|
|
A study done on… golly, Antarctic Ice, allegedly shows that in the catchment area for Newcastle in NSW, Australia, the last 100 years have been pretty darn nice, compared to the past when droughts and big-wet periods used to last a lot longer.
Set aside, for a moment, that the ice cores are thousands of kilometers away and in a totally different climate, if they are right, if, then natural climate change is much worse than our short climate records are telling us. And if our current records are so inadequate and don’t represent the “old-Normal”, then we have a flying pigs of predicting the “New Normal”. Has the climate changed at all, or is the new one just like the old old one?
Hydroclimatologist and lead author, Dr Carly Tozer from the ACE CRC said the research showed exposure to drought and flood risk was higher than previously estimated.
“The study showed that modern climate records, which are available for the past one hundred years at best, do not capture the full range of rainfall variability that has occurred,” Dr Tozer said.
“The wet and dry periods experienced since 1900 have been relatively […]
Is Force X two different forces? The Sun could influence Earths climate through magnetic fields, solar particle flows, or spectral changes. | Image: ESA
There are two key clues, almost contradicting each other, which we must solve to figure out what Force X is. How do we explain that mysterious pattern — the little spike of extra sunlight each sunspot cycle doesn’t warm the Earth as it arrives — and it should. Instead, the warming appears greatly amplified 11 years later (or one sunspot cycle later). What’s going on? Logically the sunlight itself is not the direct cause, but only a signal, a leading indicator of something else going on — perhaps the solar wind, the magnetic fluxes, or the changes in the UV-Infra Red spectrum. Any one of these (or all of them) or maddeningly, even something else, could be influencing cloud cover on Earth — and some action on clouds is by far the most likely mechanism to amplify the solar effect. They blanket 60% of Earth, and small changes make large differences. We live on a Water-Planet. So having looked at the reasons for Force X, we now split it into two different forces (N and […]
Christopher Monckton reminds us of just how badly the “experts” have failed in the last 15 years, even including the recent hottest ever El Nino months. China bombed the atmosphere with record carbon “pollution” — worse than we thought. The world though, warms sedately at a mere half a degree per century. This is what 95% certainty looks like. — Jo
Introducing the global warming speedometer
A single devastating graph shows climate panic was unfounded
By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
A single devastating graph – the new global warming speedometer – shows just how badly the model-based predictions made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have failed.
…
9 out of 10 based on 132 ratings […]
While Turnbull and the Liberals are attacking Labor for wanting a “massive new carbon tax on electricity,” it turns out that the Climate Change Authority is going to recommend the Liberals do exactly that but not ’til after the election. Allegedly Greg Hunt’s office are “very happy” that the report will be delayed. It would muddy up that scare campaign about Labor’s carbon tax if the punters knew the Libs planned to bring one in too. Labor and the Greens are crying foul, saying the report should be released now.
We are bizarrely reliving 2009. The public don’t want carbon trading. They have voted against it at every opportunity. They don’t want to spend even $2 to neutralize flights, yet both major political parties are now demanding we have one. If the report is suppressed in any way it shows Turnbull and Hunt know the public don’t want a carbon tax, but they’re going to give them one despite that.
The Climate Change Authority was rescued from the Abbott sabre by Al Gore and Clive Palmer. Turnbull and Hunt pointed at it on Sept 22 last year, barely two weeks after the coup, and announced carbon trading and a “cap” […]
…
7.8 out of 10 based on 17 ratings
Tony Abbott’s plan is one of the most efficient and effective programs anywhere in the world. But the Green hero is really enemy number one. Apparently giving the eco-cartel what they say they want is a disaster. Don’t look now, but green underpants are showing. Who cares about carbon reduction or trees? Givem’ power and money!
Gillard’s carbon tax cost $5310 per ton. Abbott’s plan at $10/ton this round is 531 times greener. The Direct Action plan uses a reverse auction to buy the cheapest carbon reduction in Australia. In the third round another half billion dollars has bought 47m tons of carbon reduction at an even cheaper price than the first two rounds. Most it achieved by planting or restoring greenery and trees.
The real problem with the Direct Action plan is manifold — a/ it doesn’t specifically punish the “big polluders” (those big independent companies that don’t need the government to survive). b/ it doesn’t reward the right patrons — there’s no money for the parasitic windmills and solar industries. And c/ It is more like the real free market solution the eco-fans say they want — showing that the fake free market idea of imposing an […]
I’ve said before that the man-made climate-faith is a luxury of the stupidly wealthy. Only people with time to stress about the carbon footprint of their oranges can wallow in the indulgence of owning the idea that windmills in Alabama could reduce tidal surges in Peru. It follows then that if (or as) the economy falls apart so will the Green religion.
