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

Go NCSE “March for Science” — Rage for Cliches!

The whole NCSE march  on April 22nd is devoted to a strawman:

The National Center for Science Education was one of the first organizations to endorse the march, and we are encouraging our members to take part. Why? Because we believe that the marches will be a powerful and positive reminder that there is something that virtually everyone agrees on: the value and importance of science.

There is no public debate saying science is not important. It simply does not exist. So why march? According to Ann Reid, biologist, science is important for farming, water quality, and beer-making. No kidding. Load up the strawmen.

Rage On: March for the trite!

“Science is for Everyone” (except scientists who disagree with government propaganda):

And that’s where the March for Science fits in. On April 22, 2017, people all over the world will be gathering together to celebrate science, and to declare that science belongs to everyone. NCSE will be there.

Obviously the real subtext are controversial topics (why else does anyone march?) Guess which branch of establishment science is the one hardest hit by the Trump presidency:

At the National Center for Science Education, we know that science sometimes addresses controversial issues. It’s no surprise to us that scientific findings can trigger fierce disagreement. We’ve devoted over thirty years to making sure that science teachers have the expertise and support they need to teach about evolution and climate change, even when there are people in their communities who object.

So this is a climate protest in disguise, masquerading as a generic “science” protest. These people couldn’t form a sequential cause-effect argument if their lives depended on it. Indeed, their jobs almost depend on them not doing it. (If they did, they might get sacked, evicted, blackballed,   terminated, punished, vilified and bullied.) It will be touted by religious climate believers as a protest for “climate change”. Whatever: it’s another Science-for-Big-Government-PR exercise. It’s a form of Argument from Authority: “Trust us” some scientists can make good beer, therefore they can predict the climate. Wash out your brain, cleanse your thoughts, scientists speak with one mind.

The irony and projection of Ann Reid peaks in the next sentence:

But it is important to remember that many who object to the teaching of evolution or climate change haven’t encountered the science for themselves.

How much does Ann Reid know of the missing water vapor feedback recorded by 28 million weather balloons. How much has she looked at the scandal of temperature adjustments that are larger than the trends they measure?

Thus speaks a scientist who has never studied the evidence herself:

They are merely taking cues from those they trust—politicians, church leaders, or their favorite websites and newscasts.

Reid “takes cues” from the IPCC, which takes cues from Greenpeace. (Did she know?)

When people are given an opportunity to explore the scientific evidence for themselves, they often conclude that accepting what the evidence shows need not threaten their fundamental values.

Thus speaks the condescending put-down, if you disagree with her climate change belief it’s only because of your “values” — you have personality flaws.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.9/10 (118 votes cast)
Go NCSE "March for Science" -- Rage for Cliches!, 8.9 out of 10 based on 118 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/hexxx3d

300 comments to Go NCSE “March for Science” — Rage for Cliches!

  • #
    Yonniestone

    The NCSE marching for the value and importance of science while completely oblivious to the fundamentals of science itself.

    452

    • #
      Oliver K. Manuel

      The NCSE March for Science is a carefully organized propaganda campaign to try to prevent Trump’s exposure of the UN (United Nations) and the UNAS (United National Academies of Sciences) as an attempt to deceive and rule the whole world with 97% consensus science.”

      362

    • #
      Rereke Whakkaro

      “Science” comes from the Latin, scientia, meaning “knowledge”, or gnosis, in Greek.

      So these people are marching, in protest of other people not knowing “stuff”?

      How marching, as a protest against people who don’t profess to know everything, seems oxymoronic to me.

      90

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Rereke:
        It is a march against people who don’t know ‘stuff’ like how truthful and accurate the marchers are, and how they deserve rewards.

        50

  • #

    A parade of Holocene deniers, lysenkoists and data torturers.

    472

  • #
    DMA

    I’ll be watching for the counter-protest to develop. Who do you suppose will organize an anti-science demonstration? I think you hit the nail squarely Jo. It seems to be a protest without any focus or a demonstration of support for something that has no detractors.
    If it morphs into a climate science tirade it will be demonstrating the antithesis of their stated goal

    212

    • #
      Yonniestone

      The insanity of zealots is ever far from the surface.

      172

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Never far… Duh!

        81

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        I see many raised clenched fists….up the workers!!!!!!!!!!!

        91

        • #
          Glen Michel

          Scientists singing “The Internationale”

          132

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            I think we need to go back to basics…

            Educate our kids why Socialism and communism is bad – anti human, corrosive, crushes indiviualism etc etc, what socialism looks like, what are socialist ideas etc, so that when stuff like this nonsense crops up, kids can see it for what it is.

            North Korea would be proud…..

            91

          • #
            toorightmate

            I would like to enter a float depicting the outstanding work of the new breed of scientist – THE HOMOGENISER.

            50

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Having a clenched fist raised up you, sounds very painful.

          I am glad I am not a worker. There is much to be said for being a lowly parasite.

          81

    • #
      Ted O'Brien

      It has nothing to do with science. It’s all about politics!

      10

  • #
    turnedoutnice

    Whaddya expect when the basis of this pseudoscience, Planck’s radiative physics, ONLY APPLIES TO A VACUUM? That’s because it all depends on the gap between the two emitters in radiative equilibrium. Goody got it wrong in 1964. Analyse the radiative physics of a GHG containing atmosphere with no gap between condensed material and the gaseous emitter: no stored energy.

    Take that away, also the mistaken aerosol optical physics from Sagan and Pollack (1967), van der Hulst (1967) and Hansen (1969), and the incorrect cloud physics from Hansen and Pollack in 1974, and the whole house of cards collapses. CO2 Enhanced Climate Sensitivity is near zero because of the operation of the water cycle with 25 x [H2O]. Thus the hiatus is real. What is also real is the AGW from the 2nd AIE having the reverse sign to that claimed, meaning that the real AGW was from increased [CCN] during Asian industrialisation.

    The same mechanism plus biofeedback accounts for Milankovitch amplification at the end of ice ages, the 50 – 70 year Arctic melt – freeze cycle. The two recent large El Ninos are evidence of the way the planet adapts by pushing the extra heat in the oceans to the poles. This scam was created to meet the demand of the Globalists (then the Club of Rome) via the 1975 ‘Endangered Atmosphere Conference’, to replace gold with carbon as the monetary store in Global Finance.

    403

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      I understood the last line, and it said it all.

      62

      • #
        PeterPetrum

        And I thought it was just me!

        41

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          I think T O N has tried to fit in too much there.

          The first two sentences were also great but I lost it at Goody, not having heard of him.

          20

          • #
            turnedoutnice

            R M Goody Atmospheric Radiation 1st Edition Ox Ac Press.

            2nd Ed with Yung 1995.

            This is the basis of Atmospheric Physics’ teaching.

            20

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              Hi TON,

              A good piece.

              Problem for me was that I needed to go to the references quoted to get the full message.

              Try BSandL or MSTM.

              It feels like I spent half my life with them but very few would have heard of them.

              The fellow who taught us mass, heat and momentum transfer seemed to be into the practical situation where you had to suspect that he had checked out Stephan and Boltzman’s equation in a practical experiment.

              Never the less, ALL of us here are well ahead of the climate scientists.

              :-)

              KK

              21

          • #

            KinkyKeith March 8, 2017 at 5:42 pm

            “I think T O N has tried to fit in too much there. The first two sentences were also great but I lost it at Goody, not having heard of him.”

            Turnedoutnice is quite correct! The reference is to the Harvard R.M Goody and Y. L. Yung physics textbook 1st Edition (1964). The first text to promote the mistakes on EMR of Dr. Satyendra Nath Bose FRS (1 Jan 1894 – 4 Feb 1974). Dr. Bose tried to explain thermal EMR flux as some quantum emission of mass ‘sensible heat’ rather than the correct wide band electromagnetic flux between opposing electromagnetic field strengths as per Maxwell, Stephan, and Boltzmann. 53 years later we are still saddled with such mess because none of the post normal so called scientists ever bothered to check!
            All the best! -will

            91

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    Substitute “National Center for Science Education” for Humpty Dumpty and “science” for “glory” in the following quote and it will describe the situation exactly.

    “There’s glory for you!”

    “I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’” Alice said.

    Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’”

    “But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument,’” Alice objected.

    “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

    —Lewis Carroll, “Through the Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There”

    It is not about science at all, it is about the destruction of your ability to think and communicate.

    281

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      There are a number of parallels between Lewis Carroll and Climate “Science”; e.g. the reaction of the Red Queen to any criticim, the Cheshire Cat disappearing act and temperature ‘adjustments’ in line with the doctrine. And the ‘Drink me’ and ‘Eat me’ ways of fitting predictions/excuses to the real world, and I shouldn’t mention Tweedledee & friend lest it upsets certain personages.

      132

    • #
      sophocles

      Lionel Griffith said:

      It is not about science at all, it is about the destruction of your ability to think and communicate.

      Yes, it’s also about Authority. (and heavy Argument from authority).
      We’re the IPCC
      We’re the experts on climate
      We use only peer-reviewed research papers
      Our authors are top scientists
      Listen to us
      We KNOW.

      I bought a copy of Donna Lamframboise’s book The Delinquent Teenager about the IPCC shortly after it was first published. I’ve finally gotten around to reading it. Hoo Boy!. Some commenter here called their (IPCC) “Science” to be more like “Seance” which I found amusing at the time. It’s turns out to be a very good replacement word and to be surprisingly accurate.

      According to the book:
      The IPCC cannot be believed nor relied on.
      They have used students as some chapter and as lead authors, not the senior and knowledgable scientists they claim.
      Peer review is not rigorous although everyone would like you to think it is. Steve McIntyre was invited to write something and asked how he went about getting the data to check it. Prof Susan Solomon, ticked him off for potential breach of confidentiality and said he could be dismissed for it. The IPCC has apparently used papers as sources which hadn’t even been published. They claim total “transparency” in public yet are anything but: many of their chapter authors didn’t know how they were selected.

      Science? Not IMHO. Seance? Yes.

      According to Donna in her book, Phil Jones of the CRU was asked how many of his reviewers had asked for his data and the answer was “None.” One of my colleagues pointed out that paper reviewers ere unpaid and couldn’t put much time into any review. About all they could do was see if the arguments covered everything, the ‘i’s were dotted and the ‘t’s were crossed and not the other way around and the conclusions were plausible.

      An academic’s time is about 40% teaching and everything to do with that, 40% researching, and 40% finding funding for the research. Reviewing papers for those who agree to do it, takes about an extra 15% and has to be from their copious free time.

      I’m not yet half-way through Donna’s book and it’s become riveting. Warning: it’s already far worse than any of us had ever thought. :-)

      One thing Donna’s book has brought home already is that the IPCC can be relied on: relied on to get it wrong. All of it, all the time.

      Thank you Lionel. I knew I had seen or read all that somewhere, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on what and from where. Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass brought to Real Life. It is so apropos. :-)
      We should send them all to the Red Queen to be tried. And executed. :-) :-)

      80

      • #
        Lionell Griffith

        People who can and do think cannot easily be controlled. Authority is left with either you do as I say or you will be imprisoned. Then, if that is not enough to obtain obedience, you will be executed.

        The vulnerability of Authority is that it soon believes it is a god that can command reality to obey its whims. Fortunately, reality is what it is and is totally and completely indifferent to such things. That gives a huge lever to the thinking person to out think and eventually to abolish the imagined power of Authority. See USA history and 1776 as a case in point.

        If you can’t, don’t, or won’t think, your choice is to do and die in service to Authority. Which, incidentally, is the majority of the history of man.

        71

      • #
        Howie from Indiana

        I read “The Delinquent Teenager ….” some time ago and it is very revealing. It’s a little dry in places but well worth the read. What the author shows is that the IPCC isn’t about science at all but instead about activism, power, and suppression of the real truth.

        41

  • #
    el gordo

    Sciencedebate.org is funding the protests and here we see some of the backers behind them.

    http://sciencedebate.org/backers

    131

    • #
      el gordo

      Johnny Depp, actor/producer and dog smuggler, is among the throng.

      He doesn’t look like a pseudo Marxist, but appearances can be deceiving.

      131

      • #
        Glen Michel

        Johnny, as a noted Parisian bien pensant is often seen at Père Lachaise cemetery licking the plinths of certain monuments.

        91

      • #
        Dennis

        Dog smuggler!

        81

      • #
        Popeye26

        You’ve just gotta love the description of the page that Johnny Depp et al appear on as backers.

        “Writers, Artists & Thought Leaders”

        THOUGHT LEADERS – who the heck do these cretins think they are?

        ROTFLMAO – the below directly from IMDb

        “He dropped out of school when he was 15, and fronted a series of music-garage bands, including one named ‘The Kids’. However, it was when he married Lori Anne Allison (Lori A. Depp) that he took up the job of being a ballpoint-pen salesman to support himself and his wife.”

        THOUGHT LEADER – ONLY in his dreams.

        Cheers,

        30

    • #
      jorgekafkazar

      Did you notice the five phony Nobel Peace Prizes? “as member of IPCC”

      151

    • #
      Oliver K. Manuel

      Thanks for identifying the science debate backers: http://sciencedebate.org/backers

      That list confirms my suspicion the NSCE March is organized by pseudo-scientists, afraid to discuss or debate experimental evidence the Sun is the creator and sustainer of every atom, life and planet in the Solar System.

      142

      • #
        Oliver K. Manuel

        Is Obama’s Nobel Prize-winning former Secretary of the Department of Energy one of those using a tax-exempt, charitable 501(c)3 organization to incite street marches for phalse physics?

        May President Trump grant that “scientist” special recognition !

        61

      • #
        toorightmate

        Oliver,
        There is a significant gender imbalance among the “individual” support group.
        Quick, call the ABC/Fairfax helpline.

        20

        • #
          Oliver K. Manuel

          Dr. Steve Chu, Nobel Prize winning Secretary of Energy under
          Barack Obama, Nobel Prize winning President of the United States

          Neither able to see the error in “nuclear binding energy” that
          A 19-year old student, Kazuo Kuroda, realized on 13 June 1936

          https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/TRIBUTE_TO_KURODA.pdf

          21

        • #
          Oliver K. Manuel

          Since 2000, I have tried to get 97% consensus scientists to publicly DENY or DEFEND empirical evidence NEUTRON REPULSION is a powerful, short-range nuclear force in cores of ordinary atoms and stars that powers the Sun and the expanding cosmos, filling interstellar space with the waste product, interstellar hydrogen.

          22

          • #
            Greg Cavanagh

            Please give it a rest, you do this every thread and every article.

            50

            • #
              Ted O'Brien

              Oliver has clearly observed the success of those who spread untruths by repetition. If it is so easy to sell a lie, how much better should this method work to spread the truth? I do it myself on various blogs.

              When I left school in 1960 farming in Australia was a fantastic place for a young bloke to be, so farming I went. Had I not, I would probably be found today unwashed, unshaven, coming out occasionally for a sandwich, buried in the bowels of some Physics department, building a better bomb. (Fusion on a leash).

              I am watching for April 1, not because it is fool’s day, but because it is P. K. Kuroda’ s birthday. Is neutron repulsion on the pathway to our future source of directable energy?

              10

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            If possible, on an unthreaded W/E, could you write out a bit of material that would help explain what the crux of the matter is.
            No doubt many here are curious but having looked at the “graph” I’m still none the wiser.

            KK

            70

            • #

              I agree with that! Few here have the experience in nuclear physics or isotope chemistry to be understanding of, or comfortable with Oliver’s claims, and Oliver is no help whatsoever!

