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

ABC investigates grammar entrails of Malcolm Roberts

...

Malcolm Roberts, Lateline, ABC

This is what we pay the ABC a billion dollars for, so they can investigate the really big questions we were all asking, like why Malcolm Roberts used such odd grammar five years ago, and is he connected with other groups that use odd grammar?

One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts denies links to Sovereign Citizens movement

Yes, I’ve never heard of them either.

The big breakthrough was that Malcolm Roberts wrote some letters five years ago with highly suspicious grammar:

The senator has been quizzed about his knowledge of the Sovereign Citizens movement because of the existence of documents he began writing five years ago in a style similar to that used by the group’s adherents.

The crime:

Among the documents’ distinctive characteristics was an unusual style of punctuation.

593,000 people voted for One Nation, but the ABC wants to ask about semi-colons.

Similar stylisation of names is often employed by those within the Sovereign Citizen movement, in the belief that hyphens and colons can help them evade governments’ use of grammar to enslave their citizens.

And it takes three people write up about some tenuous grammar connections…

Story bv Nick Grimm, Peta Donald and Francis Keany

Meanwhile, all by himself and and no funds from the Australian taxpayer, Michael Smith, is researching Australian taxpayer donations to the Clinton Foundation.

The smear campaign against Malcolm Roberts is obviously a higher priority.

h/t David B, Pat.

UPDATE: Watch  Malcolm interviewed on Lateline with Emma Alberici

Malcolm does a great job. Emma Alberici just doesn’t understand what empirical evidence is.  Instead she cites consensus, opinions, a hot run of years, and resorts to the big-coal smear, fishes for the banking family conspiracy, and hauls out the grammar entrails too. No wonder she runs out of time. Anything but topics that matter.

Alan Jones interviews Malcolm Roberts on 2GB

For those who want to hear from the new Senator, instead just “about him” here’s a radio interview today. At least one media outlet wants to talk about policies that matter instead of grammar entrails. For foreign readers, Alan Jones is one of the most influential talk back radio hosts in Australia.

Alan Jones interviews Malcolm Roberts (13 mins)For those who don’t want to listen: Jones gives him a pretty spectacular introduction and Malcolm talks from 3:40 on. He speaks well, and talks about the introduction of the new carbon tax by the Turnbull government. When asked why companies go along with this he explained correctly that it was because they are intimidated by namecalling as “environmental vandals”. (In a perfect world he could have added that some of these companies are making money from the Green Gravy train themselves, or they they can just pass on the cost to consumers who have no choice but to pay it if it’s an item or service that can’t be ordered cheaper from overseas.)

Malcolm Roberts has spent the last 9 years working pro bono exposing the alarmist statements. He explains that carbon is plant food, and “we want things warmer anyway”. There’s no pussy footing around: “Greens are one of the most dangerous and vile forces in this country.”

He criticizes universities for accepting funds so they can make alarmist claims that they government wants to hear. But when he asked federal Minister Christopher Pyne about this problem, Pyne simply said they have no control over the university, and told him to write to a state minister. So Malcolm did and the state minister said the same thing. Roberts claims the UQ Vice Chancellor earns over a million dollars a year. But where is the accountability?

No one seems to be responsible for the taxpayer funds. This is a big issue for me too. As I’ve said before modern scientists have become networking grantwriters rather than researchers.

As a curiosity which really needs updating: In the late 1990s an ABS report apparently showed that an Australian on an $80,000 salary paid 68% in taxes levies and charges. (Currently the average income is 80k, it would be nice to get up-to-date figures). They spend from Monday to Thursday morning earning money for the government, they get to keep what they earn after morning tea on Thursday and then on Friday.

His three priorities are raising accountability, cost of living, and security (economic and terrorism).

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.7/10 (69 votes cast)
ABC investigates grammar entrails of Malcolm Roberts, 8.7 out of 10 based on 69 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/gosd7fc

179 comments to ABC investigates grammar entrails of Malcolm Roberts

  • #
    pat

    Debra throws in everything imaginable for the lengthiest, “in-depth” attack on Roberts to date!
    as is quite common with news.com.au headlines of late, the original headline: “New senator’s link to conspiracy theorists” has now been changed:

    8 Aug: news.com.au: Debra Killalea: Malcolm Roberts: One Nation senator’s letter asked Julia Gillard for carbon tax exemption
    HE IS the Pauline Hanson ally who won a Senate seat from just 77 votes.
    Now Queensland senator-elect Malcolm Roberts has been linked to a bizarre sovereign citizen movement…ETC ETC ETC
    http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/malcolm-roberts-one-nation-senators-letter-asked-julia-gillard-for-carbon-tax-exemption/news-story/45cdaa95e758a774c4ed5b8da1afa808

    40

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      When in Rome, you don’t speak Dutch.

      Right now there is a lot more than this going on. Get behind Bill Leak and The Australian. They have already rocked the establishment and forced some to open their eyes. Keep rocking until they have all opened their eyes.

      Then get the farmers to support the greyhounds in NSW instead of sitting back waiting to be the next domino that comes under attack, and we might sort them all out at once.

      20

  • #
    RoHa

    Jo, sometimes I get the impression that you think that Australian politics and the Australian government matters.

    Surely you know by now that if an Australian government could make a difference, we wouldn’t be allowed to have one.

    It’s a very short leash. Gough Whitlam always looked dodgy, and when it turned out that he thought Australia should have its own foreign policy, it was clear he had to go.
    Kevin Rudd apparently believed he should put Australia’s interests before Israel’s. ‘Nuff said.
    Tony Abbot looked perfect, until it became clear that he really wasn’t going to play the Global Warming game. Too much Big Money and Presidential prestige involved. Exit Tony.
    And we’ve still got that order in for F35s, even though the world and his dog know the things don’t work.

    So treat Australian politics as the entertainment it supposed to be, not as something serious.

    111

    • #

      RoHa, forgive me, I’ll get back to more global stuff soon. For the moment, watching the ABC wallow in this is quite good fun. Malcolm did not get flustered at all by Emma Alberici who obviously had the inhouse smear list of dot points to ask him about. I expect the ABC will stop interviewing him soon if he stays calm and doesn’t bite at their bait.

      582

      • #
        joseph

        I watched the interview on the night and I thought Malcolm got off to a bad start with this comment:

        MALCOLM ROBERTS: “Sure. But first of all before doing that, I would like to mention that you said that I claimed there are some conspiracies. I’ve never said that. I avoid using the word “conspiracy”.

        Often a lot of these things, Emma, remind me of the old saying “rather than malice, why attribute malice when stupidity suffices”.

        What I’d say is, why attribute malice or conspiracy when stupidity, weakness and gutlessness suffice?”

        And, when they don’t, I guess we can use a stupidity, weakness and gutlessness theory to try to explain it all. Great!

        103

        • #
          el gordo

          Joseph its of some concern that you have received no ticks either way, don’t be diffident.

          50

        • #
          PeterPetrum

          Joseph, contrary to you, I thought that was an excellent start! He corrected her first up on an inaccuracy that she made on an important issue on his philosophical approach. I can tell you from personal experience with being interviewed many times many years ago on the ABC (over pesticide issues) that an ABC interviewer hates being corrected, especially at the start of the interview. Full marks to Robert for taking the initiative.

          330

          • #
            PeterPetrum

            Full marks to Malcom Roberts!!

            161

            • #
              climateskeptic

              Is this the same Malcolm Roberts?

              Malcolm-Ieuan,

              In considering your request that I identify errors in the report you sent to me – CSIROh! Climate of Deception? Or First Step to Freedom? – I find myself confronting an unusual problem: how does one critically analyse a pile of horse shit?

              Even by the exceedingly low standards of Australia’s climate skeptic community, your report is dire. You direct me to Appendix 13. It is littered with errors of all kinds: a mish-mash of muddled conjecture, impossible leaps of logic, fundamental misunderstandings of the scientific method, misread and misquoted research that has been poorly cited, internal contradictions, confused dates, spelling mistakes, and strangled grammar. It is, in all respects, a dud.

              I am not going to comply with your demand that I ‘‘identify, specify and justify’’ all the errors in your report. There are too many. However, this should not be read as a reluctance on my part to address your complaints. You will recall that, many months ago, you asked me to provide you with some empirical evidence of human-induced climate change, and I immediately sent you a series of peer-reviewed papers that did just that.

              You responded, a month later, after lengthy consultation with your science advisor Tim Ball (not ‘‘Tim Tall’’, as you call him in your report). You advanced an unpublished and frankly bizarre theory about underwater volcanoes. Apparently these hidden volcanoes conveniently rumbled to life at just the right rate to mimic both the rise and isotopic signature of human-generated atmospheric CO2. With theories like this, it is not difficult to see why even other climate skeptics have distanced themselves from your work.

              Your report tries to allege that there are factual errors in my reporting. If you honestly believe this, there is a fairly simple way to deal with it: request a correction from the newspaper. Your requests will be independently considered on their merits by people other than me. It is remarkable that you allege thousands of errors, spanning a period of several years, yet have not sought to address them in this straightforward, transparent way.

