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

Malcolm Roberts, a polished punchy senate speech

In his maiden speech as a new Senator, Malcolm Roberts looks sharp, stands tall, and fires his words precisely, and articulately. He oozes determination.

He’s put in long hours for years to be there and he knows exactly why he’s there. James Jeffrey in The Australian described it as “impassioned”, delivered with “the pyrotechnic power of his larynx”:

Roberts gave a speech that left even his leader, Pauline Hanson, with big shoes to fill. He quoted John Cleese, former US president Andrew Jackson and Banjo Paterson, and compared himself to Socrates. Climate change was boomingly dismissed as “a scam”.

His remarks on climate science are in the first ten minutes: Roberts strength is his reasoning — his focus on cause and effect. He’s right to draw attention to the failed predictions of Flannery and Karoly; he’s right to talk about the pause, and the cooling from WWII to the late 70s.

He’s right to question the sacred institutions like the BOM and their inexplicable and unreplicatable adjustments.

He’s right to keep asking for the data that shows that human use of hydrocarbon fuels affects the climate. Its 2,447 days since I asked if there was any evidence. To save the planet, you’d think one person would have emailed it.

Malcolm has been in the trenches of the carbon wars. At the start he thanks many familiar names, like the late great Bob Carter, and Ian Plimer. And it’s nice to see recognition to a lot of fellow volunteers — some of whom are dedicated at achieving things behind the scenes, yet rarely get a public thank you.

POST NOTE:

Some great lines in his speech, which are setting the twitter-sphere on fire —

“The biggest purchase of our life is not our home, it’s government.

“We work Monday to mid-morning Thursday for the government.”

Australia’s values and way of life are also at risk from insidious institutions such as the unelected swill that is the United Nations.

The people of the United Kingdom recently spoke and I have great admiration for the way they broke free of that socialist monolithic monster, the European Union. The EU is a template for total socialist domination of Europe through unelected bodies such as the IMF forcing their frightening agenda on the people. It is also the UN’s template and Australia must leave the UN, we need an Aus-exit.

We once thought we were a poor nation, when we were actually rich. Sadly, we now think we’re a rich nation, yet we are becoming poor. Instead of no nation, we must have one nation.

The Greens Senators rudely refused to get up and congratulate the new Senator as is the custom. Some called that a snub, but for Malcolm their petty bad-manners would be a reward — a badge of honor. As he says on Twitter: “If I upset the Greens, then I hit the target”.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (169 votes cast)
Malcolm Roberts, a polished punchy senate speech, 9.3 out of 10 based on 169 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/j5ld9zm

255 comments to Malcolm Roberts, a polished punchy senate speech

  • #

    Jo, can you please export Malcolm Roberts to the US for our Senate. The benefits are great, except for having to deal with the Obama Administration……lol.

    534

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      Today’s lines of communications are long. He may be there already. Ask your local rep.

      175

      • #
        • #
          AndyG55

          Another empty Guardian opinion piece with zero science eco-chamber propaganda, using corrupted temperature data as if it actually meant anything. Opened, of course by the obligatory backlit water condensationcoming from cooling towers. Really, do they still do that ?

          The piece starts with a lie and never changes tack.

          [snip and edited]

          486

        • #
          AndyG55

          Thanks for the link, CS,, :-) So hilarious reading the far-left ignoramous Gruniad posters going ape. Many empty heads nearly exploding.. :-)

          Malcolm Roberts has really got them going, showing their utter ignorance and hatred in every post. Well done Malcolm

          [Edited - no CAPS yelling thanks. - Jo]

          414

          • #
            Ross

            Andy, do you agree with Senator Roberts theory’s on the international [snip] banking [[snip]system]? Sounds about right, don’t you reckon?

            [With some words removed this is a valid question and I'm approving it.] AZ

            32

            • #
              sophocles

              Ross:
              Mr. Roberts was positively gentle with his criticism of the financial instutions.

              If you are at all interested in finding out more about it, I can recommend Dr. Michael Hudson’s latest book:
              Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy published Aug 20, 2015
              It’s at Amazon.com, and Dr Hudson is not at all gentle.

              80

            • #
              Ross

              Sophocles. Unfortunately , AZ censored my post to such a degree, that the point may have been lost. I’ll try again. The Senator is on record in his belief that the banks are conspiring together to form a one world socialist government.
              Why would they want to do this? Even the good Senator is a little vague on that one. Perhaps Andy G55 could fill in the blanks.

              [Ross, The topic was the senator's maiden speech in the senate. He mentioned the bank problem but I don't recall any accusation of conspiracy. You might infer a conspiracy but he didn't say it that I can remember (watched it twice). Since you phrase the question again and make it obvious that you refer to "on record" rather than the speech, I will use my editorial judgment and approve this.] AZ

              36

              • #
                sophocles

                why would they want to do this?

                because there’s money in it. Lot’s of money.
                I still recommend Dr Hudson’s book.

                50

            • #
              AndyG55

              I don’t follow the banking sector argument, so I have no opinion either way.

              30

        • #
          Glen Michel

          Gee I’m convinced.The left/ Greenie media can flap their hands ( that’s another story) and get in a right tizz about something that their inhibited brains cannot comprehend,but that’s their problem.What is it about such people who are so brainwashed and gullible?

          174

          • #
            climateskeptic

            There I was thinking that pointing out Roberts is no scientist would be relevant on a blog supposedly about science

            118

            • #

              climateskeptic, and your ad hom fallacy is never relevant in a discussion about science. Your comment has been orphaned down here because I deleted the to and fro about you from #1. The topic is Malcolm Roberts. Not you.

              201

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              The definition of “scientist’ is, “a person using scientific methods; a student of science”.

              We are all scientists, because we are all in pursuit of knowledge. With a few exceptions, of course, such as yourself.

              61

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Oh, silly me. I have just realised that you were referring to the fact that Malcom Roberts had not been annointed, and ordained, by the Lord High Poobar of Klimate Korrectness.

                Perhaps he doesn’t suit pointy-hats with stars on.

                101

              • #
                AndyG55

                Malcolm Roberts is actually an engineer with extensive experience..

                Engineers make science work in practice.

                He has an Honours degree in engineering, has studied atmospheric gases,

                He also has an MBA in statistics, and has studied extensively in Earth Sciences and Geology.

                This would put him far, far ahead of most computer modelling so-called climate scientists who’s only claim would be a pass in the UQ Climate 101 propaganda course.

                231

              • #
                Rod Stuart

                Yes Andy, but he has no experience in observing the fornication of tree kangaroos. That is an essential quality for an expert in klimate seance.

                81

              • #
                AndyG55

                “Yes Andy, but he has no experience in observing the fornication of tree kangaroos”

                He’s a Queenslander.. of course he has.

                21

              • #
              • #
              • #

                “Yes Andy, but he has no experience in observing the fornication of tree kangaroos. That is an essential quality for an expert in klimate seance.”

                All eastern Climate Clown 101 students have many graphs of fornication of (snip). And the mommys/daddys actually pay for this! Oh woah are we!!

                02

              • #

                That and US$5 gets you a cuppa at STARBUCKS maybe, Lousy coffee, go to Dunkin Doughnuts where most cops shoot few!

                02

            • #
              PeterPetrum

              He is a qualified statestician and engineer who specialises in gasses. He is quite capable of digesting data from other scientific fields. There is no such thing as a “climate scientist”.

              101

            • #
              Lord Jim

              There I was thinking that pointing out Roberts is no scientist would be relevant on a blog supposedly about science

              And yet we don’t hear you complaining that Tim Flannery – paleontologist and mammologist – is on the ‘climate council’ and routinely contacted for his opinions on climate change by the media (particularly the ABC) despite the fact many of his predictions (eg the one about rains and the dams) have not materialized.

              21

        • #
          David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

          Many thanks for the link CS, which included:
          “Most news outlets had stopped covering the views of climate science deniers in regular reporting. There is a clear scientific consensus that the world is warming and that human carbon emissions have caused it, so reporting the views of a few non-experts who push fanciful theories with no credible evidence is seen as “false balance”.”

          That bias is more generalised than even I expected. Thanks for the confirmation.

          And the first graph alone would qualify for inclusion in “How to Lie with Statistics”, which was used as a text back in the 1950s.
          Cheers,
          Dave B

          223

        • #
          Mikky

          Malcolm Roberts invited the counterattack with some highly dubious bits of science, in particular the part about the inability of the atmosphere to warm the planet (so are clothes unable to warm bodies?), and that Aus temperatures today are cooler than 130 years ago, which is probably only true if you compare radiation-enhanced (pre-Stevenson) data with the proper screened measurements of today.

          318

          • #
            AndyG55

            The atmosphere cools the planet.

            Its called conduction and convection.

            145

            • #
              Ted O'Brien.

              Methought we’d be cooler without it.

              And for the whole story I would have put in there evaporation and condensation, with a bit of freezing thrown in as well.

              20

          • #
            Radical Rodent

            …are clothes unable to warm bodies?

            Yes, you are right; clothes are unable to warm bodies (unless the clothes generate their own heat, of course – which is not usual, as another energy source will be required). Clothes keep you warm by slowing heat loss. Without clothes, the air circulating around you will cool you; this is why people tend to take clothes off in warm weather, to expose their skin to the air, allowing it to remove the heat by conduction and thence by convection. While the passive effects of convection will cool you, you will cool quicker in moving air, which is why people will seek a breeze in hot weather. Clothing restricts this heat loss by trapping the air in immediate contact with you, and minimising air movement around the body; this is why it is better to wear several layers when cold; it is even more effective if the outer layer is wind and water-resistant, which is why you put a coat on when going out into the snow and rain.