              30

          • #
            Oliver K. Manuel

            Kinky Keith, I will try to write out something on an unthreaded W/E this weekend.

            Weizsacker’s error: Arbitrarily assume a greater “nuclear binding energy” (BE) of 0.782 MeV for each neutron than for each proton.

            That is why Weizsacker’s BE values are often higher for a radioactive atom than for its stable decay product:

            BE(H-3) > BE(He-3)

            BE(C-14) > BE(N-14)

            BE(Al-26) > BE(Mg-26)

            Etc., etc., etc.

            10

            • #

              “BE(H-3) > BE(He-3)”

              From a molecular standpoint
              2(H-3) (tritium molecule) => 1(He-3) atom plus 3 neutrons somehow; or 1(He-4) atom plus 2 neutrons somehow!
              Even worse is a H-3 (tritium atom) plus a H-1 (hydrogen atom); Perhaps known as a deuterium molecule, spontaneously decaying into one He atom\molecule, plus lotsa heat, light, thunder, and much hiding behind bushes, eating berries!
              All the best! -will-

              11

        • #
          Greebo

          Sorry, it was International woman’s Day, but we couldn’t find any to man err person err operate the switchboard, as they were all on air.

          10

    • #
      AndyG55

      And at the march , look out for 97% being paid leftist thugs dressed in the obligatory lab coat and purple gloves.

      Sort of like a satirical, anti-science mardi-gras.

      155

    • #

      Round up the usual susspects, Holdren, McNutt, Podesta …
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtSmfws0_To

      30

  • #
    TdeF

    The CSIRO have a real responsibility here. Their 2016 report on State of the Climate is irresponsible waffle. It is full of deceit, propaganda and bad science or none.

    “Ocean temperatures and ocean heat content have been steadily increasing globally.”
    and
    “Global average annual CO2 levels are steadily increasing”

    Therefore CO2 causes ocean warming? Where is the proof? What sort of science is that?

    It took 350 full time public service scientists to suggest that heating an ocean with 98% of the world’s CO2 would not increase CO2 levels, that CO2 caused the heating.

    However they say “The overwhelming contribution to the additional CO2 in the atmosphere is from human activities, mainly the burning of fossil fuels.”. Evidence? None.

    Then fake science like “Because carbon dioxide increases persist in the atmosphere for hundreds of years”. Say which scientist? CO2 has a half life in the atmosphere of 14 years. In the 1950s it was believed to be 5-7 years. Which CSIRO scientist came up with this figure? Who writes this stuff?

    Then the logical seque, CO2 is a greenhouse gas, without greenhouse gases the world would be colder therefore CO2 causes any warming we see. Also the subtle shift in argument over the last decade that while the planet is not warming at all as predicted, the oceans are warming, so the predictions are right. No one predicted warmer oceans. This is a new idea which never existed before, that CO2 warms the oceans without warming the air. Claiming “The last 15 years are among the 16 warmest years on record” is a devious way to hide the fact that the temperature is not changing at all.

    And sea level rise “Globally-averaged sea level has risen over 20 cm since the late 19th century, with about one third of this rise due to ocean warming and the rest from melting land ice and changes in the amount of water stored on the land.” Really? I thought we were coming out of an ice age. Where is the acceleration in sea level rise?
    And the old faithful “ocean acidity levels have increased”. Fact. No ocean is acid.

    Extreme events is a favorite without even trying to explain how this is connected to CO2?

    This report cost the people of Australia hundreds of millions of dollars with 350 full time scientists. As the new head of the CSIRO said, they need to move on from trying to prove Climate Change exists to dealing with the consequences as it has been proven overseas. What? So they failed to find Climate Change?

    This whole CSIRO report is FAKE science, socialist propaganda posing as science and environmentalism. What is the CSIRO even doing in this area when we have a Bureau of Meteorology?

    It cost us taxpayers hundreds of millions for this report and no one found any obvious climate change, so they are moving on without being honest. A real science report would say there is no problem and everything we observe is natural variation and that building windmills is the biggest science scandal in Australia’s history, aided and abetted by the CSIRO, promoters of Climate Scientology. Just close the CSIRO. Fake Science vendors. Sell the ABC. Fake news. The SBS simply has no purpose. Close the awful and useless HRC. As for the RET, the Clean Energy Authority, they are destroying our country in the name of fake science. Close them all. Balance the budget. Stop borrowing for windmills and solar panels.

    We support real evidence based rational science. Not FAKE science.

    576

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Ersatz science once again which will be lapped up by our socialist media.Really abysmal stuff from CSIRO and those ludicrous clowns at theClimate Council. 1degree C rise in temperatures.Bah! Poppycock.

      151

    • #
      Craig Thomas

      Gosh you are a confused person.
      We came out of an ice age between 10,000 and 7,000 years ago. Since 7,000 years ago, sea levels were falling until recently when they starting rising very rapidly in comparison.
      The provenance of atmospheric CO2 is a well-known and uncontroversial fact. You can deduce where it comes from using the carbon budget. Or, you can use isotopic analysis to see that the increase in CO2 is linked to a decrease in average weight of the Carbon molecules in the atmosphere which in turn tells you where it is coming from.

      Anybody wishing to become informed (based on what you just wrote, you *really* need to have a go at this) should carefully read the CSIRO report, researching science texts and published research to better understand the detail of any parts of the report that are of interest.

      650

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Can it be proved beyond reasonable doubt that that the land could be rising and falling, not the oceans rising and falling?

        144

        • #
          Robert R

          Well this could be why all the small Pacific Ocean nations are getting physically bigger, not smaller, in recent times. And this is not because they are using the millions of tax payers money they were given to offset the non existent sea level rise to shift sand from one side of their island to the other. Ocean levels are not rising ha ha ha. What a lurk for a profitable strategy to get money for nothing!

          143

        • #
          Craig Thomas

          We have GPS now.
          So, for example, we know that the sea level rise measured by tide gauge at Port Kembla needs to be adjusted upwards by about 0.3mm-0.4mm per year to compensate for land rise.

          12

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            So it is the land that is rising. Explains why so many of the Roman ports in England are now miles inland.

            30

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              It is a known, acknowledged, and verifiable fact that the oceans have dropped 1200 ‘m over the last 2000 years.

              There have been significant oscillations of sea level over the last 7,000 years and any recent rises are miniscule and unrelated to human activity.

              KK

              30

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘….they starting rising very rapidly in comparison.’

        That’s a fallacy, there is no difference between our present rise out of the LIA, than say the planet’s emergence from the Dark Age into the light of the MWP.

        113

        • #

          SLR since the late 1700s has been a disappointing dribble. Even allowing for siltation etc, you’d think we would have had enough “very rapid” rise to be able to paddle a canoe into old seaports like Ostia and Ephesus where they used to park whole fleets. Where the Claudian invasion came ashore in Britain now lies well inland and even Pevensey where William the Conqueror arrived needs a good flush.

          Hey, I once drove right by the pass at Thermopylae and missed it. Too far from the sea, you see!

          92

          • #
            Greg Cavanagh

            I had some old maps of the Hot Gates, so I searched over Google Maps for half an hour or more before finally discovering (via a tourist notation) that it is all well inland now.

            50

          • #

            The Optimum’s climate change and the huge impact of the Holocene Transgression (think Doggerland, Bass Strait etc, dry not many millennia ago) may have had a long impact on sea levels. Even in the 1500s Henry VIII’s defensive coastal forts, now nearly all inland, had access to the sea.

            Land reclamation and siltation as well as sea level rise account for many ports moving inland, but it’s hard to fathom how so many of these sites are still dry if there has been anything more than a dribble of rise since the 1700s.

            Some parts of the world go up from the sea (Juneau, Stockholm) and some go down due to post-glacial rebound, but if you look at the record for geologically stable Sydney Harbour it’s impossible to see what people like Craig are on about. (Of course, if you built a giant city near sea level in a notorious hurricane belt and made the mistake of narrowing your river mouth with the rubble from World Trade Centre construction, then you might be more than happy to change the subject to CO2. But what would a climate skep know about conservation in the age of Green Blob?)

            20

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        Craig,
        You claim that “The provenance of atmospheric CO2 is a well known and uncontroversial fact.”
        To the extent I agree with you, my knowledge is supported by:
        ***
        Prof Weiss video.

        A week or so back TdeF posted this link to a 2015 video (21 mins) in which Professor Weiss gave an interesting talk about some work he and some colleagues did following his retirement.

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l-E5y9piHNU

        which was delivered to the Schiller Institute International Conference 13-14 June 2015.

        The title is “Spectral Analysis of Climate Data shows: all Climate Change is due to Natural Cycles”, and TdeF gave it to us at reply #16 in Jo’s post:

        http://joannenova.com.au/2017/03/trump-takes-away-epa-right-to-control-every-puddle-in-usa-wotus-order/#more-53153

        The paper, by Ludecke, Hempelman, Weiss was published in 2013, and I found it using their names as search argument.

        I found Professor Weiss convincing and authoritative, but am not in a position to confirm or refute his position. Can anyone here do either, or point to one or more papers which do either? If my understanding is correct, it will be difficult to refute.
        ***
        I was looking for somewhere to place the above when I came across your (unreferenced) assertions. Perhaps you could address my questions?
        Cheers,
        Dave B

        82

      • #
        AndyG55

        Yes Craig.. we all know you are only “informed” by AGW propaganda non-science, you comments make that patently obvious..

        Sea level has been rising at a pretty much constant rate since the LIA.

        It is NOT rapid. No acceleration. No CO₂ signature.

        “The provenance of atmospheric CO2 is a well-known and uncontroversial fact.”
        http://notrickszone.com/2017/02/25/blockbuster-paper-finds-just-15-of-co2-growth-since-industrialization-is-due-to-human-emissions/#sthash.oetOPOST.dpbs

        It is GOOD that humans are having at least some effect on atmospheric CO₂, means that we can continue to push it up away from the danger zone. A first aim should be 700+ppm, raising it to 1000ppm is possible

        173

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘A first aim should be 700+ppm, raising it to 1000ppm is possible.’

          Heresy!

          81

        • #
          Craig Thomas

          Make your mind up, Andy:
          “No CO₂ signature.”
          and
          “It is GOOD that humans are having at least some effect on atmospheric CO₂”
          can’t both be correct.

          You also appear to *still* be in the position of not understanding the earth’s CO2 cycle: where is the CO2 emitted through the burning fossil fuels going? Do you realise that the amount of CO2 we emit is a known quantity?

          01

      • #
        TdeF

        Good golly gosh Craig. Is that a school photo? How appropriate.
        It’s nice to believe everything you are told and have faith.
        With faith you have certainty and there is no need to question anything.
        Rational science is not like that. Read up on Rene Descartes.
        I always visit his tomb in Paris. Cartesian geometry. The father of rationalism.

        Also your Carbon isotopic story does not make sense.

        C12 is 99%, C13 is 1% of all Carbon. C14, the isotopic marker created only by cosmic rays which
        distinguishes fossil fuel from modern CO2, the one used in Radio Carbon dating is 1 in a million million atoms
        with a half life of 5400 years.

        So you can tell absolutely that there is almost no fossil fuel CO2 in the air.
        This was the original Suess effect who was amazed how little industrial CO2 was in the air.
        Dr. Suess concluded CO2 is rapidly absorbed into the oceans where 98% of all CO2 is dissolved. This was 70 years ago.
        So increased CO2 is simply due to increased ocean temperature, nothing more. That in turn is due purely to solar activity.

        183

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          TdeF,

          There is a story about the photo.

          Craig imagines himself as an Irish revolutionary hero: Michael.

          Sad.

          KK

          32

      • #
        sophocles

        Your watch has failed, Mr. Thomas. It needs servicing.

        The Holocene Warming started about 15.000 years ago. It was interrupted by the Younger Dryas from c. 12,900 to c. 11,700 years ago. The Holocene Optimum, when temperatures were, on average, 4 degrees C warmer than now went from c. 9000 years ago to c. 5000. It’s been downhill all the way from there.

        Sea level rate of rise Down Under was about 1.7mm pa in the early 1900s. From about 1950 to now, it has decreased to about 0.9mm pa. (PSMSL). That’s deceleration, not a rise of rate.

        72

        • #
          toorightmate

          A failed watch is the very least of Craig’s problems.

          51

        • #
        • #
          Craig Thomas

          NASA says it’s been 3mm since 1993.
          Who’s right, the rocket scientists…or you?

          Why don’t you check the Port Kembla tide gauge and tell us what it shows for the last 10 years>

          11

          • #
            PhilJourdan

            My auto mechanic said my fuel filter was clogged. My doctor said it was the catalytic converter. I listened to my mechanic as he was write.

            I do not ask my doctor about climate, and I do not ask rocket scientists about it either.

            10

      • #
        ATheoK

        “Craig Thomas March 8, 2017 at 12:16 pm
        you can use isotopic analysis to see that the increase in CO2 is linked to a decrease in average weight of the Carbon molecules in the atmosphere which in turn tells you where it is coming from”

        And you claim we are confused!?

        -
        Increase in CO2, linked to decrease in average weight of carbon molecules in the atmosphere…!?
        -
        Tell us explicitly, how do carbon molecules lose weight? And please explain, exactly what composition carbon molecules are? Is that c2, c3, c4?
        -
        basically you have strewn a load of nonsense cloaked in science sounding mumbo jumbo so you could make specious claims.
        -
        The alleged carbon budget is somebody’s restaurant napkin of their version of carbon movement on Earth. There is not one single solid fact in that carbon budget. Every alleged carbon movement is based on estimates produced by people without any intent to build a legitimate estimates.
        -
        At no point in science is an estimate, a valid replacement for direct observable reproducible fact. Estimates and guesses based on flimsy estimates rank right up there with the horrid climate models pretending to forecast future scenarios. Uncertified, unverifiable, impossible to reproduce climate models producing garbage.

        100

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Why bother Theo.

          Michael hasn’t changed his suit in 3 years.

          21

        • #
          Craig Thomas

          When you increase the proportion of C12 in the atmosphere, the average weight decreases. derr.

          Also, maybe you should listen to the experts instead of just making stuff up, for example, you could listen to what Murry Salby says,
          ““In truth only one component of the CO2 budget is known with any certainty, human emissions, implicitly through records of extraction – how much coal and oil are dug up”.”

          It’s perfectly straightforward. We know how much CO2 we’re putting in the atmosphere, and we also know that CO2 has increased from 280ppm to 400ppm.
          And we also know through isotopic analysis that the release of C12-rich carbon has in fact increased the proportiong of C12 carbon in the atmosphere.

          01

      • #
        Peter C

        The provenance of atmospheric CO2 is a well-known and uncontroversial fact.

        Agree with that! Atmospheric CO2 is going up.

        . You can deduce where it comes from using the carbon budget. Or, you can use isotopic analysis to see that the increase in CO2 is linked to a decrease in average weight of the Carbon molecules in the atmosphere which in turn tells you where it is coming from.

        Do not agree with that. Craig, please provide references, if you can.

        Anybody wishing to become informed (based on what you just wrote, you *really* need to have a go at this) should carefully read the CSIRO report,

        Do not waste your time. CSIRO no longer an authority on CC!

        Usual tactic from Craig. Start with an agreed statement, then twist it around.

        41

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        It seems we have reached a consensus:

        44 : 5

        Does a consensus count though.

        Just possibly, Michael may be right and the 44 wrong?

        KK

        10

      • #
    • #
      Hivemind

      They are an embarrassment to all Australians.

      30

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      Tdef
      Of course the oceans are acid , they just have a special homogenised chart that’s all .
      Oh and changed the definition of a few things here and there , all on the up and up though .