              You demand I declare my ‘‘personal financial interests in advocating the claim that human CO2 should be cut’’. First, I’m not advocating anything in particular, apart from fact-based reporting. Second, I have no financial interest in any industry related to emissions cuts. Nor have I worked for coal companies, as you have.

              As I’ve made clear in earlier replies to your many emails, I don’t mind a civil discussion about environment reporting or climate change. But until you start to ground your opinions in fact, I will continue to regard your correspondence as amusing spam.

              https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2016/aug/09/why-one-nation-senator-malcolm-roberts-demand-for-empirical-evidence-on-climate-change-is-misleading-bunk

              32

        • #
          Axelatoz

          If the content of the Climategate emails is not evidence of a sordid conspiracy, then what is?

          100

      • #
        Bulldust

        The most appalling thing about the ABC is that they have removed most blog comment opportunities. One used to be able to point out their hypocrisy politely, but now they simply broadcast their “truth.” So much for the last vestiges of transparency and accountability.

        I am still mulling whether to reply to their reply where I called them out on a wrong Fact Check, but really, what is the point? They will defend their bias unrelentingly. The Fact Check is where they claimed Julie Bishop was wrong when she claimed Labor left them the biggest debt and deficit in history in 2013. Technically true, albeit moot given debt:GDP not being the largest ever etc… but to the ABC Fact Checkers it was a lie. Go figure… what’s the point of debating facts with ideologues?

        130

      • #
        Ian

        His comments on tax are too simplistic as it ignores the fact that Australians believe the government should supply their every need either directly via government cash such as Family Tax Benefits and age pensions indexed to the average wage or indirectly through subsidised services such as Medicare and education. All this has to be paid for. Does the Senator elect intend to reduce and/or remove these benefits? Is he aware that to do so is political poison? If the politics is too hard to overcome, as Tony Abbott found out post the 2014 budget how are they to be financed without taxes?. Its OK making grandiose statements when you know you’ll never be called upon to act on them. That said, his views on climate change are refreshing but again, neither he or One Nation will never have to implement the changes they are seeking.

        42

        • #
          Bulldust

          Good ole bracket creep will keep on strangling Australian workers. It’s gradual, so people don’t tend to notice, but it amounts to hundreds of extra tax dollars for the typical worker every year (that the politicians don’t push up the tax brackets). It has been the main tool for “fixing” the budget for about 5-6 years now.

          60

      • #
        Geoff Sherrington

        Can someone with more time than I have please try to track down who wrote and supplied the ABC list of dot points? Alberici was reading them out, poorly, as if she had not seen them before.

        (Joke: Can I also adjust simple English and refer to the reporter as N. Emma?)

        52

    • #
      el gordo

      RoHa we need a good laugh down at the barricades and in this respect Jo’s lively sense of humour keeps us buoyant in dark times. There are few of us and we are surrounded on all sides by zombies, give us a break.

      Excellent satire Jo.

      130

      • #
        mc

        Breaking news:

        Important new study reveals disturbing evidence of connection between clever haircuts and loss of public confidence in news and current affairs presenters.

        The results of a groundbreaking survey of literally dozens of people conducted by a prestigious social research institution, (me), examining the influence of unorthodox haircuts on peoples’ perceptions has found that public confidence in the authority and trustworthiness of high profile news and current affairs presenters falls in direct proportion to the increasing eccentricity of the haircuts they wear.
        The following is a presentation of the study’s methodology.

        Questionnaire;

        Please examine the photo shown below of well known current affairs presenter Ms X, sitting at her state run TV presenter’s desk.
        Ms X has an interesting haircut. Fashion consultants contacted for their views about the haircut have described it variously as “pseudo ironic”, “a little bit too clever”, “somewhat confrontational”, “kind of passive aggressive”, “try-hard” and “if a haircut could sneer, that’s exactly what it would look like”.
        Given these empirical facts please circle one number between 1 and 13 to indicate which of the following statements best describes your feelings about the haircut.

        1. I find this haircut troubling.
        2. For pity’s’ sake, a haircut like that has no place in public broadcasting.
        3. That haircut is a nuisance and a menace to society.
        4. Strewth, pretty condescending isn’t it?
        5. You think I’m pretty intellectual don’t you.
        6. Oh come on, surely you can’t be serious!
        7. Impartial reporting and that haircut, in the same person, what are the odds eh?
        8. Views expressed by anyone with a haircut like that cannot be regarded with any seriousness or credibility whatsoever.
        9. That haircut makes me feel like I’m guilty of something I didn’t do!
        10. Get over yourself!
        11. If I stare at it for too long I start to have feelings of shame I can’t account for and wonder if I should go back into therapy, but then I think, stuff it, crack another beer and say “happy days”.
        12. Why don’t they give her a job compatible with her haircut, like security guard or something?
        13. That’s it, I can’t take anymore of this crap, I’m going walkabout, see you in six months!

        Thank you for your participation.

        Results of the above survey indicate that the theory, “Pundits with clever haircuts undermine public’s confidence in their authority” has been confirmed by 97% of participants, producing an overwhelming consensus. The substance of the debate is over, however, the question that emerges from these findings is what measures should governments, social institutions, and individuals take to address what has been dubbed in some circles (me) as, Funny haircut fatigue syndrome (FHFS), or Going to hell in a haywire haircut crisis (GTHIAHHC). Do we concentrate our resources on silly haircut mitigation, or would better outcomes be produced by investing resources into unhinged haircut adaptation?

        100

        • #
          OzWizard

          Obviously, we need more FUNDING to extend this research to include the effects of the relationship between “clothing” and “Haircut” styles on “political bias”.

          60

        • #
          Angry

          I reccon global warming causes bad haircuts.
          I need one million dollars to research it………

          30

  • #
    pat

    a couple of laughs:

    8 Aug: Guardian: Dana Nuccitelli: Rejection of experts spreads from Brexit to climate change with ‘Clexit’
    Clexit calls for withdrawal from climate treaties, rejects the conclusions of 97% of climate science experts and 95% of economics experts
    Older generations were more likely to vote for the UK to leave the EU and are more likely to oppose taking action on climate change; younger generations disagree, and will be forced to live with the consequences of those decisions. On both issues there’s also a dangerous strain of anti-intellectualism, in which campaigners mock experts and dismiss their evidence and conclusions.
    ???With Brexit, the Leave campaign won the vote, and the UK economy is already feeling the consequences…
    Clexit leaders are heavily involved in tobacco and fossil fuel-funded organizations, in what’s become known as “the web of denial.” …
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/aug/08/rejection-of-experts-spreads-from-brexit-to-climate-change-with-clexit

    5 Aug: Daily Caller: Blake Neff: NY Times complains that inventing fire caused sexism, global warming
    The article is already attracting substantial ridicule online…
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/05/ny-times-complains-that-inventing-fire-caused-sexism-global-warming/

    62

    • #
      Radical Rodent

      I’ll repeat a link given in another thread, ‘cos it is good for a laugh: https://www.facebook.com/ukipsociety/photos/a.246514648872828.1073741828.246314792226147/496608123863478/?type=3&theater

      Just seems rather apposite for this thread, too.

      30

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Just a private gripe …

        I loath going to the UKIP site because it throws up a banner asking me to become a member. I cannot remove the banner, nor go past it, at least on the browser I use. They need to elect a web designer who knows what they are doing, and doesn’t end up scuppering the ship.

        100

        • #
          Radical Rodent

          meh….

          30

        • #
          TdeF

          You can remove this with a click.
          I may be wrong but this is a whole of screen transparent overlay which is confusing. It is hard to see but there is a X in the top RHS which removes it.

          20

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            Splendid. Can we adapt this idea to politicians? I’ve often wanted to tick them off (oops! cross them off perhaps).

            50

          • #
            Bulldust

            If they use the Win10 upgrade approach, clicking the top RHS “x” would be to join the party :D

            40

        • #
          Angry

          Rereke Whakaaro,
          Use adblock plus element hiding application for firefox to hide the offending frames on the site.

          40

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Thank you all, for the advice. It appears that Safari shows the “x” button as off-white on white. I have an appreciation for subtly, but that is just getting a bit overly ridiculous.

          60

    • #
      mikewaite

      Re: #3:
      The NYTimes article is totally idiotic in that we know, with reasonable certainty from the excavations at
      Zhoukoudian (Dragon Bone hill in China) that fire was used by Homo Erectus at least 500,000 years ago,
      300,000years before the emergence of Homo Sapiens. Furthermore , as pointed out by 2 young paleontologists,
      Boaz and Clochon in their 2004 book about the discovery of “Peking Man” the fire was used as a defence
      mechanism . Erectus had no adequate weapons against herbivore prey , nor against the large cave hyenas and big cats
      of that time,so fire was used in food gathering as a way to separate powerful predators from their prey.
      Erectus, and the later Sapiens via Heidelbergensis relied on scavenging for much of their protein until quite recently.
      The idea that fire was invented in order that women could stay at home cooking and men went out hunting
      is not supported by any archaeological evidence that I have read about.
      The invention of fire lies much further back in time than any later gender division of activity ,IMO.