            In your next lesson, we will discuss the benefits of eating and drinking.

            251

        • #
          Radical Rodent

          The One Nation senator dismisses the conventional scientific view of climate change. Here are the holes in his most commonly deployed arguments

          Slight typo at the start, there. I have very thoughtfully corrected it for you.

          “ … there is no data proving human use of hydro-carbon fuels affects climate,” he said.

          The implication here is that there is such data… could you back that idea up and provide it for us? The Graun certainly couldn’t.

          Not wanting to lose the will to live, I skimmed to the comments: the link to XKCD was good, but the effect was ruined by XKCD splicing on “Mike’s nature trick” at the end (i.e. “Stuff the proxies, let’s put on some instrument readings, as we can make them far more scary!”).

          81

        • #
          sophocles

          Hilarious.

          Of course, choosing a record hot year as your starting point is cheating

          ROTFL. Somebody buy that poor reporter a course in statistics and statistical analysis. ROTFL.
          And make sure s/he passes it.

          Some rebuttal. The rest of it doesn’t even deserve picking apart.

          32

          • #
            sophocles

            I wasn’t going to but I just couldn’t help it after laughing so hard at the Guardian Debunker’s last shot at Malcolm. It’s beautiful; a paragraph of brilliant ignorance.

            Michael Slezak quotes Malcolm Roberts thus:

            It is basic. The sun warms the earth’s surface. The surface, by contact, warms the moving, circulating atmosphere. That means the atmosphere cools the surface. How then can the atmosphere warm it? It cannot. That is why their computer models are wrong.

            and then demonstrates his ignorance and lack of knowledge with:

            It’s honestly just not clear where to start with this quote. Is he doubting that the sun can warm the atmosphere? If so, then why is the atmosphere not freezing? Is he arguing that because the earth’s surface is warmer than the air above it (which is true over land), that the atmosphere can’t warm?

            Climatesceptic: your mission is to buy dear little Mikey a year in Physics 101, and a year in Statistics 100. He needs ed-ju-ma-kating.

            You have a nerve to call that juvenile tripe a debunking.

            From that, I deduce your knowledge of simple physics is just as bad. The atmosphere is freezing as you rise into it. It’s at ground temperature at ground level and drops past freezing point somewhere around 2500m high (5000-6000 ft). Have an engineer calculate it for you. I shouldn’t have to point out that the atmosphere is almost transparent to solar insolation. It’s the heat transfer from the warmed ground to the atmospheric gases in contact with it that gives us that nice warm air down here at ground level where we live. It’s carried away (up) by convection pretty quickly as the atmosphere cools the ground. Same applies over water.

            Mr Roberts is a qualified engineer. He knows heat transfer. He’s right. Engineers, no matter what their final specialisation, all have to pass thermodynamics. And you, climatesceptic, should have read that `debunking’ before you recommended it. Shame on you.

            I’ve only dunked two points. I’ll leave the others for other blog readers to strip.

            123

    • #
      Oliver K. Manuel

      I agree, and I wish Senator Malcolm Roberts well. He faces a formidable opponent. National academies of sciences seem to be united, worldwide, in support of UN’s Agenda 21. That includes those that gave Nobel Prizes to Al Gore and the UN’s IPCC.

      322

      • #
        JohnM

        The national Academies of Science didn’t survey their members, with the exception of the Russian Academy which said “Nyet”. The academies also know how much money flows into the pockets of their members in the name of researching or fighting climate change and rejecting the IPCC’s claims would cut that flow of money and cast a lot of reputations under a bus.

        80

    • #
      crakar24

      Sure you can have Malcolm but we want Dr Ron Paul in return deal?

      20

    • #
      Albert

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oODkLTizy0 good video, caution; you may die laughing

      00

  • #
    Richard Barnett

    Queensland may want to keep the good senator.

    473

  • #
    Vlad the Impaler

    How can I vote for this gentleman?

    362

  • #
    graphicconception

    Well done Malcolm!

    I don’t have any specific interest in Queensland but I find that I am in agreement with his more general points.

    I would extend his point about banks to the wider financial community. Organisations like Goldman Sachs need to be included. Their ex-employees seem to pop up everywhere.

    I can remember whenever we had a new tax imposed on us in the UK people would say: “They will be taxing fresh air next!” as if it could never happen. If only they could see us now.

    I am not sure that leaving the UN would be a good idea but it does need keeping in check, certainly. Once they get a global “carbon” tax administered by the World Bank with the UN getting a rake off, they will be set for life.

    Roberts sounds like just the person I would want to represent me. It’s a pity that I can’t move to Queensland

    There seem to be lots of un-elected people who are gaining increasing control over people’s lives. Brexit was an attempt to reduce that and I notice that Roberts has spotted it as well.

    532

  • #
    grahamd

    Yes I like many watched Malcolm’s presentation live.
    It was certainly a polished professional performance. Exactly, what many of us were hoping for!

    502

  • #
    Harry Passfield

    The biggest purchase of our life is not our home, it is our Government!

    Brilliant.

    553

    • #
      Dennis

      Unfortunately in Australia there is a majority of apathetic voters who seem to believe that politics is not something worth their attention.

      371

    • #
      Albert

      When our PM war involved in the referendum to abandon the Queen as head of state, it was widely reported that the duplication alone between State Governments and the Federal Government was costing us $31 billion yearly.
      An intelligent Government would start white-anting the duplication immediately

      211

      • #
        Dennis

        As per arrangements at the time of federation, agreement on states rights and powers.

        But imagine if all power was held by the Commonwealth of Australia federal government and people in such a large country had to rely on decisions made in Canberra.

        121

        • #
          ExWarmist

          We could strengthen the states by eliminating Federal duplication.

          The Fed has Health and Education departments without students or patients.

          161

          • #
            Dennis

            I agree, to have federal departments overseeing state and territory departments is ridiculous, and noting that the state governments have responsibility for public hospitals and schools, and own them. Furthermore the duplication enables politicians from both levels of government to play political games, to take credit or to deny responsibilities, as they determine will most likely gain them points.

            There is no doubt in my mind that taxpayers could be saved billions of dollars if government departments like the above mentioned were rationalised.

            50

      • #
        RexAlan

        I used to think like you Albert, but not anymore. For governments to be representative they not only have to be local but to think local. To take your position to its logical conclusion we don’t even need a national government then, lets just embrace a UN one world government and be done with it, just think of how much money we could save. I’ll guarantee you one thing though it wouldn’t be democratic, it would intrude into every facet of your life and there wouldn’t be a damn thing you could do about it.

        191

        • #

          I’m with RexAlan. What we need is competition – independent states who can’t raise taxes too far or make laws too stupid or people and businesses will move to another state. The Federal Gov should only be in charge of things that absolutely make no sense to leave to the states — like having one railway gauge, one army, one voltage (feel free to debate these). All the other stuff — education, GST, hospitals should be state based.

          Our state governments are being steadily neutered as more power gets centralized. The quality of the candidates reflects that.

          One national curriculum only means any deficiency in a curriculum will hurt a whole generation. One national tax and wage system means a company can only go overseas to find a better arrangement. If one state here was more business friendly, businesses would flock, and the other states would be forced to compete as they lost workers and dollars to the more efficient state.

          323

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Two armies are a good idea. If they get bored, they can fight each other.

            Or better still, if each State had its’ own army, and they could take turns in invading Tasmania.

            151

            • #
              AndyG55

              “and they could take turns in invading Tasmania”

              ummmmm… why ??

              Oh they grows hops down there.. OK !! :-)

              60

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              The red was meant to be green.

              20

            • #
              sophocles

              The Air Force fights the Army
              the Navy fights the Air Force
              and the Army fights the Navy.

              That’s adequate competition, surely?

              31

            • #
              ExWarmist

              We need to protect ourselves from the Kiwis…

              Defend the southern reaches…

              30

            • #
              David

              Rereke prior to Federation each State did have its own army. Three of my Great Grandfathers were in them and the other GGF in one of the Colony’s Navy. The navy of the Colony of Victoria actually sent one of its ships, HMCS Victoria, to the Maori Wars in 1860. The irony is that it was actually part of the Victoria Police

              Sophocles to add to your bit there is that delightful saying.

              The Navy has traditions.

              The Army has customs.

              The Air Force just have disgusting habits.

              21

            • #
              Ted O'Brien.

              You haven’t been watching Syria.

              10

          • #

            The purposes of a national/federal government!
            1. Deliver the mail!
            2. Keep foreign enemies out of my yard.
            3. Stay the hell out of my life!
            end.

            120

      • #

        Yes, a lot of money could be saved by the Federal government getting out of areas belonging to the state governments such as health, education and industrial relations. Taxing should be returned to the states and allow the states by comparisons and competition to reduce taxes to attract enterprising people and companies such as happens in the US (this would cause South Australia and Tasmania quickly change their tact of discouraging manufacturing) . Even more the comparison should be with Switzerland, the most democratic country in the world and one of the richest. Switzerland has 26 cantons (states) which do the taxing and pass a minor portion to the Federal government for such things as defense. Note Switzerland has a number of referenda every year- most of these through the constitution allowing citizen initiated referendum and recall. They do not have a problem with costs and have introducing electronic voting.

        40

  • #
    James Murphy

    Even the ABC was relatively light-on with their piece – I thought they would be utterly remorseless and relentless in their efforts to discredit him.

