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


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Climate Change is sexist

Wired reports that Climate Change is worse for women

Who knew? Not only are all past droughts and floods wiped from history apparently climate change makes men invisible too:

The struggles are coming fast, and they’re coming hard. For farmers, drought or even just less reliable rainfall means crop failure and less water for cattle. Landslides from stronger monsoons wipe away farmland. Living alongside rivers is increasingly perilous, as stronger—yet often less frequent—storms flood communities.

So men walk 120 extra kilometers and women walk 30 fewer kilometers, and this is “worse for women”:

All terrible crises in their own right, but exacerbated by underlying societal norms. In East Africa, for instance, men in pastoral communities have traditionally wandered 15, maybe 30 kilometers from home in search of water for their cattle, returning to their families periodically. But with climate change, now they’re having to travel up to 150 kilometers. Before, women would go with the men and milk the cattle, using the product both for their family’s own nutrition and as an extra source of income, and heading home as needed. Now that the men have to cover much greater distances, the women end up staying at home base, thus losing out on the invaluable resource that is milk.

Men are forced to live in strange towns far from their families. But who needs families anyhow?

In India, the dynamics are even more complicated. Anticipating lower yields, men may plant seeds and get the crop going, then migrate away to find work in factories or on construction sites. Left with these new farming duties, on top of childcare and other household responsibilities, women struggle to support the family. Their agency slips farther and farther away as the family’s plight grows.

And men are simply bread-winning robots.

The author is Matt Simon a science journalist at WIRED, where he covers biology, robotics, cannabis, and the environment. This could be the blinding culture of political correctness, or in some part, just the hunt for status-points in the pecking order competition to impress the girls. Its so “fashionable” to show how much he cares for women. Too bad if it comes at the expense of third world men.

Amazing, the places political correctness takes us. To misandrist, anti-science, self-serving corners of the mind.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.7/10 (42 votes cast)
Climate Change is sexist, 9.7 out of 10 based on 42 ratings

51 comments to Climate Change is sexist

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    I have to say, the whole CAGW thing is becoming very “Up the workers….!”

    Pass me the G&T please…ta…and popcorn….thanks.

    Now….this should be rather entertaining….

    90

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    This is a relevant topic because it has so much to show
    about how the climate change control mechanism has been conceived and implemented.

    Sometimes we can’t see the forest for the trees and a change of view might help.

    What things might climate change and sexism have in common.

    First, there’s nothing useful to measure in each area, it all descriptive verbiage.

    Then, there are the obligatory victims who must be protected.

    The solution is common to both; submit to the guidance of the unipccc.

    There are more , can you spot them.

    Media, government, taxation.

    KK

    110

  • #
    WXcycles

    What can’t men wear yoga pants to the shops too?

    90

  • #
    Mal

    I understand that the ABC has introduced a 2 goldfish into their think tank and consequently doubled their intellectual capacity 100%

    140

    • #
      Annie

      Years ago the cartoonist Carl Giles had a caption to one cartoon with ‘Grandma’ in it…”I think Grandma has sprung a leak in her think tank”. It was when that idiotic term ‘think tank’ first came into being.

      00

  • #
    el gordo

    There is a rumour going around that 97% of women have no understanding of climate change science … but moving right along.

    ‘Africa has become the fastest urbanizing region of the world, with rural migrants moving into cities a clip that has even surpassed that of China and India, as the continent becomes one of the final frontiers of the forth industrial revolution.’ Forbes

    70

  • #
    Gee aye

    I’m not feeling it

    24

  • #
    • #
      WXcycles

      The ocean_”a n a l s” link flipped out the moderation bin again.

      40

    • #
      el gordo

      This time next year La Nina should be up and running, what do you reckon?

      00

      • #
        WXcycles

        I can’t predict them. I hope not, El-Ninio Summers are no fun. We need proper La-Nina weather to end the drought phase down south. A couple of people over at WUWT think they can predict El-Ninos with stats, but they’re kidding themselves. If a detailed WX model has no capacity to see that far forward with skill or accuracy, I don’t see why they think they can with a correlation and its implicit belief in predictable cycles. There are too many overprinting meta’cycles’, and even the known ones are rarely in phase, to drive weather in any particular predictable direction. And many cycles fade in and fade out with time, no consistency. Usually the cycles are out of phase, thus just cancel each other out to NET to no significant change, and no longer time-span predictability.

        I like it when it does that. I’m actually not a fan of overly ‘interesting’ weather.