      30

      • #
        ROM

        You can go a lot further back than half a million years ago for evidence that our Homo species were deliberately using fire for cooking and no doubt defence plus tool making and who knows what else.
        .

        Reference for both quotes below; Archaeologists Find Earliest Evidence of Humans Cooking With Fire
        .

        The oldest well established dates for deliberate, controlled use of fire for various tasks by our Homo precursors which is supported by very strong archeological evidence comes from;

        Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, a lakeside site in Israel, was considered to have the oldest generally accepted evidence of human-controlled fire. There, a team of scientists found traces of numerous hearths dating to between 690,000 and 790,000 years ago.
        A wide range of clues made this site convincing, including isolated clusters of burned flint, as if toolmakers had been knapping hand axes by several firesides. The team also found fragments of burned fruit, grain and wood scattered about.

        But!
        There is now good evidence from South Africa’s Wonderwerk Cave site, southern and eastern Africa being where it is believed the Homo species originated from, that the species Homo erectus were using fire anything up to at least a million years ago with some further fragmentary and contested evidence from other African cave sites that Fire was being deliberately used by the early Homo erectus or the previous Homo species as far back as 1.5 million years ago.

        At the base of a brush-covered hill in South Africa’s Northern Cape province, a massive stone outcropping marks the entrance to one of humanity’s oldest known dwelling places
        Humans and our apelike ancestors have lived in Wonderwerk Cave for 2 million years — most recently in the early 1900s, when a farm couple and their 14 children called it home. Wonderwerk holds another distinction as well:
        The cave contains the earliest solid evidence that our ancient human forebears (probably Homo erectus) were using fire.

        Like many archaeological discoveries, this one was accidental.
        Researchers weren’t looking for signs of prehistoric fire; they were trying to determine the age of sediments in a section of the cave where other researchers had found primitive stone tools.
        In the process, the team unearthed what appeared to be the remains of campfires from a million years ago — 200,000 years older than any other firm evidence of human-controlled fire.
        Their findings also fanned the flames of a decade-old debate over the influence of fire, particularly cooking, on the evolution of our species’s relatively capacious brains.

        More>

        50

    • #
      MudCrab

      Feminists and Socials love to argue about how evil men have been throughout history. I once had the bemusement to sit through a panel on, from memory, ‘Female characters in fantasy/science fiction’. It sounded interesting at the time and a friend was also on the panel, but it quickly broke down to the Elites (Lucy Sussex springs to memory) telling their nodding fans that men were basically evil and division of labour was oppressive.

      One of the audience members had the nerve to challenge Sussex et al on this. She gave the example of how when in a small family group the mother figure would look after the baby while the man in the group would carry the pointy sticks and fight the sabretooths.

      Why? Because men don’t lactate. If the man, while hunting, was to die then the mother and baby would still have a chance to survive, the baby would grow old and the circle of life would continue. If the mother was to die then so would the baby and the circle of life would come to a grinding halt. It wasn’t about being fair and equal, it was about protecting the mutual long term future of the group.

      The view from the Elite? Sussex made the effort to track down the woman who had raised this counter argument to tell her, (from memory), ‘I appreciate what you were asking, but you are WRONG’.

      So there you have it kids, Our Betters have spoken and cavemen should have spent more time raising infants in order to free the cavewomen from oppression and breast milk be damned.

      90

  • #
    pat

    8 Aug: Independent: Denis McShane: 12 reasons not to panic about Brexit – and why we probably won’t leave the EU after all
    The idea of ‘one vote, one time’ belongs in the Robert Mugabe political playbook, not the British democractic system of flexible constitutionalism
    (Denis MacShane was the UK’s former Minister for Europe and is the author of ‘Brexit: How Britain Will Leave Europe’)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-wont-happen-eu-referendum-european-union-12-reasons-not-to-panic-leave-remain-a7178611.html

    Wikipedia: Denis MacShane
    Denis MacShane is a British former Labour Party politician who was convicted of false accounting by falsifying parliamentary expense claims…
    He worked for the BBC from 1969 to 1977…
    In 2002, he became Minister for Europe…

    40

  • #
    Martin

    This kind of stuff is exactly why i stopped watching TV.
    Wonder why so many think the U.N. is a great thing? Here you have it.
    I live in Canada and we have the CBC and its pretty much the same.
    The style, the tone, the propaganda so is similar. People watch this kind of programs daily thinking they have good journalistic standards… How low the so called free world have fallen.

    260

  • #

    At the height of the Cold War a Russian dissident was visiting the West. He said he was amazed how our journalists and commentariat did willingly what their Iron Curtain equivalents only did under threat of persecution, torture and death. To pass as a dangerous dissident in the ABC you’d only have to let a conservative finish a sentence. (“We’re nearly out of time, Mr Abbott.”)

    250

  • #
    sillyfilly

    Roberts, Jones and the Galileo Movement: what a pathetic and insipid triple treat those who don’t do science or empirical evidence on AGW/CC.

    854

    • #
      Radical Rodent

      An ad hom, there SF – or several, depending on your level of pedantry. What you must do is learn that argument requires you to provide references and your own evidence to counter those previously presented. Just screaming, “S’not so!” at those arguments you do not like – especially if the main premise of your denial is because they have been presented by persons you do not like – will never be considered correct scientific principles (well, hopefully, anyway – it does look that there are some who do think that is how it should be… look in a mirror for a good example.)

      What science or empirical evidence do you have to back your comment?

      335

      • #
        Craig Thomas

        OK, I’ll play – Malcolm Roberts is wrong.
        My “reference” is the “empirical evidence” which Malcolm Roberts says he has, but which he hasn’t stumped up yet.

        629

        • #
          el gordo

          Malcolm Roberts: … ‘there is no empirical evidence anywhere in the world that our production of carbon dioxide affects global climate in any way at all.’

          I’ll pay that.

          256

        • #
          Frank

          CT,
          Its not about evidence, never was, the deniers continually demand more evidence yet can’t get anything past peer review themselves, otherwise this site wouldn’t exist.

          619

          • #

            I’ve been asking for observations that show a cause and effect link of a significant size since Jan 2010, and you can’t answer.
            And you still can’t name one paper that shows that water vapor amplification is as large as the models claim.

            285

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Frank, we will keep on demanding more evidence until we get some that is self-consistent, and which follows the currently established laws of Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics.

            Pointing to the margin of measurement error, and seeing a trend, or pointing out the round-off error as if it were dramatic evidence, no longer cuts the mustard. We have seen it all before, several times, and it wasn’t overly exciting the first time.

            Getting faint, and hyper-ventilating, over a change in homogenised measurements of one one-hundredth of one degree Kelvin, may work to energise the media luvvies, but it certainly does not impress us at all.

            204

          • #
            el gordo

            Frank the hiatus and massive model failure means the game is up for the Klimatariat, but they will push ahead nevertheless.

            Global cooling has begun and I have evidence to prove it.

            195

          • #
            Angry

            As soon as sombody uses the term “deniers” they lose all Credibility……..

            174

          • #
            Bulldust

            Oh, and Frank, remember it isn’t true scientific empirical evidence if you had to massage and homogenise (invert sometimes) the data to get the answer you first thought of… This chap must be doing somersaults in his grave:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b240PGCMwV0

            133

          • #
            James Bradley

            Frank,

            This site exists because of the number of contributors, readers and responders – thank you for your ongoing patronage that helps to increase Jonova’s KPI’s.

            93

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Its not about evidence, never was, the deniers continually demand more evidence …

            Yes we do demand more evidence, because all you seem to rely upon are appeals to authority – a logical fallacy.

            … (yet sceptics) can’t get anything past peer review themselves …

            We don’t need to. We only need to point out that there has been at least one variation of the actual climate, from what the computer models predicted, to invalidate the current generation of climate models. If they could predict future climate consistently, and without error, then there would be no discussion. The fact that they cannot demonstrates that they are at best, incomplete, and at worst, totally erroneous.

            … otherwise this site wouldn’t exist.

            Yes it would, Frank. It is a social networking blog for those people interested in science, and related topics.

            This site is useful as an educational resource to demonstrate that there are multiple sides to any discussion, and that great care needs to be taken in isolating the pearls of wisdom, from the mass of politically motivated dross.

            As for peer review, you need to understand that it is a mechanism used by some publishers (but not all), to maintain consistency across their range of publications. It saves them from hiring a full-time editorial staff. In no way is it a measure of accuracy or completeness, and it is certainly not a stamp of approval. “Science marches forward, on the bones of previously failed experiments”.

            121

          • #
            tom0mason

            So Frank has the science of climate found the long lost empirical evidence for –

            1. An accurate temperature/density/salinity profile of the all seas and oceans at all depths.
            Not too dissimilar to those measurements which could be measured for atmospheric chemistry/temperature/pressure.
            Leading to a verifiably plausible, coherent and complete theory of how this planet’s major surface affects most other processes on it.