    Then again, maybe the “journalist” who wrote it is now looking for other work…

    402

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      The ABC hasn’t changed a bit. They headlined him with the same sex marriage debate.

      222

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        This was just run of the mill for the ABC. But they surely must soon be called to account. The Northern Territory election was surely the last straw, too big to be passed over.

        172

        • #
          Dennis

          Massive scare campaign in the Northern Territory based on the ABC 4 Corners misleading report, a scare campaign crafted to deceive the unwary and naive voters, and it worked.

          What happened to the term “deceptive advertising” and it being unlawful?

          251

  • #
    reformed warmist of logan

    Hi Jo,
    Yes, yesterday was a truly fantastic and “ab-fab” day!!
    I’m as heartened and inspired after this election, as I was disillusioned after the last (remember the hopeless results of climate sceptics party).
    I wish the good Senator Malcolm – as opposed to the bad or luke-warm “other” Malcolm (gotta love the irony … lol.!) every success in the coming weeks and months.
    As usual Jo, keep up the scintillatingly-good work.
    Reformed warmist of logan.

    413

  • #
    oldbrew

    James Delingpole reports on the Roberts speech…

    An Australian senator has used his maiden speech to slam the “fraudulent” climate change industry which he blames for “costing jobs, destroying families, bankrupting businesses” and making his country “less competitive.”
    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/13/australian-senator-climate-alarmists-prefer-pictures-cute-smiling-dolphins-facts/

    292

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    The Truth eventually comes home to stay.

    This is a heartening move in that direction.

    KK

    413

  • #
    pattoh

    Can’t wait to see what he can add to some of the committees & inquiries

    However I bet London to a brick that Greg Hunt may not be so enthusiastic.

    Bring on the broad daylight!!!

    413

  • #

    What Malcolm Roberts and those in parliament that support his views need to do now is be in the news constantly spreading the message. They need to do what Trump has done, totally confused the media by sending what they see as the wrong message and then getting them to publish it, damning him for his (insert latest offensive stance here). The public will very quickly begin to pick up on what’s happening.

    222

  • #
    J.H.

    Damn fine Senate speech. Well done and well said.

    402

  • #
    delcon2

    Well done Malcolm Roberts.It’s a pity that there aren’t more Politicians like him,Pauline and the other”One Nation”senators.This Party may be”Our”next major party,since the Liberals have gone to the”Dark Side”
    To all Australians,watch this video.Pity we can’t send a copy to all the other so called Politicians.

    242

  • #
    Yonniestone

    I know many genuine sceptical scientists will pick at the points Malcolm Roberts addressed concerning ‘climate change ™’ which is perfectly acceptable and correct….BUT lets not forget where science and Australian politics are at the moment.

    With years of illegal PC driven agendas we have representatives that range from centre to extreme left with maiden speeches such as,

    Robert Simms-Greens 13/10/2015
    Richard Di Natale-Greens 16/08/2011
    Nick McKim-Greens 9/09/2015

    I want you to look at these links then seriously consider what Malcolm Roberts has achieved in 22 minutes compared to the commonplace,modus operandi, nation destroying, PC textbook drivel that is espoused then bombarded into every aspect of Australian life.

    301

    • #
      AndyG55

      A simplified speech aimed at a political audience.

      He kept the science dumbed-down to suit, but still hit all the right targets. :-)

      271

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Considering the immediate flack from the outraged fright bats I’d say he was directly over the target. :)

        271

      • #
        Glen Michel

        I thought it quite impressive too.I think that all concerns of the senator should be put out in a maiden speech.It makes no difference that the political left will ridicule it,the agenda that is espoused is given air.Keep chipping away- and that means all of us.

        111

        • #
          AndyG55

          “It makes no difference that the political left will ridicule”

          Yes it does.. that is a huge plus for the speech.

          If he had not upset them, he would not have made his several points.

          71

  • #
    Dennis

    Does anybody have a summary of how many Australian Dollars our governments have thrown into the UN IPCC agendas, squandered monies?

    121

    • #
      Albert

      Many charities including the Red Cross, Doctors without Borders donate a portion of their income to the UN IPCC. They collect billions every year

      81

  • #
    John

    Thanks for putting that video up Jo. The science is settled? We will see if one lone voice in Canberra can prove it ain’t necessarily so.

    181

    • #
      Angry

      My question to all these Charlatans would be……

      “If the Science is really settled then why are we still funding your research?”

      70

  • #
    Dennis

    How about conducting due diligence (auditing) the BoM as Prime Minister Tony Abbott tried to arrange but failed to get full support of his Cabinet …

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/washout-warmist-bureaus-drought-prediction-fail/news-story/d3a9c8dff77c70ecfb8e9d2f261390e8

    131

  • #
    Albert

    RAW data shows trends up and down, up and down, up and down, it has never been different.
    From 1850 to today using data trends from Phil Jones, only 3 trends were up, [.16C], [.15C], [.16C]
    It was always considered a joke by politicians, if only they could tax air ! and they did it
    Climate is a shift in conditions for 30 to 60 years, we should always use the word ‘weather’, not climate as only weather changes overnight.
    Good speech by Senator Roberts, no doubt the ‘warmists’ will have an army of people to destroy him, as truth is their enemy

    201

  • #
    Ruairi

    A senator makes a great speech,
    On climate and man, which could teach,
    The alarmists the facts,
    And expose all the cracks,
    In the climate-change nonsense they preach.

    291

  • #
    George McFly......I'm your density

    Excellent work by the Senator Jo. I hope he keeps saying this in a loud and clear manner.

    150

  • #
    Dennis

    This news item looks suspiciously like yet another British Met Office climate change department beat up. I have experienced extremely hot weather in England in the 1970s and the 1990s at this time of year.

    http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/britain-records-hottest-september-day-in-more-than-a-century/news-story/959c27b0f5acb0cc5ba857879b7f44e9

    71

    • #
      Albert

      Richard Lindzen would say he teaches his students during their first days that ”spot temperatures make almost NO difference to global average” and he would show a genuine graph, not a Brian Cox alarmist graph from an unknown source

      81

    • #
      Margaret Smith

      “Dennis
      September 14, 2016 at 8:36 am · Reply
      This news item looks suspiciously like yet another British Met Office climate change department beat up. I have experienced extremely hot weather in England in the 1970s and the 1990s at this time of year.”

      Always remember that the London-based Met Office always acts as though the SE of England is the whole UK. Up here in N Ireland it barely topped 18°C. Nice but hardly startling.

      70

    • #
      handjive

      Were carbon (sic) levels @400pm a century ago?
      No?
      So, what caused the the record temperature?
      The BMO fail to join the dots.

      101

    • #
      AndyG55

      I love it when they say “since” whatever date :-)

      91

  • #
    PeterS

    Very good politician with no future as the leftist media will destroy him as easily and quickly as they did Abbott. In fact they have already started. The leftist media know nothing apart from how to exercise political assassinations of those who oppose the left. We have a PM who used to have the portfolio and power to change all that but reneged. For example he could have clamped down on the ABC bias but he did nothing. Now as PM he will let things get out of control and allow the leftist media continue spreading their lies to tear down any good politician who dares to speak the truth for the benefit of the nation. Sorry but this nation is doomed as there is no hope for a good politician to make a difference – even a little difference thanks to the leftist media who have too much power. Our only hope is for this to change but I see no such change on our radar. When the ALP+Greens win the next election comfortably our decline will accelerate. Perhaps then the public will learn something and history will judge people like Roberts and Abbott more kindly. It will be too late but at least we might, just might learn the lesson albeit the hard way. I hope so as the alternative is catastrophic for our children’s future.

    161

    • #
      Albert

      Against him will be the ABC, SBS, 7 and 10 Networks who will also promote the ”yes” case in the gay marriage referendum. There is no balance in Australia, the Left rules

      151

    • #
      ExWarmist

      …We have a PM who used to have the portfolio and power to change all that but reneged. For example he could have clamped down on the ABC bias but he did nothing. Now as PM he will let things get out of control and allow the leftist media continue spreading their lies to tear down any good politician who dares to speak the truth for the benefit of the nation. … When the ALP+Greens win the next election comfortably our decline will accelerate….

      I always thought that was Turnbulls personal agenda.

      81

    • #

      Very good politician with no future as the leftist media will destroy him as easily and quickly as they did Abbott.

      No Peter, it doesn’t work like that. As long as Malcolm stays true to his voter base it doesn’t matter what the ABC says — indeed the more they attack the better it gets for him. Abbott was trying to appeal to the middle, he pandered a little too often, and the middle is influenced by the mainstream media. If Abbott had kept the passion of the blood oath the ABC would have attacked him slightly more, but Abbott would have had the undivided passionate support of the base. I’m not suggesting Abbott is finished, or “destroyed” at all, just saying that the ABC could hurt him, but not Roberts. He’s already been called a wild conspiracist, a climate denier, and everything else.

      The danger is that Malcolm might get bulletproof, polished and careful, and then the ABC will actively ignore him. He and Pauline might play this as quite a good combo.

      262

      • #
        PeterS

        I’m a realist. History unfortunately is on my side. Look at it this way. The leftist media are very powerful and are experts at telling lies and twisting things around – far better than any other side of politics. I presume no one here disputes that. Hence they are at war with people like Roberts until one or the other side is left standing. It won’t stop as it’s in their blood. For them to go silent is like the Islamic extremists suddenly deciding to stop hating the West and the Jews. It can’t happen that way. It will stop when one side rules supreme, or some other not yet known party enters the picture and wins the war.