      92

      • #
        TdeF

        They are usually careful to say increased acidifiction. What that is debatable and semantic games.
        For example if you have cash in the bank and you take out a dollar, you have increased your indebtedness, except it is not true.

        The oceans are all alkali and hugely buffered by countless tons of limestone and coral covering the planet. The idea that they are acidifying is so devious as to be intentionally deceitful.

        The other deceit is that living organisms are incredible sensitive to pH. In fact animals play with pH all the time for many reasons like digestion. The idea that life is so fragile is against the entire history of evolution because nothing special is happening, certainly nothing which is not natural or has not happened before. So you can be sure the animals and fish and molluscs and insects cope quite nicely because they have seen it all before in their genetic memory.

        122

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Good perspective.

          70

        • #
          AndyG55

          I always counter the acidification argument with…

          “No, if the pH drops slightly from 8.2, the oceans become LESS CAUSTIC

          93

          • #
            Robert Rosicka

            Or if the ph drops just a bit more the oceans will become neutral, given the error margin and normal range of the oceans ph , there is nothing to see here .

            60

        • #
          bobl

          It is always illuminating that in the human body the difference between acid and alkali is just a few feet. The PH of saliva is 7.5 and stomach 1.5, then a few inches on in the Duodenum it’s about PH 6 again. But of course our distant sea dwelling relaives surely can’t control their bodies PH like we can.

          60

        • #
          sophocles

          AndyG55 has put it correctly: Less Caustic.
          It’s because of that little barrier at pH 7 = Neutral. Less than that, it is ACIDIC, becoming stronger as the number decreases. Above 7, it is ALKALINE, and increasingly so as the numbers rise.

          Saying More Acidic while the pH is above 7 is WRONG, because it is still ALKALINE.

          You know that, I know that and most of us with a bit of Chemistry know that. We have to hose all over this meaningless language every time we see it. It’s designed to confuse and muddy the waters, so we have to REJECT it and insist on the correct use of the pH terms.

          10

    • #
      Ted O'Brien

      Do not forget here that in December 1986 the Hawke “Labor” (read “Marxist”) government appointed the National President of the “Labor” Party as chairman of a newly appointed board of management of the CSIRO. Neville Wran was the first non scientist to hold that position.

      Note that this predates the formation of the IPCC.

      10

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Too bad the march is in April. I could almost make a good limerick out of it if it was in March.

    There once was a month named March;
    A very good month for a march;
    Though a cause we have none;
    The march shall be done;
    Destroying the splendor of March.

    So that one is thwarted. And it’s April 22, not 1st so I can’t make something out of All Fool’s Day either. And in any case, a poet I am not. So let them march, even in April.

    Poor March is more than a little a little disappointed though. :-(

    112

  • #
    Neville

    One of the most famous and recent Science identity thieves will be marching as well. Unbelievable that such a co man still has the hide to show his face in public.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/06/disgraced-identity-thief-peter-gleick-democracy-under-assault-from-liars-like-gleick/

    122

    • #
      Oliver K. Manuel

      Peter Gleick, the UN, the NAS and the AGU face a common fate if Trump actually drains the swamp!

      122

      • #
        Ted O'Brien

        Yes. One of our local msm red rags has screamed lately that 1. there is no pause, 2, record low ice in Antarctica, and 3. Record high temps in Antarctica. All scarcely plausible.

        With Scott Pruitt declaring from a position of strength no temp rise in eighteen years, those hysterical “news” articles move from being news to promotion of a common, ordinary scam on an unprecedented scale.

        When will the charges start?

        00

  • #
    manalive

    … teach about evolution and climate change …
    … the teaching of evolution or climate change …

    They know that climate change™ alone is a cause only fanatics will turn up for so it has to piggyback on something else that has popular acceptance, for instance in politics air quality concerns i.e. genuine pollution, and in pure science something like the theory of evolution.

    72

  • #
    Pat Frank

    I used to be a member of NCSE, and knew Eugenie Scott, the previous president, and met some of the scientific staff. I quit when they began to tout global warming.

    Jennie Scott and her Biology/Geology staff are experts on Evolutionary Theory. They personally knew the subject, and their defense of teaching Evolutionary Theory was truly knowledge-based.

    Not so with climate. They were and are ignorant of the subject. They consulted outsiders including Jim Hansen, and Peter Gleick before his fall from grace for lying (He had been on their board of AGW consultants but was asked to resign).

    NCSE hired Mark McCaffrey to lead their charge, with degrees in education and previous experience at the “Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES)” at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He was an “Associate Scientist III,” and apparently took a “leadership role in the development of Climate Literacy.” Mark’s background made him not particularly trained in climate science itself, but distinctly trained to promulgate his views about it.

    When I became aware of NCSE’s turn to climate, I contacted Eugenie Scott in protest and tried to explain the danger. Her response was as arrogant and dismissive as characterized the creationist bigotry she had spent 30 years fighting.

    I was truly amazed. Eugenie had become who she had been fighting.

    A bit later, I tried to publish an article in NCSE Reports, in response to a really awful climate screed from David Morrison.

    The NCSE Reports editor, Andrew Petto, took every excuse to reject the manuscript, all with Eugenie’s support. I didn’t know it then, but he was employing the standard tactic of partisan journal editors to suppress AGW-critical manuscripts.

    So, now, NCSE is perfectly suited to participate in the march. They have betrayed their principle, acting in ignorance and motivated by partisan beliefs. Just like their erstwhile opponents. Just like certain climate so-called scientists.

    192

    • #
      Craig Thomas

      Why should the NCSE accept for publication a combative amateur paper pretending to be a scientific paper but packed full of howlers (eg the discussion of “error” is particularly unsound) and written by somebody with no publication record in the relevant field?

      The contributors in this relevant field – such as Hansen – have written papers over *decades* which still stand as sound and upon which the rest of us prefer to rely rather than put any store on stuff that only sees the light of day on blogs run by non-scientist ex-weathermen.

      530

      • #
        Pat Frank

        And you’d know, Craig, because you read the NCSE manuscript.

        Very clever of you, also, to dismiss an analysis without providing any critical content.

        Not one of Jim Hansen’s papers, going back to at least 1986, has any physically valid error bars. Not his papers about air temperature, not his papers on climate models.

        But the lack of substantive verification in his papers shouldn’t bother you, as you exhibit no particular affinity for substantive content, either.

        284

      • #
        Neville

        CT have you read PF’s paper and what is your background? Just asking?

        122

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        The typical left wing approach is label anyone who dares hold the left accountable for its usual shifty nonsense, as “agent provocatuer”, thus attempting to turn the tables and create a (false) position of authority. Saul Alynski was a master at creating chaos and blind siding people with repetetive broadsides to inflict a form of trauma.

        What I do find heartening is I have been training children to ask hard questions, and to recognise the left and its tactics, so the next generation know how down right iffy and outright nasty the left is.

        Every time I consider sympathy for the left and its tactics, I recall the Romanovs and their demise. Kind of keeps it all in perspective.

        A lot of us who are in positions of significant influence, have very very long memories…..

        92

      • #
        Raven

        Give it a rest, Craig.
        The debate is over.
        James (the oceans will begin to boil) Hansen is an activist, not a scientist.

        142

      • #
        AndyG55

        “The contributors in this relevant field “… have made basically ZERO true prediction.

        Nearly every thing they have written is proving “not to be so”

        ie mostly ULTIMATELY WRONG !!!

        82

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        The contributors in this relevant field – such as Hansen – have written papers over *decades* which still stand as sound…

        Except that nothing James Hansen has ever predicted, ever happened.
        With a failure rate of 100%, how can you possibly take his word over some random blog comment?

        41

    • #
      llew jones

      Here’s an obviouly conservative US pastor having a go at Greenie Evangelical Leaders who in his estimation haven’t got a clue about science or theology. His congregation of some 5000 plus seem to be enjoying this anti AGW talk:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXnwB97fBj8

      20

    • #
      Dean from Ohio

      Their uncritical acceptance and enforcement of evolution is an exact parallel of their uncritical acceptance and enforcement of CAGW. The two noble causes are one and the same at root, with the same arrogance from Scott and others. I’m glad you saw your way clear of the latter; please turn the same skepticism on the former.

      33

      • #
        llew jones

        Dean the fossil record of the Cambrian explosion was a bit of a worry for D. himself but he had enough faith in his hypothesis to believe that some pre-Cambrian fossils with a bit of the old transitional stuff would turn up. They haven’t yet.

        Most of those scientists from his time (and even back to Democritus in ancient Greece) were believers in a Steady State Universe. I.e. it existed eternally so that no one needed anyone to start it. The Big Bang hypothesis mucked that one up. As you know the BB postulates that time, space and matter came into being at the Big Bang. Which means if you have enough faith, as the new atheists have, nothing created something. John Lennox Professor of Mathematics at Oxford UK and a Christian apologist who has debated some of the new atheists including Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss, mentions that one of the British science publications wrote, as the BB hypothesis was gaining acceptance and Fred Hoyle was opposing it, we cannot accept the Big Bang because it gives too much credibility to the creationists.

        That of course doesn’t disprove the process of evolution but it makes one wonder how life and consciousness came from a single cell. I guess that and the inadequacy of the fossil record, is why, increasingly, many atheistic scientists and philosophers say they can no longer accept the evolutionary hypothesis, though they remain atheists.

        21

        • #
          el gordo

          In defence of atheism I present Brane theory, which may partially explain the big bang.

          ‘The central idea is that the visible, three-dimensional universe is restricted to a brane inside a higher-dimensional space, called the “bulk” (also known as “hyperspace”). If the additional dimensions are compact, then the observed universe contains the extra dimensions, and then no reference to the bulk is appropriate.

          ‘In the bulk model, at least some of the extra dimensions are extensive (possibly infinite), and other branes may be moving through this bulk. Interactions with the bulk, and possibly with other branes, can influence our brane and thus introduce effects not seen in more standard cosmological models.’

          wiki

          20

          • #
            llew jones

            el g. My background study was mathematics so I tend to look at the probability of evolution occurring. A brilliant physicist like the atheist Stephen Hawking seems to understand, along with many other evolutionists, the potential improbability factor so what they propose is a Multiverse. That is that there is an infinity of universes which, apart from anything else, helps in calculations to improve the probability of something like evolution occurring.

            You see 13.8 billion years since the singularity, called the Big Bang, then about another 9 or 10 billion years for the Earth to cool down and organise itself enough to allow life to start allows an incredibly short time for evolution to begin and progress to the complexity we see today and thus feeds positively into the improbability factor.

            That’s why the early evolutionists who thought the Earth eternally (the equivalent of Countless trillions of years then plenty more) existed had no trouble with improbability. Multiverse? Evidence please. Well who cares anyway, evolution and a self generating universe (ours) is far more important than trying to find some evidence for the Multiverse.

            Check out the atheist philosopher, Thomas Nagle, who, in “Mind and Cosmos”, says he doesn’t want to believe in God and apparently still doesn’t, but thinks evolution as a credible theory will be dead in a few decades. He has been branded a heretic by the true believers and just like the alarmist sect of AGW no evolutionist seems to want to ague, face to face, with any informed evolution denier.

            20

          • #
            PhilJourdan

            I have read that theory- and it seems plausible (and explains a lot). However, as with the BB theory, you still come back to the same point where the science simply says ” i do not know”. Where did the other dimensions come from? Any theory that tries to explain the origin will still get to a point of not being able to explain its origin. As man’s knowledge increases, that point is pushed back farther and farther, but it never will get to the very beginning. Just closer to it.

            Kant said “leap of faith” in his works to explain why he was a believer. But that works both ways. TO be an atheist, you still have to take a “leap of faith” that everything will eventually be explained by science.

            To each his own. A fascinating subject. And one that will keep Man always one step behind the final answer.

            10

        • #
          Pat Frank

          llew jones, “[Darwin] had enough faith in his hypothesis to believe that some pre-Cambrian fossils with a bit of the old transitional stuff would turn up. They haven’t yet.

          A bibliography of publications describing Precambrian fossils.

          I tend to look at the probability of evolution occurring … the potential improbability factor so what they propose is a Multiverse.

          How the statistics of random occurrence have zero relevance to the origin of life: here and also here.

          00

      • #
        Curious George

        Uncritical? Please document. Actually they have been rather skeptical all the time.

        Personally, I don’t believe that God lost all creative power after six days. I believe He is still at work. It is nice to see a little of his techniques.

        70

        • #
          Annie

          I’ve often felt there need be no problem with reconciling the creation with evolution. If one believes that there is an all-powerful creator I cannot see why He should not use evolution as a force for continuing creation. I’m not too keen on people being too prescriptive about how God can and cannot act; they don’t know and shouldn’t be battering other people as to what to believe.
          There is far more to this world and the universe than any of us can ever know and it’s impertinent of us to think otherwise!

          50

        • #

          Indeed true! If only the acolytes of God, Cal Tech and Lockheed alike would stop tweeking the damned thing for a while; some of us earthlings could start to learn something, anything please! :-)

          11

      • #
        Ted O'Brien

        For the man in the street, there should be no conflict between Creation and Evolution. The problem rests wholly on the interpretation of one word. Day. Substitute “a period of time”, which is a legitimate interpretation, and Evolution becomes a tool of Creation.

        I long wondered how Genesis got things so right. Then I saw David Attenborough in Life on Earth. There it was in the fossil record, which even the ancient Egyptians could see.

        00

    • #
      Frank

      Pat,
      Have you considered the possibility that your article was rejected because it was poor ?

      22

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Guess which branch of establishment science is the one hardest hit by the Trump presidency:

    It occurs to me to note that Donald Trump has nothing to show by way of science credentials. And he’s not been exactly 100% consistent on climate change. I think his objections are based more on the impact all the regulation has on business, especially the energy business and not so much to do with a real understanding of why the whole climate change charade should be laughed right out of town. He doubts it at the gut level because the predictions don’t come true and so-on. But could he actually explain that there is no credible evidence that climate change is happening or even explain what credible evidence might be? I don’t know. But that’s my take on it straight from his public statements.

    92

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      No doubt he has experienced the pain first hand with his business. I view it more that he understand how it hurts “every” business in America.

      21

    • #
      TdeF

      What Donald Trump has in great quantity, is a lot of skepticism. That is the definition of a scientist. He can also see Global Warming is a very political topic. Democrats and the media and the banks and their friends push it. No one else. Given none of the predictions have come true, most people should be skeptical and at least half of the US does not believe it.

      He has no reason to believe the ‘scientists’ of the EPA or the various self interest groups are telling the truth. You do not have to look far to find many senior and well credentialled scientists who utterly disagree with man made warming, apart from the fact that it is transparently not warming and such warming as is argued is negligible just compared to annual summer to winter changes. So why spend trillions?

      No one has drowned. New York is not 100 meters under water. In fact there has been no disaster after thirty years and like most Americans, he has been hearing this for thirty years. As for statistics, you can prove anything and Donald knows that.

      Just as the MSM spread Fake news, Man made Global Warming is Fake science. That he understands.

      152

      • #
        TdeF

        Besides in the emerging competition between China and the US and Russia, which one is crippled by a belief in man made global warming? In fact if you leave the EU out of it, which significant countries cripple themselves with punitive taxes and buy Chinese windmills and rare earths and solar panels? With 3 billion of the world’s population between China and India/Bangladesh/Pakistan doing nothing, Australia’s sacrifice in shutting their own industries and power generation is a remarkable example of self harm for nothing. Trump is not a masochist.

