      “…let us assume, for example, that the total emissions from the United States were reduced to zero, as of last May 13 th, 2015 (the date of a hearing at which I testified). In other words as of that day and going forward, there would be no industry, no cars, no utilities, no people – i.e. the United States would cease to exist as of that day. … After 50 years, the impact as determined by these [IPCC] model calculations would be only 0.05 to 0.08 °C…” [P. 14]

      And, “Finally, regulations already enforced or being proposed, such as those from the Paris Agreement, will have virtually no impact on whatever the climate is going to do.” [P. 15]

      80

    • #
      Carbon500

      Thanks for this link Tom – a very well stated testimony from a proper scientist. I’ll be making good use of the information!

      00

  • #
    John Shade

    Does that mean that the wretched ‘climate scientist’ rappers in this Australian video, a video so degrading to science and scientists that it beggars belief, are going to have to seek new jobs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiYZxOlCN10 ?

    I think they would need to go back to nursery school to start their retraining if they hope to make themselves employable outside of the Green Blob Scare-Based Subsidy matrix.

    162

    • #
      David Maddison

      Thanks for posting that video John. How degrading they are of science and the scientific method. It’s target audience is obviously “low information” voters.

      30

  • #
    Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia

    What did the engineer and the physicist say to the climate scientist?

    “2 cappuccinos, thanks.”

    321

  • #
    LittleDavey83

    Here’s another one:

    Graeme Pearman, who headed climate science at CSIRO from 1992-2002 and authored almost 200 scientific papers on the world’s carbon budget, said the move was “arrogant and ill-informed”.
    Tell me how our climate-modelling skill-base, as truly excellent and world-competitive as it is, is still unable to tell us whether the Murray Darling Basin, the ‘food bowl of Australia’, is going to get wetter or drier as the planet warms?,” Dr Pearman said.
    “Only someone who confuses climate and weather would fail to appreciate that the past investment in climate science is a platform for the real and future needs, not something that is ready for economic exploitation alone,” he said.

    So much for ‘settled science’ huh? Again we ‘sceptics’ are proven right..

    302

    • #
      LittleDavey83

      I’d also love to see how the CSIRO models stack up (a job for Mr Tisdale or Ken?) – from memory, in CMIP5 they’re pretty ordinary..but I’m happy to be proven wrong on that point.

      112

      • #
        el gordo

        One senior researcher who requested anonymity said:

        “Yes, climate change has been proved to be real, but the Greenland ice sheet, the Antarctic ice sheet, ocean acidification, deep ocean warming, and biodiversity changes – are not at all well understood,” the scientist said.

        ——-

        In fact, AGW has been falsified by the hiatus, the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets are perfectly intact, while ocean acidification, deep ocean warming and biodiversity changes (due to a small fractional increase in CO2) are all pure myth.

        That anonymous senior researcher needs a proper job.

        232

      • #
        Another Ian

        IIRC if you wanted a hot result you cited the CSIRO modelling

        40

    • #
      Raven

      “Tell me how our climate-modelling skill-base, as truly excellent and world-competitive as it is, is still unable to tell us whether the Murray Darling Basin, the ‘food bowl of Australia’, is going to get wetter or drier as the planet warms?,” Dr Pearman said.

      Dr Pearman misses the point completely.
      We don’t need to compete with our Australian world class modeling because it’s not a competition and there’s plenty of existing modeling groups already.

      00

      • #

        If the CSIRO models are so excellent; which one(s) predicted the cessation of warming?

        Oh that’s right: Excellence is apparently measured by funding, not by models having worthwhile predictive skills.

        60

  • #
    Klem

    “.. understanding climate change is important, innovative or impactful.”

    Impactful, is that a real word or did she just make that up?

    132

  • #
    ROM

    There is a fair bit of glee being publicly exhibited here at the moment.

    Quite understandable considering the spit, the vicious invective, the lies, the manipulations and deliberate distorting of the data both present and historical, the arrogant hypocrisy and even the hate in some scientific quarters that has been directed at the Skeptics by many of these same self promoting, hubris driven excuses for self styled and purported to be “climate scientists” that infest so much what was once a long time ago, the respected Halls of Academia and science institutions.

    However it is probably a judicious strategy by the Skeptics, after all unlike climate alarmist scientists who can foretell of the global climate a century ahead, we, the skeptics can’t foretell the future even only seconds ahead, to maintain a low key approach to the discomfort of the climate alarmists whilst at the same time as some Skeptics are already doing, pointing out the gross and utter hypocrisy and the sheer arrogance of these same climate alarmist scientists who claimed that the debate was over.
    And who then went on and claimed it was Time for Action and the Skeptics were at the point of Evil to even dare question their high flung and lofty, never to be questioned or doubted, pronunciations on the diabolical and catastrophic future for the global climate.

    The Earth and its climate and its life forms are doomed to eternity unless of course we listened in rapt attention to those same so knowledgeable, all seeing , all knowing, never yo be doubted let alone questioned climate experts and trusted them implicitly to provide the answers on how we and the peoples of the earth will have to be governed and closely controlled under their close scientific and legal supervision so as to “Save the Planet”.

    So before you start sniggering all over again at the stupidity of those climate alarmists scientists and the climate modellers, do put your hand over your mouth so that the public can’t quite see just how overtaken with laughter at the utter stupidity of those same oh’so’ smart climate scientist who are too damn dumb to ever even consider or think about their own future and the consequences of thier constant screechings of impending doom when they monotonously and moronically repeatedly proclaimed that the “science is settled, there is no further debate’.

    Climate alarmist scientists are now very much like a bunch of farm yard roosters.
    They were king of all they surveyed, strutting the world’s stage, on the best and most expensive feed, preening and expansively displaying their academic plumage for the media , the politicals and the public to admire in all their glory along with their glistening gloating power over the global chookyard.

    And then!

    They are no longer needed.
    Their public and political and media alarmist fertilization project has accomplished its goal.
    The strutting roosters are no longer needed as the job is done as they said out of their own beak. 
    As they are no longer in demand as the job is done, the debate has ended and as they are very expensive to keep so out they go

    As the truck departs from the CSIRO climate science chook yard with its load of “has been” science roosters, we know that tomorrow we will be able to buy a very cheap job lot of a very high sheen academic feather dusters, dusters which are very, very light in weight which unsurprisingly, was a major characteristic of the original climate science strutters whose feathers are in those dusters.

    203

  • #
    Harry Twinotter

    I can see from many comments here that “kill the messenger” is alive and well on this blog.

    435

    • #

      Not at all Harry. We would prefer it if the government funded scientists instead of “messengers”.

      557

      • #
        Raven

        Oh, I dunno . . why should the Government be the only ones doing the funding? ;)

        Via Prof. Chris Turney; the gift that keeps on giving.

        Sir Douglas Mawson’s Antarctic expedition was privately funded and apparently so was Chris Turney’s follow up mission in 2014. Here’s what Prof. Chris Turney had to say after some criticism arose about his climate tourism (mis)adventures cleverly intertwined with social media ‘outreach’. *cough*

        […] Although it was frustrating to be caught by sea ice, the expedition showed private funding could support targeted programmes of research and communicate it to the wider world. Small-science research can capture the public’s imagination and also reap real scientific outputs. Although it is a funding model developed in the Antarctic a hundred years ago, the beauty is it can applied anywhere in the world. The crucial thing is to excite the public about the science, something we should be able to do regardless of who has paid for the work.

        Source:

        Hear, hear.
        So, there ya go CSIRO . . get on ya bike and organise some private funding like everyone else

        P.S. I love the way Prof. Chris Turney describes himself as . . . Scientist, Writer, Explorer.

        204

        • #
          Lewis P Buckingham

          Yes but we still don’t know who paid for all the damages claims for the ships that rescued him from the unforseen two year ice pack with 12 inches of snow on top.

          52

    • #
      Yonniestone

      You’re seriously going to ride the moral high horse on this one Hairy?

      Where’s your outrage at the vile spleen vented by your ilk over the passing of Professor Carter?

      Hypocritical to a Fault!!!!

      236

      • #
        Harry Twinotter

        Yonniestone.

        A subject change, really?

        If you actually want to address the point I made, please do.

        [Reads like a bot reply.]ED

        07

  • #
    Climate Heretic

    Imagine those 350 ex CSIRO scientists getting scientific funds and proving that the climate science is not settled or they end up supporting the skeptics. Maybe they will spill the beans on what the managment told them what to write, instead of telling the truth. Oh the irony if this should happen.

    Regards
    Climate Heretic

    294

  • #
    Bob

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-04/climate-science-on-chopping-block-as-csiro-braces-for-shake-up/7139224

    “The organisation will attempt to redeploy as many staff as possible into emerging areas such as data science, but there are likely to be redundancies in the process.”

    Hmmm… “data science”. I wonder what might come out of that.

    152

  • #
    TdeF

    So Professor Bob Carter departs and the CSIRO fire 250 climate scientists? What a compliment.

    163

    • #
    • #
      Another Ian

      TdeF

      Check out Rudyard Kipling’s “The Grave of the Hundred Head”

      50

      • #
        TdeF

        Thanks. Amazing poem. Deadly with no daffodils. I am sure the end of the utterly pointless CSIRO Climate department shows the beginning of the end of credibility for so called climate research. The fear is that attention will now be drawn to making money from the fantasy under the guise of helping people cope. Lots more solar panels, windmills. No one will be allowed build dams or mine coal gas however. Sustainability is all about sustaining the CSIRO.

        30

        • #
          TdeF

          My point is that Prof Carter would be thrilled at the end of the Climate Research farce but may not be pleased at the scientists making money direction either. Public service money making group is a contradiction in terms. They should be doing those things which need to be done. Climate Research, whatever that means, was never one of them. Or the whole group should be sold, which would put a value on their skills.

          40

  • #
    Geoff

    This is like solar panels and batteries for same.

    The battery price will get to 0.20 per kWhr next year when three large manufacturers come fully on-line.

    It will then be far cheaper to be connected to the grid and get off peak power rather than buy solar panels.

    111

    • #
      Dave

      Yup!

      Very close to a diesel genset shortly for me!

      121

      • #
        bobl

        Yes Dave,

        As I’ve said a few times before, with a good battery system a 10KW inverter and a diesel Genset I can just export all my solar power and it would more than pay for the diesel to charge the batteries that powers the house.

        Can’t wait for that day!

        40

  • #
    Alan Kendall

    Gloating responses here are understandable but don’t we still need to study earth’s climate? It is changing (and always has) and we do need to be able to get some sort of heads up as to what might be in our future. Why waste a resource, why not retrain your redundant “scientists to provide a more responsible and useful product?

    @lanK

    323

    • #

      Alan, climate science will progress faster without people who “know” the wrong answer. I predict progress in unravelling the climate will stay the same and probably even improve without these 350 workers. I hope they find other jobs where they can be useful.

      368

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Very diplomatic Jo but a speedbump is not a job outside of CAGW science……. ;)

        104

      • #
        Scott

        Hi Jo,

        Something about this smells, given Turnbull’s belief in the whole global warming religion.

        I want to know what he is up to?

        is he just placating some inside the (Liberal party) tent without really hitting on the BOM which is adjusting our temp records, and has been the subject of requests for an independent audit of their practices.

        or is it something worse?

        like I said I just dont trust him.