        51

        • #
          Analitik

          The left is on the decline. The general population is waking up to the fact that our political scene went too (much too) far to the left with the emergence of The Greens and the center/left shift by both of the major political parties.

          Why else do you think One Nation won FOUR senate seats with next to no budget for political advertising while The Greens lost a senate seat and failed to win any additional lower house seats despite a massive amount of campaigning in Victoria?

          Reality is hitting home and at some stage, the MSM will have to recognize it and realign their reporting else viewers/readers will continue to switch off and their advertising income will reflect this.

          112

          • #
            PeterS

            I sincerely hope you are correct but one begs the question how come we now have two left-wing major parties, one moderate and one more extreme? Are you saying the next election we will have neither in power? More likely we will see the ALP+Greens in power. So much for the left being in decline. Time will tell though as a lot can happen between now and then.

            61

            • #
              Analitik

              how come we now have two left-wing major parties

              The decline I mentioned has begun pretty much since Turnbull’s coup. Up until then, normal conservatives felt fairly comfortable with the balance between Coalition vs Labour/Green but the coup was the slap to back of the head for them to look more closely at how the left was dominating debates and actual policy.

              The decline was manifested in the election results and I’m confident that the normal conservatives in the electorate have been shocked into keeping a closer eye on the way things are reported vs facts that can be readily checked via the internet these days. So I see the political balance will be forced back to a more traditional division rather than being so heavily weighted towards the left and The Greens are becoming exposed as the hard left rather than viewed as moderate conservation movement.

              Of course it will take time to unravel the legislative, economic and structural damage that has been wreaked over the past decade so those issues that you and Ted have mentioned remain to be dealt with. But I see the high point of the greenwash as having been reached and corrective actions (eg ARENA getting kneecapped) are beginning to come into effect.

              20

          • #
            Ted O'Brien.

            On the decline? You are very wrong there. Julia Gillard’s carbon tax was the last tool they nèeded to complete the abolition of private management of industry and private ownership of land in Australia.

            At the earliest opportunity it will be reinstated. If Malcolm Roberts doesn’t carry the day that could be at the next election.

            41

          • #
            Yonniestone

            Analitik you are spot on saying the general population is waking up, it may seem frustratingly slow to those who have seen or predicted the decay of Australian politics long ago but it is happening, the speed of change will only be exasperated by anti democratic behaviour from those herded in for cheap votes and seriously misplaced good intentions.

            Trust me when saying the Australian working class and welfare class have zero tolerance for anyone wanting to erode their lifestyles, the art of a ‘good o’l public shalacking’ has not been forgotten.

            22

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          I would dispute that the press is very powerful. They might think they are, and they may have convinced some of he populace that they are. But in reality, they are only a legend in their own lunch times, as they sit around the sandwich, telling each other how great it is to be part of the fourth estate, whilst manufacturing tomorrows fish and chips wrapping.

          A lot of businesses, and some of the individual movers and shakers, now hire private research companies to provide a regular analysis of events, that may be of direct import to themselves, and their plans. Targeted news, if you like.

          A lot of these research companies share their raw input information, through mutually owned private networks. Their output analysis, on the other hand, is held close to themselves and their Clients, because that is where their true value lies. This is where the evolution of “news” is going.

          The News Media doesn’t like it, because their business model cannot compete with it, The Establishment doesn’t like it, because the establishment cannot control it. Nobody else is shedding any tears.

          52

      • #
        Albert

        True Jo, all Malcolm has to do is stick to the truth and remain a small target, the truth that most on this site know, that’s why we visit, we can review the facts and make up our own minds, we are adults here.
        The alarmists seem to self destruct in the face of real science, prediction after prediction failing, bears refusing to die, the Arctic refusing to melt away and the seas refusing to rise to drown us all.

        Recently I learned when China & India doubled their comsumption of fossil fuels, co2 did not increase by 200% so on the graph, temperature departed from the co2 line, there is not the connection between them that alarmists claim, a reduction of fossil fuels will not necessarily reduce temperature. Climate science is still young

        52

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          … bears refusing to die, the Arctic refusing to melt away and the seas refusing to rise to drown us all.

          None of that is important, when faced with the fact, that Brian Cox has graphs!

          61

  • #
    TdeF

    I was delighted with two facts quoted
    1. Man cannot change the level of CO2 in the atmosphere.
    2. Temperature controls CO2 levels not the other way around
    and loved his categorization of the UN as unelected swill. That is possibly an insult to swill under 18C.
    He also called out the BOM change of cooling trends into warming trends and thanked Jennifer Marohasy.

    This has twitter in an uproar according to Andrew Bolt. Especially the UN comment. How dare anyone insult both the UN and swill.

    282

  • #
    pat

    bemused has linked to Latika Bourke/Fairfax spin in The Age. however, note:

    here is how the article is described on The Age’s homepage:

    “‘Our Pauline’ left squirming by One Nation senator’s bizarre speech”

    on SMH homepage:

    “‘Our Pauline’ left squirming by senator’s speech”

    on Fairfax Brisbane Times homepage:

    “Hanson left shaking her head by One Nation senator’s speech”

    Fairfax AFR has nothing on the homepage, but does have this article up:

    13 Sept: AFR: Primrose Riordan: One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts makes Pauline Hanson roll her eyes
    Mr Roberts received 77 below-the-line first preference votes and will receive a $199,040 salary.
    http://www.afr.com/news/one-nations-malcolm-roberts-makes-pauline-hanson-roll-her-eyes-20160913-grfjsg

    SBS has nothing on homepage, but carries same AAP/Belinda Merhab headline as news.com.au

    13 Sept: SBS: AAP: One Nation senator snubbed after speech
    One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts has been snubbed by the Greens and had his own leader roll her eyes after his controversial first speech to parliament.
    The controversial senator…
    Greens senators refused to get up and congratulate Senator Roberts, as is customary…
    Labor senator Murray Watt later took a swipe at One Nation in his own first speech, insisting the shift toward division was out of step with Australian values.
    Australians wanted a plan for jobs, not conspiracies, he said…
    http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/09/13/one-nation-senator-snubbed-after-speech

    ABC to come…

    42

    • #
      AndyG55

      “Australians wanted a plan for jobs, not conspiracies, he said…”

      Malcolm has that plan… and one of the first steps is getting rid of the AGW and other Green scams, so that Australia can go back to business.

      162

    • #
      Ilma

      The left’s cherry picking in their reporting of Pauline’s ‘rolling of her eyes’ ignores the more obvious fact that at the end of the speech, she arose, turned to Malcolm, and have him a huge hug.

      10

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    Well said Malcolm Roberts.
    Great speech.
    ‘We work from monday to thursday smoko to pay for our bloated governments and excessive taxes’… how few point that out!
    I will make a point of (in future) voting for ‘one nation’ and the likes, instead of big bank lackeys(LNP coalition),big union lackeys, economic vandals and foreign sellouts (ALP),or the environmental ratbags and U.N. appeasers(the Greens).

    I suspect that Hanson’s ‘one nation’ will double it’s vote at next election on present form with such senators and ethics as displayed by Roberts and company, especially so when considering the trash littering the other 3 main parties.

    First order of business should be the defunding/privitisation, or just straight out abolition of the ‘state propaganda outlet’ the AlpgreensBC, closely followed by the other mongrel …the SBS.

    These blatantly defiant taxpayer funded Marxist/Totalitarian monstrosities need to go (via the S bend).
    The waffling wizard of Wentworth,PM TurdFull,can lead the way out.
    Cory Bernardi and a few standouts should leave the dismal LNP and form their own conservative party, join one nation,or at least be closely aligned with one nation and similar

    163

  • #
    PeterS

    Topics discussed included the climate change scam, taxation, GDP, banks, big government, freedoms, property, sovereignty, laws, all faiths and religions, peace, border protection, immigration, UN, OZExit, etc.. Most if not all of these are the antithesis of what all the other parties including the LNP stand for and support. I hope I’m proven wrong but I do believe the establishment with the aid of the leftist media will continue to destroy people like Roberts. Look at what the leftist media in the US are doing to Trump. I’m not a great fan of him as he’s a great unknown but as for the Hiliary, one has to be brain dead to vote for her. The main reason the leftist media hate him is the same reason they hate people like Roberts over here – they don’t follow the status quo on a variety of fronts (such as the climate change scam, globalisation, higher taxes, etc.).

    82

  • #
    pat

    on ABC news homepage:

    “Pauline Hanson rolls eyes as Malcolm Roberts sings her praise”

    13 Sept: VIDEO 37secs: ABC: Pauline Hanson rolls eyes as Malcolm Roberts sings her praise
    Posted yesterday at 7:16pm
    One Nation Senator Pauline Hanson looked visibly uncomfortable as Malcolm Roberts sung her praise during his maiden speech in the Senate.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-13/malcolm-roberts-pays-tribute-to-'pauline'/7840858

    even tho the above was posted more than 13 hours ago, ABC has not yet produced a single report on Malcolm Roberts’ speech.

    James Murphy linked (comment #7) to a pre-speech fluff piece, headlined “BEHIND Behind Malcolm Roberts’ maiden speech”, but with a URL suggesting it was a report on the speech. the video in the article is for ABC24.

    the abc writer Caitlyn Gribbin, who is a federal political reporter for ABC News in Canberra, merely inserts a few lines about the actual speech into the middle of the article which, at the top, states it was “Updated about 2 hours ago”.

    abc homepage does have the Gribbin “Behind the scenes” headline.

    we can only ROLL OUR EYES when it comes to the monolithic MSM.