        112

        • #
          Peter C

          The USA and the EU and Canada and Australia and New Zealand are crippled by belief in AGW.
          “Australia’s sacrifice in shutting their own industries and power generation is a remarkable example of self harm for nothing.”

          That is why we (on this blog) are so upset and distressed now!

          50

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        What Donald Trump has in great quantity, is a lot of skepticism.

        That’s certainly true. And it’s served him very well over his life. But being skeptical is just the start when it come to understanding science. You have to know the right questions to ask. To say, “I don’t believe it,” isn’t enough. You need to be able to say, “I don’t believe it because…,” And then go on and ask the questions that uncover the flaws in your behind “because”.

        I don’t know if Trump is equipped to do that. On the other hand he’s been surrounding himself with good people and they are obviously not the yes man, go along with the boss type but will probably tell him when they think he’s wrong.

        10

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘But could he actually explain that there is no credible evidence that climate change is happening or even explain what credible evidence might be? ‘

      No, which is why he intends walking in the middle and take catastrophism out of the equation. So the debate now becomes a CO2 sensitivity issue, without recourse to the sun, moon and gas giants.

      The other day Judith Curry said something along the lines that we may never be able to forecast climate because its a truly chaotic system. This is a red rag to a bull and yet its also Socratic, a blank canvas for the warmists and coolists to sort out their differences in the interest of science.

      Curry is an honest broker and deserves an opportunity as assistant to the Trump Administration.

      61

      • #
        TdeF

        Remember also that the concept was runaway, tipping point, catastrophic warming, not the more nebulous ‘climate change’.
        +0.5C in ten years, so +5C in the next hundred. That was the universal confident prediction. Let’s not let it get watered down to a bit of a worry. It was Armageddon, the greatest moral challenge of a generation! Moral.

        So we are now 30 years into that 100 years and the temperature has not changed for twenty. So regardless of anyone’s hypotheses about CO2 and sensitivity, CO2 is still going up and temperature is not. What then is the problem? If there is no problem, why is the world spending $1.5Tn a year?

        If Global Warming is busted, Climate Change is busted.

        123

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘If Global Warming is busted, Climate Change is busted.’

          Personally I would like him to come out and say CO2 is a beneficial trace gas and at the end of the Holocene we need to get out of the mitigation business.

          It would start a revolution and the president may wish to avoid that option.

          By taking catastrophism out of AGW he can then sack all those brain dead scientists who are surplus to requirement. No more renewable subsidies and heaps more.

          Most importantly Donald Trump will become the hero of the masses by single handedly bringing global warming hysteria to an end.

          52

          • #
            TdeF

            In a talk in Melbourne by Daniel Hannan, a British MP in the European parliament and brilliant speaker, he was asked what would happen when Global Warming was shown to be hokum. In his opinion, it would take 20 years to die away, simply because of the inertia in the system. Incidentally, he was the most enthusiastic proponent of BREXIT, despite it being the end of his job.

            I would guess we are ten years into that period. Tim Flannery (61), Al Gore(68) will retire to their sea side homes while tens of thousands of young environmentalists will start looking for real jobs as the hyperinflated EPA and Climate Change departments disband. Sadly people under 35 do not remember a world in which man made Global Warming was not a fact, so it will take time. The sad thing is that like all nutty religions, the best and most enthusiastic are the ones sucked into the vortex and have to start their careers again.

            93

            • #
              el gordo

              Because of the trillions involved, four years should be enough to sink AGW. Once the ‘precautionary principle’ is discredited, the game will be up.

              Until then, standup comics with the right bent would be useful, along with a serious drop in temperature.

              61

            • #
              Robert Christopher

              Children won’t know what being confident in what a teacher says is.

              40

    • #
      David Maddison

      Trump doesn’t need to understand the lack of “global warming” in detail.

      His great strength is in hiring the best experts for the specific area of expertise he wants them for.

      83

      • #
        Raven

        Precisely.
        When Trump has his science advisor in place, he would rightly defer to that expertise.

        Apparently William Happer is in the running and would be excellent.
        Happer says ‘Global Warming is Good’

        41

        • #
          John F. Hultquist

          Happer or someone else might make a good “climate science” adviser. If Trump wants on of those, he can hire one.
          However, Trump has expressed the view that global warming is a hoax — meaning, to him, it has mostly been used as an anti-USA crusade. Yes, he used China in his comment because China is the nation taking the most advantage of the dollars flowing from the scam. [Actually, the scam started with the East German communists that transitioned to the Greens.]
          I suggest a generalist “science adviser” and that person can draw on others. Climate really is not the biggest issue the US has regarding science. I would go in the medical direction — asthma, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, …, Z— .

          32

    • #
      Dean from Ohio

      As flawed as he is, he gets it because fake science and fake society are all idolatries, and seeing them as such is a spiritual thing. He gets it, mostly.

      41

  • #
    Richard Ilfeld

    Watch for the funny pink hats, and the black sweaters.
    “Marches” have a dynamic all their own, burned into the DNA of the left,
    thus the cause is irrelevant to many of the semi-pro marchers whose only
    expertise is finding the TV cameras.

    62

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Considering what those pink hats are supposed to represent vs their appearance, I’ve been doing something very wrong for many years………

      21

  • #
    Neville

    Greenpeace now admit they cannot be trusted and they freely admit they exaggerate and lie to make a case against companies. And yet left wing donkeys think they are simply wonderful. So much for logic, reason , evidence, data and the rule of law. Incredible but true, just ask them.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/03/dr-patrick-moore-was-right-gree npeace-is-full-of-shit/

    Here’s a connected story about a woman who was a left wing extremist all her life but started to have doubts after a comment made by David Horowitz in 2004. Anyway she lists 10 reasons why she abandoned her former life of left wing activism and hatred. It’s a very good read, but I always find it hard to understand why it takes some people so long to wake up.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/05/a-primer-on-the-hatred-of-clima te-skeptics-one-woman-saw-the-light-and-is-no-longer-a-leftist/

    62

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Looking down the track, I think eventually when the Left pushes its energy nonsense too hard, I can see a quiet but open rebellion by the population against the policies.

      People will be out collecting firewood from the side of the road, power stations will be commandeered to keep the lights on, people wont stand for having their lives literally choked off. There comes a point when all the riot laws in the world wont be able to stop a population thats had enough. The left will lose – again.

      The Left can try, but they will be beaten back ( figuratively speaking ) against the chain mesh fence and held there at the populations’ pleasure….

      Please note I an *not* advocating this, I do know how people think, and once peoples kids are threatened with danger and/or starvation, get out of the way.

      62

    • #
      Annie

      The article by the left wing convert is a very sobering read but not exactly surprising, unfortunately.

      10

  • #
    Robdel

    In other words another form of virtue signalling. Duh.

    32

  • #
    Neville

    Families are footing the bill for the UK’s delusional energy policies. Incredible how this fra-dulent extremism has been promoted and encouraged all around the world by govts of the left and right. This corruption and fra-d is very easy to understand yet the MSM are reluctant to inform the people and in fact most will try to hide the obvious truth. But perhaps this could be changing?

    http://www.thegwpf.com/rupert-darwall-its-families-who-are-footing-bil l-for-britains-deluded-energy-policies/

    And the science con merchants have dined out on dangerous Arctic warming for decades. Let’s hope this new study throws a spanner in their works.
    This Stein et al 2017 study has found that the Arctic today has more sea ice than was the case over the last 10,000 years. It was slightly higher during the LIA but the Med WP had lower levels of sea ice. This seems to correlate well with the Greenland ice core studies over the last 10,000 years. Graph is very interesting and perhaps the decrease in Solar forcing may be a factor? Who knows?

    http://www.thegwpf.com/new-study-more-arctic-sea-ice-now-than-for-near ly-all-of-the-last-10000-years/

    82

  • #
    nightspore

    This is what happens when you get activists posing as scientists – “science” becomes a kind of PR extravaganza.

    I wonder if there’ll ever be a March for Algorithms. (I can imagine the signs: “Don’t Give Up on Insertion Sort!” “B Trees are Forever!” “P can Equal NP if You Only Try!”) I’m sure that will do the field a world of good.

    82

  • #
    David Maddison

    O/T

    LOL

    Business is booming for a pedal-powered taxi fleet in Adelaide. SA of the future will be powered by humans and beasts of burden which are more reliable than the wind. And if you consider a reasonable 8 hour working day for humans or animals their capacity factor is around 33% which is a bit higher than for wind but unlike wind is reliable and can be scheduled.

    http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-07/pedal-powered-businesses-on-the-rise-in-adelaide/8331788?pfmredir=sm

    92

    • #
      Dennis

      When will the All Wind Turbine be installed in Parliament House, Adelaide?

      81

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Logical result. No electricity, no petrol or diesel because pumps won’t work. But don’t worry, Jay Weatherdill is ‘real soon now’ going to unveil his SuperDooper, All Singing & Dancing Answer to the electricity crisis. Buy 10 year bonds in the pedal-powered business!

      91

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      In today’s paper in Adelaide is a letter saying that they responded to Tom the (No)Energy Minister’s appeal to reduce electricity consumption over the week end by sending their punkah wallah home early. This raises the possibility of retraining unemployed workers as punkah wallahs. It will add a period look to those higher priced hotel bedrooms to compensate for the kerosene lamp.
      Stores and supermarkets will have to reduce hours if they aren’t willing to pay double time, but in the future who knows? Perhaps a politician will release a ‘biography’ saying he was born to poor parents who supported the family as punkah wallahs. It would be a change for SA’s parliament, we have plenty of punkahs.

      72

      • #

        excellent idea. Plus all the new flappy fan things that will be required could be made of natural fibers – ie sequestered carbon!

        53

      • #

        Look, I know this is horrendously way off topic, but I couldn’t help it. See where Graeme No.3 mentions this: (my bolding here)

        In today’s paper in Adelaide is a letter saying that they responded to Tom the (No)Energy Minister’s appeal to reduce electricity consumption over the week end by sending their punkah wallah home early.

        I had no idea what a punkah wallah was until I saw an English TV show in the mid and late 70′s called It Ain’t Half Hot Mum. I was never really a fan of the show, as the comedy was more slapstick camp in nature than typical English comedy of the time. I saw a few episodes, as some of the guys from 77Sqn were fans, and they would watch it.

        Years later, I was astonished to find that two of the stars had a huge Number One Smash hit in 1975 with a song written in 1940 called Whispering Grass.

        The YouTube video I have attached here shows the two of them singing the song. They are in character from that TV show, The guy with the moustache is Windsor Davies who played the long suffering SgtMajor, and the short guy is Don Estelle, who played the part of Lofty, ironically named because of his stature at only four foot nine inches.

        Windsor Davies says his lines in mostly spoken word, but just wait till (the late) Don Estelle opens his mouth to sing. This is absolutely beautiful.

        “I will not have gossip in this jungle.”

        Link to video

        Tony.

        81

        • #
          PeterPetrum

          Oh, Tony, I loved the program (sorry) and I do remember this episode when this song was sung. Sgt Major (Davies) in the series, believes (probably erroneously) that Private (Estelle) is his love child, and thus is always enamoured by his activities. This song was a smash hit form day one, and you are quite correct, Don Estelle was a surprise package as I cannot remember him singing anything else in the series. Oh! So far in the past, when times seemed much kinder than now and we laughed at things that would be sneered at today.

          30

        • #
          Peter C

          Ha ha, loved it. Lofty (Don Estelle) has a very good voice

          30

        • #
          Annie

          We used to enjoy ‘It ain’t half hot Mum’ too; sorry you didn’t Tony! Chacun à son goût, n’est çe pas? (I still struggle with producing accents on this thing!)

          20

        • #
          TdeF

          Thanks. Loved the clip. Actually I loved the show as it was about the dislocation and adaption of being a soldier in India and coping. India is a very different place and so not England. Curry to England’s stodge while the Indians tried to be more English than the English. Don Estelle transformation reminded me so much of Harry Seacombe (Neddie Seagoon). The voice is most unexpected, unsuspected and therefore doubly delightful. A real pleasure.

          20

  • #
    Ruairi

    With warmism down a blind alley,
    The alarmists now call for a rally,
    In a great show of force,
    And for science, of course,
    With a consensus 97% tally.

    211

  • #
    David Maddison

    Sorry, another O/T.

    Follow the money trail. They own both fossil and wind generators. It is much more profitable for them to sell expensive and unreliable wind power than cheap and reliable fossil power. And when the wind stops blowing (which is 70% of the time) they get to sell expensive power from closed cycle gas turbine peaking generators for huge prices on the spot market. They profit both ways.

    http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-07/agl-joins-calls-from-farmers-peak-body-for-carbon-price/8332058?pfmredir=sm

    71

  • #
    PeterS

    My BSS (BS Science) detector just went off the scale. Why is anyone surprised in a age when science and politics to so many are the same? After all the boundaries between Big Government and Big Science are being blurred. What still amazes me though is how scientists themselves don’t even realise that their science is being sullied as a result. I suppose the money is so tempting. Fake science is now a cousin of fake news. There was a song made titled “Fifty million Frenchmen can’t be wrong”. Glittering generalities and bandwagon thinking int he camp of global warming alarmists proves yes they can be wrong!

    31

  • #
    PhilJourdan

    The left is a parody of straw men! And hyperbole. What they are marching for is not science. It is their beliefs! If you do not believe as they do, then you are not a scientist. So says the Medieval Church. And modern shamanism.

    Trump has not made any statement on science. All the anti-science statements have been made by the marchers. They must support their religion. And it has nothing to do with science. They fail the branding law.

    61

    • #
      Raven

      What they are marching for is not science. It is their beliefs!

      Yes . . or at base level, they’re marching to protect their job security.
      Of course, if they were doing their job (science) there would be no need to march at all.

      I wonder if someone will point out that the Emperor has no lab coat.

      51

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Why are there any people left to march? I thought they were all going to go to Canada or Europe if Trump won.

        71

        • #
          PhilJourdan

          These are the poor schmucks that cannot afford foreign travel as Soros does not pay that much.

          30

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        Indeed. They are upset that their belief is being challenged. That is it in a nutshell.

        An honest person would see nuances in the science, and nuances in one’s conviction of the outcome. But not these people, they are in full defence mode. You either believe as we do, or you are the enemy.

        30

  • #
    Andy Pattullo

    If the march is intended to highlight the value and importance of science, a fact with which everyone already agrees then the point of this exercise is what? This seems a continuation of the deliberate polarization of beliefs along simplified one dimensional axes (e.g. Right versus left, religious versus atheist, capitalist versus socialist). There is no side that is always right nor any side that is always wrong with respect to scientific process or conclusions. Those who don’t believe in evolution or the safety of vaccines and GMO products may be ignoring the best evidence science can provide but that hasn’t prevented many of the same people from very correctly coming to the conclusion that CAGW is only a theory with very little in the way of backing evidence and with a consistent track record of failed prophecies.

    That said there are many degrees of risk with respect to correct or incorrect interpretation of scientific evidence. Believing in ghosts or aliens living among us doesn’t necesssairly lead world governments to enact laws and policy detrimental to all of society, but believing we must cease the consumption of the most effient fuels for the affordable energy that drives everything we value in modern life is a belief of grave consequence to all. The near total absence of reliable evidence that such a policy will provide benefits is breathtaking.

    I don’t really care if a politician believes in creationism, evolution or a combination of both if it never becomes government policy and doesn’t do harm to the population they serve. Whether Trump understands all of the science that leads most honest, capable and respected scientists to doubt the validity of global warming theory or not, Trump has taken some very important steps to stop an already too far gone policy march toward the destruction of industrial society. For that I am thankful. Not that is something that does deserve a march!