        114

        • #
          Oksanna

          If he knows CAGW is rubbish, well, that would be a given, wouldn’t it? He can still try and get offsets trading implemented. It does not actually require for the science to be accurate. ETS is an end in itself, no need for good science, just a need for no change to the enforced consensus. (Hey, maybe that is why they axed the scientists, because they wanted to freeze the science at the consensus warmist position, sensing a looming change in the paradigm. Why let the CSIRO herd of warmist scientists ‘do a Thomas Kuhn’ and jump ship to the lukewarmer boat, when you can preemptively sack them instead? Like Kramer’s ‘pre-emptive dumping’ in Seinfeld) And, the clincher is, offsets trading can still be touted as “mitigation” and put in place by Turnbull to greenwash/immunize the government before the next election.

          31

        • #
          Ted O'Brien

          I haven’t given up on Turnbull. He is not a mug. His support for an ETS was a long time ago, before Bob Carter’s message had sunk in.

          There is indeed something about this that raises eyebrows. And what is the source of each report we read? If ABC or Fairfax or the other usual suspects it will be coloured alarmist. If from the CSIRO management is it on the level, or dodging bullets, or maintaining the warmist cause?

          00

    • #
      AndyG55

      CSIRO stands for Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.

      It was set up to do research into industrial and agricultural ideas that might have some sort of commercial application. It was funded by the government, because the ideas were often a bit wide-reaching to gain commercial funding.

      Climate science of the type that the climate division was doing, has basically ZERO commercial application, and produces nothing in the way of new ideas.

      Climate science should be BOM activity, and there was never any reason, except political and funding, for CSIRO to get involved.

      173

      • #

        Andy that is not completely correct. The science done at CSIRO is to support Australian industry and non-commercial enterprises (e.g public health) be more productive, not just the narrow focus of a commercial application as you’ve opined. Climate science, in theory, can assist the agricultural industry plus to a lesser extent others (town planning, medical science etc). Whether it is doing so or not is the debate here.

        411

        • #
          AndyG55

          You are correct in one respect. The aim was to do “useful” research.

          But the climate science that came out of CSIRO was more of a hindrance than any assistance to agriculture.

          And I can assure you, the climate models are proving worse than useless for town and civil planning because of the MASSIVE inconsistency of this so-called “settled” science.

          for eg.. streamflow or IFD projection can range from +25% to -25% to “we have no b*****y idea” depending on the GCM or the downscaling.

          124

          • #

            sounds like you think they need to put more funds into research so that they get it right.

            19

            • #
              AndyG55

              Its not a topic they should even be looking at.

              Its BOM’s job.

              The climate division of CSIRO has always been a monumental waste of funds and resources… like most things to do with the AGW farce.

              165

            • #
              Lucky

              ‘they need to put more funds into..’ =
              those who work will pay more tax to give more money to those who talk

              50

  • #
    TdeF

    What sort of science cannot explain anything? Science is about understanding, validated models which correctly predict, not posturing. So no explanation or predictions of El Nino, La Nina, record ice in Antarctica, Hurricanes, sundry oscillations, jet streams, the little ice age, the major cycles in climate. All we get are observational explanations based on cute named phenomena, not informed opinions based on deep understanding and proven models. This is not science. It is augury. What is the CSIRO doing in Climate anyway when we have the BOM? Have we started seeding clouds again?

    183

  • #

    Just got to love irony ..

    Settled science don’t need more research, no more to debate .. Oh wait, – what?

    “My services are no longer needed? Why, haven’t i been a good sport, telling all kinds of lies,
    balancing how far i can bend the truth, not mentioning any of my doubts .. I promise, i didn’t mention any of my doubts ..

    Who will hire me now that i am on record being both dishonest, stupid and harboring a low moral, personally and academic ..?”

    The irony, the irony, just got to love irony!

    261

  • #
    ROM

    Now lets get a bit more serious as my first post above is in moderation.

    No blowing of the biggest bubbles here but!

    There are quite a few very subtle indicators coming together that the future of the global warming cult is on limited time as is the same indicators indicating the Green cult might be going down the same track as the odds start to stack up against both of these power grasping, power and money grubbing centres of obscene intellectual and moral and integrity lacking depravity.

    Some time ago on a blog, not sure if it was Jo’s blog or not, I likened the Skeptics constant questioning and their often devastating debunking of the increasingly content free displays of supposed scientific rigor that supposedly passed for some semblance of climate science, to water dripping on a stone.

    Nobody can see any effect of that tiny constant drip, drip onto that hard rock like stone.

    But come back a few years later and you will possibly detect that a tiny portion of the stone is gone, finished , no more,
    Come back a couple of decades later and you will definitely see the effects of that constant drip, drip onto that stone.
    The one day as the stone is worn away even more it will suddenly tip and roll over and even start rolling down the stream or down the hill towards oblivion.

    That drip, drip of the skeptics constant questioning of climate alarmist science claims, of the skeptics constant dismantling of a whole basket of climate alarmist science claims that can only be classified under the heading of “irrational scientific stupidity”, of the skeptics proposing alternative climate scenarios based solidly in science using past solar and oceanographic and geological and climate history is leading to an ever increasing sense of doubt in many quarters including some sections of the media as well as in the political and business arena.

    Another straw in the wind is the slowly increasing number of articles in the MSM, subtle increases I know but they are there, that are openly doubting and even directly in some cases contravening the claims of climate alarmist science.
    Some of the MSM shift is now due to the time factor where hard line climate alarmist predictions of a decade ago or so ago from self styled climate experts are now shown and known to be beyond stupid as climate and events of a completely different nature has revealed itself.

    Locally Flannery is really starting to get some kick back as the politicals and public start to realise just how much in wealth and infrastructure Flannery with his self styled, self awarded role as a “climate expert” has cost Australia over the last decade.

    And the “Flannery Effect” is beginning to have a very noticeable rub off onto a lot of other high profile, self promoting, self aggrandising climate “experts”.
    They are not under any circumstance ever to be fully trusted again.

    Then in another post some time ago I suggested that the world political scene will move from predominantly a socialistic Left position towards the Right as economic circumstances tighten and civil strife increase world wide.

    The world, Europe in particular, maybe the USA, Australia, Canada has gone Left but a retreat has begun from the far Left it appeared Trudeau was taking Canada, even Russia under Putin is Fascist Right and going even further that way and fast.

    The shift to the political Right is ongoing driven far more by terrorism and the European / North African / Syrian refugee problem. [ it now turns out that a high percentage of the purported refugees are from North africa, Tunisia and Libya and aren't refugees at all but just opportunists looking at ripping some money out of wealthy Europe ] and not by economic circumstance change that I originally thought it would.

    And with the shift to the Right, comes a far greater degree of fiscal accountability and the cleaning out of the dead wood in bureaucracy and as is likely now, in the science institutions .
    Climate alarmist science will definitely be placed on the back burner to be slowly snuffed right out if a right wing presidential candidate wins in the USA.

    In Europe the right is on the rise fast in politics particularly in Scandanavia which we rather faultily think of a a socialist type paradise..

    India won’t wear any stupidity about refugees or limiting its advancement as it has demonstrated by it going after Greenpeace in no small way, another omen of the long term decline in power and influence of the green blob.

    With a shift to the political right, a lot of the positions held by the unelected, unaccountable environmental and hard left lobbying NGO’s in Global forums will be dissolved and the NGO’s kicked out of much of the power structure they parasitically reside in at the moment.

    A new generation is coming into power and as always they will do it differently into their fathers and mothers.
    And No body can know or predict where the world, its peoples , its climate , its civilisation will be in the second half of this century.

    The one prediction I would make is that by about 2050, climate science will be just another small time scientific pursuit carried out by a few dedicated scientists along with a phalanx of climate science historians wading through an enormous volumes of sheer utter climate predicting stupidity and drivel of what was once more than a century previously, a tiny but respected branch of science called climate science..

    252

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    quote from a Dr Abram at The Con :

    Yes, it is now absolutely certain that the greenhouse gases we have added to the atmosphere are causing Earth’s climate to warm, but that big-picture knowledge does not allow us to predict and prepare for the many ways in which climate changes are going to impact on the safety and prosperity of Australia in the future.

    But one aspect where models consistently show we still have much to learn about exactly how the pieces of the climate jigsaw puzzle fit together is in their ability to accurately represent the Southern Hemisphere.

    I wouldn’t be so quick to throw out the bath water, there might be something important still in it.
    The impacts we’ll have less ability to foresee are the short-term regional changes that have far larger impact than AGW. We still need climate models. Unfortunately the global ones create the boundary condition for the regional scale model, not sure how the boffins can simulate “planet Australia” by itself.

    I would also question why freezing climate science is a good idea. It can’t get better if it is frozen in current state. Clearing house is okay as a first step to hitting the RESTART button on CliSci.

    At the same time, when 20 years of work has produced models that don’t deliver an accurate Southern Hemisphere, one has to wonder how pouring good money after bad is going to change the outcome.

    132

    • #
      Mike Bromley the Kurd

      One indeed has to wonder. The science’s ongoing contortions, distortions and cognitive dissonance really lend themselves to dispassionate analysis.

      71

  • #

    Repost from un-threaded!!
    THE STATE OF 20th CENTURY SCIENCE!!!

    I have proclaimed my two beliefs; I will; (1. have another beer, or, 2. sleep in today)! I disbelieve only one God, but not much else! The Greek group of Gods, now called ‘bankers’, is but expensive, fine, decadent party time!
    “Whom the God would destroy such first makes mad!” WOW!
    True evidence of ‘madness’ is any self proclaimed ‘knowledge’ of anything!
    Belief, as in ‘religious belief’, is acceptable in folk as an alternate to madness. I do not ‘know’ when/where I was born, I was not there, but I also ‘believe’ that what mommy says, did happen, long ago is true! I still do not ‘know’ when/where/if I was born!
    Can we not paste a bright blue star on the forehead of all that proclaim ‘knowledge’, then in ‘pity’ allow such to rummage about, in peace, without the further destruction of society?

    415

  • #
    cedarhill

    Maybe the money saved can be spent on developing thorium driven power plants or fusion power plants or simple nuclear power plants that manufacture hydrocarbons using the CO2 and N2 and H2O in the atmosphere.

    Fitting the warmist won the argument and now heed “re-training and re-education”.

    113

  • #
    A C Osborn

    Love it, Lying has cost them their jobs for all the wrong reasons, but who cares?

    213

  • #
    Mike Bromley the Kurd

    Beyond delightful. Especially the tripe about “our models prove climate change” Land sakes, don’t they have a Pleistocene History Book? That’d be a lot cheaper than 90 million. Maybe a few windows, too, to remind them of the real world that continues on without their pithy revelations!

    141

  • #
    David Maddison

    I wonder if, as a condition of their undoubtedly generous redundancy packages, they will be asked to sign secrecy agreements so as not to disclose the conclusions they were instructed to come to in their “scientific investigations”?

    182

  • #
    Dave in the states

    Mitigation and adaption now huh? They might want to hire Bjorn Lomborg. He’s has already done some research on that.

    163

  • #
    Douglas Kubler

    Have pity on the CSIRO
    only 97% have to go.