            2. Observed and measured the energy balance of all clouds types at all steps from initialization to eventual dissipation. Leading to a verifiably plausible, coherent and complete theory of how they work.

            3. Observations and proxy evidence for the levels of atmospheric gases and vapors for the last 1000 years, with plausible (and where it can be done testable) reasons for all changes.
            See 2 above for why currently this can not be done.

            Just a few of (IMO) the glaring omissions from the so called ‘climate science™’ or should that be ‘climate seance’.

            Note –
            Science without validated and verifiable proof is just rumors and tall tales.
            With validation and verification there comes scientific knowledge and understanding but also more unknowns to be investigated …

            60

        • #
          AndyG55

          “empirical evidence”…”but which he hasn’t stumped up yet”

          Mirror mirror!!!

          We are all still waiting for something, ANYTHING from Craig or Frank.

          143

          • #
            ROM

            Carfeful there AndyG55!

            You named Frank and Craig Thomas but it seems that in your no doubt unintended sexist approach you denied Sillyfilly her feminist rights in not being named along with Frank and Craig Thomas in that collection of the science free, trolling cabal of Natural Climate Change Deniers.

            Our current Troll crop of “Natural Climate Change Deniers” do seem to have got their roster in a hell of a mess as far as trolling here on Jo’s site as we haven’t seen much of any of them recently and then they all turn up together.

            However the standards of the their comments which is pretty pathetic even from any self respecting Troll’s side of things, do give very considerable credence to that old saying;

            Their minds are just like concrete!
            All mixed up and set hard.

            122

            • #
              AndyG55

              Do trolls actually have “gender” ?

              SF has zero gender characteristic except its pretend name.

              61

        • #
          PeterPetrum

          Hard to present empirical evidence in an 10 second ABC sound bite when the “interviewer” won’t let you get past the first five seconds without interrupting. Many years ago I was interviewed repeatedly on the ABC over “cancer causing” insecticides. I learnt just to present a succinct list “facts” and let the other side try to demolish them. That’s what Malcolm Roberts is doing and doing well.

          183

        • #
          Radical Rodent

          Okay, CT, I have to accept that English is not your first language. As a Swede once told me, English is an easy language to learn, but a difficult language to master, as there are so many subtle nuances in it. Let me clarify Sen. Roberts’ statement for you: he did NOT say that he had empirical evidence; he quite clearly stated that there was no empirical evidence. Sadly, it is not usually possible to prove a negative. It reminds me of one conversation I had a while ago, an analogy of which could be that I could not find any water in a desert – my antagonist then ask me to show where there was no water. As I could not do that, he considered himself the winner of the argument.

          To date, there is still NO empirical evidence of AGW, catastrophic or not, which, with so much time and money having been spent looking for it, should begin to ring a few alarm bells in people’s heads.

          60

    • #
      AndyG55

      Still avoiding the glue factory, hey SF.

      Probably because nothing you ever say, sticks.

      203

    • #
      AndyG55

      “who don’t do science or empirical evidence on AGW/CC.”

      You just described the WHOLE CAGW SCAM and the alarminati behind it.. Well done. :-)

      235

    • #
      el gordo

      SF we have a hindcast which shows global cooling has begun, which is no time to hide behind a skirt and blush, this is very serious. At least give a thought to your grandchildren.

      204

      • #

        SF we have a hindcast which shows global cooling has begun, which is no time to hide behind a skirt and blush, this is very serious. At least give a thought to your grandchildren grandparents.

        92

    • #
      el gordo

      If there are any lurkers here who don’t understand the science, SF takes this stuff as gospel.

      http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/articles/media-releases/malcolm-roberts.html

      The Climate Institute can be located near Hyde Park in Sydney and is a not for profit organisation.

      82

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        As just one example from that web site, I will submit this single sentence, in evidence:

        There is abundant evidence that heat trapping greenhouse gases are in the atmosphere at record levels, this is causing the climate to change, and this is impacting on natural and human systems now.

        The interesting things about this sentence are:

        1. It is the key message in the very first paragraph of the introduction, so sets the tone for the whole site.

        2. It does not indicate what those “heat trapping greenhouse gases” might be. They are not named, so we do not know what is being discussed, nor can we know what chemical reactions they may be part of.

        3. It is claimed that the composition of the atmosphere has somehow been changed, but since we do not know the chemical reactions, we cannot validate what is being claimed.

        4. It is stated that “natural” and “human systems” are being impacted, but does not list those “natural systems”, nor does it explain the chemical and physical reactions that must occur, in order to cause the impact. Similarly, it does not list the “human systems” involved, nor does it explain how “human systems” might be different to “natural systems”, and how that might influence the outcome in some way.

        This site does not present good science. It does however, present extremely good propaganda. If it hangs around, it may well serve as an exemplar of propagandist technique.

        111

        • #
          crakar24

          5, How does a GHG trap heat?, Which GHG does all the trapping, At what altitude does the GHG do the trapping, Is the trapping uniform around the globe, If it traps heat how does the heat get “in” in the first instance…………

          72

          • #
            crakar24

            This one is bordering on comical

            3. No one denies CO2 can be helpful for plant growth and our planet would be an ice ball without it (and has been at low levels) but any drinker on a Friday night can tell you – you can have too much of a good thing. Empirical measurements show that CO2 in the atmosphere is 40% higher than before the industrial revolution (see p11 here).

            I am not even attempting to demolish the old “snowball earth” chestnut, I dont even understand the analogy surrounding getting pissed on a Friday night, although I will say these types of websites do tend to digress from the facts in these ways but I will make comment on CO2 being higher than since…..well a long time ago.

            We humans breath in approx 400 ppm and breath out 40,000 ppm, so we compare high CO2 levels to Friday night drunks but we neglect to mention we breath out 52 Friday nights worth of alcohol.

            Typical jibberish written by someone who has a very weak argument in the first place.

            91

            • #
              AndyG55

              “but any drinker on a Friday night can tell you”

              I think they are implying that its the CO2 that makes them dizzy and incoherent.

              About the level of science expected from a “believer” web site.

              63

            • #
              AndyG55

              “and our planet would be an ice ball without it (and has been at low levels)”

              The planet has also been an ice ball at very HIGH levels of CO2.

              So, their point is… ????

              74

      • #

        Pehr Bjornbom says: August 8, 2016 at 2:15 PM (other site)!
        “However, as a metaphor one may say that carbon dioxide works as a thermal insulator, referring to that the surface temperature of the planet will be greater with carbon dioxide than without carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”

        This may possibly be correct for a planetary atmosphere with no convection (outward atmospheric heat transfer via atmospheric mass motion). On this Earth, exactly the opposite is the physical result. The emissive CO2 (with its sensible heat) is moved to higher altitude to be able to dispatch entropy via EMR flux to space more efficaciously than can be done through the atmosphere from the surface. The surface temperature, and whole atmospheric column temperature “must” go lower as atmospheric CO2 fraction increases.

        80

    • #
      Angry

      Ah the “Stupid Horse” who used to infest Andrew Bolt’s blog with vacuous inane drivel, lies and BS rears it’s head here.

      Nobody is listening dumass.

      71

    • #
      john karajas

      Dear dopey nag, please go and consult the geological record to see that carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere has a very minor effect on global temperatures (and on oceanic acidity as well). For instance coral reefs flourished in the Late Devonian Canning Basin when carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were at levels of 2,000 ppm, 5 times higher than today! There was no runaway global warming at the time. There: is that some hard empirical evidence for you to digest?

      112

  • #
    Reed Coray

    After watching the Alberici interview my reaction was Holy Cow! For the hostess to say “…one thing at a time. Let’s just talk about one thing at a time” (3:37) and then to interrupt (6:34) Mr. Roberts during his discussion of CO2 to bring up “banks” and their role in the AGW scam is the typical liberal host(ess) response to “I don’t like the way this interview is going; so I’ll change the subject by asking another inane question that is aimed at discrediting the guest.”

    Jo, in your 2.1 comment you inferrentially applaud Mr. Roberts for staying calm, and I do too. But after being interrupted for the nth time by a “morally superior, constantly interrupting, no-nothing television host(ess),” what I want to hear from the guest is something like the following: Five seconds of silence followed by a statement to the effect that “I thought the purpose of this interview was for me to express my thoughts and opinions about matters related to our common good. I guess I was wrong. Common courtesy requires that when you ask a question, you let me respond without interruption. I’ll continue this interview only upon the condition that when you ask me a question, you let me respond in full without interruption. The next time you interrupt my response to one of your questions, this interview is over.” And then when the host(ess) next interrupts [as he (she) will because you see the host(ess) (a) is interested in what the guest has to say only if those words embarrass the guest, and (b) believes he (she) is the more important member of the interview], the guest walks off the set.