    113

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Having a march for science is a contradiction in terms.

      Science is reason and civilized debate. A march is an emotional, angry, selfish agitprop act. Its a bit like throwong a mass tantrum….oh wait, didnt that happen after Trump won in the USA? The left had a massive dummy spit coz it got driven into the sea?

      71

  • #
    Andy Pattullo

    Correction: Now that is something that deserves a march!

    61

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Jo, thank you.

    That has to be one of the clearest statements of the current situation available.

    The world has gone from being thankful, inquisitive, thrifty, honest and self disciplined after a horrific world war to the present where each and every distortion of reality is accepted without question by the masses.

    We now actually have the technical engineering skills to produce cheap electricity, free from particulate and noxious gas pollutants but because of the current manipulation of government by forces hidden from view, WE DON’T.

    As stated many times by various commenters on this blog, our education system is now one of indoctrination and persuasion.

    I just loved the bit that said: “these people couldn’t form a sequential …….”

    Come on Jo.

    Logic isn’t for everyone, it requires discipline.

    Oops, How can you have real science without discipline.

    The only way out of this human tragedy has been demonstrated to us via Brexit, Trump and those “its” currently fomenting in Europe.

    The people will rise and install honest governance.

    Or else.

    KK

    42

  • #
    ROM

    To quote Roger Pielke Jr, himself a very smart scientist who has been hounded out of climate science because he was a luke warmer.

    This quote from Judith curry’s Climate etc blog site.

    The smartest people on the planet want to oppose Trump & the best they can come up with is a march in support of themselves? – Roger Pielke Jr

    The smartest people on the planet ” description is being hotly contested on Climate etc. and one in which I would also take some umbrage on.

    If those scientists were that damn smart then they would be in demand by every corporation and institution.

    So it seems we are looking at a group of featherbedding degreed know nothings who can’t keep a job in private enterprise due to a high level of incompetency or maybe just sheer laziness and a complete failure to be able to actually prove their rights to their scientific credentials by turning out some quality research that would justify their positions and their tax payer funded lucrative and munificent salaries and grants.

    So they march and make a spectacle of themselves to the public and by doing so further reinforce the growing realisation amongst the public that there are scientists and then there are grant scammers who are purported to be some remotely vague image of a scientists who have to march to assure themselves they are still supposedly scientists of some sort or another.

    63

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      I do object to those with degrees in Geography calling themselves scientists. And I suppose they will march in glistening white coats to ‘proove’ they are one. All that will proove is that they have never worked in a laboratory.

      72

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      “The smartest people on the planet ”
      I took that as being a clever irony. One that you and I would get, but they would not; which makes it double funny :)

      30

  • #
    Neville

    A number of recent studies show that recent grape harvesting startup dates are not unusual throughout Europe. So where is their co2 impacted CAGW? Looks like the evidence and data has gone missing AGAIN.

    http://notrickszone.com/2017/03/06/historical-grape-harvest-dates-show-modern-temperatures-no-warmer-now-than-most-of-the-last-1000-years/#sthash.eeKGedSp.dpbs

    And the already very high German electricity prices are projected to quadruple by 2020. Compare the near flat USA graph with France and the disastrous German outcome. Why do they still tell porkies about S & W energy and why do the people vote again and again for these con merchants? The mitigation of their so called CAGW is the greatest fra-d in history and it is mind boggling that people cannot understand it. And all this has been copied by the clueless Vic Labor govt. Will the voters ever wake up?

    http://notrickszone.com/2017/02/28/german-electricity-price-projected-to-quadruple-by-2020-to-over-40-cents-per-kilowatt-hour/#sthash.VCrrorhh.dpbs

    71

  • #

    To begin with, it would be good to ask the promoters of this march for their definition of science. I’m sure concepts like consensus, science as a group activity or a social construct would figure in thir answers.

    For laughs, we could also ask some of their rank-and-file followers.

    61

  • #
    Neville

    More on the “social cost of carbon” junk science. Just more GIGO.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/03/06/end-the-phony-social-cost-of-ca rbon/

    Here’s the last couple of paragraphs of Judith Curry’s post on the SCC. Absolutely spot on.

    “Climate variability and change impacts water, food and energy. But there isn’t much we can do to influence the climate on the timescale of the 21st century — however much we have impacted the climate over the past 70 years or so, those impacts (large or small) will work their way through climate system over the next centuries as the oceans act as a big flywheel on the climate system.

    Back to the question posed by Revkin: Will Trump’s climate team accept any social cost of carbon? Well, I hope not. Here’s to hoping for a more pragmatic approach to all this in the Trump administration”.

    https://judithcurry.com/2017/01/17/rethinking-the-social-cost-of-carbo n/

    61

  • #
    liberator

    I wonder how many real scientists won’t be marching? Those who are head down, bum up not and are not trying to skim the cream off the top to further their own funding, sorry, agenda.

    51

    • #
      Dennis

      There are only a few seats available on the UN IPCC Bus where polls are conducted.

      41

      • #
        toorightmate

        I am about to organise a march for croquet enthusiasts – just to show Donald Trump how we feel.

        What do we want? WE DON’T KNOW.
        When do we want it? NOW

        50

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    At least the science hikeathon is on a Saturday. It is also Earth Day, National Record Store Day, National Girl Scout Leader’s Day, and National Jelly Bean Day.
    I can get my mouth ready for this last one.

    It is always good to mix messages and confuse those not really interested. Thus the recent march following Trump’s inauguration. What was that about?

    Meanwhile, the USA is having a ‘Day Without a Woman’ strike. Tomorrow — Wednesday. Because many teachers are women and have notified the schools, some schools have decided to shut in solidarity with teachers.
    Children will have to stay home, families, and all sorts of functions will have to adjust. Again, this is a confusing message, and apparently just a continuation of the anti-Trump stuff, but officially not presented that way.
    Who cares? Serious people consider Wednesday a work day.

    31

  • #
    David Maddison

    I’m finishing off my day paying my final respects to Hazelwood Power Station having had a swim in its cooling pond. I am now having a picnic at the disused Power Works Energy Education Centre next to a memorial bust of General Sir John Monash. The Victorian energy grid was largely his creation and he would be appalled about its systematic destruction and the failure to apply scientific and engineering principles in regard to supposed “global warming” and a grid increasingly dependent upon expensive and unreliable renewables.

    71

    • #
      PeterS

      So how far does the deliberate destruction of our main base load power generation stations have to go before it’s recognised and dealt with accordingly as though terrorists have blown them up?

      71

      • #
        Annie

        Could our ‘Dear Leaders’ be had up for treasonable activity, undermining manufacturing and the economy, not to mention morale?

        30

    • #
      Yonniestone

      General Sir John Monash is considered our greatest wartime leader and one of the greatest Australians ever, a true warrior he was not a man to suffer fools gladly or to trifle with!

      30

  • #
    pat

    6 Mar: Science Daily: Cold extermination: One of greatest mass extinctions was due to an ice age and not to Earth’s warming
    Universite de Geneve
    The Earth has known several mass extinctions over the course of its history. One of the most important happened at the Permian-Triassic boundary 250 million years ago. Over 95% of marine species disappeared and, up until now, scientists have linked this extinction to a significant rise in Earth temperatures. But researchers have now discovered that this extinction took place during a short ice age which preceded the global climate warming. It’s the first time that the various stages of a mass extinction have been accurately understood and that scientists have been able to assess the major role played by volcanic explosions in these climate processes…
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170306091927.htm

    21

  • #
    pat

    given smart meters are being rolled out in the name of CAGW, it might be worth checking out this study:

    3 Mar: University of Twente: Electronic energy meters’ false readings almost six times higher than actual energy consumption
    Some electronic energy meters can give false readings that are up to 582% higher than actual energy consumption.
    This emerged from a study carried out by the University of Twente (UT), in collaboration with the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS). Professor Frank Leferink of the UT estimates that potentially inaccurate meters have been installed in the meter cabinets of at least 750,000 Dutch households. The is published in the scientific journal ‘IEEE Electromagnetic Compatibility Magazine’.
    In the Netherlands, traditional energy meters (kWh) – the familiar energy meter with a rotating disc – are being increasingly replaced by electronic variants (which are also known as ‘static energy meters’). One well-known variant of the latter is the ‘smart meter’. The Dutch government wants smart meters in every household by 2020…
    https://www.utwente.nl/en/news/!/2017/3/313543/electronic-energy-meters-false-readings-almost-six-times-higher-than-actual-energy-consumption

    1 Mar: IEEE: Static energy meter errors caused by conducted electromagnetic interference
    http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7866234/?reload=true

    31

  • #
    pat

    5 Mar: Judith Curry: Exactly what are scientists marching ‘for’?
    The smartest people on the planet want to oppose Trump & the best they can come up with is a march in support of themselves? – Roger Pielke Jr…READ ON
    https://judithcurry.com/2017/03/05/exactly-what-are-scientists-marching-for/

    7 Mar: NYT: Coral Davenport: E.P.A. Head Stacks Agency With Climate Change Skeptics
    Mr. Pruitt has drawn heavily from the staff of his friend and fellow Oklahoma Republican, Senator James Inhofe, long known as Congress’s most prominent skeptic of climate science. A former Inhofe chief of staff, Ryan Jackson, will be Mr. Pruitt’s chief of staff. Another former Inhofe staff member, Byron Brown, will serve as Mr. Jackson’s deputy. Andrew Wheeler, a fossil fuel lobbyist and a former Inhofe chief of staff, is a finalist to be Mr. Pruitt’s deputy, although he requires confirmation to the position by the Senate.
    To friends and critics, Mr. Pruitt seems intent on building an E.P.A. leadership that is fundamentally at odds with the career officials, scientists and employees who carry out the agency’s missions. That might be a recipe for strife and gridlock at the federal agency tasked to keep safe the nation’s clean air and water while ***safeguarding the planet’s future…

    Another transition official under consideration by Mr. Pruitt for a permanent position is David Kreutzer, a senior research fellow in energy economics and climate change at the conservative Heritage Foundation who has publicly praised the benefits of increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That view stands in opposition to the broad scientific consensus that increased carbon dioxide traps heat and contributes to the dangerous warming of the planet…READ ON
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/us/politics/scott-pruitt-environmental-protection-agency.html?_r=0

    31

  • #
    pat

    AUDIO: PICS: 7 Mar: Kent NewsUK: Luke May: LISTEN: Aggressive cold callers scammed more than 70 elderly and vulnerable people out of £1.7million
    Analysis revealed employees would cold-call members of the public using aggressive and persistent sales techniques, to persuade them into buying green investments known as ‘carbon credits’.
    To match the fraudulent company’s facade, glossy brochures promoting the ‘credits’ were published, and even quoted Barack Obama.
    Investigating officers discovered none of the victims’ money was being used to buy the credit, but was instead paid into bank accounts in the name of Taylor & Mills Ltd…

    The 29-year-old from Parkside Avenue, Bromley was sentenced to three months imprisonment, suspended for two years, for money laundering by concealing criminal property.
    He must also complete 150 hours unpaid work.
    The company’s director, 64-year-old Alan Mill was sentenced to 16 months imprisonment for conspiracy to defraud.
    Dean Hempseed from Hayes was sentenced to five years in prison for conspiracy to defraud.
    An audio clip of the 35-year-old’s aggressive sales technique can be heard in this article…
    http://www.kentnews.co.uk/news/listen_aggressive_cold_callers_scammed_more_than_70_elderly_and_vulnerable_people_out_of_1_7million_1_4920782

    7 Mar: Daily Mail: Cold-call fraudsters who conned more than 70 vulnerable pensioners into handing over £1.7million using inspiring quotes from Barack Obama are jailed for a total of 14 years
    Aaron Petrou, 49, and Dean Hempseed, 35, used pseudonyms as they cold-called more than 70 elderly victims, between 2008 and 2011, to encourage them to buy green investments called ‘carbon credits’.
    The con artists barraged potential targets with aggressive sales techniques and sent them glossy brochures quoting then President Obama’s views about the importance of green energy…
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4290748/Cold-callers-conned-vulnerable-pensioners-1-7m.html

    20

  • #
    pat

    comment re sentencing of carbon credit fraudsters is in moderation.

    VIDEO: 7 Mar: ClimateChangeNews: Karl Mathiesen: Anti-fossil fuel activists stage Louvre oil slick
    Fossil fuel divestment activists staged an oil slick pouring down the steps of the Louvre’s iconic Winged Victory statue in Paris on Sunday.
    The protest was directed against the Louvre’s sponsorship deal with French supermajor oil company Total.
    Roughly two dozen activists from the group Libérons le Louvre (LlL) silently crowded around the statue wearing black cloaks, which they removed and laid along the stairs. The symbolic river of oil stretched out from the prow of the stone ship on which the statue stands…

    The campaign group 350.org, which is part of the LlL coalition, released a statement that said: “Through its partnership with Total the Louvre Museum lends legitimacy to Total’s rogue business model. Like other fossil fuel companies, Total relies on public acceptance to continue its destructive activities. That is precisely why they strike sponsorship deals with cultural institutions.”…
    No details were provided by the group or visible on the Louvre’s website regarding the nature or size of the sponsorship…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/03/07/anti-fossil-fuel-activists-stage-louvre-oil-slick/

    20

  • #
    pat

    lengthy…

    6 Mar: NYT: Amy Harmon: Activists Rush to Save Government Science Data — If They Can Find It
    Much of the scientific information so painstakingly collected over the decades, at a cost of ***hundreds of billions of dollars, remains held only by the government, scattered on thousands of servers in hundreds of departments where it may not be backed up and could be impossible to find…
    “It’s like dark matter; we know it must be there but we don’t know where to find it to verify,” said Maxwell Ogden, the director of Code for Science and Society, a nonprofit…
    “If they’re going to delete something, how will we even know it’s deleted if we didn’t know it was there?” he asked…
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/science/donald-trump-data-rescue-science.html

    6 Mar: New Scientist: Deep cuts to environmental research in Trump’s budget proposal
    By Chelsea Whyte
    New Scientist did not receive a response to a request for comment from the Commerce Department, which oversees NOAA, or the Environmental Protection Agency.
    Journal reference: New England Journal of Medicine, DOI: 10.1056/NEJMms1615242
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2123641-deep-cuts-to-environmental-research-in-trumps-budget-proposal/

    21

  • #
    pat

    6 Mar: DundeeCourier: Gareth McPherson: EXCLUSIVE: Scottish Government experts sidelined while energy blueprint was drawn up
    Gordon Wilson, a former SNP leader, has accused the First Minister of presiding over a “dangerous vacuum” and failing to protect the country’s electricity supply…
    “Why did it prepare an energy strategy without taking advice from its own body?
    “There is a dangerous vacuum here and no sign that the Government is concerned about security of power supply in Scotland. This should be its first priority.”…

    He said Scotland was a big exporter of electricity until Westminster subsidies for the south and midlands in England led to the early closure of Longannet and Cockenzie power stations.
    A fresh threat is the uncertain future of the Peterhead gas-fired plant, Mr Wilson added, as well as the lack of progress on the replacement gas generator at Cockenzie “without a squawk of protest” from the Scottish Government.
    He said it is “only a matter of time” before Scotland’s nuclear plants at Hunterston and Torness will have to close.