    192

  • #
    Turtle of WA

    I wonder how Bjorn Lomborg feels about this. The CSIRO is moving in exactly the sort of direction he has been encouraging all along.

    I hope Lomborg writes about this. He has been demonised for having the only logically consistent view a warmist who is certain of the threat of AGW could have.

    131

    • #
      Dave in the states

      But he didn’t tell the politicians what they wanted to hear. I wonder how these scientists feel now that it is clear they have been nothing but patsies to a political agenda.

      101

  • #

    CSIRO has announced it will axe 300 to 350 climate jobs

    If these climate scientists knew what they were talking about, you’d only need one! :)

    171

    • #

      But you forget the inevitable positive feedback mechanisms which take a minsucule 350 and scale it up at least 6x to over 2000.

      Then this figure will increased by “homogenization” of the data, by the urban employment effect, there are also site specific issues that increase it further, not to mention a few unscrupulous people might just add a bit extra for good measure where there are site specific excuses. All in all the final figure taking all global warming employment issues into account is bound to be nearly 10,000. In addition that figure is increasing rapidly at an alarming and “unprecedented rate” and current predictions projections show that 97% of all climate extremists will be unemployed in the near future unless we all step in RIGHT NOW to save their jobs.

      111

      • #
        Raven

        But you forget the inevitable positive feedback mechanisms which take a minsucule 350 and scale it up at least 6x to over 2000.

        *Gulp* It’s worse than they thought . . .

        00

  • #
    michael hart

    Penny Sackett is a “We’ve got 5 years to save the planet” person.

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/archive/news/weve-got-5-years-to-save-world-says-australias-chief-scientist-professor-penny-sackett/story-e6frf7l6-1225806754392
    That was in 2009, so I guess, post Paris, it is now a case of “mission accomplished”. But it could also beg the question of what she has been doing for the last couple of years since the planet-saving deadline expired.

    However,as she was originally an Astronomer, I would guess that she is now in the fortunate position of being able to discover other planets that need saving, should the downsizing affect even her. Younger scientists who made the mistake of following her down this ruinous path may not be so lucky.

    181

    • #
      michael hart

      [Mods, I'm still not sure why my posts can land in moderation. I don't think I've been a naughty boy. At least, not here.
      I know you sent out an email a few months ago apologizing for unwarranted 'moderation', so I just thought you might like to know. Does using the preview function several times trigger it? Bishop Hill had a similar problem with WordPress recently. MH]

      [The preview button cannot put you in moderation. As to the comments you're talking about, a moderator would need to look at each one to find out exactly why it landed in moderation.] AZ

      60

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    What is that old saying again? Oh yes, I remember it now.

    Fools rush in where even angels fear to tread.

    On the other hand, from what I’ve read here, CSIRO isn’t exactly a model of great benefit for the buck spent. So maybe some of it can go without hurting anything?

    61

  • #
    TdeF

    Still stunned. An army, 350 scientists at the CSIRO studying Climate Change? Not the BOM, the CSIRO. $90 million a year. For how many years? After spending billions now ‘researching’, what do we know we did not know before? Where is our return on investment, or is that not science?

    I just read the CSIRO web site and the waffle about climate and weather and ‘settled science’ (“Science is rarely, if ever, ‘settled’”) and extreme events and likelihood of things. You have to laugh though when they write seriously about the Australian climate of ‘droughts and flooding rains’, a quote from Dorothea MacKellar’s poem, “my country”. Did we spend billions to rediscover what a teenage girl observed in the 19th century?

    More expensive insights
    In climate change science, the robust findings include:

    Clear evidence for global warming and sea level rise over the past century
    Changes observed in many physical and biological systems are consistent with warming
    Due to the uptake of anthropogenic CO2 since 1750, ocean acidity has increased

    Increased? This is utterly deceitful. No oceans are acidic.

    So what do we have to show, now that the Climate Change department has achieved its objectives and where on their web site are their discoveries, conclusions, hard facts and settled science? Or was it just another huge waste of money like the 50 year cloud seeding program or the robotic shearing machine? How can anyone claim that this massive project has completed its mission and achieved its objectives? What were they?

    Are all these successful scientists now going into glorious publicly funded retirement? No wonder the country is broke.

    171

    • #
      Yonniestone

      My youngest sibling once worked at the now defunct Department of Climate Change, they are very proud of the work undertaken there to help educate the public on the science behind the greatest fear facing mankind, their qualifications is a degree in film studies.

      144

    • #
      diogenese2

      The Madness of Crowds (h/t Charles Mackay)

      TdeF; trust you to ask the most embarrassing questions. I would point out that 350 is only the number to get the bums rush, not the total who have been beavering away producing more papers than any human can read to no purpose that can be simply described.
      A consensus of astrologers predicted (with 97% confidence) that, on 1st February 1524, the Thames would rise up and wash away 10k dwellings. Half the population fled, the outcome is described below;

      “Bolton, the prior of St. Bartholomew’s, was so alarmed, that he erected, at a very great expense, a sort of fortress at Harrow-on-the-Hill, which he stocked with provisions for two months. On the 24th of January, a week before the awful day which was to see the destruction of London, he removed thither, with the brethren and officers of the priory and all his household. A number of boats were conveyed in wagons to his fortress, furnished abundantly with expert rowers, in case the flood, reaching so high as Harrow, should force them to go farther for a resting-place. Many wealthy citizens prayed to share his retreat; but the prior, with a prudent forethought, admitted only his personal friends, and those who brought stores of eatables for the blockade.

      At last the morn, big with the fate of London, appeared in the east. The wondering crowds were astir at an early hour to watch the rising of the waters. The inundation, it was predicted, would be gradual, not sudden; so that they expected to have plenty of time to escape as soon as they saw the bosom of old Thames heave beyond the usual mark. But the majority were too much alarmed to trust to this, and thought themselves safer ten or twenty miles off. The Thames, unmindful of the foolish crowds upon its banks, flowed on quietly as of yore. The tide ebbed at its usual hour, flowed to its usual height, and then ebbed again, just as if twenty astrologers had not pledged their words to the contrary. Blank were their faces as evening approached, and as blank grew the faces of the citizens to think that they had made such fools of themselves. At last night set in, and the obstinate river would not lift its waters to sweep away even one house out of the ten thousand. Still, however, the people were afraid to go to sleep. Many hundreds remained up till dawn of the next day, lest the deluge should come upon them like a thief in the night.

      On the morrow, it was seriously discussed whether it would not be advisable to duck the false prophets in the river. Luckily for them, they thought of an expedient which allayed the popular fury. They asserted that, by an error (a very slight one,) of a little figure, they had fixed the date of this awful inundation a whole century too early. The stars were right after all, and they, erring mortals, were wrong. The present generation of cockneys was safe, and London would be washed away, not in 1524, but in 1624. At this announcement, Bolton the prior dismantled his fortress, and the weary emigrants came back.”

      Note the last paragraph and expect, as La Nina sets in and we (UK that is) begin a summer freeze, the “pause” will again found to be an illusion or the apocalypse postponed yet anon.

      211

      • #
        TdeF

        Great story! Thanks. Astrologers.

        Our precise modern parallel was the amazing IPCC announcement that by 2035 some 400 million Indians were to die of thirst because the glaciers of the Hindu Kush were vanishing. Now that was illogical as while the waters of the Ganges came from melting glaciers, glaciers only delay the result of falls in the high mountains. Still the amazing peer reviewed accurate science so scared the Indian government that they commissioned their own investigation and found it was factual rubbish. Ultimately the idea was traced to a single throw away line from a tour guide but the IPCC announced the 2035 date was a simple typographical error, that it should have been 2135 or 2351 or somesuch. Passed through the proof reading by the same illustrious peers as well, apparently. As for the doomed 400 million, the entire population of Europe in size, they were reprieved when the IPPC astrologers revised not recanted their prediction.

        What is hard to understand is that nothing was said about the value of the IPCC reports or their infallible peer review system or the value of their extremely serious pronouncements. No facts, no truth and a typo. Oops. Reading goat entrails or tea leaves might be better after all.

        130

  • #
    AZ1971

    Those who bang loudest on a drum should not be surprised when it’s taken away for disturbing the peace.

    121

  • #
    F. Ross

    This announcement will, no doubt be an a$$ puckering experience for them, especially when the pink slips start to flow. Perhaps the many loud climate scientists who scream that the debate is over will suddenly learn a bit about the scientific method, and just maybe all those models just aren’t that good after all.

    91

  • #
    jorgekafkazar

    Oh, yes, the Lysenkoist pretenders have danced their little dance; now it’s time to pay the piper. They thought they were in charge, but they were only (putting it far more politely than they deserve) hired help.

    101

  • #
    ScotsmaninUtah

    In an interview Prof Steve Sherwood said the following:-

    DAVID MARK: What would you say to those people who say, no, we still don’t believe that there is evidence against climate change, we don’t accept it, this is man made

    STEVEN SHERWOOD: All I can say is that this has been debated in the scientific community for many decades now and there’s really no serious doubt left within the scientific community.

    121

  • #
    Don Gaddes

    Put them all into data analysis – and give John Cook the job of providing the ‘data’. Steffen and Flannery can make the coffee – ( it will need two.)

    121

  • #
    doubtingdave

    Calm down a little people , is this all good news !! The research from CSIRO has long been an easy target for sceptics to attack , the soft underbelly of the alarmist side , so maybe that’s why they’re getting rid , mitigation has always been the name of the game , that’s were the money is !! Mitigation gave us carbon markets and taxes , Mitigation gave us alternative energy like wind and solar etc why did Lomborg get such short shrift if it wasn’t because he would’ve shown mitigation instead of adaption was economically unsound , by kicking him out they in effect shut down any criticism or investigation into the mitigation money go round , now with this latest move they have begun to close the door to prevent sceptics from revealing the faults with the basic science research , allowing them to ignore sceptical scrutiny whilst they go forward with the lucrative mitigation cash cow

    161

  • #
    ScotsmaninUtah

    Professor Will Steffen a key science adviser to the past Howard Government has described the debate in the media over the basics of climate change science as:-

    ”almost infantile”

    equating it to an argument about the existence of gravity.

    101

  • #
    Ross

    It is interesting this is announced in the same week the UK BOM have come out saying there is likely to be global cooling in the next fives years.
    Is something going on in global political circles behind the scenes ?

    131

    • #
      ROM

      Ross @ #77

      I also am quite suspicious that somewhere, somehow, somebody has been given a very strong message maybe even delivered to and via the CSIRO board that enough is enough of this climate catastrophe nonsense.

      A very strong message was needed and is being delivered that there are rapidly narrowing limits to just how much the politicals and the increasingly the public will tolerate re the amounts and volume of academic and climate science bulls**t as it is becoming realised that most of this climate change BS has no detectable foundations based on actual hard researched science but is all just little more than a whole raft of self promoting hyperbole by a huge cabal of self aggrandising “climate experts”.

      And those back room political somebodies in the bureacracy and even in the media are sniffing the climate change roses and have detected that there is no longer a poklitically acceptable scent coming from to those roses but a rather pungent and getting stronger odour emanating from those same climate change roses.