        BOM’s seasonal forecasting – why do they even pretend to have a clue about seasonal future weather trends? If they want to experiment with crystal-ball reading it would be best they didn’t publish it as a forecast for others to read. When a kid we used to read the 3 monthly “Walker’s Long-Range Weather Forecast”, in the newspaper. Us kids used to marvel at how Walker could tell the future. Later we realized he couldn’t, took about ten years to realize it was mostly wrong. The one thing BOM do have is a good range of Weather cycle indicators (like the “a n a l s” link above) and those indicator’s ‘lean’ seems to be as good as it gets and the limit of their capacity to predict anything longer than about 5 days out.

        But when I see BOM’s terrible cyclone ‘forecasting’ and especially their reporting, I realize they’re completely hopeless, and then their temp reporting and Acorn BS and it’s clear they don’t even have the required basic honesty to be trusted or considered ‘reliable’. Last night I read some of Ken’s site, currently, “Percentage of all Australian [BOM Temperature] sites not compliant: 38.54%.“, and you realize that in terms of instrumentation and science data logging they couldn’t even grow a choko-vine over a s***house.

        It took me about 30 years to figure that out.

        50

        • #
          WXcycles

          “… they couldn’t even grow a choko-vine over a s***house.”

          If you’re younger than 40 years old you wouldn’t understand that reference, or grasp just how unfathomably incompetent that is. :-)

          40

          • #
            Graeme No.3

            But WXcycles, they are trying to grow the choko vine in Antarctica because they know (from 30 years of predictions) that it will soon be the only habitable continent.
            All those climate refugees would want a nice choko, wouldn’t they?

            40

            • #
              WXcycles

              I guess they could fill the Thunderbox’s can with hotter-er than evah ACORN 2.0 ‘data’, as a substitute for raw s***, as this would provide the ‘dynamic-lifter’ to boost choko-vine growth … considerably.

              20

  • #
    pat

    “Leaders from over 200 countries” says DW. BBC is the only media I’ve heard reporting there only 51 leaders are at COP25, the Spanish leader, understandably, being the most prominent.
    anyway, the woman they mention certainly travelled quite a distance to earn their keep:

    3 Dec: Deutsche Welle: COP25: 200 countries pledge ‘green revolution’
    by ed/ng (AP, dpa, AFP)
    Leaders from over 200 countries gathered for talks on Tuesday, as the second day of the COP25 climate summit got underway in Madrid…
    Who said what?
    Many world leaders and representatives took to the stage on the first day of the major climate conference.
    Spain’s interim Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez slammed climate change deniers, saying “only a handful of fanatics deny the evidence.” US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters later that she agreed with the sentiments, and that leaders should “stick with the science” when it comes to climate change…

    New President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen also attended, on her second day in the role…
    Swedish teen climate activist Greta Thunberg is expected to arrive back in Europe on Tuesday after crossing the Atlantic for the second time in a catamaran. She may visit and address the conference, as she did at the UN general assembly in New York in September…
    https://www.dw.com/en/cop25-200-countries-pledge-green-revolution/a-51507172

    World leaders tackle climate change at COP25 summit
    Yahoo News – 16 hours ago

    Cop25 in Madrid: Who will be there and what will be agreed?
    ‘The point of no return is no longer over the horizon. It is in sight and hurtling toward us’
    Irish Times – 2 Dec 2019
    Who will be there? Who won’t be there?
    Cop25 will be attended by leaders from almost 200 countries. The notable absentee will be supreme climate denier US president Donald Trump…

    World leaders tackle climate change at summit…
    World leaders are meeting at a major climate summit in Madrid to tackle rising temperatures around the globe.
    CBS – 2 Dec 2019

    it seems the entire FakeNewsMSM is determined not to mention the leaders ain’t there…with the exception of Trump!

    70

  • #

    Like all beat-ups about climate, this overlooks real current factors, eg – https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/africa-population/ – and willfully ignores the climatic past in order to establish modern climate exceptionalism. Despite the cooked up numbers to sound sciency, the account is deliberately mushy, hinting at a past when rainfall was more reliable and storms more clement but never venturing to say as much. It’s all wink-wink and you-know-what-I-mean.

    So far they’re focusing on (drum roll…) women. No doubt some idler in need of publication will come up with the devastating impacts on persons of non-binary gender in an impoverished but exotic setting. And don’t forget the children! Including the non-binary children!

    Heard about the Ugandans driven off their land so the government could set up carbon credit forests? That really happened. I’m not saying green plunder has been as cynical as the new colonial thrusts of France, China and the US in Africa. But using the inevitable climate disasters of a continent that has always been prey to famine and now has a massive population to carry is pretty flaming cynical.