    Mr Wilson added: “When that happens, Scotland will be dependent on base load supply of power from England when our windmills run out of puff.
    “Bad news in itself but failure there to invest means that England is not far away from cuts or ‘brown-outs’ in a bad winter.”
    Meanwhile, there are questions over whether renewables such as wind power, which are strongly supported by the Scottish Government, will fulfil the country’s electricity needs throughout the year…READ ALL
    https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/381522/exclusive-scottish-government-experts-sidelined-energy-blueprint-drawn/

    31

  • #
    pat

    7 Mar: Guardian: Adam Vaughan: Schools with solar panels face £1.8m bill due to business rates rise
    Tax hike on solar-installed properties to affect 821 state schools in England and Wales, research suggests
    New research suggests schools in England and Wales which have solar panels installed will be landed with a £1.8m bill because of business rate changes that have been branded ludicrous and nonsensical.
    More than 1,000 schools installed solar power in recent years to address climate change, educate pupils and provide a crucial new revenue stream to help squeezed budgets.
    But figures from 74 education authorities that responded to freedom of information requests show 821 schools with solar will together have to pay an extra £800,000 a year in business rates from April because of taxation changes…

    Children from Eleanor Palmer primary school in Camden, north London, handed in a Greenpeace-organised petition with 200,000 signatures to the Treasury on Thursday, calling on ministers to rethink their plans…
    Solar-equipped private schools will duck the changes because of their charitable status. The 300-plus Scottish schools with solar panels will also be exempt, as the changes will only apply to England and Wales…READ ON
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/06/solar-powered-schools-bill-business-rates-rise-england-wales

    21

  • #
    pat

    7 Mar: WaPo: Jason Samenow: Biting cold that set records in Canadian Arctic poised to invade eastern U.S. this weekend
    In recent days, some of the coldest March air in decades has gripped portions of Alaska and the Canadian Arctic. Fragments of that frigid air will come crashing into the eastern United States on Friday and into the weekend…
    On Saturday, Mould Bay in the Canadian Arctic set an all-time record low of minus-66.5 degrees (minus-54.7 Celsius)…
    Then on Monday, Fairbanks, Alaska, saw its temperature plummet to minus-38, the coldest temperature this late in the season since 1964, according to climatologist Brian Brettschneider.
    Meteorologist Ryan Maue tweeted that temperatures in the Canadian Arctic’s lower atmosphere challenged the coldest levels observed in March since at least 1958…
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/03/07/biting-cold-poised-to-invade-eastern-u-s-this-weekend/

    52

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      The interglacial is over.

      32

    • #
      David Maddison

      Of course it’s cold. The earth is likely cooling, not warming because the main driver of global temperatures is solar output and we know the sun is entering a dormant phase. All politicians and “scientists” and others with their snouts in the CAGW trough should have their access to food and other survival resources minimised during the forthcoming lean times.

      51

  • #
    David Maddison

    I took these pictures and videos today.

    Some of the last pictures of Hazelwood in working condition before its destroyed.

    https://www.facebook.com/david.maddison.758/posts/10155892412598082

    71

    • #
      Robert Rosicka

      Excellent work David , beggars belief that they will demolish it to satisfy their ideology, all for the dream of a green future .

      51

    • #
      TdeF

      French Enegie own this $2.5Bn power station, equivalent of 3,000 windmills. Lovely day and not a breath of smoke from the four chimneys. CO2 is invisible. I am hoping that the owners, French giant Enegie are taking on the government because they know how essential this power station is to not only Victoria, but also SA, Tasmania and NSW and of course Alcoa. However they cannot keep going losing money and the Andrews government has stopped the $500Million silent subsidy, demanded cheaper power for Alcoa and tripled the price of coal and that’s just the last few months. NSW would have shut down two weeks ago except for Hazelwood. SA and Tasmania depend totally on the interconnectors. This power station is the backbone of the Eastern States. So its double or nothing. In shutting and stopping the bleeding cash drain, Enegie will create a crisis by not playing ball with the windmill lobby. In business their backs are to the wall. Old? Much of our infrastructure is older, much of our population is older. Like a bridge, it can last forever. Polluting? Only if you consider CO2 is poisonous.

      Worse, as even reported in the SMH, the cost of closing it will be $1.3Bn. Guess who gets to pay this? So Andrews will have paid $1.3Bn to not build a road we desperately need and was contracted. He will now cripple Victoria and pay another $1.3Bn to not have reliable and adequate electricity. You could not light a 40 watt bulb with Daniel Andrews, unthinking Union puppet. The Unions are settling old scores with private owners. At our great expense, as always.

      81

      • #
        David Maddison

        Well said TdeF and so very sad. It’s horrible witnessing the deliberate destruction of Western Civilisation by the Cultural Marxists. Even genuine Marxists such as the forner Soviets and pseudo Marxists such as the Chinese were and are proud to build huge fossil or nuclear power stations.

        51

      • #
        David Maddison

        As I have said before, my concern is that they will deliberately destroy it at the time of shut down rather than properly mothball it so they can restart it if sanity ever prevails. Nevertheless, I am looking forward to the sheeple who voted for these [snip] suffering. I no longer care. I have batteries, propane for a BBQ and a generator to maintain the basics to get me through an extended power outage.

        51

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        A tragedy.

        31

    • #

      ATTENTION David Maddison,

      I wonder if I may ask a small favour of you.

      I looked at your images of the Hazelwood plant, and I was wondering if I may use one of them for a Post at my home site.

      That Post has already been put up at my home site, and I have made it a Sticky Post, so it will be visible at the top of the site until the time comes to take it down. I already have an image of Hazelwood, but it’s pretty average, and is an old image.

      I noticed a week or so back that Hazelwood is running all eight of its units, constantly, in the lead up to the closure, and for a 53 year old plant, that’s no mean feat.

      What I wanted to achieve with my Post is to compare the output from Hazelwood with wind power, and for the sake of comparison I am using two comparisons, the first, comparing output from Hazelwood, with ALL wind power in Australia, and second, the output from all wind plants just in the State of Victoria, the same State as Hazelwood.

      It may surprise you that in that last week, Hazelwood has delivered more power than EVERY Wind Plant in Australia, (13% more in fact) and the total from Victorian wind is only slightly more than from TWO of Hazelwood’s eight units.

      I was wondering if I may use one of your images near to the top of the Post showing the plant in its last weeks. If you look closely, you can just make out very thin wisps of smoke rising from all eight ‘stacks’. I will credit the image back to you.

      Link to my Post – Hazelwood Power Plant Closure

      Tony.

      30

    • #
      Annie

      Is there any other way to see your images David? I’m not on Facebook and really don’t want to join it.

      20

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    The number of marchers will be directly proportionate to their ignorance. i.e. a liner ramp upwards.

    30

  • #

    “evolution and climate change” – twice.

    The organisers of the march try to sneak in the theory of global warming with the theory of evolution, as if the evidence for, and explanatory power of, each was equivalent. The implication is that climate change sceptics are in the same league as creationists.

    70

    • #
      Oliver K. Manuel

      You are right, Rod. Each one of has to pay close attention to detect:

      1. Scientific facts, like evolution, used to promote

      2. UN propaganda, like AGW, anthropologic global warming.

      Likewise,

      3. The free neutron has 0.782 MeV more energy than the H-atom, but

      4. The bound neutron does NOT retain 0.782 MeV more energy than the H-atom, as Weizsacker assumed, despite the less energetic decay of tritium.

      30

      • #

        “3. The free neutron has 0.782 MeV more energy than the H-atom, but”

        But what is the form of such “0.782 MeV more energy”? A fast neutron can have much more energy, and more momentum (power), than an electron accelerated through 782,000 V. What does that mean if anything? Can your free neutron result in action with some phosphor and cause emission of visible light? You seem hung up on the word “energy”! Why? “Power”, “energy”, and Plank’s “action” (h) are but different ways of considering the same thing. Electromagnetic “power transfer” between inertial physical locations requires no mass whatsoever.

        “4. The bound neutron does NOT retain 0.782 MeV more energy than the H-atom, as Weizsacker assumed, despite the less energetic decay of tritium.”

        Where is your evidence that Weizsacker assumed anything about the form of power\energy\action that you claim is called “neutron repulsion”!
        All the best! -will-

        21

  • #
    pat

    i have a couple of comments in moderation.

    the nonpartisan march for science:

    8 Mar: TheConversation: Why we’re marching for science in Australia
    (HEADLINE OVER PHOTO OF PROTEST “COAL CAN KILL”,”TURTLES AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE” ETC)
    by Stuart Khan, Associate Professor in Environmental Engineering, UNSW
    (Disclosure: Stuart Khan receives funding from numerous Australian government and industry agencies including the Australian Research Council (ARC) and Water Research Australia (WRA). He has previously received funding from the National Water Commission. He is affiliated with March for Science Australia as a volunteer organiser of events in Sydney and other Australian cities. He is an employee of the University of New South Wales)…
    We are a nonpartisan group, marching to demand action in areas of literacy, communication, policy and investment…

    The abolition of key science-focused national bodies, including the Climate Commission in 2013 and the National Water Commission in 2014 were widely taken as a sign that the Australian government was no longer so interested to receive expert science-based advice on these issues.
    Cuts to key climate science research programs at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) soon followed.
    In efforts to publicly justify these cuts, CSIRO chief executive Larry Marshall characterised internationally respected Australian scientists, who opposed them, as “the climate lobby”, stating “in fact it almost sounds more like religion than science to me” – a statement for which he subsequently apologised…
    Statements such as those by former Prime Minister Tony Abbott that “the climate change argument is absolute crap” and the promotion of fossil fuels as “good for humanity” reveal the lack of appreciation that some of our most high profile political leaders hold for this urgency.
    This attitude may be contributing to the Australian government’s pursuit of new coal mines and coal-fired power stations, and lack of enthusiasm for the development of cleaner energy sources…
    When Australian climate science was observed to be suffering during CSIRO funding cuts, US scientists were quick to defend the work undertaken by their Australian colleagues…
    http://theconversation.com/why-were-marching-for-science-in-australia-73907

    7 Mar: Bloomberg: Why Some Scientists Won’t March for Science
    by Faye Flam
    While there’s no single reason for the protest march in Washington planned for April 22, many scientists have voiced concern over President Donald Trump’s apparent disregard for facts…
    At the AAAS meeting where Gates spoke, uncertainty was in the air. At a panel discussion titled “Defending Science and Scientific Integrity in the Age of Trump,” organized by the Union of Concerned Scientists, the March for Science kept coming up. So did concerns about the new administration. “It’s clear from the news that we have a president who rejects facts that don’t comport with his pre-existing beliefs,” said panelist John Holdren, who was Barack Obama’s science advisor…

    Physicist and former congressman Rush Holt, now chief executive officer of AAAS, has publicly backed the marchers. In an interview for BBC News, he said that though this new administration has said little about science, “the silence is beginning to sound ominous.”
    One scientist Trump has spoken to since his election is Princeton University physicist William Happer(1), who some consider a likely Trump pick for science advisor… Happer told me there’s no need to march for science, because there’s no reason to assume the president is against science. He also warned that the march might send the impression that scientists are elitists who enjoy much more interesting jobs than most other Americans, at taxpayers’ expense…

    “This administration is sending strong signals that imply they think political and financial interests are more important than the scientific evidence,” said biologist Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists…

    (1)Happer, while accomplished in his field, holds views that are far from the mainstream on climate change. He said he stands by quotes he’s made in other publications that rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere will do more good than harm.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-07/why-some-scientists-won-t-march-for-science

    40

    • #
      TdeF

      “The abolition of key science-focused national bodies, including the Climate Commission in 2013 ..the Australian government was no longer so interested to receive expert science-based advice on these issues.” Expert? Tim Flannery has no hard science qualifications in physics, chemistry, mathematics, computer modelling, engineering, meteorology.

      So a Climate Commission with a dead kangaroo expert chief commissioner and not a single meteorologist gave expert science based advice? These were political propaganda bodies created to support political agendas much as the original IPCC. When we have had a Bureau of Meteorology for 100 years, why did we need a Climate Commission plus 350 CSIRO climate scientists? As Tony Abbott said, socialism masquerading as environmentalism. As Tony Abbott also said, Climate Change is crap. He is right.

      What he actually said in 2010 was
      “The climate change argument is absolute crap, however the politics are tough for us because 80 per cent of people believe climate change is a real and present danger”.

      101

      • #
        PeterS

        If Tim Flannery is classed as an expert on climate change then any 6 year old child is a genius in such matters.

        60

    • #
      Ted O'Brien

      All true and correct.

      Didn’t see any mention, though, of the reason for these policies. Too many of their “facts” are not fact.

      30

  • #
    Oliver K. Manuel

    There will be no need for a March in April if seven decades of deceit end by 1 April 2017 to celebrate the centennial birth of P. K. KURODA’s birth on 1 April 1917.

    A paper currently being written, The Universe Is In Good Hands,” repeats a message in the rest masses of every atom, a message sent to Kuroda when he was dying in April 2001:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/SPIRITUAL_CRADLE.pdf

    Thanks to the attention JoNova focused on the 2009 Climategate emails I am now confident seven decades of deceit will end soon.

    50

  • #
    el gordo

    The Climate Institute is closing down after more than a decade because there is no money in it.

    60

  • #
    pat

    el gordo mentions it – some detail:

    9 Mar: SMH: Adam Morton: Climate Institute to shut due to lack of philanthropic support
    Australia’s original climate change-focused think-tank and lobby group will shut after it failed to replace the multi-million-dollar bequest it relied on.
    The Climate Institute, known for its research and leading role in public debate since being set up in 2005, will close in June.
    It comes 18 months after the institute called for public donations to offset the lapsing of the foundational support set up by Rupert Murdoch’s niece, Eve Kantor, and her husband, farmer Mark Wootton…

    The closure follows the resignation of the institute’s long-time leaders, chief executive John Connor and deputy chief executive Erwin Jackson.
    Mr Connor will move to Fiji next month to head the secretariat supporting the Pacific nation’s presidency of this year’s United Nations climate negotiations. Mr Jackson resigned late last year for personal reasons…
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australias-original-climate-body-to-shut-after-running-out-of-funding-20170308-gutlte.html

    21

  • #
    TdeF

    Breaking news. Front page, The Australian. “Power rows drive surge in prices”.
    While a waffling explanation blaming political dispute, government paralysis, investment crisis the submission from the Energy Council shows the wholesale contract price has reached $100-$120 a megawatt hour. (11-12c a kw hour). This is triple the US price. Worse, gas prices are rocketing and 5GW of power has been shut down and will not be replaced. Hazelwood is next.

    Most importantly, this has been presented as a Carbon Tax of $50 a tonne, more than twice the $23 proposed by Gillard and removed by Abbott with the very reluctant help of the Palmer party.

    Now it gets vague. How did this happen? Government inaction? Bans on fracking. Overseas sales of gas. Bans on exploration.

    No it is all the RET, the reason Pelican point lost money, the reason Hazelwood is closing despite running at full power.

    Doesn’t anyone ask why an ageing generator is closing when it is flat out working, making and selling electricity, the highest producer at the lowest price. Why is Enegie closing Hazelwood? Why has it closed Pelican Point? Why has 5GW of coal power vanished an not replaced. Why are the shops shut when the customers are banging on the windows and offering triple the cash? Why is our gas being piped to Brisbane?

    The Australian uses Dr. Tom Quirk’s approach, that the LGCs and STCs convert directly into a $50 a tonne carbon tax paid by every consumer. From this point of view the carbon tax on gas is $100 a tonne and you make more money selling it overseas as all our electricity payments go to building windfarms.