    102

  • #
    pat

    MOVING ON TO SOMETHING EVEN MORE MONOLITHIC FOR THE MSM,
    INCLUDING ‘THEIR ABC’ – IS THIS LEGAL, GIVEN THEY ARE TAXPAYER-FUNDED?

    14 Sept: Yahoo: Facebook, Twitter join coalition to improve online news
    Washington (AFP) – Facebook, Twitter and news organizations including Agence France-Presse have joined a coalition of media and technology groups seeking to filter out online misinformation and improve news quality on social networks.
    First Draft News, which is backed by Google, announced Tuesday that some 20 news organizations will be part of its partner network to share information on best practices for journalism in the online age…
    The partner network includes Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, The New York Times, Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, CNN, ***ABC NEWS OF AUSTRALIA, ProPublica, AFP, The Telegraph, France Info, Breaking News, Le Monde’s Les Decodeurs, International Business Times UK, Eurovision News Exchange and Al Jazeera Media Network…
    Other organizations in the network include Amnesty International, European Journalism Centre, American Press Institute, International Fact Checking Network and Duke Reporters’ Lab.”
    First Draft was formed last year with support from Google News Lab…
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/facebook-twitter-join-coalition-improve-online-news-193958420.html

    FirstDraftNews: Partner Network:
    SCROLL DOWN:
    Partners are invited to display this digital badge, so look out for: (BADGE PIC? “F” FOR “FAKE”?)
    ***ABC News is pleased to be the first Australian partner in the First Draft Partner Network, an important initiative in ethical newsgathering practices. We look forward to collaborating with the other member news organisations worldwide to share best practices, assist in the development of new training resources, and collectively solve problems related to the verification and use of information sourced online.
    Gaven Morris, ABC News director
    https://firstdraftnews.com/partners-network/

    13 Sept: Washington Examiner: Rudy Takala: Tech giants, progressive news groups to ‘train journalists’
    A coalition of left-leaning tech giants will team up with progressive media outlets in order to “train journalists” and protect the public from “false information,” according to an announcement made Tuesday…
    “Filtering out false information can be hard. Even if news organizations only share fact-checked and verified stories, everyone is a publisher and a potential source,” Jenni Sargent, managing director of Google’s First Draft News, wrote in a Tuesday blog post. “We are not going to solve these problems overnight, but we’re certainly not going to solve them as individual organizations.”…
    The tech giants have increasingly met with criticism for filtering the news they present to users. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg held a meeting with conservative leaders over the summer to convince them his organization would seek to improve. Twitter has met with similar criticism, both for censoring content and banning conservative users, but has done less to address these complaints…
    A Tuesday story from one of the initiative’s participants, Agence France-Press, noted the issue with fake news stories on Facebook, but omitted any mention about the allegations of liberal bias…
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tech-giants-progressive-news-groups-to-train-journalists/article/2601714

    42

  • #
    Rob

    Finally a brave voice in our nations’ parliament.
    Well done, Malcolm.

    182

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Jo,

    a great speech by Senator Malcolm Roberts, and it was good to see your efforts acknowledged

    OldOzzie

    221

  • #
    macha

    So much politics, when good observational science speaks volumes. Here for example. https://reality348.wordpress.com much ado about ozone and polar vortex rather than CO2.

    42

  • #

    What a privilege it was to be in the Gallery last evening in the company of 40-50 other dedicated Climate Realists in support of Malcolm’s maiden speech, concluding with a resounding & long applause. Not surprisingly, The Greens were unimpressed (that’s a plus!). With a clear & certain climate sceptics voice in the Senate, now the hard work begins!

    142

  • #
    John Westman

    Impressive!

    Thanks to Malcolm Roberts, where in his maiden speech, in the Senate Chamber, he articulated many things that ordinary Australians think. He spoke in a clear and concise manner and covered many points that the layman can understand. I note that he received a considered acclamation, from the other members present.

    At last, a politician that I may be able to put my confidence and trust in.

    His speech on U Tube is a must view.

    112

  • #
    pat

    13 Sept: Reuters: Dustin Volz: U.S. tech firms urge Congress to allow internet domain changeover
    Major technology companies including Facebook, Google and Twitter are urging Congress to support a plan for the U.S. government to cede control of the internet’s technical management to the global community, they said in a joint letter dated on Tuesday…
    Some Republican lawmakers are trying to block the handover to global stakeholders, which include businesses, tech experts and public interest advocates, saying it could stifle online freedom by giving voting rights to authoritarian governments.
    The years-long plan to transfer oversight of the nonprofit Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN, is scheduled to occur on Oct. 1 unless Congress votes to block the handover…
    In the Sept. 13 letter, a copy of which had been reviewed by Reuters before it was sent, the technology companies said it was “imperative” that Congress does not delay the transition.
    “A global, interoperable and stable Internet is essential for our economic and national security, and we remain committed to completing the nearly twenty year transition to the multi stakeholder model that will best serve U.S. interests,” the letter said.
    Other signatories include Amazon, Cloudflare, Yahoo and several technology trade organizations…
    Former presidential hopeful Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who leads the opposition against the handover, will hold a congressional hearing on Wednesday to review the transition, which he has criticized as a “giveaway of our internet freedom.”…
    https://www.yahoo.com/tech/u-tech-firms-urge-congress-allow-internet-domain-102048068–finance.html

    42

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      The unfortunate thing about all this is that even if congress does block the turnover, the pressure to do it will continue until the world finally gets what it wants. The only way to avoid this inevitable result will be for the American voters to wake up and start paying attention to what their government is doing to them. They Will then start putting men and women into public office who will know their elbows from a hot rock. But the voters now have too much incentive to lean left, lest their government’s largess disappear. They will wake up one day and wonder where their free and open Internet went and by then it will be too late. They may wake up and wonder where their country went as well because we’re squandering what made us the nation we once were and the replacement will be an unpleasant place.

      52

    • #
      ianl8888

      Oh dear … when will Obama just GO AWAY !!

      He’s been there several lifetimes, much longer than Clinton’s double term.

      50

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Climate change was boomingly dismissed as “a scam”.

    What’s not to love about such a man. Nothing except possibly the fact that he’s only one senator. But what an excellent addition to Canberra’s real elite, the ones who know what they’re talking about.

    182

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Even if he’s the only one.

      72

      • #
        el gordo

        We only need one articulate charismatic individual to turn the world upside down, the man became a wordsmith over night. Congratulations to him and many thanks to all his supporters.

        Malcolm Roberts is an atmospheric scientist, amazing, so we shouldn’t expect to see Craig Thomas anytime soon.

        122

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Upon going through his speech again and paying more attention to the video instead of just listening, it appears that there are some empty seats on the senate floor. Is this the usual treatment of a new senator who doesn’t agree with some of the members? Or are there extra unused seats? Or am I imagining something? It’s hard to tell.

      His theme throughout is simply a superb recognition of things once understood and then forgotten by zealots trying to gain power or trying to fix nonexistent problems. His grasp of the situation is perfect, notwithstanding any mistakes in the small facts as several commenters have noted.

      30

      • #
        el gordo

        Its called a maiden speech, heckling and interruption is banned. Senators are not compelled to turn up and its their democratic right to walk out if they object to what is being said. In the old days it was polite to shake hands, no matter what your political affiliations, but that has gone by the wayside.

        Australians have a very relaxed political system.

        10

  • #
    tom

    Malcolm said:
    temperatures statistically have not been warming since 1995.

    That’s not true.

    Malcolm said:
    “Temperatures are now cooler than 130 years ago.”

    That’s not true.

    Malcolm said:
    “we do not and cannot affect the level of carbon dioxide in air.”

    That’s not true.

    There’s many more statements of his that are wrong. What a waste of time and taxpayers money.

    316

    • #

      You claim but only have claims. Senator Roberts has actual factual data, and will have more! Where o where are your actual measurements? The only data that ever matters. The best data you will ever have for that time and place, even if you know not what it was you were measuring.

      140

    • #
      AndyG55

      “temperatures statistically have not been warming since 1995.”

      The trend in RSS since 1995 is +0.072 +/- 0.145.
      Zero warming is statistically possible.

      You have to go back to 1992.6 before a zero trend is not statistically possible.
      Malcolm R is CORRECT

      ““Temperatures are now cooler than 130 years ago.””

      The 1890′s still stand as having the highest record temperatures in Australia, ignored by BOM
      Malcolm is CORRECT

      During the massive industrial expansion of China, CO2 continued to rise at the same steady rate as before.
      China’s industrialisation had zero effect on the trend of CO2 level rises.
      And certainly the piddling amount Australia produces has absolutely zero effect.
      Australia is, in fact, a net carbon sink.
      Malcolm R was CORRECT.

      Sorry Tom, but… you are WRONG

      200

    • #
      el gordo

      “Temperatures are now cooler than 130 years ago.”

      http://jennifermarohasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Newcastle2.png

      20

  • #
    Bob Brock

    Part of the reason Malcolm Roberts joined One Nation (apart from his admiration for the integrity of Pauline Hanson herself) was his frustration at the indifference over many years of Coalition MPs to respond to his frequent well-presented concerns. Hopefully, the success of One Nation in the last election will be a signal for the Conservatives to listen to its constituents.