      So if you have an increasingly pungent odorous something that a very sensitive political nose has possibly detected in the political body corporate and is also a huge and increasingly unwarranted draw on scarce government resources and getting more so, “the science is settled” remember , a point probably not lost on many members of the political and bureaucratic class who are competing with the climate science cabal for funds, as the climate change and academic troughers get ever deeper into the public trough, it is best to eliminate the problem and fast by using a very sharp knife, a situation which if allowed to fester is going to create a lot more angst and will thus become ever harder to fix as the climate change troughers organise to make sure they have continuing access to their increasing share of the tax payer funded slushies deep in that trough.

      Don’t underestimate the influences here of the rest of the bureacracy behind the scenes who are also in there competing for funds against the climate science troughers for their pet projects.

      And maybe already mentioned elsewhere above and a lot like the international recognition and even the increasingly vocalised international envy on how Abbot solved Australia’s unwanted, uninvited boat borne “house invader” problem by taking a hard line attitude towards those uninvited imposters, one hell of a lot of bureaucrats and politicals elsewhere on the international political scene who are all competing for the decreasing government funds across all the developed nations will be watching with very great interest as to the consequences and the “hows ” it is being being done here in Australia on the beginnings of the great clean out of the gross infestations of incompetent in science “climate experts” into science institutions everywhere.

      90

      • #
        Ross

        ROM
        Agree, but who was the key person in Aussie politics/bureaucracy who put the hard word on the CSIRO ? Can’t have come from Turnbull could it –unless the internal polls are telling him that the voters have had enough as you say. If that is the case then the polls must show a HUGE swing against Turnbull’s position on the subject.
        Will be fun to watch.

        PS. We should not forget the strong possibility of a Republican US President at the end of the year –2 of the 3 front runners are skeptics and the EPA will be near the top of their agenda.

        80

        • #
          ROM

          Ross
          It doesn’t have to be just one person or even a specific group operating in concert to lean on the CSIRO hierarchy.

          Just a lot of short asides and remarks, many sarcastic, at meetings with business, politicians , in clubs and at parties and etc on how everybody is getting fed up with the whole climate change catastrophe thing.
          A hell of a lot of people will say one thing in public so as not to be seen to be too different and so not cop unwanted flack from hard liners but will say something close to the opposite in private with people they feel they can trust.

          And who knows when the wife, partner / husband comes home from a gathering somewhere and casually mentions that the mob are getting sick of hearing about all the supposed climate change catastrophes they were supposed to be facing and having when they could remember very well they had a number of similar supposed climate change caused events when they were kids and much younger a long time ago.

          In the end and as we are all human including those at the top of the heap, such decisions are all governed by perceptions and appearances and attitudes including just getting thoroughly bored with whole deal and moving on to something more challenging, particularly if another lot of bureaucrats elsewhere are starting to lean on their ministers and other bureaucrats to get at some of the loot being handed out to the global climate catastrophe spruikers.

          40

        • #
          Geoff Sherrington

          Ross,
          Maybe Warren Truss and other Nationals?
          Geoff

          00

      • #
        Lewis P Buckingham

        My own thoughts on this.
        What I think has happened is that many CSIRO scientists have felt that the work of the Climate Scientists is not up to the usual high standard of the existing Corps of scientists.
        It was insightful that the CEO made it clear that he welcomed 41 other Universities using CSIRO developed GCM’s while the CSIRO got on with practical action about inevitable climate change.
        All of a sudden he distanced his organisation from the University Professors who have been scaring people witless about snow disappearing, dry dams, endless drought, death from heat, rising oceans killing a lot of people, polar bear destruction and so forth, while belting them up emotionally with the guilt trip that they are destroying the planet for their children.
        So he cut out the emotional baggage and said we in Australia have decided to actually do something about any climate change.
        A voice of sanity.
        Hopefully he will make sure we end up with an accurate non ‘homogenised’ record of our climate, so real decisions are made about mitigation if and when climate changes.

        60

  • #
    RB

    Larf!

    Aren’t these all the “world’s expert” scientists? I’m sure they’ve been telling us that for years now.

    SO no worries. They’ll all get picked up in the private sector and paid handsomely, I’m sure.

    20

  • #
    Mikey

    They shouldn’t have any problems finding new jobs, given their level of skill.
    “So, you have many years developing complex models! That’s perfect for this position’
    “Yes sir! Glad to hear that!”
    “So then tell me. Just how accurate were the results of your models when measured against reality after the fact?”
    “Ahhh..errr.ummmmm…That depends on how you define ‘reality’. Our reality or the real reality?”

    50

  • #
    ScotsmaninUtah

    CSIRO not GISS – damn it !

    There are times when I wish that Gavin Schmidt worked in Australia.

    52

  • #
    cephus0

    Prof Penny Sacket: “Paris did not determine whether or not climate change is happening, scientists who generate and study big data did. The big question now, which underlies all climate adaptation work, is ‘How is the climate changing?’” That’s a pretty unfortunate surname given the subject matter but what a fabulously crass thing to say. The mad folks with their snouts in the trough have been saying all along that the science is definitely settled and if co2 goes up then so does temperature and we can’t have that now can we and violent weather and sea level rise and ice cap melting and every other climatic parameter is directly correlated with human co2. So there is only a single response and that is drop co2 so why she goes all surprised that we then no longer need battalions of expensive researchers to keep saying the same thing over and over is anyone’s guess. The one thing which is more certain than the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is that they will never change their ‘settled science’ by a single micron so it’s so long and thanks for all the fish.

    20

  • #
    Mikey

    Or if they can’t get jobs in Australia perhaps they can emigrate to Canada and get jobs in a factory that makes hockey sticks.

    30

  • #
    ScotsmaninUtah

    Professor Sackett said:-

    “while the reality of climate change was clearly understood (sic), there was less certainty about its effects on rainfall patterns in Australia”

    and ABC journalist Sabra Lane quotes Professor Sackett as saying:-

    “The evidence is clear the planet is warming due to human activity. … It is also clear that the largest portion of that [warming] is due to human action.

    71

  • #
    GoFigure

    Send those folks over here. I understand Obama, Biden and Terry will hire them all !

    30

  • #
    Mari

    Sarah Perkins – Article at http://insidestory.org.au/wherever-you-are-heatwaves-are-getting-relatively-worse – whining about her too-warm Swiss vacation and stating that heat waves are more intense and occur more often;

    http://insidestory.org.au/how-should-we-feel-about-climate-change – touchy-feely article about scientists describing how they feel about climate change and how we need to buck up. Also “Many thousands of scientific studies on human climate change have been conducted over the past few decades. The overwhelming majority (hovering between 97 per cent and 99 per cent) indicate that human climate change is happening and unmitigated impacts can and will be severe.”

    and final nail in the lid – “: Book now for our free event in the lead up to COP21 with some of the best minds in climate science. https://www.science.unsw.edu.au/climate4change Extreme weather records continue to be smashed. And Dr Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick says there is no doubt that humans influence is behind these events” from http://reliefweb.int/videos/single/UNSW/doNtQtejkwQ

    60

  • #
  • #
    TdeF

    It is sad in some ways, Sarah Perkins Fitzpatrick was awarded her PhD in 2010 at the Climate Change Research Centre, UNSW, Australia. She studies heat waves and extreme events in Australia. Here is someone who has grown up from childhood with Climate Change a fact of life and based her life on it, attending an institution built entirely on a belief in Climate Change and Climate Change Research and goes on holiday and amazingly finds and reports Climate Change overseas from the observation of a hot summer. Sad really. Like a friend who did a PhD in theology and decided there was no God, believing something from childhood does not make it true. It’s going to be hard to find another job except building more web sites.

    121

  • #
    John Robertson

    The government minions should be grateful, the communists shot their useful idiots every time they achieved power.
    These useful idiots, while ruining their reputations, will get a payout at layoff and a government pension.
    Amazing what a low price they set on their own integrity, but hey, they knew what it was worth.

    Indeed the “science is settled”.
    Nature ran the experiment and the speculated warming caused by CO2 emissions has been measured.
    As unmeasurable against natural cycles.

    20

  • #
    Robdel

    So will Lomborg be moving to the new climate mitigation division of CSIRO?

    70

  • #
    Duke Silver

    What do you have when you fire 350 climatologists?

    ……… a good start.

    90

  • #
    Thinker

    JOANNE and DAVID!

    It’s as simple as this to

    [SNIP!

    Cotton has been banned and we'll delete any comment he sneaks through. Please don't encourage him with reply comments. If you see a comment that gets through, contact the support email.]ED

    15

    • #
      ROM

      Another invasion of the climate blog pest species Cotton pestis seems to have occurred again.

      70

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      Doug
      It is not necessary to go to all that trouble to dispense with the notion of “GHG”.
      It is beyond dispute that plants have lived on planet Earth for at least 500 million years.
      It is beyond dispute that plants die when atmospheric CO2 is below 150 ppm.
      Therefore it is indisputable atmospheric CO2 has been present at no less than 150 ppm for 500 million years.
      If the notion that CO2 is capable of increasing surface temperatures were true, this would have taken place continuously for at least 500 million years.
      The effect then would be the INTEGRAL of effect on temperature of one measure of CO2 multiplied by the measured integers of CO2 in the atmosphere.
      The result of course would be a steadily increasing temperature until such point that no organisms could survive.
      Since this is obviously not the case, the GHG notion is silly nonsense.

      61

      • #
        AndyG55

        Particularly as past CO2 levels have been magnitudes higher than now.

        We currently have VERY LOW CO2 levels wrt historically and wrt necessity for plant life and future food supplies.

        This anti-CO2, anti-life nonsense HAS TO STOP !!!

        73

  • #
    handjive

    Now that the science is settled, disproving it might be a legitimate question and a funding source for enquiring minds?

    61

  • #
    ianl8888

    As I implied in #35 above, all this is not yet FACT

    As with the putative cuts to ABC funding in Abbott’s time, the bureaucrats immediately go public threatening the most politically sensitive areas (like the ABC’s Peppa Pig) so the resultant public furore reverses the threatened funding losses

    This seems to me a much more likely scenario than that supposed here. And Lord Waffle will save them, burnishing His greeniness

    100

  • #
    Ted O'Brien

    That was yesterday’s story. Here is today’s, in the smh, Brian Robins:

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/energy/will-the-future-arrive-in-time-to-head-off-the-emerging-crisis-20160203-gmlb0z.html

    “Rising amounts of electricity generated from renewable energy has driven down the wholesale price which makes it increasingly difficult for the operators of baseload power stations to make money especially since the cost of renewable energy is next to nothing once it is built and plugged in.”

    This is why the retail price is skyrocketing. ??????

    They haven’t been taking their advice here!

    150

    • #

      Ted this is the fundamental issue with renewables and their logic as it relates to consumers.

      Do renewables drive down wholesale prices? It would appear they may, the couple of studies (including the Senate inquiry) have made similar statements.

      However the hole in the logic for consumers is lost on socialists because they have the naïve idea that savings will be passed on LOL!! All renewables do is increase the profit margins of the wholesalers. Tax payers money built most of the infrastructure, it is then wholly or partly sold off (usually overseas) and the difference in generating costs is pocketed by the new owners and whoever else benefits from the contract.