    More wind turbines in California and more solar panels in Brandenburg to fix land and resource availability in Africa? Yeah, that’ll work.

    130

    • #
      william x

      Logic, reason, commonsense, open debate, professional integrity, empathy and facts. They are not needed anymore, Mosomoso. That is so 20th century thinking. We, the elite know what is best for you. Unfortunately you continue to obstruct our right to preach and rule.

      You have the gall to question your betters by asking for answers we cannot supply . You have no right to do so. You are the worst type of human. You are a denier. You are on notice. We will deal with you once we secure our increased funding grants, increase our investments in renewables companies, get awarded an OA and finalise the purchases of our waterfront properties.

      You have been warned. Don’t stand in our way or oppose us. As elites, we can ask AL, Leonardo, Arnold, et al to fly here on their private jets to peer review, validate and promote our claims.

      Atm, you and your fellow deniers, are the reason why our planet is in a catastrophic tipping point re climate change! Repent! All you have to do is submit to us and obey without question. Just worship what we preach or forever be discredited and silenced from any media or debate.

      It is your choice mosomoso.

      90

    • #
      PeterW

      I’ve been involved in discussion of another aspect of Green neo-colonialism…. the green campaign to deny Africans the right to sustainable utilisation of their Wildlife resources.

      It denies ecological, economic and cultural outcomes… because outcomes matter less than the feelings of pampered foreigners.

      Sound familiar?

      50

  • #
  • #
    StephenP

    /S
    But surely cattle are bad, they produce methane which is one of the causes of climate change.
    Also in the cattle raising parts of Africa cattle were the regarded source of wealth, so the more cows you had the wealthier you were, regardless of the condition and productivity of the cattle.
    The cattle were milked and bled, and the milk and blood were mixed to provide the ingredients for a pastoral Bl**dy Mary cocktail.
    So more cattle produce more methane, thus providing a positive feedback mechanism which is resulting in overgrazing, drought and climate change.
    What are the Vegans doing about this?
    /S

    50

    • #
      PeterW

      Vegans are campaigning to shut down the alternative – the sustainable utilisation of wildlife resources.

      Make wildlife valuable enough and the rural people have an incentive to preserve and encourage wildlife, instead of replacing it with cattle and crops.

      The transition to Game Ranching and the protection of communal village land has created more protected land in just Southern Africa alone, than all the Government controlled Parks and Reserves in the whole continent.

      If it pays, it stays.

      22

  • #
    Deano

    I guess once every scientist and his dog are now applying for grants using “climate emergency” woven into their abstract, you have to employ some extra triggers – like a feminist perspective on antarctic glacier rates of melting. There is such a paper!

    60

  • #
    Gerry, England

    Perhaps he has been focusing too much on the cannabis part of his job….

    40

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    All those years I taught C++ programming and only now do I realize that if I had just published, published anything on how climate change affects this or that group, person, sacred cow, anything, I could have become a world renown climate change expert. Roy Hogue could have surpassed even Al Gore as an in demand speaker commanding thousands of dollars for an hour of telling the audience they were about to die from their own foolishness. So now it’s Al Gore or seemingly hundreds of others getting rich and I’m a poor man.

    I can see it now in my mind’s eye, “Climate change causes C++ to achieve only C+, missing half its potential.” Oh the horror of it. The next time you turn on your laptop or smart phone the world might end…gasp. But no, I had to play it straight so C++ still works and the world is safe and someone else has all my millions of $$$$ along with my famous name. I may cry any minute now.

    150

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      On the other hand, I don’t have the burden of trying to remember which tall story I told to what audience. Phew, that’s a relief all by itself. Maybe I’m better off this way. ;-)

      140

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Climate Change is worse for women

    Giving that a little thought I come up with the need to ask, “Where is the climate changing? Why must it be something man made?” Without the UN and its IPPC who would claim the climate is changing? It would be just weather.

    The 1930s saw unprecedented conditions in Oklahoma and Arkansas that ruined farming and drove thousands to move toward the promised land, California. I have never once heard that blamed on carbon dioxide from human use of fossil fuels. Why? Could it be because that real catastrophe is in the past and we can’t change it? They need a potential catastrophe that we can still change if we change our ways to suit them.

    90

  • #
    el gordo

    There has been a breakthrough in our understanding of fish, they are not very bright and easily fooled.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-12-03/great-barrier-reef-coral-fish-acoustics/11760016

    20

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      el gordo:

      The fish or ABC reporters?

      40

    • #
      WXcycles

      This appears to be another misleading glib MSM ABC coral story.