    This is hidden because the refineries (Steel, lead, aluminium), the factories, the fabricators are shutting shop and going overseas. Not for lower wages, but because it is uneconomic to continue. As the Greens and Communists know (tautology), shut the electricity and modern society collapses. Now Hazelwood is closing. Will someone please point out the bull in the China shop, the bipartisan RET, Renewable Energy Tax. Target is just a diversion word and Carbon is not even mentioned once in the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000. This week the Victorian Paliament banned fracking! This year they tripled the price of coal, to ourselves!

    Stop this insanity! Stop the RET! We are killing ourselves for a mad idea that the world is warming rapidly and that little Australia with 24 million out of 7,000 million will save everyone else by self harm. Tell your politician today that the Coalition/Labor RET is the problem, two to four times the Carbon Tax Gillard imposed.

    51

    • #
      TdeF

      Amazingly, the Green RET has bipartisan support. Labor despite the fact that factories are closing everywhere. Alcoa only came to Australia for the cheap electricity. We built a free $250Million (40 years ago) powerline to Portland which cost half the power, but it was worth it. We only refine steel and other ores here because it is cheaper to do so, but all those jobs are going. Tens of thousands of jobs. The Labor Party is anti job.

      The Liberals are killing businesses with their RET, the agreement with Labor that the tax on Carbon Dioxide should be punitive. They just allowed fracking to be banned in Victoria when they could have stopped it. Malcolm Turnbull has crossed the floor against his party on a Carbon Tax and he has it.

      What is appalling is the conspiracy of silence as the RET is so well hidden, so devious in its wording, so mild in its intent. Administered by a body like the Clean Energy Authority. Now who does not want one of those. Children would applaud.

      It is all fake. We are being taxed to death by our own parties to pay for the Green dream of no CO2 for Australia. Next the Kangaroos and cattle and pigs will have to go. They fart methane, 30x worse. We will have a Ruminant Elimination Tax.
      At least it is front page, top story on our only National newspaper. Now the politicians will notice that. Their ABC will say nothing.

      61

      • #
        Dennis

        $50 a tonne carbon tax

        SIMON BENSON
        A decade of political dispute and government paralysis is to blame for wholesale electricity prices spiking this year.

        The Australian

        [paywall]

        40

      • #
        Dennis

        An energy debate from dark ages

        MATT CANAVAN
        Gas projects are being banned or held up, as the lights go out because we’re unable to use our natural resources.

        The Australian

        [paywall]

        40

      • #
        Dennis

        Creative gas solution needed

        9:27AMROSIE LEWIS
        As NSW, Victoria and SA face power shortages, Josh Frydenberg says they should look to Queensland’s solution.

        The Australian

        [paywall]

        30

  • #
    Wendy

    OT but……..I had to laugh this morning when 9 reports that the east coast is going to be facing energy shortages…..again. But this time it’s the lack of natural gas.
    Energy crisis warnings as report shows gas shortages imminent

    40

  • #
    TdeF

    It’s simple. Remove the RET tomorrow and electricity prices will drop 50% the next day, maybe 75%. Gas will stay in Australia. Hazelwood and Pelican point will start up again. Investors will stop backing windfarms and start building coal generation, new supercritical boilers because they use less coal.

    Also we can put the Victorian coal price back where it was! A 300% increase by the Andrews government is a disaster. We are taxing our own power as coal is the only input and the money pays for Andrew’s mad promises to not build roads, hand power to his friends in the Unions and build railways in the air. No one talked about sovereign risk, but how would anyone like their power bills tripled? Actually, that’s everyone.

    72

    • #
      TdeF

      They should not only remove the RET, the government could also save a lot of money by removing

      1. the Clean Energy Regulator. A non corporate Commonwealth Entity.
      2. Climate Change Authority. A non corporate Commonwealth Entity and a Statutory Agency.
      3. Clean Energy Finance Coporation. A Corporate Commonwealth Entity.
      4. Australian Renewable Energy Authority. A Corporate Commonwealth Entity.

      No wonder electricity prices are soaring, National debt is soaring and total power is going down rapidly, so far by 5GW. The only bright side is that so many public servants are busy doing nothing and administering the destruction of our way of life and our jobs, so there is job creation in the Green government ranks.

      82

  • #
    pat

    surely US organisers will call off their march now? lol.

    8 Mar: UK Daily Mail: David Martosko: Trump’s first full month in office brings massive employment boom as U.S. companies added whopping 298,000 new jobs in February
    New job figures from ADP beat economists’ estimates by more than 100,000
    Trump tweeted that January and February ‘were the strongest consecutive months for hiring since August and September 2015′
    The report from ADP, a global human resources and payroll firm, provides the first hard economic numbers from Donald Trump’s first full month as president.
    Trump tweeted a self-congratulatory note, calling the number ‘much more than expected!’…
    Construction jobs increased by 66,000 in February, and the manufacturing sector added 32,000…
    ‘Confidence is playing a large role,’ Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, told CNBC.
    ‘Businesses are anticipating a lot of good stuff – tax cuts, less regulation. They are hiring more aggressively.’…
    The official U.S. unemployment rate is expected to shift downward from 4.8 per cent to 4.7 per cent, in response to the official jobs numbers report, due Friday…
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4293622/Trump-s-month-brings-massive-employment-boom.html

    while, in Australia, they could march against this instead!

    9 Mar: Australian: Simon Benson: Power rows drive surge in prices equal to ‘$50 a tonne’ carbon tax
    A decade of political dispute and government paralysis over energy policy is to blame for electricity prices spiking to the equivalent of $50-a-tonne carbon tax, the power industry warns in a submission to the government’s energy security review.
    Warning that the country is facing an investment crisis in new power generation, the submission says that more than 5000 megawatts of generation, representing 10 percent of national capacity, has been decommissioned since 2012 and is not being replaced.

    The submission from the Australian Energy Council, representing the nation’s generation and retail businesses, reveals the future wholesale contract price has now reached $100-$120 per megawatt hour, more than double the 10-year weighted average of $57 forecast by Climate Change Authority modelling…READ ALL
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/power-rows-drive-surge-in-prices-equal-to-50-a-tonne-carbon-tax/news-story/76250cea38872e5789741256e00643a2

    32

    • #
      TdeF

      As with my comments above. $50/tonne for coal and perhaps $100/tonne for natural gas. Pure Carbon Tax, presented as a well meaning direct subsidy to non ‘fossil’ fuels and hidden in your electricity bills.

      What puzzles me in the Australian article is that no one can see how this Carbon tax is raised? Really? When you pay $89 a MWHR, 8.9c per kw/hr for the right to buy power from Hazelwood, that is 90% of what you are paying for electricity. The LGCs are the Carbon Tax Certificates, trade in a fake (compulsory) market and administered by fake regulator (Clean Energy Regulator) who can punish offenders. Even more amazingly, solar gets an instant credit for 15 years future Carbon savings in STCs/cash, which goes to the people installing the system. Real huge Carbon Taxes based on Fake Science.

      The Renewable Energy Target scheme is nothing of the sort. It is a bipartisan silent Carbon Tax in which the word ‘CARBON’ is not used once. The closest they get is a tax on ‘fossil’ fuels at fake market prices.

      This is all based on fake Climate Science but it is so devious, even the Australian cannot pinpoint the problem. It is the RET, the Renewable Energy Tax.

      Why do they call it ‘The Science(tm)’? Because it is not science. Not a single person on the Climate Council was a meteorologist. This is political science and we are being ripped off by both sides of our government. To quote Prime Minister Tony Abbott, it is crap, socialism posing as environmentalism.

      81

  • #
    pat

    re Simon Benson’s Australian article.

    the final paras will make your blood boil. all about how AEC’s “warning of an energy crisis that would lead to eventual de-industrialisation has been echoed by the CLIMATE INSTITUTE”…

    “The failure to deliver credible CLIMATE POLICY is now forcing households to pay an estimated extra $240 to $360 a year” deputy chief executive of the Climate Institute Erwin Jackson said. “There will be no long-term resolution of the current energy crisis without a bipartisan-supported plan for an energy system that is affordable, secure and clean.”

    how incredible Benson ends with this rubbish.

    82

  • #
    Bruce

    aka Sunray
    Thank you Jo, the arrogance of the self declared “educated and enlightened” born to rule classes, drives them to totalitarian mendacity, in order to “save the planet”.

    41

  • #
    pat

    end of fossil fuels?

    7 Mar: FuelFix: David Hunn: BP to finish seven new projects in 2017, largest year ever
    After years of stalled growth, British oil major BP will bring more projects online this year than any in the company’s history, CEO Bob Dudley said on Tuesday.
    BP will finish seven “massive” projects around the world in 2017, Dudley said, from Egypt to the Gulf of Mexico. In 2011, the company had 8 million man-hours of work on projects under construction around the world, he said. This year, BP will log 88 million man-hours…
    The company said the new projects will add 1 million barrels of oil and gas per day to BP’s production totals by 2021.
    http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/03/07/bp-to-finish-seven-new-projects-in-2017-largest-year-ever/

    7 Mar: Denver BizJournal: Cathy Proctor: Oil and gas giant expects to spend $840 million in Colorado this year
    Anadarko Petroleum Corp., one of Colorado’s biggest oil and gas companies, on Tuesday said it would pour about $840 million this year into its operations in the state’s Denver-Julesburg (DJ) Basin, which sprawls north and east of Denver to the state line.
    The company, which has been working in the DJ basin for years, also boosted the amount of oil, natural gas and liquids it expects to pull from the basin by about 33 percent — to more than 2 billion barrels of oil equivalent, at least…
    http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2017/03/07/anadarko-expects-to-spend-840-million-in-colorado.html

    22

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    Latest news :

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-09/looming-gas-shortage-will-threaten-nations-power-supplies/8337204

    “A major gas shortage looms for Australia from next year, posing a risk to electricity supply and security in several states.

    Key points:
    •AEMO says NSW and SA face power supply risks from 2018
    •Liquefied natural gas export is a significant market challenge, it says
    •More gas production or quick alternative energy options are urged

    An assessment from the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) is warning that, without a swift response, Australia could face a difficult choice — keeping the power on versus cutting gas supplies to residential and business customers.

    “If we do nothing, we’re going to see shortfalls in gas, we’re going to see shortfalls in electricity,” AEMO chief operating officer Mike Cleary said.

    The analysis said without new development to support more gas-powered electricity generation, modelling showed supply shortfalls of between 80 gigawatt hours and 363 gigawatt hours could be expected from summer 2018/19 until 2020/21.

    Widespread shortages are predicted to hit New South Wales and South Australia first, then Victoria in 2021, and Queensland between 2030 and 2036.

    AEMO said the anticipated shortfalls would breach its reliability standard, which was an aim to supply at least 99.99 per cent of electricity demand.

    The report warns AEMO could be forced to curtail gas supplies to big users in winter next year to prevent a shortage in Victoria and South Australia, unless a pipeline upgrade can be fast-tracked.

    An upgrade of the south-west pipeline is required to refill an underground gas storage facility at Iona in Victoria, which is used to help meet peak winter demand”

    40

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘An upgrade of the south-west pipeline is required …’

      If Talcum doesn’t take advantage of this infrastructure opportunity he deserves the sack.

      The China Infrastructure Bank would be amenable and with a bipartisan work crew it could be finished within a year.

      10

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    Dams that will never fill ( according the Flannel Ears ), now this?

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-09/csiro-climate-change-warning-for-wheat/8337110

    “Australia’s wheat productivity has flatlined as a direct result of climate change, according to CSIRO research.

    “While 2016 set a new national wheat harvest record, the national science organisation’s findings indicate that result masks a more troubling long-term trend.

    “While Australian wheat yields tripled between 1900 and 1990, growth stagnated over the following 25 years.

    “A CSIRO study which monitored 50 sites across Australia’s wheat zone between 1990 and 2015 found that climate change was the clear cause of the decline.

    “That trend remained, even after the bumper 2016 figures were included.

    “Across those sites, average maximum temperatures increased by more than 1 degree over 26 years during the months when crops were growing — a significant increase. Rainfall during the growing period declined by about 72 millimetres, or 28 per cent.

    “Zvi Hochman, a senior research scientist with CSIRO Agriculture and Food said the team considered whether other factors could have shared the blame, such as investment in research and development (R&D), changing patterns of land use, and soil fertility.

    “But those could all be ruled out: investment in grains R&D was stable, changing land-use patterns should have favoured wheat production, and soil management improved as farmers adopted new techniques such as zero-till.

    “Climate variability can make it look as if there is no trend, just one year’s good and one year’s bad, but we’ve statistically analysed the trend that we observed,” Dr Hochman said.

    “The chance of that just being variable climate without the underlying factor [of climate change] is less than one in 100 billion.”

    30

    • #
      el gordo

      “The chance of that just being variable climate without the underlying factor [of climate change] is less than one in 100 billion.”

      Sir … sir ….I’ll take that bet.

      20

      • #
        toorightmate

        I wonder if anyone has whispered in Zvi’s shell like ear that CO2 is good for crops.
        The CO2 horsesh*t has to stop.

        31

    • #
      Glen Michel

      I read that as well. More nonsense.Easily refuted because based on vague assumptions.Ie;we ruled out everything else.

      11

  • #
    pat

    8 Mar: UK Times: MPs turn up heat as energy girms raise prices
    More than 50 MPs have demanded “immediate action” to stop households being ripped off by energy companies after Eon raised its prices. The cross-party group of politicians condemned the treatment of those on expensive standard variable tariffs, about two thirds of households, and said that telling people to shop around would “not fix the problem.
    Yesterday Eon said that it was raising its standard tariff by an average of 8.8 per cent from April 26, adding £97 to a typical annual dual-fuel bill. Electricity prices will rise by 13.8 per cent and gas prices by 3.8 per cent, it said, blaming government “social and environmental schemes” such as renewable energy subsidies…SUBSCRIPTION REQD
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/mps-turn-up-heat-as-energy-firms-raise-prices-vwjfwqmzp

    7 Mar: Guardian: Adam Vaughan: E.ON price rise branded ‘monstrous’ as users face £97 a year extra
    Electricity and gas supplier blames increase, which affects 2.5 million people, on rising cost of government policies
    About 2.5 million E.ON customers will pay an extra £97 a year on energy bills in what consumer groups have branded a “monstrous” and “crippling” blow for householders.
    The company’s 8.8% price rise for customers on a dual-fuel standard tariff from the end of next month is the second highest increase among several announced recently by rivals, including a 9.8% rise by npower, 7.8% by Scottish Power and 1.2% by EDF.