      Why anyone thinks renewables in their current form are either a good idea or a solution to anything is a mystery. But given the excess of dumb in society right now, I think we can guess at the reasons for their success.

      60

      • #
        Analitik

        No, wholesalers take it in the back too due to the fixed pricing they pay (via PPA’s) no matter what the current wholesale rate is (especially bad when it’s windy and sunny on a weekend or holiday and the price goes into negative)

        The “winners” are the companies with the wind and solar generation and even they can’t really make a profit once the capital costs (and maintenance for wind) are factored in.

        40

    • #
      Analitik

      Don’t worry. Elron Musk (deliberate misspelling – think about a phonetic connection) will save the day for SA’s grid with the Powerwall (even more so now that the Mk2 has been announced) – the Catalyst told us so this week
      http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4398364.htm

      /SARC

      52

    • #
      ROM

      For information only;

      Quoted from “Ted O’Brien @ # 94″

      especially since the cost of renewable energy is next to nothing once it is built and plugged in.”

      From Pierre Gosslin’s NoTricksZone blog

      Offshore Wind Turbine Maintenance Cost Fiasco: “100 Times More Expensive Than A New Turbine Itself”!

      &

      Unreliable Power: Major Technical Failure Sidelines Another Offshore Wind Park…Adding To Exploding Costs

      71

      • #
        AndyG55

        “Adding To Exploding Costs :-0″

        How much does it cost to “explode” a wind turbine ?? (as opposed to just waiting)

        I’m sure I could find a donation. !! ;-)

        53

        • #
          ROM

          “Exploding costs”

          More true than funny as the broken undersea power cable from the farm to the grid system runs through an area in the North Sea where the WW2 allied bombers used to unload any unused ordinance ie; bombs and etc that hadn’t been dropped on target for a whole variety of reasons.

          As these weapons were not armed when they were disposed of in the North Sea drop zone , the whole area apparently is riddled with highly dangerous unexploded WW2 bombs and other ordinance which has to be cleared first so as to find and repair the power cable before the wind farm can again transmit power to the shore installations.

          Rather stupidly it doesn’t worry the owners of the wind farm as they just keep getting paid by the grid operators under the German renewable energy transition laws for the power they might have produced but didn’t due to the cable break.

          The grid operators suffer no loss as they just transfer this cost onto their customers.

          Even with the most warped imagination possible, you really couldn’t make most of this stuff up.

          100

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        Yes. Thanks. So how could the smh publish this statement?

        20

    • #
      William

      Renewables are working well in the spiritual home of the Greens, Tasmania. http://www.theage.com.au/environment/rainfall-drop-cable-failure-leave-tasmania-scrambling-for-electricity-20160203-gmkdt6.html. Sadly the outcome of the drought is people calling for more wind generation. It mystifies me that a movement, now a political party, that had its genesis in preventing wilderness from being despoiled by a dam, now worships at the base of the eco-crucifixes that scar our headlands and ridges and kill countless birds and bats.

      111

      • #
        AndyG55


        It mystifies me that a movement, now a political party, that had its genesis in preventing wilderness from being despoiled by a dam, now worships at the base of the eco-crucifixes that scar our headlands and ridges and kill countless birds and bats

        .

        Just wanted to reiterate your point :-)

        54

  • #
    TdeF

    Looking at Larry Marshall’s credentials. Impressive. In his US business world you crashed through or crashed. Twenty patents. Started six companies. Venture capital. Take no prisoners. Succeed or perish. He would have been shocked to find 350 scientists studying something for decades without producing a single useful result, in fact without even proving there was such as thing as man made Climate Change and in direct competition with the Bureau of Meteorology. So perhaps 20×350 or 7,000 man years, most of a billion dollars and nothing to show for it, the CSIRO doing what it has perfected, nothing much at enormous expense and without time limits or even objectives.

    You have to wonder how many other divisions of the CSIRO achieve nothing except their own eternal existence at the public expense? In retiring 20% of their staff in the last two years, how much of a loss has that been to Australian science? How much value has the Australian public really received for $1,000,000,000 a year which could not have been achieved by subsidizing private research for example instead of tax breaks? You know, where people actually have to invent things which work and do research which has practical results or gives real understanding which can be used commercially? As for the single CSIRO patent used as part of WiFi, it was a windfall that the world WiFi group had a need for it but contrary to the story, the CSIRO did not invent WiFi. That was serendipity, publicly funded. Now Marshall knew if he did not close it down simply for lack of any results, someone else would. All of these taxpayer organizations, the BOM with data collecting automated, the ABC with 1,000 journalists and the CSIRO with its tradition of morning tea are under scrutiny for belonging to the early 20th century concept of public institutions to do badly what private companies do for profit. Sell them all.

    150

    • #
      ROM

      Three hundred and fifty climate predicting scientific quacks and shamans being fired from just one significant science institution here in Australia!

      Just how many of these scientific practioners of climate alarmist quackery actually exist here in Australia, spread across and through the numerous academic institutions let alone the numbers of those same climate alarmist practitioners of climate predicting quackery who exist in vast numbers across the whole of the developed western world ?

      The cost of supporting such parasitical climate alarmist troughers must be enormous and crippling to advancement on other societal problems in the eyes of the western national treasuries.

      The costs to the public and national treasuries that have arisen and been imposed at the behest of those same climate alarmist quacks must dwarf even the cost of sustaining those same highly versed in climate modelled mythology quacks.

      The value of benefits that could have arisen from a far wiser and far more beneficial use of those public funds to advance the facilities of our society and the standards of living world wide would no doubt again dwarf those previous climate quack retaining costs by a huge margin.

      And what we have got and seen in actual real measureable benefits from this enormous and lavish outpouring of wealth onto the climate alarmist science scene?

      Nothing, nothing at all!

      In fact a huge deficit in scientific advancement with only the constant and moronic and public morale destroying pronunciations and the persistent claims of future disasters from climate change having an entirely negative impact on the morale and belief in the future of society as a direct effect from the derisory machinations of climate science over the quarter of a century past.

      It has all been an almost total and gigantic waste and dispersion of the tax payers scarce wealth and resources.

      Even the climate alarmist scientists themselves are now admitting, admittedly as they see their lavish funding and their jobs dissapearing down the sink hole of past history and despite their past gross previous bare faced “misrepresentations” that they knew it all about the climate, the “science was settled” remember, they now admit they don’t really know how the factors and the interactions and how the global climate actually operates despite their almost unlimited access to massive amounts of public funding for over two decades past.

      In short after a few hundreds of billions of dollars being spent on their welfare and a quarter of a century of very expensive scientific window dressing aka a climate science Potemkin Village , the self styled climate “experts” know very little more about the global climate than they knew some two decades ago;
      ie; the Climate Sensitivity number, a key item in predicting the increase in temperature from the increase in atmospheric CO2 is still completely unknown after near on 30 years of climate research into that number within any set of reasonably believable and universally accepted numbers.

      140

    • #
      Ted O'Brien

      It is very, very wrong to even suggest that the CSIRO achieves nothing. It has been a marvellous institution over the years, doing just what its title indicates.The I in its title is Industrial. With industrial research the CSIRO was the channel for not just government subsidisation of science in industry, but for providing smaller participants with access to facilities which would have otherwise been beyond their resources. It worked marvellously, so much so that I would be very reluctant to give it away to the so called “Free Market”.

      The CSIRO was and is not a stand alone institution. It worked with our academies and industries. It would be foolish in Australia’s small by “developed” world standards economy to depend on a “free market” to do what the CSIRO has been doing.

      I am hoping that the problems with the CSIRO are limited to the exceedingly partisan Climate Change department. Even that should not be thrown out before the records are sorted.

      50

      • #
        TdeF

        So what has it achieved? Especially in Industry. Where has it worked with industry in industrial research? It would be very interesting to hear a single story. After all, a group which can pay the salaries of 350 scientists to achieve nothing at all should have quite a story to tell about the rest. A story of great achievements.

        Who said Australia was small? That has been an excuse for failure I have heard for a lifetime.

        Australia is half the population of England, five times that of New Zealand and comparable to Canada or say Sweden, Norway and Denmark combined, 40% of the population of France and growing by a million people a year. No car industry, no aircraft, cannot even make a transistor, no heavy industry and whole mendicant windmill states dedicated to the public service and without enough coal power to save themselves.

        The CSIRO is a dangerous dinosaur like the ABC, BOM and the multicultural fantasy SBS when everyone gets their real ethnic content from the internet or satellites. Sell the lot, like Telstra, CSL, Power utilities, railways, airlines, post office, transport, ports. Why should the government dominate the media, which is against the law. Why should 350 people be working on climate change in competition with the 1,000 people of the Bureau of Meteorology. Was anyone asked if this $90million a year was justified? Was anyone in fact told this was happening or is this a cover up by the new bosses?

        70

        • #

          Yes, and we have heaps of lawyers, politicians and economists who produce very little.

          10

          • #
            TdeF

            Some people produce absolutely nothing and politicians are the ultimate public servants. Lawyers and economists have a very different service role to a publicly funded industrial research body.

            What I do not know is what real good the thousand scientists of the CSIRO do and how they could put 350 of them on full time Climate Research, achieve nothing and get away with it. It is not that they are being fired, but that they were ever hired? Who approved that? The public? Was Australia even aware that this was happening? This is a huge number of people without any justification I have read. In fact it should be a huge scandal and that may explain the sudden move. What were these 350 people supposed to be doing? Proving something? What?

            60

            • #
              ROM

              TdeF @ # 95.2.1.1.1

              What I do not know is what real good the thousand scientists of the CSIRO do and how they could put 350 of them on full time Climate Research, achieve nothing and get away with it. It is not that they are being fired, but that they were ever hired? Who approved that? The public? Was Australia even aware that this was happening? This is a huge number of people without any justification I have read. In fact it should be a huge scandal and that may explain the sudden move. What were these 350 people supposed to be doing? Proving something? What?

              Those are also questions I am starting to ask myself over the last couple of hours as I get past the immediate reaction to news of the firings.

              What in the hell did 350 CSIRO climate scientists ever do?

              350 CSIRO climate scientists if they wanted to be classified at all as “scientists” must surely have produced some identifiable item of public good that we can see and measure in its impact on society, business and the people.
              Where are and what are those benefits if any actually exist?

              How many similar situations exist in the publicly funded Australian academia where large numbers of “climate scientists” are employed on the public purse but have never provided any justification for their employment or produced any measurable results or advancements, scientific or otherwise.

              In short, is the CSIRO situation re the numbers of climate scientists employed in publicly funded science institutions and academia merely the tip of another very large and very thoroughly corrupted climate science iceberg?

              50

  • #
    Robber

    Great decision by the CSIRO. Now if we could get all the Australian universities with climate activists (I struggle to call them scientists) to also reprioritise their work to focus on the innovations that Australia needs in manufacturing, agriculture, medicine, we could cut the waste and deliver real benefits.

    160

  • #

    Ah Will….. you were a funny guy before, but now…. please just stop it hurts when I laugh this much.

    “This is deeply disturbing news. The impacts of climate change are already being felt around Australia at an increasing rate, and there is more to come. We absolutely need to know more about the basic operation of the climate system — how it is changing and how best can we respond to the climate change challenge.”