    381

    • #
      MarloweJ

      As soon as any global warming proponent uses that “97% of scientists” crap, they have proven that they have absolutely no understanding of the issues or the science and that they have made no effort to educate themselves. When Alberici quoted it, she revealed her hand and Malcolm Roberts really had her on the ropes. He should have asked her to explain that statement. Anyone who parrots that statement has lost, game set and match and should not be allowed to get away with slipping it into an interview. Argument from authority should not be accepted.

      291

      • #
        TdeF

        Agreed.
        The real survey result was that most of the 40% of Climate papers which referenced Global Warming supported the idea.
        60% of climate papers did not even see the idea as worth mentioning.
        This does not mean 97% of Climate Scientists support the idea and inferring this is utterly wrong.
        You could more validly say 60% of scientists did not at all support man made global warming in their climate paper.

        100

        • #
          TdeF

          My point is that instead of flatly contradicting someone, educate. The paper from which the 97% was derived actually established 60% of climate scientists did not support man made global warming. The 97% was only of the 40% who mentioned it. The only puzzle is that 3% of those did not agree with it, so they mentioned it only to publicly disagree.

          60

        • #
          Angry

          Interesting youtube video on this…..

          Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree?

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSrjAXK5pGw

          30

          • #
            TdeF

            That’s very good. My view, the reason I am involved, is that you can prove mankind is not increasing CO2 anyway. CO2 is set by ocean surface temperature and nothing much else. The naive view is that if we output CO2, man is so all powerful CO2 must go up. Our CO2 is nearly insignificant and the levels are set by physical chemistry, so this is just rubbish. As for the Cook paper, it is outrageous that Cook alleges the 60% who did not even mention Global Warming are considered implicit supporters of the theory or they would not have had their papers published? This is not science. It is not true.

            51

    • #
      TdeF

      Sure the ABC will attack One Nation senators and even ridicule a PM on air or treasurer ‘Joker’ Hocking a Leigh Sales laughed on camera. However the ABC gives them air time and publicity, which they really need. Ridicule and private jokes by a journalist will backfire.

      This is a bit like a barrister trying to prejudice a jury by a clearly slanted line of questioning. Some jurors will listen and if the interviewee conducts themselves with decorum, answers questions and quietly puts their point of view, it has a positive effect.

      On the contrary, getting upset and storming out is exactly the behaviour ABC journalists want from their ridicule. The ABC is a Green political organization, but everyone knows that now, even the people who watch the ABC. So it is great work if One Nation senators can get air time and while they will be predictably setup, ridiculed and attacked they will have a real impact. The viewers are not always the dumb sheep the ABC expect. You can tell you are winning when the ABC give up inviting you.

      90

    • #

      The Donald could use that effectively. So could Pauline. Malcolm Roberts still needs more training in the trenches! He seems to try, but has not ‘internalized’
      “Do unto others, before they do unto you!!!”
      All the best! -will-

      10

    • #
      Geoff Sherrington

      Reed,
      Fine in theory, but if you do that you do not get invited back.
      Geoff.

      00

  • #
    Reed Coray

    Jo, how can a non-citizen of Australia send a message to Senator Roberts encouraging his actions? Do you have an email for Senator Roberts?

    121

  • #
    Rich

    Is this the group that has brought about the improper use of bring/take, brought/took, etc., taught by all US educators today?

    15

  • #
    diogenese2

    “One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts denies links to Sovereign Citizens movement

    Yes, I’ve never heard of them either.”
    No Jo neither had I, who has? Will your average Joe (figurative) both to google to find out? If not then this must be the lamest ever smear. If this is the best they can do then Senator Roberts will walk all over them.
    mind you he would have been better following the example of poet ee Cummings who in his later years eschewed the use of punctuation and capital letters entirely whose comment was

    since feeling is first
    who pays any attention
    to the syntax of things
    will never wholly kiss you

    certainly applies to dear emma alberici

    71

  • #
    Yonniestone

    The ABC shouldn’t be critical of semi-colons as they’ve utilised colons throughout their network for decades.

    I sense grammar rudimentism, this is no accidence.

    82

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I think broadcasters and the press see the semicolon as being inferior to the colon, so they avoid using them.

      I don’t think children are taught the rules and usage of punctuation in written English, for fear that it will disturb their creativity.

      It is a great shame: for it lessens the language; and it also removes the ability for the author to impart feeling, and nuance.

      We need to start a movement: a movement to protect endangered punctuation; one that will stir the hearts of publishers.

      161

      • #
        Mark Fraser

        I am familiar with colon problems: Mine is a case in point, though I probably would prefer it to a surgical conversion to a semi.

        50

      • #
        mc

        Watch out Rereke is on the lookout for grammar miscreants again, wooden ruler in hand and a sharp rap across the knuckles in mind for anyone caught offending.

        Actually Rereke I totally agree with you, it is impossible to convey the subtleties and nuances of meaning you may be trying to express without possessing a sound knowledge of the rules of written English, so I support you on all the points you have made above; and I speak from considerable experience.

        I went to a hippy secondary school. That education left me academically unfit for further education. We were not provided the opportunity to study the subject of English in general or its sub-topics spelling, punctuation, grammar ECT, we studied “Humanities”; as for how to research an essay subject or how to structure and present arguments and ideas once you had cobbled together some findings, well, what has that got to do with the sound of whale songs?

        Speaking of which, the singers of said songs were a typical example of our essay writing subject matter, i.e.
        Question;

        How do you feel about the plight of the Whales?

        Please return an essay on this subject by, oh, the end of the year or whatever.

        So when the assignment is handed in 18 months latter to allow final assessment of the previous years’ work, (which by the way involved no scores or rating system, so that you had no idea if you had passed with flying colours or just scraped through; scores are hurtful, oppressive and anachronistic, see?), there would be no critique of the formal structure of the words whatsoever, in fact if you had compiled a pastiche of Rorschach ink blotches that somehow conveyed the idea that you feel a deep affinity , and great desire, to swim off into the wild blue yonder, hand in fin with your aquatic brethren like some Whale justice marine boy, you could more than likely do away with using the written language altogether, and still receive high praise.
        OK, maybe I exaggerate, but in all honesty, not by much.

        Gotta go; I’m gettin out of reach of that wooden ruler.

        50

        • #
          Ted O'Brien.

          Late 1980s. Not a hippy school, but our daughter reported that her English teacher, who was born in continental Europe and had half a dozen languages, lamented to the kids that she was not permitted to teach English grammar.

          I can see no other purpose for this prohibition than to create a confused society. Basic Marxism.

          Go back another 30 years, I learned more English at Latin than ever I learned at English. I would recommend a smattering of Latin to anybody.

          20

    • #
      Another Ian

      Yonniestone

      Plenty of use of the product of colons evident too

      70

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      Colons are normally used at the introduction to a list:
      And then each item;
      In the list;
      Can have a semi colon;
      Including the second last one;
      Which can also have an; and
      To finish the list.

      30

  • #
    Hat Rack

    Re the Emma Alberici link provided by Jo, the headline reads “Interview: New Senator Malcolm Roberts joins Lateline”.

    What followed was nothing like an interview. Couldn’t even really be called a debate either. More like attempted bullying. And “their” ABC say they are not biased.

    182

    • #
      TdeF

      The political nature of the ABC Green political machine is obvious to everyone, even to their viewers. There is no hiding their outrageous bias and it is
      hard to see why they bother. No one in the ABC cares about their charter, which is why they should be sold or just deprived of funding completely.
      Let them compete for advertising like everyone else. Let them fund themselves, like the Guardian or the Age or Fairfax.
      As Mark Scott said, we are not North Korea. We do not want government media. Clearly we should not be paying $30million a week for the ABC/SBS.

      100

      • #

        In the US, PBS (private begging broadcaster) receives government funds for not doing commercial advertising! Not ideal, but two sides (at least) to every situation.

        40

  • #
    TedM

    I have always used semi-colons; colons: and hyphens since I learnt correct grammar at primary school. Perish the thought that I might be under investigation. Should I get a VPN?

    There again perhaps the ABC might do some basics in the English language. They have no idea when to use one of the following words- sink, sank or sunk. The latter seems to cover all tenses and uses for their journalists.

    Perhaps some basic maths also. How often do we hear something like, three times less. Both a grammatical and mathematical absurdity. Three times less than what?

    For example to be both grammatically and mathematically correct, three times less than nine would have to be 9-(3×9)=minus 18. Have they never heard of sub multiples or fractions.

    If you ever hear three times over the limit on the ABC; they actually mean three times the limit. Or for instance something like at a rate of seven. At a rate of seven what per what?

    Or the death rate has increased by x%. I was under the illusion that the death rate was 100%.

    I could continue with numerous examples but would probably become as boring at the ABC.

    90

    • #
      TedM

      Correction: “as boring as the ABC”.

      40

      • #
        Frank

        Mal didn’t get the bizarre writing style from nowhere.
        The Jones / Mal show proves nothing, wait til mal has to talk to a real scientist.