    141

  • #
  • #
    pat

    11 Sept: NY Post Exclusive: Isabel Vincent: Schneiderman tried to contact eco-tycoon amid Exxon probe
    When state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman took on ExxonMobil over climate change last year, it seemed like an odd global crusade for a local politician.
    Perhaps he was drilling for campaign cash, critics now contend after The Post obtained an e-mail that appears to show the state’s top cop was seeking a tree-hugging billionaire’s help to finance a run for governor in 2018.
    In March 2016, four months after announcing the Exxon probe, the Democratic AG tried to arrange a phone meeting with hedge-fund mogul Tom Steyer, an environmental activist and Exxon enemy.
    “Eric Schneiderman would like to have a call with Tom regarding support for his race for governor … regarding Exxon case,” reads the March 10 e-mail…
    A spokeswoman for Steyer and the two Fahr execs confirmed the e-mail exchange but said the phone meeting never happened…
    Steyer is a heavyweight Dem donor who has poured cash into Hillary Clinton’s coffers, organized a fund-raiser for President Obama and helped bankroll Clinton acolyte Terry McAuliffe’s successful 2013 gubernatorial bid in Virginia…
    “It all smacks of politics,” said former New York AG Dennis Vacco. “What’s unsettling to me about this probe is that many of Attorney General Schneiderman’s supporters are investors in alternative-energy companies and enemies of Exxon.”…READ ON
    http://nypost.com/2016/09/11/schneiderman-tried-to-contact-eco-tycoon-amid-exxon-probe/

    CBS today:

    13 Sept: Twitter: CBS Evening News: DEVELOPING: New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has opened an investigation into the Donald J. Trump Foundation
    https://twitter.com/CBSEveningNews/status/775830036490362880

    Conversation with Eric Schneiderman
    for Hillary Victory Fund (Hillary Clinton)
    http://politicalpartytime.org/party/41716/

    31

  • #
    pat

    comment #38 is in moderation.

    11

  • #

    Oh dear. Senator Roberts says there is no evidence that carbon dioxide affects the climate. Surely its simple chemistry to work out that changing the ratio of gases in the atmosphere changes various other factors, including temperature. And carbon dioxide has a warming effect. Just nowhere near as much as we are led to believe, and the increase is subject to the law of diminishing returns.

    612

    • #
      Michael Hammer

      Rod, of course you are right but this was a wide ranging political speech and the point he was trying to make twas that CAGW is wrong. So he simplified and polarised the issue a bit in the interest of making that point quickly and forcefully. While I agree that CO2 does have some effect (but far far less than the warmists would have us believe) I have no problem with how Senator Roberts portrayed the subject.

      110

      • #

        Michael, I have disagreed your with analysis of heat transfer previously while agreeing that CAGW is wrong. Prof Hoyt Hottel (late Prof of Chemical Engineering at MIT) made a lot of measurements about heat transfer involving gases in furnaces and heat exchangers (ie real data)and developed charts and equations to allow engineers to make calculations for design. If you plug in the atmospheric conditions concerning CO2 and water vapor in his equations eg 5-145 in Perry’s Chemical Engineering handbook (section 5 Heat & Mass Transfer edited by Prof Hottel)you will find that the absorptivity due to CO2 is insignificant and close to zero and would be the same if the CO2 was 1000ppm. That is the first point. The second point is that any heat absorbed by CO2 will with some delay be radiated to space and none back radiated to the warmer surface. Water evaporation from the surface (about 70% of earths surface is water), water vapor condensation, cloud formation, and precipitation driven by radiation from the sun are the major determinants of weather and climate with contributions of rotation of the earth on its axis and around the sun plus a small contribution from the moons rotation around the earth.

        93

    • #
      Mikey

      This is a very good point. The physics says CO2 will increase temp, but has a logarithmic effect, so not by anywhere near what their water vapor feedback models say. But I don’t think it helps to say it doesn’t affect temperature. But then again, they don’t listen to any logic anyway. I looked at the Guardian comments. There’s a lot of dumb people there that think they got it all figured out. Understanding and believing are two different things. My fav was that Mars and Venus would be exactly the same temperature as earth if they had the same CO2 concentrations.

      71

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        G’day Mikey,
        Can you give me a pointer to the physics you mean please?
        Cheers,
        Dave B

        11

      • #
        AndyG55

        “The physics says CO2 will increase temp, “

        Actually, NO it doesn’t, not in an open convective atmosphere.

        93

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          We will, however get overrun with plants. Especially green plants.

          And, by “green plants”, I mean green follage; not “Hecklers With A Clue”(TM).

          53

          • #
            Radical Rodent

            I think you meant “Hecklers Without A Clue”.

            11

          • #
            Radical Rodent

            (TM)

            10

          • #
            bobl

            As long as they’re not Triffids Rereke,
            Way back when, as I first started commenting here I used to regularly point out that about the only deleterious effect CO2 has is that I need to mow the lawn more often. Ten years later and I still stand by that comment!

            The cult must die, anything more than a cursory look tells anyone with even minimal maths/science skill that CAGW is impossible, once shifted from the side of ignorance there is no turning back. One by one as people look at it themselves they must follow the one-way path to scepticism, you just can’t unknow something.

            Ironically it was the RUDD carbon tax that did that for me, since they were going to dip into my back pocket, I thought I’d do due diligence and check the science and math. I came across a simple blog post that showed a few simple things. The main thing being that CAGW defies conservation of energy (is energetically impossible) and so it is – it is because the basic premise requires adding more CO2 and water at 10 km UP, at that height the trillions of tonnes of extra CO2 and water take energy to put there (mass x G x Height), more energy than CO2 warming is supposed to provide. Then I came across a talk by the late and great Bob Carter, one that basically said that by focusing so much on the global warming boogeyman we forget to prepare for the weather, and the very real prospect of either a mini of full-on ice-age within the next thousand years, something that historically speaking is inevitable. In such a scenario, with widespread crop failures (in Europe, Northern Asia and North America) Australia, Africa and SE Asia might be feeding the whole planet – are we prepared for that?

            My conversion was complete – the CO2 cult is evil they force us to take our gaze of the real risks and really important human things like disease and poverty and waste our time and money on trivialities. I actually am ashamed of myself that I didn’t do some of the simple sums earlier, that I once “Believed” in spite of never having checked myself, because someone had said so. How was I ever so gullible, I no longer make that mistake, I look at everything anyone in “Authority” says/does critically now.

            43

      • #

        Warmists often claim that “deniers” deny that CO2 causes warming. I usually reply by saying, that’s not what sceptics deny, they deny

        that it is almost certain that most of the warming of the last century was caused by anthropogenic CO2, that the costs of warming outweigh the benefits, and that the benefits of attempting to reduce the warming by reducing fossil fuel burning outweigh the costs

        The global warming industry obviously hasn’t falsified the above claim. If sceptics go around making the much stronger claim that there is no evidence that CO2 causes warming, they’re making an easy target for the warm-mongers.

        88

        • #
          AndyG55

          “that it is almost certain that most of the warming of the last century was caused by anthropogenic CO2″

          Sorry. there is absolutely NOTHING to support that fallacy

          You are welcome to provide proof that CO2 causes warming in an open atmosphere.
          So far, there is none, just baseless supposition.

          In the whole of the satellite era, the only warming has come from EL Ninos and ocean effects, neither of which have anything to do with CO2. They are regional effects , that feed through to the calculated global temperature, just like GISS etc use Urban and fabricated data to “adjust” to create non existent warming trend.

          And from the late 1930′s (the warmest period before data adjustment) to the mid 1970′s there as a cooling trend, during one of the most rapid industrialisation phases.

          Where/when there are no EL Nino, ocean circulation, urban, or fabrication data effects,
          there is no warming.

          124

    • #
      Albert

      It’s a simplistic view to assume co2 is the main driver of climate, it still remains a trace gas and on a graph it did not increase substantially when both India & China increased fossil fuel consumption by 200%, co2 remained on its normal linear upward slope from decades ago, so why didn’t co2 rise sharply ? We are a long way from all the answers but I don’t believe co2 has proved to be the problem

      124

    • #
      AndyG55

      Sorry Rob, but there is no mechanism by which CO2 can have a warming effect on an open convective atmosphere.

      54

      • #

        Blankets per se don’t emit heat, they just retard cooling.

        81

        • #
          AndyG55

          And the atmosphere cools the surface when it gets too warm..

          strange sort of “blanket”

          And remember, the only reason we have clouds, is because that H2O has already done its cooling job.

          Sometimes it does its job a bit too effectively, so the cooling effect slows for a while. That is why clouds sometimes seem to make it warmer.

          16

        • #

          In the peak of LIA cooling, one million,
          might’ve been one billion serfs trudging
          through snow drifts,wrapped in blankets,
          their horses in horse blankets, sheep ‘n
          goats etcetera wearing fur. Say, did this
          warm the planet? No, not even one iota.

          21

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘And carbon dioxide has a warming effect.’

      Speaking on behalf of the Denialati we reject that view outright, I bookmark you as a lukewarmer.

      Admittedly CO2 forcing under controlled conditions will warm dry air, but in the real world it doesn’t happen.

      63

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      Rod, you have to remember he was speaking to elected parliamentarians. Not only are many of them not terribly smart, none of them (since the last election) have any scientific knowledge or understanding. If he had started to talk about the “negative logaramithic effects of doubling CO2″ do you think any one would have understood? Instead, he said that CO2 has no effect, which is as close to the truth as the unscientific need to get!

      71

      • #

        actually he is speaking to the people of Australia and their representatives through the President. Not only that, but standards dictate that knowingly providing incorrect information is a breach of the parliamentary code. If he dumbed things down knowing he was being inaccurate (as opposed to just simplifying and leaving out details) then he is in breach.