    90

  • #
    pat

    like some others, I do wonder if this is merely the science is settled/time to move on to making money, as we often heard at COP21.

    also on Marshall’s background:

    Oct 2014: AustralianJournalOfMining: Oliver Probert: New CSIRO boss has clean energy background
    Marshall is currently managing director of Southern Cross Ventures, a venture capital firm based in California, Shanghai and Sydney, specialising in growing Australian technology in Asia and the US – with a specific focus on ‘clean’ technologies such as photovoltaics.
    ***Southern Cross Ventures is the manager of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA)’s Renewable Energy Venture Capital Fund, and Marshall sits on the board of that fund…READ ON PLUS ONE COMMENT
    http://www.theajmonline.com.au/mining_news/news/2014/october-2014/october-15-2014/other-news/new-csiro-boss-has-clean-energy-background

    ARENA: Renewable Energy Venture Capital Fund
    ARENA’s Renewable Energy Venture Capital Fund Programme was created to provide venture capital and active investment management to encourage the development of Australian companies that are commercialising renewable energy technologies.
    The Southern Cross Renewable Energy Fund (Fund) established under the Programme is a Co-investment between ARENA and Softbank China Venture Capital, with each providing half of the committed capital to the Fund. The Fund has committed capital of up to $120 million and is managed by private sector fund manager, ***Southern Cross Venture Partners Pty Ltd…ETC
    http://arena.gov.au/programmes/renewable-energy-venture-capital-fund/

    don’t know that Marshall remains on the Board at SCVP, but interesting that they managed ARENA’s funding.

    60

  • #
    Road Toll

    Woops The Global Warming Bus just ran over some folks. ;)

    70

  • #
    pat

    p.s. from previous comment. presumably SCVP still manages ARENA funding.

    as for BoM…yesterday was ten days from the Sky Weather channel’s forecast of 40°C temperature for my region for Feb4, according to their 10-day forecast, which was subsequently revised down to 32, then 30 and ENDED UP BEING 28°C MAXIMUM.

    what can you expect when this man is Sky’s chief meteorologist?

    Australia Day Ambassadors: Dick Whitaker, Sky News – Chief Meteorologist
    Dick Whitaker is Chief Meteorologist at SKY NEWS Weather and SKY NEWS National.
    He is known as Australia’s premiere weather man, with a career spanning over 40 years…
    In 1971 Dick started his career as a Meteorologist, working for Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology…
    Dick left the Bureau in 2002 to retire, but the ‘weather bug’ struck again and he came out of retirement to begin his own meteorological consultancy business.
    In 2006 Dick joined The Weather Channel on Foxtel as their first Meteorologist, before being promoted to Chief Meteorologist 2011.
    In 2012 Dick accepted a role at SKY NEWS Weather where he continues to lead the SKY NEWS Weather team and appear across the SKY channels during severe weather…
    http://www.australiaday.org.au/ambassadors/view/?id=317

    2013: Amazon: Understanding Climate Change: The Story of the Century
    by Richard Whitaker
    Anyone wishing to come to grips with the current debate about global warming and its consequences to mankind will find this book fascinating – and sometimes disturbing – reading…
    About the Author
    Dick Whitaker is an Australian meteorologist and author. He is currently a Senior meteorologist on The Weather Channel (Australia) (now Sky), following an esteemed 30-year career as a meteorologist with the Bureau of Meteorology. Richard has authored or co-authored
    several books about weather and historical topics, having a particular interest in natural disasters…
    http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Climate-Change-Story-Century/dp/1459650735

    91

    • #
      TdeF

      Thanks, Pat. I now see what is not clear in his own carefully scriped summary, that Marshall has been up to his neck in Climate money before. So much for all those ‘companies’ and patents. It is all about making money from Climate, but not by discussing it and modelling it, by getting involved in making and selling stuff. Do we Australians need a $1Bn publicly funded R&D company in the Climate business? At what point is the whole thing simply competing with private funding, like the ABC? Is that what was intended when the CSIRO was set up, or is it now just a big business opportunity, to make money with public funds? Is the CSIRO simply past its use by date as a concept? Why not just go public, as did CSL? Or would it be worthless today, in which case why spend $1Bn a year keeping it going? Then again, that is only what we borrow each week at a Federal level and we get nothing for that.

      60

  • #
    handjive

    The head of the CSIRO, Larry Marshall, said in a letter to staff on Thursday that the government’s science agency’s job had been “to prove climate change”.
    That question has been answered,” he told staff.

    > That “question” was far from settled for Larry only 18 months ago:

    “Climate change a CSIRO priority as new chief looks to secure funding
    Larry Marshall says global warming is high on the public’s agenda because ‘the science is so compelling

    70

    • #
      TdeF

      Maybe the funding has just dried up, or maybe he wants to focus on photovoltaics, wind, other sources of energy where there is money to be earned and his former buddies can get involved. Conflict of interest? Of course not. Besides, the computer modelling of the climate on ‘supercomputers’ has yielded nothing and is clearly near useless at long term predictions. Perhaps 7,000 man years or R&D wages and resources wasted. Good thing no one is asking questions in parliament.

      60

  • #
    tom0mason

    So now for the CSIRO the science is truly settled…
    The main problem is that people are often led to the erroneous belief that virtually any climate changes can be based on simple logic and causation principles. e.g. ‘This climate parameter change has caused, or is correlated with, this or that event.’
    This is largely wrong.
    Outside of the very short term catastrophic event, (e.g. a large volcanic explosion) no one parameter appears to dictate the general flow of weather changes, though the changes in ocean currents and temperature appears to be a major factors.
    The natural movement of atmospheric gases and vapors, and the oceans and seas are (AFAIK) defined within the field of fluid mechanics. Therefore all the various interacting parameter changes that have happened and that are currently happening affect the current weather and the general direction of the climate’s change. Our climate, however seems to be dependent also on some other subtle signals that are probably from outside this planet’s domain.

    Modern Fluid Mechanics is based on the Navier Stokes equations formulated nearly 200 years ago. These are non-linear, tightly-coupled second order partial differential equations forming a deterministic system to which analytical solutions exist in only a few special idealised cases – not in the real world.
    The field of Chaos Theory has shown that all physical systems previously thought to be deterministic in fact have unpredictability built into their very nature due to the unavoidable non-linearity they contain. The mathematical models of classical mechanics are idealised approximations. In reality, absolute prediction of the outcome is not possible – only the probability of an outcome.
    This article gives a brief overview of some of Chaos Theory and how we see it applies to both Fluid Mechanics and Computational Fluid Mechanics, with a view to how these disciplines could be re-thought to facilitate technical advance in aerospace and related fields.

    — from ‘Observations on The Application of Chaos Theory to Fluid Mechanics’ available from Meridian International Research, Aviation House,Wellesbourne Airport,Wellesbourne. Warwick. UK
    ¯
    Also see https://www.technologyreview.com/article/422809/when-the-butterfly-effect-took-flight/
    ¯
    So often those ‘climate scientists’ with some appreciation of this matter fail to fully grasp the implication of the chaotically deterministic aspects of our climate’s and weather’s fluid motion. Or the fact that overlying all these ‘simple’ mechanical effects is life itself and its complex interaction with the biosphere and so the climate.
    In other words an observed set of weather parameters may imply some easily predictable future situation but all too often such a prediction fails as all the governing parametric variations are not fully observed and/or the couplings, interactions, and feedbacks are not properly understood.

    Finally questions for the any ‘climate scientist’, or anyone who believes they know –
    “(1) What are all the governing parameters of our climate, and (2) how do they all interact?”
    Please show all your working…

    40

  • #
    Bill Schlibdiver

    Good riddance! Now how do we accomplish the same for NOAA and NASA??

    82

  • #
    Manfred

    “This is deeply disturbing news. Prof Steffen, ANU

    Are they addicted to the funds, the power and influence, the politics, to the entrails and glass balls, or the whole lot? Their angst is delicious.

    They betray themselves at every turn.

    102

  • #
    pat

    over to ABC, which needs urgent culling.

    Fran’s Brekkie today had:

    5 Feb: ABC Breakfast: ‘Very difficult’ for Australia to meet promises in Paris climate agreement: leading CSIRO researcher
    CSIRO fellow Dr. John Church says the proposed changes are likely to wipe out the ‘majority’ of the climate science program that the organisation has built up over the past 25 years…
    But today, John Church tells RN Breakfast that the changes will make it harder for Australia to frame policies on appropriate carbon reduction targets, the likely impacts of extreme weather events, and effective adaptation to climate change…

    but also had:

    5 Feb: ABC Breakfast: Seven deserts, seven continents, seven weeks: raising awareness for the global water crisis
    That’s the seemingly impossible task that Australian-born entrepreneur Mina Guli has set herself.
    She’s the CEO of the global not-for-profit organisation Thirst, and she says she’s running to make saving water ‘famous’—and to highlight the looming global water crisis…
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/seven-deserts,-seven-continents,-seven-weeks/7142418

    there’s not a mention of CAGW.
    Fran asks Mina who she is – but not as head of a charity or as an entrepreneur, because Fran knows all that (what about the listeners, Fran?) – but as an athlete! (more on who Mina is in followup comments).
    Mina has a videographer, a photographer and a medically-trained support team with her. she will walk across Antarctica.

    BBC had their own piece days before, also not mentioning CAGW:

    26 Jan: BBC: Seven deserts, seven weeks, forty marathons
    Mina Guli, an Australian adventurer, entrepreneur and founder of a charity that aims to raise awareness about water conservation (Thirst) has set herself a difficult task: running the equivalent of forty marathons across seven deserts on seven continents in seven weeks to highlight the issue of water scarcity…
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03gn7w9

    to be continued.

    40

  • #
    pat

    some of what we might have learned on Fran’s Brekkie:

    LinkedIn: Mina Guli
    Following a 15-year successful career as a world leader in climate change, including cofounding Peony Capital – a company that provides capital and knowledge to Chinese companies to help them mitigate their impact on the environment, Mina established Thirst, an organizational initiative of the Young Global Leaders of the World Economic Forum…
    CEO Thirst 2011-present
    ***We are a registered Charity and work with large numbers of corporate and multilateral organisations such as Inditex, Levi Strauss & Co and the Foundation for UNESCO (amongst others) who support our program.
    As well as her role at Thirst, Mina is also in training to become the first person to run 1680km across 7 deserts on 7 continents (in just 7 weeks!) – all in support of UN Global Goal 6 – Water…
    Counsel, World Bank, 2002 – 2005
    Developed the first carbon projects in China, India, Indonesia, and Nepal, and structured seven of the World Bank’s carbon funds representing more than 1 billion of assets under management.
    Senior Associate, Baker & McKenzie, 2001 – 2002
    Working with senior partner Martijn Wilder in Baker & McKenzie’s world leading climate change practice. Developed some of the first documentation supporting the transaction of carbon credits (still used today), and worked on nascent “first of type” carbon deals across the world. Acknowledged as a leader in the field.
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/mina-guli-37294a6

    ***Mina leaves out a major supporter:

    Mina was planning to tackled five deserts at this point:

    Nov 2014: World Economic Forum: How China is tackling its water crisis
    by Mina Guli, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Thirst
    Imagine identifying an issue so big you think you’ll never make a dent in it. Then think about how you’d feel if you actually could. Here at Thirst4Water, we can.
    Through a series of mass education programmes, social media, public awareness campaigns, smart partnerships and the mobilization of hundreds of thousands…
    Since our launch in March of 2012, 30,000 Chinese students have graduated from our Water Experience education module, and our messages have reached more than 250 million people online. We have set a Guinness World Record, established 67 clubs in schools and universities across China, and collaborated with some of the world’s leading consumer brands, such as Inditex and Levi Strauss & Co, and with foundations such as UNESCO and the ***PAULSON INSTITUTE.
    http://www.weforum.org/agenda/2014/11/davos-mina-guli-thirst4water/

    Paulson Institute as in ex-Goldman Sachs boss & Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson, which even Time Magazine named as one of the “25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis” of 2008, yet the Paulson Institute has been the major player in advising China on how to set up carbon (dioxide emissions) trading. (multiple Paulson papers on the subject are available online).