        04

        • #

          Frank, your conspiracist brain is at work. Every legal hack who can’t afford a lawyer probably copies odd formats from all over the web.
          As for Roberts meeting a real scientist — he’s been meeting them for 8 years. They won’t answer his questions because they can’t.

          180

          • #

            probably copies

            in other words without any evidence for this, they probably don’t.

            Why would you stick a colon and a hyphen in your name? While it is without doubt some form of weirdness, it is getting him the media attention he wanted.

            15

          • #
            Frank

            Jo
            You don’t accidentally get onto the SC site . Mal knew where he was.
            The scientists don’t respond to Mal because he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, not because they can’t . They don’t have time to rebuff every miner, engineer or journalist playing scientist.

            13

            • #

              What’s the SC site? Oh, yes, the group mentioned in the post? I take it from your familiarity with the acronym that you visit them a lot?

              Where did you get your telepathic skills to know what Mal was thinking?

              BTW the scientists did respond. They didn’t answer his questions, but they tried…
              so much for your telepathy.

              31

              • #

                Is that SC some Sovereign Citizens thingy? The grammar is OK The punctuation symbols are similar to that used by NASA Goddard in their peer reviewed CAGW nonsense!

                41

          • #

            joanne,
            Perhaps you can ask Malcolm Roberts to write a new thread asking what is definitely ‘unknown’ of how Earth’s atmosphere/oceans operate! The detailed contribution from the leftover 3% represented here could go on for centuries! The CAGW fraudsters and religious disciples are the only that claim that they know.

            42

          • #
            TedM

            Also Roberts has expertise in atmospheric gasses. Something most, if not all of the scientists he has met with won’t have. No wonder they won’t answer his questions.

            60

        • #
          AndyG55

          “wait til mal has to talk to a real scientist”

          I take it that you mean…. as opposed to a “climate scientist™”

          90

        • #
          crakar24

          And Frank where do you suppose we find one of them?

          40

        • #
          ROM

          Frank @ # 14.1.1

          “wait til mal has to talk to a real scientist”

          Quite an interesting bit of very arrogant and self centred hubris behind that statement from Frank.
          .

          1 / By implication Frank in his comment is apparently claiming that he knows who the “Real Scientists” are and by implication they are the ones who happen to agree with Frank’s own personal catastrophic climate change ideology, an ideology he has made quite clear he believes in whenever he trolls this site.

          2 / Scientists who have a different view of the climate outcomes to Frank and maybe views that co-incide with Malcolm Robert’s views and ones who Malcolm Roberts has got his information from on the climate aren’t apparently “Real scientists” by Frank’s reasoning per his comment.
          .

          To take this a bit further If you want to follow this bit of logic down a rabbit hole,
          .
          3 / From that, Frank’s defining of a “real scientist” as a scientist who has views on the climate that co-incide with Frank’s views, Frank is in fact defining in a very tight and constrained and very limited way the science that is in his estimation is the only acceptable “real climate science”.

          4 / From that we can gauge that Frank “Knows” what is the real science re the climate and therefore using Frank’s absolute certitude that he knows what the “real science” of the climate is as promoted by “real scientists” and as so many of those “real scientists” admit themselves that they have only got an outline at best on the global climate, we can all turn to Frank and use his expertise to define what exactly is the “real science” of the climate.

          5 / The savings would be immense.

          Just ask Frank what the “real climate science” today is and we will get the definitive answer.
          No more climate scientists of any sort need to be employed.

          No Climate modellers needed any more.
          Jo and her web site and all those other climate websites from both sides would be out of a job.

          Billions, maybe a couple of trillions of dollars would be saved instead of splashing it around on “non real climate science” and trying to prevent predicted climate catastrophes that according to Franks knowledge of what is the “Real climate science” were never going to happen or the resources should be diverted to where it might happen or is going to happen.

          Just ask Frank what is the “real Climate science” as promoted by “Real Scientists”.

          After all he has firmly established by his comment above that he knows which are the “real scientists” and no doubt what is the “real climate science” those “real scientists” are claiming to have a full knowledge of.

          50

      • #
        Angry

        ABC…….Australian BRAINWASHING Commission

        30

      • #
        PeterPetrum

        It was OK the first time.

        20

        • #

          “as boring at the ABC”. v.s. “as boring as the ABC”

          Peter,
          I agree, but your subtlety eludes me! The originator gets to pick words and correct them. Except for Brad Keyes who must be correct the very first time, else all us children jump up and down on the trampoline giggling.

          21

  • #
    handjive

    UPDATE:

    Science Minister Greg Hunt has offered crossbench senators a detailed briefing on climate change.

    “A number of the new senators, including One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts, have voiced scepticism about the science of global warming and suggested it is a global conspiracy.

    Mr Hunt told Sky News on Monday although the senators had a right to express their views, he would be happy for scientific agencies such as the CSIRO to brief senators on the “categorical” advice on [Doomsday Global Warming].”
    . . .
    Greg Hunt is picking up where Jula Gillard left off …

    121

    • #
      Angry

      Greg Hunt the global warming nutter and traitor to all Australians.
      What a disgrace he is!
      Time for him to take off his tin foil hat!!

      101

    • #
      Angry

      More on the non scientific leftist csiro………

      CSIRO – Turnbull acts!
      http://morningmail.org/csiro-turnbull-acts/#more-48348

      Hunt “fully supports” CSIRO
      http://morningmail.org/csiro-being-refunded/#more-48277

      40

      • #
        TdeF

        This is all driven by Turnbull. He lost his job over Global Warming. His instructions to Minister Hunt will be unequivocal. Hire more Climate Researchers and justify my ETS.
        After all, the Liberal Party now owes millions to Turnbull. He has his price.

        80

    • #
      Peter C

      Science Minister Greg Hunt has offered crossbench senators a detailed briefing on climate change.

      Penny Wong tried that with Senator Fielding. Jo, David and Bob Carter went along to be snowed by the consensus arguments.

      Malcolm Roberts proabaly does not need any help, but it would be good to gert a report of the meeting, if it happens.

      60

      • #
        Angry

        Why would intelligent thinking people go to a meeting held by Oxygen Thieves to listen to Lies & BS.

        What a waste of time!

        30

        • #
          crakar24

          They could the climate scientist to bring the coffee as they will have no other purpose except obsfucation

          40

        • #
          Peter C

          Why would intelligent thinking people go to a meeting held by Oxygen Thieves

          Because the CSIRO and maybe also the Chief Scientist would be expected to present the “Empirical Evidence” that Malcolm Roberts is demanding. That could be revealing.

          40

      • #
        AndyG55

        And just who is going to give the “detailed briefing”

        Surely not the inept, zero-science Greg Hunt.

        Malcolm Roberts will make mincemeat of him !!

        41

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      Gee, Handjive, I would love to be in the room when the CSIRO tries to brief Malcolm Roberts on climate change. That should be really interesting!

      70

  • #
    doubtingdave

    JO , thanks very much for providing the link to Michael Smiths site , did not know about him before , must get around to sending you some chocolate funds just for that , I have posted a few comments recently about the Clinton foundation and you Aussie tax payers , as well as pointing out the work of American financial investigator Charles Ortel , who is offering his help and expertise to foreign nationals like Michael Smith , by coincidence today my favourite online philosopher Stefan Molyneux has a youtube video interview with Charles Ortel that you should all watch , Australia and the UK get several mentions , perhaps after watching it Michael Smith will not be described as a lone wolf anymore ; https://youtu.be/ZFcEnRu-hY8 thanks again Jo

    60

  • #
    pat

    woke up to this today…Hamish laughing throughout. taxpayers are paying for this:

    AUDIO 9mins56secs: 9 Aug: ABC Breakfast: #NeverTrump: taking down Donald Trump from within Republican ranks
    Overnight, conservative Republicans recruited a former GOP staffer, Evin McMullin, to run as an independent against Trump.
    McMullin worked for the CIA for ten years, before becoming Chief Policy Director for the Republicans.
    Hamish McDonald has been in the United States following the #NeverTrump movement for Foreign Correspondent, which airs tonight on ABC TV…
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/nevertrump:-taking-down-donald-trump-from/7703606

    8 Aug: Breitbart: Rebecca Mansour: ‘Never Trump’ Taps Their Candidate: Bald Unknown Mormon Hill Staffer from Goldman Sachs Who ‘Resettled’ Refugees for UN
    MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough broke the news of McMullin’s candidacy, dedicating two hours of his show on Monday to McMullin’s long shot bid…
    McMullin has never held elected office. According to his LinkedIn profile, from 1999-2010, he worked as an operations officer in the national clandestine service for the Central Intelligence Agency managing “clandestine operations related to counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, energy, political stability, and counterintelligence.”
    He then went on to work as an investment banking associate for Goldman Sachs in San Francisco for three years…
    According to McMullin’s LinkedIn profile, he worked in 2001 as a “Volunteer Refugee Resettlement Officer” for the United Nations, where he “vetted and processed UN-recognized refugees from the Middle East and Africa for resettlement to third countries.”…
    One of the key Never Trump figures behind McMullin is none other than “Gollum-in-glasses” Rick Wilson, who last October declared that the GOP donor class must “put a bullet in Donald Trump” to stop him…
    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/08/08/never-trump-taps-their-candidate-bald-unknown-mormon-hill-staffer-from-goldman-sachs-who-resettled-refugees-for-un/

    40

  • #
    pat

    ***warts-and-all? when has ABC reported anything but ALLEGED “warts-and-all” about Trump? is ABC praising a “God-fearing conservative”?