A new research paper backs this up, but possibly shows more about researcher’s confirmation bias than it does about the public. (I suspect the most useful part of this research was that a couple of hundred people got to see a video with Richard Lindzen in.)
That the global-eco-faith needs lots of wealth is a horrible conundrum for the Greens. The best thing they can do to encourage “climate belief” is to get out of the way and let the economy prosper, which of course is the last thing the Greens can do since “Growth” = “Pollution” in the GreenWorldView. So the more the Greens do to slow or wreck the economy, the more skeptical the population will get. It’s a “positive” feedback loop that may protect Western Civilization a little bit. Joy.
Is that motivated recall or […]
Don’t turn on the air conditioner. You might make someone a racist:
Climate change is spawning injustice, racism, intolerance and wars, according to author and political activist Naomi Klein.
Got moral decay? High Priestess Naomi Klein, expert psychoanalyst, says blame the weather. John Vidal, writer for The Guardian, believes her:
“It is not about things getting hotter and wetter but things getting meaner and uglier, unless we change the corrosive values that are pitting people against each other,”…
See, some people think mums and dads are supposed to teach values, but really it’s a humidity thing.
(Obviously, the way to fight racism is with biogas.
…and maybe ethanol.)
Naomi’s thesis reminds us that when the weather was ideal — like in 1915, there were no wars and everyone liked everyone.
She urged people to make the links between climate change and conflict. “Anti-austerity people rarely talk about climate change. And climate change people rarely talk about war. Overcoming these disconnections is the most pressing task for anyone occupied with social justice.
Yes, stop ISIS now — send in the windmills!
“There is no clean, safe way to run an […]
There is a voting block in Australia that is ignored and disorganised, but ready to be galvanized. It’s part of a worldwide phenomenon. Readers who havent read the first post on the Delcons phenomenon ought start there.
An election is likely to be called any day. There are 15 million voters enrolled in Australia. If 4% of Liberal-Nat voters are Delcons, that’s about 2% of the total voter pool or 300,000 people who don’t matter. And that’s a conservative, pardon the pun, estimate. Another 10% of Liberal voters said they are “a little less likely” to vote for the Liberal Party at the next election. These voters are not lost from the leftie end of the Liberal Party fan club. Potentially there are another 750,000 who could be convinced to instead vote National, ALA, Lib Dem, Family First or some other option should it appear. All up, these 14% of Lib voters have a million votes and are the most passionate sixth of Liberal supporters.
What could possibly go wrong?
Picture 300,000 less Liberal donors, volunteers, scrutineers, and people to hand out how-to-vote cards at 7,000 polling booths on July 2nd. Imagine 300,000 fewer website commenters willing to defend […]
Dismal failure can be rewashed as success. An outbreak of Dengue Fever could be a “hot holiday island with weight loss”.
Yesterday a study showed that the worlds sharpest fund managers couldn’t give a toss about climate change. Less than a fifth could even manage a “tangible” effort. These guys manage trillions. They assess risks for a living. They can’t see either a green revolution, nor the need for one. As I noted, most heavyweight investors are acting like skeptics.
But some poor sods reading “The NewDaily” and listening to John Hewson would think it’s a booming thing. Hewsen, by the way, ran for PM in Australia circa 1993 as the leader of the Liberal Party.
Let’s translate the marketing: When the news is bad, find a reason to cheer (don’t mention the rest):
Super funds get top marks on climate index
Tony Kaye
On an index where 80% failed to do anything at all, there are still A, AA, and AAA rated divisions of tangibility:
Three Australian superannuation funds are among just 12 institutional investors in the world to receive the top rating for climate change risk management from the Asset Owners Disclosure […]
Shame investors who manage tens of billions are not good at assessing risk. They are missing something big and obvious:
Half of leading investors ignoring climate change – study
Reuters: A report by the Asset Owners Disclosure Project (AODP), a not-for-profit organisation aimed at improving the management of climate change, found that just under a fifth of the top investors – or 97 managing a total of $9.4 trillion (6.4 trillion pounds) in assets – were taking tangible steps to mitigate global warming.
These include investing in low polluting assets or encouraging the companies they invest in to be greener.
How low is this bar. Less than one-fifth are doing anything “tangible”. To even get the tally up to a half “not ignoring climate change”, the researchers had to include a category called “first steps”, nothing tangible mind you. Perhaps someone sent an email?
Anyone might think that four fifths of top investors think climate change is a complete non-event.
A further 157 investors managing a total of $14.2 trillion were taking “first steps” towards addressing climate change, while 246 managing $14 trillion were doing nothing at all, the report said.
[…]
…
7.8 out of 10 based on 27 ratings
|
JoNova A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support AT joannenova.com.au
Statistics
The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX
|
Recent Comments