    More to come.

    40

  • #
    pat

    gosh…Thirst4Water is a “partner” of the Paulson Institute:

    PDF: 10 pages: Paulson Institute: Sustainable Urbanization
    Urbanization and its Impact on China’s Water Resources
    August 2014
    by Mina Guli
    Founder & CEO, Thirst4Water
    Raya Yampolsky
    Former Project Manager, Thirst4Water
    Thirst4Water, ***a partner of the Paulson Institute, is an NGO that educates and engages the next generation of global consumers to become more water-wise by encouraging them to participate in workshops and social media campaigns.
    Encouragingly, there are signs the central leadership is committed to looking after the environment: the plan is to be carried out in adherence to the principles of “green,
    clean, low-carbon development.”…
    Climate change poses new challenges, as flash flooding leads to more water
    pollution, rising seawater leads to increased salinity of groundwater, and glacial
    retreat alters the rate of replenishment of rivers, among other things. Between 2000
    and 2008, Asia experienced the greatest number of climate disasters worldwide…
    The IPCC’s climate models predict China will not be able to meet demand for water
    by as soon as 2020s…
    Electricity
    demand is expected to double by 2030, the majority of which is generated via water intensive coal power plants…
    http://www.paulsoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Thirst-Paper-121014_vF.pdf

    strangely, Norton’s wouldn’t allow me to open these Paulson mentions of Mina Guli:

    The Paulson Institute and CCIEE Launch Children’s …
    http://www.paulsoninstitute.org › Events › Recent Events
    Dec 5, 2012 – … Lead Scientist for The Nature Conservancy; and Mina Guli, Founder and CEO … and change our behavior to reflect that,” said Hank Paulson.

    The Paulson Institute and Sesame Workshop | Paulson …
    http://www.paulsoninstitute.org › Events › Recent Events
    Jun 27, 2012 – Experts included Hank Paulson, Deborah Lehr and Evan Feigenbaum … for The Nature Conservancy and CBS News Contributor; Mina Guli…

    exploiting children? why not.

    btw it’s time to get all these tax-exempt NGOs who want to burden taxpayers with CAGW costs to start paying taxes themselves surely.

    50

  • #
    pat

    two bits of fun:

    Wikipedia: Paulson Institute
    Named after former Goldman Sachs CEO and Chairman and the 74th United States Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson, the institute was founded in 2011 by its namesake with the goal of attempting to solve
    today’s most pressing economic and environmental challenges in the United States and China, as well as promote positive systemic cooperation between these two global powers, through aggressive research done by a worldwide network of prominent thinkers…
    The Paulson Institute claims to take a “think and do” approach. It has assembled fellows and researchers from around the globe, including figures like the former Prime Minister of Australia ***Kevin Rudd…
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paulson_Institute

    2009: ABC Carbon: CarbonExpo: There’s Gold in the Carbon Market
    A one-day key summit planned for the Gold Coast on Monday will seek to co-ordinate climate change action across all levels of government, while Greg Combet, Minister Assisting the Minister for Climate Change will headline Australia’s presenters at the three day Carbon Market Expo, as pressure mounts on Government decisions regarding the highly topical climate change stance.
    The event sponsored by major organisations Macquarie, Ernst & Young, Ecofund Queensland, and Baker & McKenzie will commence on Monday and is being held at the Gold Coast Convention Centre running from October 26-28…
    9am -12.30pm: ***Tony Jones (ABC), moderator of high level plenary sessions with global leaders throughout the day such as Robert Hill, Chair, Australian Carbon Trust; former Australian Environment Minister etc…
    9.00am: Martijn Wilder, Partner, Baker & McKenzie, and other global carbon market expat experts will present on the perspectives of Australian expats working in global carbon markets, of carbon market developments & trends, and the global financial situation.
    Other key note speakers include…
    ***Mina Guli – Vice Chairman, Peony Capital, Beijing
    Will Steffen – Executive Director, ANU Climate Change Institute…
    Coming in the lead-up to international climate change talks in Copenhagen, close to 80 delegates from across all tiers of government, academia, science, business and the community will meet to agree on a set of themed principles for co-operation…
    http://abccarbon.com/there%e2%80%99s-gold-in-the-carbon-market/

    ***Mina Guli a speaker (and at the 2010 event from another link I found online) & ABC’s Tony Jones was their regular moderator.

    never mind. Fran’s Brekkie tale of a charitable explorer, concerned about water, was a sweet story to start the day.

    50

    • #
      doubtingdave

      Thanks Pat , interesting to me for a couple of reasons , first I have a fascination with Astrotheology , which is a ancient scientifically based study of the motion of the stars , sun and planets and how they relate to the passage of time as observed by humans , according to astrotheology , and due to the earths wobble on its axis the Sun rises under a different constellation approximately every 2100 years , the Sun currently rises under the star sign Pisces and has done since the birth of Jesus is set , that is why the fish is a christian symbol , the age of Pisces is coming to an end in the next couple of decades when the Sun ( because of the wobble of the earth on its axis ) will begin to rise under the star sign Aquarius ( the water bearer ) , there are many that think when the CO2 global warming scare has played out , it will be replaced with a water shortage or water conservation meme , coinsidance ??? , Hank Paulson is a member of secret societies that still practice Astro theology , he is also related to me , he comes from the branch of my family that set sail with William Brewster aboard the Mayflower never to return , and in his case it is good riddance to bad rubbish ( sarc ) ;)

      10

  • #

    CSIRO one day, Bureau of Meteorology the next.

    This news from this morning Friday 05Feb2016.

    Bureau of Meteorology to axe staff from all regional stations except Cairns

    It may only be “more than 30 employees from 24 regional stations”, but this is also an interesting article, when taken in conjunction with the CSIRO statement.

    It also says that all observation duties will be automated.

    I guess that counts as, umm, innovation, eh!

    Also, I suppose then that homogenisation becomes a little easier when there are less eyes on the job.

    Tony.

    131

    • #
      Ted O'Brien

      Let’s see now. Yesterday the CSIRO Climate Change department. Today the BOM. Tomorrow is Saturday. Does the ABC announce spending cuts on Saturdays?

      20

  • #
    Dennis

    Moving on, apparently, I researched the new Tesla Power Wall battery pack and discovered that a 5 Kwp system would cost me around $15,000 installed. The Power Wall by itself would be $9,500 and could be connected to existing solar panels.

    There was a disclaimer: “May not be cheaper than staying on the (electricity) grid.”

    It was noted that an average family would need 3 to 5 Kwp.

    40

  • #
    ConradCA

    You prove scientific theories by comparing the theory’s predictions with the real world. The advocates of global warming are refusing to do this. Yet they think that the GW theory is proven.

    Develop a reliable method of measuring climate that doesn’t require that the data be fixed to “hide the decline” ie make it conform to the predictions of GW.

    Collect the predictions of the GW models for the next thousand years. These predictions most be identical because the science is settled.

    Then compare the predictions with the real world data and if the match for a thousand years we can consider the GW theory proven.

    They also need to develop a reasonable solution to this problem if it is proven. None of the current proposed cures will make a significant difference according to the advocates of GW. The cost of these cures is worse than the problem. We can’t allow the transfer of power to governments that is needed for these solutions because it risks the creation of a Progressive Fascist tyranny. The solution also would destroy the world economy. Throwing billions into poverty and causing the deaths of hundreds of millions. If GW is proven to be real then better solutions need to be found.

    20

  • #
    Sunray

    Thank you Jo, in the words of the late great Jacky Gleason – “How sweet it is” or “To the Moon Alice”. ( spelling?)

    61

  • #
    pat

    TonyfromOz -
    what good news re BoM. your link credits ABC at the bottom.

    Bureau of Meteorology to axe staff from all regional stations except Cairns
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-05/bureau-of-meteorology-remove-staff-regional-stations/7143562

    plus here’s a laugh:

    5 Feb: UK Independent: Tom Bawden: Global warming could be causing dogs to become depressed, say pet behaviourists
    Leading pet behaviourists say the number of depressed and unsettled dogs they have seen in recent months is unprecedented
    “I’ve been working with dogs for more than 20 years and I can’t remember a time when they’ve been this bored. I tend to see boredom in bursts but I’m seeing it chronically this winter,” said Carolyn Menteith, a dog behaviourist who was named Britain’s Instructor of the Year in 2015…
    She – like many scientists and meteorologists – puts this down to climate change and expects to see more bored dogs in the future as global warming unleashes increasingly frequent and intense bouts of winter rainfall…
    Sarah Fisher, an animal behaviour counsellor with around two decades experience, has also noticed a level of canine unrest that is unprecedented in her career…
    A large portion of the UK’s dog population is behaving strangely at the moment and it’s not generally the pet’s fault…
    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/global-warming-could-be-causing-dogs-to-become-depressed-say-pet-behaviourists-a6854006.html

    50

  • #
    pattoh

    How long do you reckon it will be before a disgruntled former CSIRO employee sees the light & comes clean with a “tell all ” book?