    VIDEO 30sec trailer: ABC Foreign Correspondent: Never Trump
    Broadcast: 09/08/2016 Reporter: Hamish Macdonald
    Can Donald Trump be stopped? Will he even make it to election day?
    This week Foreign Correspondent takes a ***warts-and-all journey through the strife now engulfing the Republican Party.
    Through backroom deals and convention floor rebellions, Kendal Unruh, a schoolteacher and God-fearing conservative, is taking on the Donald Trump juggernaut, the Republican establishment and the global media…
    Reporter Hamish Macdonald follows Unruh and her fellow dissidents as they stalk delegates, haggle over rules and crunch numbers over pizza and Coke in late night meetings.
    Unruh grew up in a cult and sees Trump as a type of cult leader, a sham conservative who is stealing the Republican Party…
    http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2016/s4513467.htm

    just in case ABC hasn’t got its point across, they have another go:

    9 Aug: ABC: Donald Trump like a cult leader who’s stealing the Party, Republican critic says
    Foreign Correspondent By Hamish Macdonald
    Kendal Unruh is on a mission — a God-given mission, she says — to stop Donald Trump becoming the next US president…BLAH BLAH

    the UNDEMORATIC Unruh, who tried to get Trump delegates to ignore the will of the voters, failed weeks ago, ABC, so your program tonite will be way out of date:

    15 Jul: NPR: Scott Detrow: ‘Never Trump Is Nevermore’: Anti-Trump Forces Fail To Force RNC Floor Fight
    Late Thursday night, when the political world was consumed by yet another terrorist attack, as well as the last-minute confusion of Donald Trump’s vice presidential rollout, the #NeverTrump movement died its last death…

    Unruh’s Free The Delegates was only around for a nano-second in political terms, ABC, & hardly credible:

    Wikipedia: Free the Delegates
    Free the Delegates was an American political effort within the Republican Party, formed in June 2016…
    The movement was started by Kendal Unruh…
    Texas financier Chris Eckstrom, founder of Courageous Conservatives PAC, a PAC that supported the Ted Cruz presidential campaign, and political consultant Steve Lonegan of New Jersey are assisting with the efforts of Free The Delegates Super PAC…

    a message for ABC:

    5 Aug: The New American: Selwyn Duke: Clinton vs. Trump? No, It’s the Media vs. America
    Liberal media bias has long been an open secret. But now it’s so bad that even a liberal mainstream newspaper notes that, in an effort to destroy Donald Trump, the media have jumped the shark.
    In a Los Angeles Times piece, columnist Justin Raimondo writes that to “fight Trump, journalists have dispensed with objectivity”; he then asks, “Why are the rules of journalism being rewritten this election year?” He also theorizes that the pro-Hillary Clinton bias has become so blatant it may actually backfire on the media…
    Even more strikingly, the media have engaged in outright collusion with Democrat operatives…
    I’ve often quipped that the Democrats have the world’s most effective public-relations team: the U.S. media…
    With only six percent of Americans approving of the media, though, Trump would be wise to portray himself as the opponent of this fourth estate-cum-fifth column. It’s morally fitting, too, to run against a group that is running against America.
    http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/23800-clinton-vs-trump-no-it-s-the-media-vs-america?
    tmpl=component&print=1

    30

  • #
    Analitik

    For more disgraceful ABC viewing, checkout last nights QANDA – US Election Special

    There never was much chance of a balanced discussion http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4494335.htm

    The panel was
    Linda Tirado – equality campaigner (author of the book Hand to Mouth: Living in Bootstrap America)

    Bob Carr – for anyone o/s, former Labor Premier of NSW (introduced the world’s first carbon trading scheme) and Federal Labor senator

    P.J. O’Rourke – life long (generational) Republican satirist but anti-Trump

    Lydia Khalil – fellow of Lowy Institute – middle east / terrorism analyst

    Crispin Rovere – analyst of US politics and defence policy (not mentioned that he is a member of the Australian Labor Party and previous convener of the ACT ALP International Affairs Policy Committee and also was once the Secretariat of the Asia-Pacific Leadership Network for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament)

    The audience was polled as being: Coalition 41%, ALP 31%, Greens 12%, Unspecified 15%, Other 1%, but the questions after the first 2 were decidedly left wing.

    And tonight, Greg Hunt will be on the panel….

    50

    • #
      Mari C

      Feh, O’Rourke started out a semi-hippy college liberal reporter – as he well documented in several books and stories – and only became a repub as he aged. Typical UASn habit, actually. Once we have to start living off our own earnings, we get -real- conservative.

      20

  • #
    pat

    ABC – do u want to know whose campaign is a train wreck? PLEASE INFORM YOUR AUDIENCE – THEY FUND YOU AFTER ALL:

    8 Aug: ConservativeTreehouse: sundance: Media Photoshops Crowd Image For Hillary Clinton St. Petersburg, Florida Speech…
    At this point, the action of the media is beyond ridiculous. Some in the media even note their own embarrassing behavior…***READ ALL
    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/08/08/media-photoshops-crowd-image-for-hillary-clinton-st-petersburg-florida-speech/#more-119917

    5 Aug: Time: Lissandra Villa: Hillary Clinton Q&A at Journalism Conference Draws Criticism
    Reporters and conservative pundits criticized those in attendance at the joint National Association of Black Journalists and National Association of Hispanic Journalists convention in Washington, D.C., for applauding after some of Clinton’s remarks…
    The presidents of both the National Association of Black Journalists and National Association of Hispanic Journalists both introduced Clinton and called the event a press conference.
    ***During their statements, it was mentioned that Republican nominee Donald Trump was invited to attend but declined…
    But the fact that the eight questions were chosen by a moderator left many to conclude that the event was not a press conference…

    ***Friday afternoon while Clinton was at the Q&A:

    Donald Trump schedule: Friday 5 August:
    Iowa Events Center in Des Moines, Iowa 3pm
    KI Convention Center in Green Bay, Wisconsin 7pm

    WHO TV: DES MOINES, Iowa – Iowan’s who want to “Make America Great Again” are willing to wait an entire workday out in the heat just to hear from the man himself.
    “I knew that I wanted to get here early, get a good seat, because I want to see the man that’s going to make America great again,” said Alec Gavin, a supporter of Trump.
    Many supporters gathered in front of the Iowa Events Center as early as 8 a.m. Friday to get a front-row seat at Donald Trump and Mike Pence’s rally in Des Moines. Steven Block, another local supporter, says he was in line since 2 a.m…

    PIC: 30 Jul: Twitter: Andrea Mitchell/NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent/anchor: We ate in Johnstown PA heart of county that’s gone GOP …
    READ SOME OF THE TWEETS IN RESPONSE TO MITCHELL BELOW THE PIC – HILLARY-OUS…
    https://twitter.com/mitchellreports/status/759479220238032896

    29 Jul: Facebook Page Craig Bernat: Well folks the Clinton Bus thing is coming to Johnstown, PA my hometown this Saturday. She will be at Johnstown Wire Technologies and the event is closed. How closed is it???? Here is a comment from a friend of an employee there from a post on WJAC TV’s Facebook page. He can’t attend and here is why……” I know people that work there and it’s not only closed to the public it’s also closed to the people who work there!!! They were told she will be bringing her own people in to stage as workers as she speaks. And I’m serious, you can’t make this stuff up!!!!!”
    Forward this to all you know!!!!!!! My guess is her own people will be the ones asking questions she gave them!!!

    40

  • #
    Bob in Castlemaine

    Their ABC, as mentioned in the article, is obsessed with the minutia of the past concerning One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts but has no interest in wide spread allegations of serious fraud by the Clinton Foundation?
    Similarly unsubstantiated sexual misconduct allegations dating back decades against conservative Roman Catholic, Cardinal George Pell seem to have their ABC similarly mesmerized. But when it comes to serious sexual misconduct allegations against a very senior ALP politician, it’s a case of “look the other way nothing to see here”.
    I suppose if nothing else, at least Auntie is consistent in it’s unofficial role as the Left’s dirt machine.

    40

  • #
    Transport by Zeppelin

    There should be a Royal commission into the bias of the ABC after the Emma Alberici interview.

    I mean, that performance by Alberici was an absolute disgrace!