        35

        • #
          AndyG55

          “knowing (s)he was being inaccurate “

          If that were the case there wouldn’t be one single Labor or Green person left in parliament.

          And please, give me the come-back that Labor and Green don’t know they are being inaccurate at least 97% of the time. ;-)

          82

    • #

      Could be, may be, but yet no evidence! Have you any evidence? Have you only more bliovating conjecture to add to the huge dump out back?

      13

  • #

    POST NOTE Added. (Thanks in part to commenters here.)

    Some great lines in his speech, which are setting the twitter-sphere on fire –

    “The biggest purchase of our life is not our home, it’s government.

    “We work Monday to mid-morning Thursday for the government.”

    Australia’s values and way of life are also at risk from insidious institutions such as the unelected swill that is the United Nations.

    The people of the United Kingdom recently spoke and I have great admiration for the way they broke free of that socialist monolithic monster, the European Union. The EU is a template for total socialist domination of Europe through unelected bodies such as the IMF forcing their frightening agenda on the people. It is also the UN’s template and Australia must leave the UN, we need an Aus-exit.

    We once thought we were a poor nation, when we were actually rich. Sadly, we now think we’re a rich nation, yet we are becoming poor. Instead of no nation, we must have one nation.

    The Greens Senators rudely refused to get up and congratulate the new Senator as is the custom. Some called that a snub, but for Malcolm their petty bad-manners would be a reward — a badge of honor. As he says on Twitter: “If I upset the Greens, then I hit the target”.

    242

    • #

      Thx M.R. A voice fer common sense against tyrannous guvuhMINT…
      License ter spend our money on their own behalf.Licence ter
      sign international treaties giving away national sovereignty
      w/out our say-so. Serfs revolt!

      122

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      The Greens Senators rudely refused to get up and congratulate the new Senator as is the custom.

      I think Senator Roberts won’t be worrying about the discourtesy. However, maybe it’s a good yardstick by which to measure the difficulty of the battle he’ll be facing. But he seems well equipped for that battle with accurate understanding of the problems Australia faces, from the UN right on down through federal, state and local government. I was thinking at several points as I listened to him that he could deliver the same message here and it would be accurate except for the name Australia instead of United States. And I cannot remember ever hearing a politician say the UN was a part of the problem.

      I wish I had such a man I could vote for in November. Nuts!

      41

  • #
    Michael Hammer

    What an outstanding maiden speech. If the other one nation senators are of similar ability I can see “one nation” growing to become the voice of liberal Australia.

    162

  • #
    Amber

    Who cares if the Green Senators got twisted . There is a reason they have about 3 % of the vote in the USA and
    don’t rate . One trick communists spot is already occupied .

    102

  • #
    thingodonta

    “Temperatures are now cooler than 130 years ago”.

    I don’t think so.

    It should have been: “temperatures at some stations are now cooler than they were 130 years ago”

    I think he quoted in a context of Australian temperatures from a relatively warm and dry period in the 1880s, with some relatively high peaks, but it’s still a misleading statement to make, as temperatures in general, in the Australian region, are not cooler than 130 years ago, despite some temporary high and local warm peaks around that time. Its also difficult to prove as the completeness of the continental record back then probably doesn’t justify the statement.

    39

  • #
    Manfred

    OT but of interest, particularly for those that not only value free speech but the ability to propagate it without impediment, bias or outright corruption.

    Washington (AFP) – Facebook, Twitter and news organizations including Agence France-Presse have joined a coalition of media and technology groups seeking to filter out online misinformation and improve news quality on social networks.

    First Draft News, which is backed by Google, announced Tuesday that some 20 news organizations will be part of its partner network to share information on best practices for journalism in the online age.

    The partner network includes Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, The New York Times, Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, CNN, ABC News of Australia, ProPublica, AFP, The Telegraph, France Info, Breaking News, Le Monde’s Les Decodeurs, International Business Times UK, Eurovision News Exchange and Al Jazeera Media Network.

    Other organizations in the network include Amnesty International, European Journalism Centre, American Press Institute, International Fact Checking Network and Duke Reporters’ Lab.” Facebook, Twitter join coalition to improve online news

    32

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      This has been on the cards for ages. It all comes down to your (or rather their) definition of “improving news”.

      My question is, how can you improve on “truth”?

      Truth doesn’t need improving. Truth just is. It may be that perceptions of events might differ, but perception does not impact on, nor change The Truth, perception may be wrong, but The Truth never is, because it is The Truth, and that is what “The Truth” means.

      You can try putting makup on a pig, but that doesn’t stop it being a pig. All that happens is that you get a very annoyed pig.

      61

      • #
        Manfred

        The partner network includes Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, The New York Times, Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, CNN, ABC News of Australia, ProPublica, AFP, The Telegraph, France Info, Breaking News, Le Monde’s Les Decodeurs, International Business Times UK, Eurovision News Exchange and Al Jazeera Media Network.

        The MSM kollectiv listed above will exist solely to propagate their World view with symphonic unison. As such, they are an enormous monopolistic red-flag. That they have considered this gathering an imperative betrays their supposed ‘objectivity’. Reporting the facts died the death of a thousand incremental lies sometime ago. They can no longer merely limit themselves to reporting the truth any more than they would fail to parrot the will of their eco-global masters.

        41

  • #
    Another Ian

    Jo

    If not already mentioned the full text of Malcolm Roberts’s speech is up at Andrew Bolt

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/commentators-give-turnbull-verdict/news-story/870a477797178146f84c7084dc03ccc3

    40

  • #
    manalive

    Good lord, I had not realised that so many of the regulars on this blog were flat-out GH effect den*ers.
    For pity’s sake have a read of Roy Spencer’s blog where he devotes a lot of space to explaining the basic physics.
    It’s a pity Malcolm Roberts would make a statement like: “… carbon dioxide level are a result of changes in temperature, not a cause …” — of course it’s both a cause and result.
    The issues are how much warming, whether water vapour greatly augments the warming effect of additional CO2, the costs and benefits of any warming and proposed mitigation measures etc. etc.
    As someone concerned about the irrationality and destructiveness of Climate Change™ alarmism, I think Senator Roberts’ ill-founded denial of the basic physics of the GH effect was sadly counterproductive.

    610

    • #
      Angry

      “manalive”,
      For your edification……..

      Greenhouse Theory disproven in 1909, 1963, 1966, 1973…but still refuses to die

      http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2010/06/greenhouse-theory-disproven-in-1909.html

      114

    • #
      el gordo

      Manalive we understand the physics, the Klimatariat ignored the fact that CO2 doesn’t warm damp air.

      53

    • #
      AndyG55

      For pity sake, understand that Roy is not an atmospheric physicist, like people like Wil Happer etc are

      He’s great on getting microwave data from satellites though. :-)

      While luke-warmers continue to bow down to the baseless assumptions of the climate scammers, then progress cannot be made.

      Again, you are welcome to prove that CO2 causes warming in an open convective atmosphere.

      84

      • #
        manalive

        William Happer on GHGs:
        “Other things being equal, more CO2 will cause more warming. The question is how much warming, and whether the increased CO2 and the warming it causes will be good or bad for the planet …”.
        The important arguments are about necessity and sufficiency of increasing atmospheric CO2 as a GHG, the feedbacks if any, clouds etc. and after all, the costs and the benefits.

        24

        • #
          AndyG55

          But other things aren’t equal, the atmosphere requires convection and conduction to be equal. That is what the atmosphere is all about.

          92

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘The great physicist Richard Feynman adds to three other giants of physics, Maxwell, Clausius, and Carnot, who have explained the “greenhouse effect” is solely a consequence of gravity, atmospheric mass, pressure, density, and heat capacities, and is not due to “trapped radiation” from IR-active or ‘greenhouse’ gas concentrations.’

          The Hockey Schtick

          61

        • #
          el gordo

          And a reminder to all splitters, water vapor is by far the largest greenhouse gas, around 70 percent. I’ll let the late Bob Carter have the last word on sensitivity.

          ‘On both annual (1 year) and geological (up to 100,000 year) time scales, changes in atmospheric temperature PRECEDE changes in CO2. Carbon dioxide therefore cannot be the primary forcing agent for temperature increase (though increasing CO2 does cause a diminishingly mild positive temperature feedback).’

          40

          • #
            Ilma

            1. As much as I admired Bob Carter’s resolve to see through the CAGW scam (& jane heard him speak in person), the statement that “increasing CO2 does cause a diminishingly mild positive temperature feedback” is unsubstantiated and probable out of his sphere of expertise.

            2. The studies by Muray Salby also show “that temperature preceeds CO2 on all timescales”.

            00

        • #
          bobl

          Manalive,
          Theoretically, in a test tube maybe, however we don’t live in a test tube. The heating power is supposed to be just 0.6W per square meter, about one LED Christmas tree light worth of energy in each column of air 1m x 1m x 10 KM free to convect, conduct, expand/contract or otherwise change to dissipate/balance energy. It’s a change of energy of just 0.6 in 360 or around 0.2% (2 parts in a thousand) and you don’t think that the earth can dissipate that “overload” of just two tenths of one percent change in heating?

          You just have to be nuts to think that the earth can comfortably dissipate 360W per square meter but somehow can’t dissipate 360.6W/sq meter.

          40

    • #

      manalive September 14, 2016 at 4:58 pm

      “Good lord, I had not realised that so many of the regulars on this blog were flat-out GH effect den*ers. For pity’s sake have a read of Roy Spencer’s blog where he devotes a lot of space to explaining the basic physics.”