    I.E. a “A Tall Tale of Homogenization, Bunfights, Booze & Bollocks”

    80

  • #
    pat

    5 Feb: Guardian: Graham Readfearn: After climate cuts at CSIRO, who should we ask about global warming impacts on Australia? Netflix?
    Former senior CSIRO climate scientist explains climate models in Australia were not being used to ‘prove’ climate change. That had happened long ago
    Dr Penny Whetton had spent 25 years working on climate change modelling for Australia’s premier science agency, but in 2014 it was time to go.
    “I could see the writing on the wall,” says Whetton, who put up her hand to take a redundancy package in October 2014…
    Whetton still holds an Honorary Research Fellow position at the agency, where she had worked as a senior principal research scientist and one of the key people leading the CSIRO’s climate modelling work…
    Whetton: “New modelling work is being done right now. Who will do the job that CSIRO has always done in interpreting those models to understand the impacts for Australia. Where will that advice come from in the future?”
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2016/feb/05/after-climate-cuts-at-csiro-who-should-we-ask-about-global-warming-impacts-on-australia-Netflix

    5 Feb: Guardian: Michael Slezak: Senior CSIRO scientist derides chief executive’s claim climate change is ‘answered’
    “Everybody is laughing at Marshall’s statement,” the (ANONYMOUS)scientist told Guardian Australia. “Who is he to declare that climate change is answered? The IPCC says so many problems are not answered yet. And unless you know how the climate is changing, how do you adapt to it?”
    Then, on the ABC’s program 7.30, Marshall further defended the shift saying universities were focused on the issue.
    “The 7.30 response is a con,” the scientist said. “There are a lot of thing that universities cannot do…
    “Because most university research is dependent on temporary research grants, many programs the CSIRO has built over decades would be impossible to reproduce.”…
    “Universities are not doing the carbon budget or the carbon cycle. There are a lot of capabilities that are not in universities that are in CSIRO. Unless they have a new huge injection of funds this capability would be lost. This took us 40 years to build.”…
    Tony Haymet has previously been the Policy Director at CSIRO and the director of the SCRIPPS Institution of Oceanography in the US, where he is now a professor. He likened Larry Marshall’s management of the CSIRO to “schoolboys playing at being managers”.
    “If you are a complete failure, what you do is take one of your best divisions, shut it down, and invest in your pet project,” Haymet said.
    “That’s the coward’s way out … The job is to raise more resources. It’s like shutting down the Australian cricket team, saying we need a lacrosse team, and spending three decades investing in that.”…
    Haymet said the cuts are “a kick in the guts” to farmers, the fishing industry, the navy and people who live on the coast and is worried about sea level rise.
    “We’ve only seen the beginning of climate change. We don’t know what the heck is waiting for us,” he said.
    http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/05/senior-csiro-scientist-derides-chief-executives-claim-climate-change-is-answered

    40

  • #
    pat

    there’s no hope for Tom, so no point in excerting him:

    5 Feb: ABC The Drum: Tom Quinn: CSIRO cuts: Without climate modelling, we won’t be able to adapt
    But it is impossible to adapt without having access to the latest modelling…
    (Tom Quinn is the CEO of the Future Business Council. He will be speaking on The Evolution of Business at PauseFest in Melbourne on February 8-14.)
    http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-05/quinn-csiro-cuts-why-we-need-climate-modelling/7143584

    5 Feb: The Conversation: CSIRO needs to tackle the impact of climate change following its jobs shake-up
    by Will J Grant, Researcher / Lecturer, Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, Australian National University
    Disclosure statement: Will J Grant receives funding from the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science.
    While it appears that overall job numbers will remain static – or may even increase – it is concerning that right in the bulls-eye are areas responsible for key climate monitoring and modelling…
    Australia, we have to remember, is particularly vulnerable. Any loss in our national capacity to understand this issue is deeply problematic…
    The CSIRO restructure has us walking into the unknown blindfolded, relying on other research institutions to pull up the slack.
    Yet we have to ask – how much climate research capacity does Australia need? If your answer is always “more”, then that doesn’t make grounds for serious discussion…
    http://theconversation.com/csiro-needs-to-tackle-the-impact-of-climate-change-following-its-jobs-shake-up-54176

    20

  • #
    pat

    one more reason for culling the ABC:

    5 Feb: ABC: Donald Trump: 73 per cent of people in poll say he should be banned from entering Australia
    Lateline – By Brigid Andersen
    More than 9,300 people took part in Lateline’s Facebook poll, with the overwhelming majority supporting a ban…
    The Immigration Department has the power to block anyone entering Australia if they fail a character test.
    A person could fail the character test if they vilify a segment of the Australian community or incite discord in the community or segment of a community.
    Mr Trump has visited Australia in the past but there is no indication he is planning on visiting again, nor is there anything to signal the Government would try to restrict him from entering the country…
    Watch Lateline tonight for a debate on free speech and the Donald Trump poll at 9.30pm (AEDT) on ABC News 24 or 10.30pm on ABC TV.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-05/donald-trump-73-per-cent-say-he-should-be-banned-from-australia/7140884

    the ABC FB page has the poll being put up at 10.34pm on Sunday 31 Jan. the first Lateline show for the year only aired on Mon 1 Feb.
    obviously copying the UK example, which no doubt amused their tiny brains while on their endless taxpayer-funded holidays:

    https://www.facebook.com/abcnews.au/posts/10154753851144988

    30

    • #
      DOC

      Pat. ABC? Who cares? The stalwarts of censorship reside in the dungeons of the ABC. Last night they had a TV program with a lady justifying control of free speech. How come they only managed 73%? 27% must have failed to fill in the Yes/No correctly.

      00

  • #

    It seems there a lot of people who have commented on this topic, and are of the opinion it has been total and costly waste of time.

    20

  • #
    Dave

    Robbo,

    there a lot of people who have commented on this topic, and are of the opinion it has been total and costly waste of time

    No! I disagree, commenting is free and often done in spare time!

    The cost is virtually ZERO!
    The time is your own!

    Have you got the demographics of “A LOT OF PEOPLE” or is it guess work Robbo?

    20

  • #
    JMO

    They have paid for their hubris, for them the gravy train is over.

    31

  • #
    Man Bearpig

    For Sale: One computer model – complete with magic beans.

    70

    • #
      Mikey

      “All the bells and whistles included. Will go wherever you want it to. Needs slight work. Tends to lean terribly to the left.”

      20

  • #
    Wayne Job

    Hi Jo, This is for you, our chief scientist came on board today Mr Finkel and a few other notables, what we have is real as I told you. Wayne

    10

  • #
    Another Ian

    Jo

    This seems to fit around here IMO

    “Some of the more “politically aware” climate scientists have been keen that nobody should publish anything that might work against the green agenda. Michael Mann’s infamous comments are a case in point. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that climate scientists moderate their behaviour accordingly withholding anything that might give “fodder” – in Mann’s words to the sceptics. They either do this willingly, because they share Mann’s political outlook, or unwillingly, because they fear the consequences.”

    More at

    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/5/hiding-your-light.html

    60

  • #
  • #
  • #
    Brian H

    A better framing of the rhetorical is: Since CO2 is ineffectual and irrelevant, who needs ‘em?

    30

  • #
    ScotsmaninUtah

    90 million dollars – me luv you long time

    I am surprised that the Australian Climate Scientists, having gotten “into bed” with the Politicians, and provided them with the answer that they wanted, could seriously have expected a long term relationship, especially after they prostituted themselves to a “political dark stranger” for whom everyone knows has a less than chivalrous reputation.

    So now after years of attention , travel, and expensive gifts, the “Climate Maidens” are left deflowered, their possesions taken, and they stand alone at the alter in the hope that someone else will come along and act as their benefactor.

    More seriously though , CSIRO by their actions, have now effectivley closed the door on the climate debate in Australia, and If I were a skeptic living in Australia I would be very concerned.

    61

  • #
    Dave in the states

    Mitigation and adaption are really code words for taxation of all types and allocation of those revenues.

    They are moving on to the next phase of their agenda.

    Many “scientists” or “climate maidens” (thanks Scotsman) are not included among those to receive further allocations.

    20

    • #
      philthegeek

      taxation of all types and allocation of those revenues.

      Here we call it Direct Inaction….. or…. $ Transfer from Consolidated Revenue to Govt donors.

      30

  • #
    Frank Van Nostrand

    Do these people have ANY idea what they are doing?

    30

    • #
      Another Ian

      Frank

      ” Neil Jordan
      February 5, 2016 at 12:17 pm

      Your observation reminded me of a clipping I had saved from a 1993 Tau Beta Pi “Bent” letter to the editor: “Economics is a difficult subject because it is not about the control of a passive system. Rather, it is about the design of policies in pursuit of complex objectives in a system comprised of people who are at least as intelligent as the government that is attempting to influence their behavior.”

      From comments at

      http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/05/friday-funnies-a-cartoon-week/

      10

  • #
    Steven Fraser

    So, to celebrate, the Earth is now pouring very cold Siberian air into the region of the North Pole, and from there Southward into the Bering Sea and around Greenland. Also, trade winds north of the Equator are now blowing solidly from the East…

    http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-144.83,84.26,890/loc=-14.856,89.454

    And still below -40 C in Antarctica

    http://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-227.41,-78.62,930/loc=89.402,-79.179

    10

  • #
  • #
    Senex

    Am I the only commenter who picked up this gem from Penny Sackett in Jo’s article?

    “Paris did not determine whether or not climate change is happening, scientists who generate and study big data did.”

    There you have it in a nutshell. Legitimate scientists do not generate data, they observe and record it.

    40

  • #
    Oksanna

    Thinking deeply about a comment by Scott (above) at #53.1.2 in this thread. I suggest that the funding cuts to CSIRO climate science is a grand-masterstroke by the Turnbull government. With this lurch to the “Right”, some govt backbenchers might be placated, but there will be a future need to boost the government’s environmental credentials before the next election. The solution to that need could be to implement an ETS. Therefore I regard these funding cuts as the prerequisite to a Turnbull ETS. Checkmate by Malcolm. He would have foiled his own hostile backbench and the Opposition in a few clever moves.

    10

  • #
    DOC

    Did I read this wrong?
    My first thought was there may have been a bit of arm twisting politics. Motherhood statement given to say ‘we’ know it all. Now to work on mitigation. Hasn’t Lomborg been on this argument for years.

    The Climate has warmed. Nobody argues it hasn’t, even if there is a pause/halt/going cold. Note now it’s all ‘Climate Change’. So non specific a term that even if it cools in time the true believers can say: ‘so what? Its Climate CHANGE!We told you so’. This looked to me like the back out from the argument when you don’t want to admit failure.

    Nothing wrong with CSIRO working on adaptation to getting hot (or cold) – housing, water, roads, power efficiency. Isn’t that what people have done for a 150years? As the man said: ‘The CSIRO hasn’t produced an income generating piece of science in generations and this might be the way to go.’ At least it could save money by increased efficiencies in structures and utilisation in all of the above. Go to Israel and have a look would be my advice.

    Seems another Abbott CC mitigation success to me. None of the big spend, cost increasing COL and penury induced by an ETS and giving away a fortune to the UN. Might upset Bishop a bit, though!

    22

  • #
    steve

    Can anybody guess the opinions of the 350 sacked at climate change central sorry CSIRO.

    01

  • #
    Ron C.

    Here are some issues that could employ those sacked climatologists.

    https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2015/07/17/edge-research-topics-in-climatology/

    10

  • #

    [...] Naturally, this caused an immediate reversal of opinion among Australia’s cashed-up climate change community. Suddenly the science wasn’t settled at all. In fact, the science was almost completely unknown! Author and climate change sceptic Jo Nova rounded up some of the more hilarious reactions at her excellent website. [...]

    00

  • #

    [...] Details at Jo Nova’s always fun website. [...]

    00

  • #
  • #
    JohnOh

    I want to have the last say. My theory: Solar panels sucks energy from the Sun. So do Windmills. So my theory is those solar and power windmills are cooling the planet. Thats my theory. Now can I have job with the Labor Party Climate Institute? It makes sense and I willspend the rast of my life proving this to the satisfaction of Flim Flammery.
    LMAO

    00

  • #
    JohnOh

    I want to have the last say. My theory: Solar panels sucks energy from the Sun. So do Windmills. So my theory is those solar and power windmills are cooling the planet. Thats my theory. Now can I have job with the Labor Party Climate Institute? It makes sense and I will spend the rest of my life proving this to the satisfaction of Flim Flammery.
    LMAO

    00