    100

  • #
    pat

    5 days ago, there was a Civitas Institute poll, which showed Trump with an amazing 32 percent of black voters in North Carolina. i posted a Daily Caller piece on a previous thread: “Trump Over 30 Percent With Black Vote In North Carolina”.

    on 6 August, a veteran reporter of many decades, Walker Lundy, (he began with Atlanta Journal-Constitution in the 60s) writes the following for the well-established Charlotte Observer in North Carolina, without the slightest hint it is satire/comedy. in the comments, we learn that the headline has changed, at least once. from searches, it was formerly: “Trump: You People Really Believed Me?”.

    note also from CBS 7 August: “Trump to visit Fayetteville and Wilmington during North Carolina trip on Tuesday”, so NC is very much a State in play at this moment in time:

    6 Aug: Charlotte Observer, North Carolina: Walker Lundy: What would Donald Trump say if he quit the presidential race?
    (Walker Lundy is a former Observer Metro editor & Philadelphia Inquirer executive editor)
    In a turn of events that shocked the political world and threw the presidential race into unprecedented turmoil, Donald J. Trump announced yesterday that he is quitting the race and endorsing Hillary Clinton.
    Trump said the only point of his campaign was to show how stupid and gullible many Republican voters are…
    Asked if he felt any remorse about fooling so many people, Trump answered in typical Trumpian style: “No. They’re all losers.” (READ IT ALL)
    FROM 1539 COMMENTS:
    TracyGrace Osborne: These are blatant lies. The Charlotte Observer has just proved themselves to have no journalistic ethics.
    Sanky Noney: A lie is a lie,you noticed he changed tHe title!
    Scott Cannon: Funny, now the sheep change the title of the article. Rigged media, libtard idiots.
    These clowns are just like MSNBC. Baaaaahhhhhhh, sheep.
    Melanie Ducote: its a good think you changed your title!! or you would have gotten sued!
    Matt Vent: I noticed the title of this article changed…. rigged media.
    Len Clements: It has changed *three times* within the last 24 hours.
    David Cambridge: Hmm, why did you change the title? Maybe because it was a shady way to get the headline out there under the guise of it being and “Editorial” knowing full well that dumb ass site like yahoo would run just the title and some people would be fooled by it. I am not sure how you call yourself a journalist.
    John Nemitz: I read this garbage of a (non-news and totally sensationalistic article) yesterday, in which it stated that Donald Trump had indeed dropped out of the race, instead of presenting the revised “what if” scenario. I was completely caught off guard and was confused by yesterday’s news article that did indeed state that Trump had already dropped out of the race.
    This is an obvious ploy (both iterations of the story) to plant the idea in the minds of the general public that Trump is about to drop out of the race, and put the entire Republican establishment into great turmoil…
    Amy Lynn: I guess I don’t understand why the Charlotte Observer published this. I can see this on The Onion, but don’t feel this is appropriate for our local paper…disappointed that the editor felt this was an appropriate avenue for such malarky.
    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article94019107.html

    left gate-keepers Snopes jumped on it – but changed their headline. they have a sub-heading beginning with “A satirical” article, even tho they go on to admit it was not marked as such:

    Trump: You People Really Believed Me? : snopes.com
    http://www.snopes.com › Fact Check › Fake News
    13 hours ago

    8 Aug: Snopes: Dan Evon: Trumped Out
    A satirical article published by the Charlotte Observer fooled many readers into believing that Donald Trump had dropped out of the 2016 presidential race…
    The article left many readers puzzled, as the Charlotte Observer is a legitimate news publication and not a fake news site through which stories of this ilk are typically published. However, those who are not regular readers of the Observer may not know that the newspaper does occasionally print satirical articles in their “Viewpoint” section, and since this particular piece was not specifically labeled as satire, many who encountered it mistook it for real news…
    http://www.snopes.com/trump-drops-out-endorses-clinton/

    apparently it was in yahoo’s Politics section, but later pulled.

    My Yahoo
    https://my.yahoo.com/
    … In a turn of events that shocked the political world and threw the presidential race into unprecedented turmoil, Donald J. Trump announced yesterday that he is quitting the race and endorsing Hillary Clinton.

    it was carried by The Fresno Bee in California, but pulled:

    What might Trump say if he dropped out?
    There are 9 comments on the The Fresno Bee story from Sunday, titled What might Trump say if he dropped out?.

    it was picked up by the Baltimore Sun, & pulled:

    Trump: You people really believed me? – National/World News …
    talk.baltimoresun.com › News › National/World News
    2 days ago – 4 posts – ‎4 authors

    naturally, it also got picked up on various alt websites.

    THE MSM IS DEAD.

    20

  • #
    pat

    comment #22 is in moderation.

    well-known political operator, Dick Morris, with co-writer:

    5 Aug: DickMorris.com: Rigged Against Trump: Presidential Debate Commission
    By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann
    The decision of the Presidential Debate Commission to hold two of the general election debates on nights that conflict with high profile NFL games — and their refusal to reconsider the scheduling — raises the question of pro-Hillary/anti-Trump bias on the Commission.
    By deliberately setting the debate dates opposite highly popular football games, the Commission seems to be angling to cut the viewership of white males, a key voting groups generally supporting Trump, in a bid to reduce their interest in the election.
    While theoretically bi-partisan, the Commission is currently dominated by high profile Hillary supporters and Republicans who oppose Donald Trump — elite insiders. So, in sum, it about as anti-Trump as a commission can get…
    Take a look at some of the “non-partisan” members…READ ALL
    http://www.dickmorris.com/rigged-trump-presidential-debate-commission/

    8 Aug: Boston Herald: Holly Robichaud: Rigged debate commission in the bag for Hillary Clinton
    Commission defenders say the schedule was set a year ago. By then we knew the Democratic National Convention was rigged for Hillary, so it’s easy to conclude these dates were picked for low viewership of an unlikeable Hillary…
    http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/holly_robichaud/2016/08/robichaud_rigged_debate_commission_in_the_bag_for_hillary

    20

  • #
    John

    Good stuff 0 double 7. I have listened to all the interviews and studied your website. Some well intentioned constructive advice:

    Be a little more measured. You cannot win the war in one day. Fire your shots at targets when they come into view like how inaccurate the alarmist predictions have been.

    I have seen nothing from you on the affect of CO2 on the greenhouse effect and resultant feed backs. The whole alarmist theory relies on this which even Chris Monckton recognises.

    So do you think CO2 has any effect. Yes but neglible. Or it doesn’t affect it?

    The crux of your forthcoming arguments with the alarmist commentators trying to catch you out will depend on your understanding of this.

    70

    • #
      Peter C

      I think that 077 has been quite clear about CO2.

      CO2 has NO effect on global temperatures.

      40

    • #

      “So do you think CO2 has any effect. Yes but negligible. Or it doesn’t affect it?”

      This is not about opinion, belief, or thought! Those pertain only to the soft social/political ‘science’, never the hard physical science, of the empirical/measurable!
      The ‘real’ in philosophy encompass all physical, fantasy, and belief; even whim, conjecture and giggles! When discussing how the Earth’s atmosphere/oceans physically operate, what part of some “real” can be safely discarded? When discussing the reaction of the masses to the outcome of a vote, what part of some “real” can be safely discarded?
      All the best! -will-

      40

    • #

      “I have seen nothing from you on the affect of CO2 on the greenhouse effect and resultant feed backs. The whole alarmist theory relies on this which even Chris Monckton recognises.”

      ‘alarmist theory relies on this belief’. ‘Tis easy to defend belief in the religious believers. You insist on believing in the fantasy of ‘greenhouse effect’ and ‘feed backs’. Why Oh why have you such beliefs?

      30

  • #
    AndyG55

    OT, and for the internet archive.

    It looks like the Northabout polar expedition is going to use that path forced through Vilkitsky Straits/Laptev Sea sea ice by TWO icebreakers and a convoy of cargo vessels and tankers.

    Look out for the FARCE of “diminished” Arctic sea ice that will follow from the alarminati. :-)

    http://realclimatescience.com/2016/08/ship-of-fools-seems-to-have-discovered-that-there-is-ice-in-the-arctic/

    50

  • #

    This is funny. The so-called “Conversation” seems to have found it necessary to commission not one but two articles attacking Malcom Roberts. One on Aug 5th by notorious science-denier John Cook here
    https://theconversation.com/one-nations-malcolm-roberts-is-in-denial-about-the-facts-of-climate-change-63581

    10

  • #
    William

    Malcolm Roberts as a University of Queensland engineering honors graduate wrote to Professor Hoij Vice Chancellor on 20/07/2015 concerned about Taxpayer funding aiding Greenpeace RE:D14/10464 and Serious corruption of science by UQ,s John Cook and Ove Hoegh-Guldbrg Re:D15/7927.They supply no evidence to support their repeated claims that carbon dioxide from human activity causes dangerous global warming ,or climate variability .Your false claim that the UNIPCC report contain empirical evidence to support Hoegh -Guldberg,s claim .John Cook’s paper fabricating a false “consensus and misrepresenting science”99.7% do not claim human activity would cause catastrophic warming .Are UQ staff breaching the Queensland Professional Engineers Act 2002 ? .Maybe now Malcolm Roberts is elected to the Senate and wants a full and open inquiry ,will the truth come out.

    10