    Unlike most of its competitors, which had cited rising wholesale prices for their increases, E.ON said it had seen a drop in wholesale costs. Instead it blamed the increase on government schemes such as renewable energy subsidies, which are levied on household energy bills. The German energy firm said the cost of various social and environmental programmes had risen by about 36% on the year before…
    MoneySuperMarket said it expected SSE to follow suit soon…
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/07/eon-customers-to-pay-extra-97-a-year-after-88-price-rise

    21

  • #
    pat

    8 Mar: InsideHigherEd: Marching for Science
    Effort gains backers and appears to build momentum, but some scientists worry that political fallout may not be what organizers want
    By Andrew Kreighbaum
    Sigma Xi boasts more than 110,000 members and AAAS counts about 100,000 scientists among its ranks. Their involvement could be comforting to leaders of some higher ed institution who worry that the march, which began as an online discussion among first-time organizers, could become overly politicized. To many administrators, the top goal now is establishing good relationships with whomever President Trump picks to lead science agencies — and some fear a large rally would suggest that scientists are allied against the administration…

    It’s not hard to see how the new administration could prompt those concerned about the role of science in society to take to the streets: during the campaign Trump called global warming a “hoax” perpetrated by the Chinese government… and recent reports indicate the White House plans drastic cuts for federal agencies conducting environmental research like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration…

    A University of Chicago biologist, Jerry Coyne, an outspoken skeptic of the march despite his personal liberal politics, said he was somewhat heartened by the endorsement of AAAS. Coyne was even more encouraged to read this week that there would be an educational component to the march, including a teach-in at the National Mall, where researchers will speak to the public about their work. He continues to be concerned that the demonstration could be politicized. Scientists should avoid that, Coyne said, by advocating for scientific facts while refraining from endorsing specific policy solutions.
    “Scientists can lose credibility if they prescribe certain solutions for problems,” he said…
    COMMENT: Adrienne: Wish everyone would coordinate for the Climate March, exactly one week later.
    https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/08/while-some-academe-raise-concerns-about-march-major-science-groups-sign

    8 Mar: HuffPo: A Scientists’ March On Washington Is A Bad Idea – Here’s Why
    by Andrea Saltelli, University of Bergen
    (Andrea Saltelli, Adjunct Professor Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, University of Bergen. This article was originally published on The Conversation)

    Some fear that a scientists’ march will reinforce the sceptical conservative narrative that scientists have become an interest group whose findings are politicised. Others are concerned that the march is more about identity politics than science.
    From my perspective, the march – which is being planned by the Earth Day Network, League of Extraordinary Scientists and Engineers and the Natural History Museum, among other partner organisations – is a distraction from the existential problems facing the field…

    Other questions are far more urgent to restoring society’s faith and hope in science. What is scientists’ responsibility for current anti-elite resentments? Does science contribute to inequality by providing evidence only to those who can pay for it? How do we fix the present crisis in research reproducibility?
    So is the march a good idea? To answer this question, we must turn to the scientist and philosopher Micheal Polanyi, whose concept of science as a body politic underpins the logic of the protest…READ ON
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/scientists-march-on-washington-is-a-bad-idea-heres_us_58c064fbe4b070e55af9eae0

    21

  • #
    pat

    8 Mar: ScientificAmericanBlog: Why Are Scientists So Averse to Public Engagement?
    It’s time to confront our demons
    By Ploy Achakulwisut
    PHOTO: CAGW PROTEST – BANNERS NO = CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS, CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL, ETC.
    As a climate science Ph.D. student who, over the past four years, has been grappling with how to reconcile my responsibilities as a scientist and a citizen, I’ve watched events unfold since the US Presidential election with a mixture of despair and cautious optimism.
    Donald Trump, currently the only climate-denying world leader, is waging a war on science. Especially when it comes to climate science, Mr. Trump has eschewed facts and embraced ideology, aligning his decision-making with the interests of the fossil fuel industry, not those of the public. The clearest indication of this is perhaps his nomination of Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency…

    I see hope in the scientists working to save federal climate and environmental data. I see hope in the scientists who have launched 314 Action, an initiative to help STEM-trained candidates run for public office. And I see hope in the thousands of scientists who will step out of their comfort zones to defend scientific integrity in the upcoming March for Science and People’s Climate March…

    I therefore call on my fellow members of the scientific community to: (1) re-evaluate our roles and responsibilities in today’s society, and to foster these discussions in our labs and universities (I recommend Jane Lubchenco’s and Naomi Oreskes’ thoughtful remarks on this issue)…
    Let’s transform the culture of academia so that being a scientist-advocate is no longer an oxymoron, but a moral responsibility we owe to society…Let’s change the mantra of academia from “Publish. Publish. Publish” to “Publish. Communicate. Engage.”
    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/why-are-scientists-so-averse-to-public-engagement/

    About the writer:
    Ploy Achakulwisut is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences at Harvard University. She was a SustainUS Youth Delegate to the 2014 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference. She has co-organized several campaigns to mobilize scientists to engage in climate advocacy, including most recently, an open letter from academics urging Donald Trump to take climate action and the “Stand Up For Science” rallies in San Francisco and Boston.

    8 Mar: Union of Concerned Scientists Blog: Angie Carter: Putting Science Into Practice: Why We Need to Play Our Part
    Recent debate over whether scientists should engage in political action stems from a debate that (Rachel) Carson knew a lot about: science as a public good…
    In a recent op-ed in the New York Times, Robert Young sparked a lot of debate on scientific listservs and in academic hallways across the country about the role of scientists in the public realm…
    In his op-ed, Young claimed that Al Gore is responsible for “politicizing” the science of climate change in the United States through his production of An Inconvenient Truth in 2006. However, sociologists Aaron McCright and Riley Dunlap document that the politicization of climate change in the U.S. happened much earlier than 2006 and that it was not because of well-intentioned documentaries; rather, it was due to the strategic work of the George W. Bush administration on behalf of private interests…

    Sandra Steingraber often uses the metaphor of the symphony to describe the situation we now find ourselves in: we are each musicians being called to play our instruments as best we can in order to save the world…
    Here’s to seeing you in the streets, at the city council meeting; to reading your letters to the editor; to hearing your voices at the legislative forums and at the rallies. Science is a public good—let’s put it into practice.
    (Angie Carter is an environmental sociologist and teaching fellow at Augustana College in Rock Island, IL)
    http://blog.ucsusa.org/science-blogger/putting-science-into-practice-why-we-need-to-play-our-part

    11

  • #
    David Maddison

    CLAIM

    Batteries could solve SA and VIC power crisis in 100 days according to “battery boss”.

    http://www.afr.com/news/tesla-battery-boss-we-can-solve-sas-power-woes-in-100-days-20170308-gut8xh

    So there you have it.

    The only thing you need to do to understand “green” energy is to follow the money trail.

    61

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Its a bit like “Yes Minister” …. when a crisis occurs, come up with expensive solutions that paper over the cracks rather, than dealing with the actual problem, but give the illusion of a solution…. every problem looks like a nail when have a hammers…

      21

    • #

      Will Janoschka repeating #65.1

      I hab many many fine honed pitchforks, unt well oiled torches available for purchase! A special price for you, my good friend, on large lots!!

      21

  • #
    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Communism….destroying the capitalist economy….now would have thought?

      The greens cant do anything – if its stopped in parliament…

      Question is – when will Australians hold govt to its repsonsibility of governing by fact , not emotion?

      40

  • #
    leon0112

    Where can I get my “Photosynthesis needs CO2″ sign? Or my “CO2 is plant food” sign? Or my “97% of botanists believe in photosynthesis” sign? Or my “Photosynthesis is settled science. Don’t be a denier.” sign?

    20

  • #
    Oliver K. Manuel

    GOOD NEWS!

    Trump is draining the swamp in the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in the Department of Homeland Security

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/08/acting-director-uscis-lori-scialabba-resigns-homeland-security/

    The Acting Director of USCIS will be free to join the March for Science in April !

    40

  • #
    pat

    I have a comment in moderation, SciAm & UCS march pieces.

    perhaps TonyfromOz can put these numbers into perspective:

    7 Mar: Guardian: Adam Vaughan: Solar power growth leaps by 50% worldwide thanks to US and China
    New solar photovoltaic capacity installed in 2016 reached more than 76 gigawatts, a dramatic increase on the 50GW installed the year before. China and the US led the surge, with both countries almost doubling the amount of solar they added in 2015, according to data compiled by Europe’s solar power trade body.

    Globally there is now 305GW of solar power capacity, up from around 50GW in 2010 and virtually nothing at the turn of the millennium…

    James Watson, the chief executive of SolarPower Europe, said: “In order to meet the Paris [climate agreement] targets, it would be important if solar could continue its rapid growth. The global solar industry is ready to do that, and can even speed up.”…

    Across Europe, the total amount of solar power passed the symbolic milestone of 100GW in early 2016 and now stands at 104GW. However, slowing growth in Europe prompted the solar industry to call for the EU to set more ambitious renewable energy targets.

    “We need to build a major industrial project around solar and renewables. To start with, increasing the 2030 renewable energy target to at least 35% [up from 27%] will send a strong signal that Europe is back in the solar business,” said Alexandre Roesch, policy director at SolarPower Europe.

    European solar companies have also been urging the European commission to rethink the anti-dumping tariffs it imposed on Chinese solar panels in 2013. The commission is looking to extend the tariffs by 18 months, shorter than previously planned, after opposition to them from member states.

    Nearly half of the solar installed last year was in China, with Asia as a whole making up two-thirds of new capacity in 2016…

    ***Solar is still a relative minnow in the electricity mix of most countries, the figures show. Even where the technology has been embraced most enthusiastically, such as in Europe, solar ***on average provides 4% of electricity demand…
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/07/solar-power-growth-worldwide-us-china-uk-europe

    31

    • #
      el gordo

      What the Guardian doesn’t say, China has cornered the world market in renewables by selling solar 80% below everyone else, its commonly known as dumping.

      The Europeans aren’t happy and the Trump Administration intends dismantling AGW, which will leave China badly exposed.

      21

      • #
        Raven

        Oh no . . . Chinese solar panes to become ‘stranded assets’.
        That whole ‘stranded assets’ ruse always made me laugh.

        20

    • #

      This is much like producing much “pig slop” or “chicken mash” when you only have the opposing critters! Always the salable extra is crap!
      Carefully grow your own barley, employ the most skilful workers, bringing their own peat-moss. Then the King himself will offer a fortune for but a dram of your product

      11

  • #
    Robber

    Once again on a warm Australian day, wind electricity generation as reported by AEMO has dropped from 1500 MW to a low of 400 MW at 3 pm today while large scale solar chips in 200 MW. Hydro is contributing 1800 MW. Total required production is currently 26,000 MW. SO what’s providing the other 23,000 MW or so? Why good old fossil fuels. Soon to be closed Hazelwood has been producing a steady 1400 MW throughout the day.
    Current spot prices about $70/MWh in Qld/NSW, $123 in Victoria, and $150/MWh in SA – so Victoria is sending electricity to keep the lights on in SA, forcing up spot prices. And don’t forget, these are wholesale prices. The wind/solar producers get a bonus of $87/MWh from the retailers that us consumers end up paying as well.
    The RET continues to drive electricity prices up and up.

    20

  • #
  • #
    pat

    CAGW not explicitly mentioned!

    6 Mar: Reuters: China nuclear power executive calls for faster sector growth: China Daily
    A senior Chinese nuclear power executive has said the country needs to accelerate the construction of new nuclear power plants if it is to meet targets to boost its use of nuclear energy, lower pollution and cut reliance on traditional fuel sources.
    He Yu, chairman of state-owned China General Nuclear Power Corp (CGN) said the country needed to build between four and six nuclear reactors each year until 2020, the official China Daily newspaper reported on Tuesday.
    China is trying to boost its use of nuclear energy. One of its biggest state reactor builders has said the country’s total installed nuclear capacity could rise to 120-150 gigawatts (GW) by 2030 from 28.3 GW in 2015…
    However, China’s ambitious nuclear plans have been subject to repeated delays, including a suspension of the approval process for three years from 2011 as the country carried out safety reviews in the wake of Japan’s Fukushima disaster.
    Without a faster roll-out of new third-generation nuclear reactors, He said China would fail to meet government plans to reduce emissions amid a broad crackdown on pollution…
    The decision to move to safer but mostly untested “third-generation” nuclear reactor technology has meant several key projects have been repeatedly postponed due to design flaws.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-nuclear-idUSKBN16E040

    6 Mar: Politico: Hungarian nuclear project secures final Brussels approval
    Budapest generated controversy by handing the contract to build the reactor to Russia without conducting a tender.
    By Nicholas Hirst
    EU state aid regulators gave Hungary the green light Monday for the controversial Russian-backed Paks II nuclear power project.
    The European Commission’s approval is conditional on Hungary collecting higher returns on its investment into the project, ensuring it is managed separately from the existing Paks nuclear power plant, and selling a third of the energy generated on an open exchange.
    Hungary has generated considerable controversy by handing the contract to build the reactor to Russia’s Rosatom without conducting a tender. The works will be financed by a Russian loan worth some €10 billion.
    “The Hungarian government has made substantial commitments, which has allowed the Commission to approve the investment under EU state aid rules,” said Margrethe Vestager, the European commissioner for competition…
    She added that under EU law, national capitals are free to decide what kind of energy source they prefer. “The Commission’s role is to ensure that the distortion of competition on the energy market as a result of the state support is limited to a minimum.”
    Hungary’s neighbor Austria has already said it will appeal any approval for the deal.
    Hungary argues the reactors are needed as it starts to phase out the four existing Paks reactors. Given the latter are Russian built, it made sense to contract Rosatom to build the new ones, the government argued — an argument accepted by the Commission.
    http://www.politico.eu/article/paks-ii-secures-final-brussels-approval/

    11

  • #
    pat

    6 Mar: European Commission Press Release: State Aid: Commission clears investment in construction of Paks II nuclear power plant in Hungary
    http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-464_en.htm

    9 Mar: Livemint: Douglas Busvine: With India visit, Westinghouse CEO keeps civil nuclear power project alive
    Despite the financial crisis, Westinghouse CEO Jose Gutierrez flew in to India last week for talks with NPCIL and the Department of Atomic Energy
    New Delhi: A deal to build six Westinghouse nuclear reactors in India is still alive, but to be viable must be ring-fenced from a financial crisis at the US reactor maker and its Japanese parent Toshiba Corp, people with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters.
    Westinghouse would only provide reactors for the six AP1000 units to be built in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh. It would not carry out civil engineering work to build the entire project—an approach that led to cost overruns at its projects in the United States…
    Modi and former US President Barack Obama made finalising the multi-billion-dollar reactor deal by mid-2017 the centrepiece of their Washington summit last June…READ ALL
    http://www.livemint.com/Industry/thpRdloEY1PnjO4rItk9ZK/With-India-visit-Westinghouse-CEO-keeps-civil-nuclear-power.html

    11

  • #
    pat

    so much money and so many countries involved, yet this is the ONLY report to be found online about this summit taking place right now!

    7 Mar: DailySabah: International Nuclear Summit to kick off in Istanbul
    Local and foreign companies that operate in the nuclear sector will convene in Istanbul tomorrow at the 4th International Nuclear Power Plants Summit, the most extensive nuclear power plant event in Middle East and Africa. The companies will discuss cooperation opportunities in a $600-billion market.
    According to a statement released by the Nuclear Engineering Department, some of the countries that supply technology to the nuclear industry, such as, Japan, Germany, France, Britain, Russia and China will look for partnerships at the summit. Moreover, local companies will compete with one another in order to partake in nuclear power plant projects both in Turkey and in the region through B2B meetings.
    The summit will also stage consultations regarding commercial collaborations for some 30 nuclear power plant projects that will be completed in Turkey, the Middle East and Africa before 2060…
    Detailed information about the two-day summit, which will offer cooperation opportunities for Turkish firms in the nuclear energy, is available on http://www.nuclearpowerplantssummit.com
    https://www.dailysabah.com/energy/2017/03/07/international-nuclear-summit-to-kick-off-in-istanbul

    11

  • #
    Oliver K. Manuel

    Thanks, Jo, I appreciate your understanding.

    Before leaving life, I would like to help humanity appreciate our good fortune:

    1. A star made our elements and birthed the solar system in a supernova explosion 5 Ga ago
    2. Earth formed 4.5 Ga ago, bathed in abundant energy from the collapsed SN core.
    3. The Earth-Sun system evolved into a water-covered planet orbiting a ordinary-looking star, 1 AU away, capable of sustaining the origin and evolution of life on Earth 4 Ga ago.

    10