      Roy Spencer’s blog is currently being hammered by folk that can discern his blatant pseudoscience for profit!
      Please check:
      http://www.drroyspencer.com/2016/08/simple-time-dependent-model-of-the-atmospheric-greenhouse-effect/#comment-225119

      22

      • #
        manalive

        I’m not talking about whether water vapor is the most prolific GHG or whether the GH effect of CO2 is minor and can be overwhelmed by other forcing factors.
        I’m concerned that denying the basic physics of GHGs, as Senator Roberts seems to, is counterproductive.
        I have a loopy theory of my own.
        There is a lot of money and prestige riding with the alarmists camp, they are well organized and well funded.
        Perhaps many of the unorthodox (to be polite) climate theories (denying the basic physics) originate with the alarmists and is spread as black propaganda:
        Black propaganda is false information and material that purports to be from a source on one side of a conflict, but is actually from the opposing side. It is typically used to vilify, embarrass, or misrepresent the enemy” (Wiki).
        Whatever the case, the result is counterproductive and harmful to the rational realist side.

        22

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘I’m concerned that denying the basic physics of GHGs, as Senator Roberts seems to, is counterproductive.’

          So in one paragraph what do you think he should have said?

          10

          • #
            manalive

            I’ve already quoted the statement above.
            He seems to be denying the basic physics of GHGs: human emissions may not be the sole cause of increasing CO2 levels, CO2 is not the sole cause or even the main cause of the modern temperatures rise ( as the IPCC claim) but as William Happer says: “… other things being equal, more CO2 will cause more warming …”.
            If he isn’t denying the basic physics I wish he would correct the record.
            Even giving the impression of not even accepting the basic physics is a reasonable cause for ridicule IMO.

            21

          • #
            manalive

            Senator Roberts is paid handsomely by the taxpayer to write his own speeches or pay someone else to do it for him.

            21

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      manalive,

      It’s been many years since I’ve seen that Kilroy picture. “Kilroy was here,” written under that picture was once a common thing seen scrawled all over everything, including railroad boxcars here in the states during WWII and afterward for a while. Where did you get the picture? I hope you don’t mind that I saved a copy of it for my small but growing collection of such memorabilia.

      10

    • #
  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    “The biggest purchase of our life is not our home, it’s government.” I’d never have thought of that – very perceptive.

    101

  • #
    peter

    As a sceptic I find some of his statements worrying.

    “temperatures statistically have not been warming since 1995”. Not true. UAH = 0.162/Decade and RSS shows 0.155/decade.

    “… 1930s and 40s were warmer than the current decades”. Not true. Only the continental US was warmer.

    “The latest warming cycle in the 17th century going into the 18th century was faster and greater than the latest warming”. Not true. The warming after the Little Ice Age was slow and gradual.

    44

    • #

      Using just what fake numbers from whom! Real physical science may never recover from this green slime!

      23

    • #
      AndyG55

      “Not true. Only the continental US was warmer.”

      WRONG. !! If you can find in-gavinised data raw data from the NH, its confirms 1940ish as warmer than in most of the NH. eg, Iceland data is still available in its Iceland Met form.

      ““temperatures statistically have not been warming since 1995″

      This is a CORRECT statement. The trend is indistinguishable from zero.
      You have to go back to 1992.6 before a zero trend is not supportable in RSS

      53

      • #
        peter

        Iceland may have been warmer but can you provide data to show that globally temperatures were warmer in 1940 than today?

        Not sure where you getting your RSS data from but when I enter 1993 to present on RSS v4.0 I get 0.193 +-0.126 which means the trend is significantly significant. For 1995 to present the figure is 0.155 +-0.144 which is also a statistically signoificant trend.

        I am a sceptic but please don’t start doing what warmists do and invent your own data.

        11

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    Apparently the greenslime walked out on Hanson’s speech!

    I would have bolted the doors to stop them from ever again entering with some prompt and abrupt free advice to keep going and don’t ever come back, ever!

    Maybe somewhere like a Nth Korean dictatorship would be more comfortable and appropriate for their ratbag totalitarian agendas.

    Go the Malcolm R, Go the Pauline H, Vote the Donald for Pres and the Hitlery for Jail.

    and remember always … CAGW = BS

    31

  • #
    Radical Rodent

    It is interesting to note that William Connelly (or one of his cohorts) has already been tampering with Sen. Roberts’ Wiki page.

    32

    • #
      PeterPetrum

      Yes, based on his Senate speech, and clearly written by someone who believes in the pure religion of Climatewarming.

      30

    • #
      Harry Passfield

      The person who seems to have done most of the hatchet job on Roberts is David Gerard He seems well-steeped in the arts of Connolley.

      I do hope Jo picks up on this and does a piece on the wiki entry. It’s a disgrace.

      00

  • #
    Radical Rodent

    For fear that this may cause rising howls of derision: there is a rising tide of evil in this world, one that has been feeding and growing for decades, if not centuries, spreading its tentacles out to infect and infest many parts of our world that we depend on – education, entertainment, the media in general, politics and business (particularly finance, where the effect can be far more… erm, effective), to name but a few of the most obvious. Do not dismiss this as a conspiracy theory, though conspiracies might be involved; its cunning skill has been its insidious growth with apparently unconnected peoples, many of whom are not aware of any connection, all concerned about working for themselves (though many may claim to be working for others), yet ultimately being the tools by which this evil works. That this evil is becoming more obvious, does not feel the need to conceal itself as much as it has done, revealing itself in many, many ways, many of which we may dismiss as “outliers”, strange aberrations of behaviour or trends, indicates that it is getting confident enough to make itself known; confident that when it does get seen for what it truly is, it will be too late, and it will be able to subjugate any and all who oppose it.

    There are beacons against this evil, the most prominent of whom you will be able to identify, and one of whom is Senator Roberts. Of the others, there will be many who will surprise you (3 international names may have already sprung to your mind). There will be many not so obvious, and even more whose work may never be recognised. You are all aware of it, to a degree, but may not be aware of the full implications of it. Become more aware, open your eyes to it, and work to open the eyes of others; it is only by spreading this awareness that this evil can be countered (but can never be conquered). There is one very good way that you can be most effective at its countering, but you have to embark on that very carefully, as it is a very productive nest for the evil – please note what I have deliberately missed off that list.

    Many jokingly call it “the vampire squid”, but it is far bigger than that, or that is just a part of it. Be aware of it, and be wary of it, as its tentacles tap into what is inside each and every one of us. Forewarned is forearmed.

    70

    • #
      Annie

      Reluctantly, I have to agree with you Radical Rodent. Whichever way you turn the tentacles are in and grasping. I do believe that what we are trying to counter here is an emanation of evil and we have each to oppose it in our own small corners. Sadly, once again, religion, in various guises, is being used as one of the vehicles for evil. What should stand for the dignity and freedom of man is being used to subdue him.
      I use the term man to mean the race; take note those of a politically correct bent. PC is just one of those slimey tentacles enveloping us.

      51

      • #
        Radical Rodent

        Thank you, Annie. I was beginning to fear that this was being skipped as the ramblings of a mad person (though, perhaps I am – who knows?). My fears grow daily, as I read of the continuing growth and the evil becomes more and more open. Religion is a significant factor, here, especially with… well, let’s call it the Voldemort religion – that-which-cannot-be-named (oh, such an apt label!), and the determined efforts of many not obviously connected to it to marginalise our fears. But it is not restricted there; it grows in many others which continue to feed it. There really is only one way to counter it, but I shall not talk about that, as I will be dismissed; we all know what it is, though.

        30

      • #

        Quite interesting, Does “us” exclude they?
        My head hurts lots! I ‘believe’ I will have another beer! What [snip] are [you] folk spouting ‘bought?

        [That was a little too much.] ED

        03

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    He’s right to keep asking for the data that shows that human use of hydrocarbon fuels affects the climate. Its 2,447 days since I asked if there was any evidence.

    You didn’t ask for evidence “that shows that human use of hydrocarbon fuels affects the climate” 2,447 days ago, what you asked for was evidence…

    …that carbon dioxide causes major warming?

    …that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the main cause of global warming

    …that shows carbon has a major role, that doubling the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide would cause, say, 2 – 10 degrees of warming. If doubling carbon only causes 0.5 degrees of warming, who cares?

    Concealing your lukewarmer views just to appease the slayer-du-jour?

    11

  • #

    [...] het als een compliment: ‘If I upset the Greens, then I hit the target’.Lees verder hier.Zie ook hier.Zoals viel te verwachten, rapporteerde de Britse ‘Guardian’ uiterst [...]

    10

  • #

    One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts on the Bolt Report discusses his maiden Senate speech.
    https://youtu.be/riC7ic57z5k

    10

  • #
    Oliver K. Manuel

    https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/09/16/a-world-hangs-in-the-balance/

    “A world hangs in the balance”- Proceed with caution!

    My reply was submitted without hyperlinks to avoid censor:
    1. The Western world was controlled by the Catholic Church in 1543 when Copernicus reported Earth orbits the Sun.
    2. The scientific revolution that destroyed the old feudal system began ~100 years later by Galileo’s arrest, trial and sentence for telling the public that the Sun controls Earth.
    3. Einstein’s 1905 discovery that mass (m) is stored energy (E) offered humanity “powers beyond the dreams of scientific fiction” (Last paragraph of Aston’s 1922 Nobel Lecture).
    4. Drs. Carl von Weizsacker and Hans Bethe designed a false definition of nuclear “binding energy” in 1935-1936 to “put the genie” back under totalitarian control.
    5. That’s why “a world hangs in the balance.”

    00