      Lizard Island is NNE of Cooktown, and is one of the few locations on the GBR that has had minimal major-cyclone disturbance during the past 50 years. The water around it is outer mid-lagoon, and the GBR lagoon in this stretch of coastline is much narrower than to the south of Cairns. So Lizard Island is comparatively closer to the outer reef margin, closer to the continental drop-off, and closer to much cooler deep ocean water. Plus Lizard’s Island’s fringing-reef is not large, or wide, and its waters are well flushed with each tide change as it also has a deep channel running right through most of it, providing cooling water flows during El-Ninos.

      Have a look at the Satellite image of the Lizard Island reef:
      https://www.google.com/maps/@-14.6847302,145.4600097,5899m/data=!3m1!1e3

      The result is that Lizard Island rarely suffers or is degraded much during widespread coral-bleaching conditions, and has a fairly undisturbed coral reef surrounding it due lack of major recent cyclones. And Lizard Island’s research-station is quite famous for its very prolific and large healthy reef-fish and high population of them, and a very healthy surrounding reef.

      So when the ABC and researcher says they found areas of dead rubble around Lizard Island for such testing, they found it very near to an extremely healthy reef system, plus there are many large healthy pristine major reefs surrounding Lizard Island that are rarely visited by humans. Ans at Lizard there are very high fish populations close by, maybe a couple of hundred meters away, at most.

      Fish sounds do propagate well in lagoon waters, but even so, how far can you increase the amplitude of the acoustic sound dB level before that sound level itself becomes a noise stress and deterrent to attracting fish to some reef rubble with poor coral cover? So the sound is not going to propagate too far before the dB level needed to propagate it a useful distance becomes counterproductive. And when the fish arrive (from just a few hundred meters away …) and see that there’s actually no food, shelter or coral, are they going to stick around? Nope, they will swim right back to coral cover and food.

      There will be reasons why this (presumably shallow and exposed) rubble area has low coral-cover. Coral settles anywhere conditions support its growth. There are no rubble areas exempt from that. If there’s consistently no coral cover there then it will remain roughly that way in future, as well.

      It is interesting to see that the fish are audibly attracted to a healthy reef, as a basic-research finding perspective, sure, but it’s not a good idea to confuse the local fish like that. And I’m sure they’re much more attracted to the longer-range drifting smells of healthy coral reef, because if nothing else, coral reefs are exotic bio-chemical factories, that would be very detectable at long range by their smell.

      “Corals form a habitat for local animals, so just restoring the fish might not be very effective,” said Professor Nagelkerken, who wasn’t involved with this study. “It’s definitely interesting to see that the mechanism works, but is it a solution?”

      A “solution“, to what ‘problem‘ exactly? There isn’t one! The coral reefs in that area are exceptionally healthy and actually pristine, with vast numbers of fish.

      This however appeals to pure nonsense:

      However, he said that his previous research published in the journal PLOS ONE found that despite not having ears, coral larvae also seemed to use sound to find and settle on reefs. “They don’t have ears but somehow they’re attracted to healthy reef sounds,” he said.

      Riiiiiight, no ears, but they sense reef sounds.

      BS much?

      Coral needs zero encouragement or ‘attraction’ to colonize any suitable substrate, and grow prolifically all over it, with no problem at all. Sink a steel-hulled ship in the GBR and come back in ten years and you’ll have a new coral reef growing on it. Or even just drop a bunch of ‘ballast’ rocks on the bottom of the GBR lagoon and come back in 10 years and it will be completely covered in coral. A submerged coral reef, the best kind for reef fishing.

      Coral does not have a stupid concept like ‘pollution’, it simply doesn’t care about human ‘pollution’. Anywhere there’s a solid substrate the coral will grow, with no help at all. You couldn’t stop it if you wanted to, and it would take a major and persistent effort to end its presence.

      But if these fake ‘concern-troll’ basic-research hand-wringers on Lizard Island and from AIMS were actually interested in improving the reef, and its fish population level and species diversity (if there was in fact any fish numbers or coral-cover ‘catastrophe’, which there sure isn’t) what they could immediately do, if they were in fact serious, and not just full of crâp, is they could use $450 million, of Mal Turnbull’s $500 million dollars, donated to reef-’savior’™ NGOs, to buy up 50 or so clapped-out large heavy cargo ships, for almost no dollars, to dispose of them, at the end of their service lives, then sink them at various strategic locations within the GBR lagoon.

      This would massively increase the numbers of deeper-water coral reefs that would act as ‘preserves’, which being sunken reefs are much less prone to being destroyed by surface wave action during cyclones, plus they would be virtually immune to bleaching conditions due to the much deeper water and tidal flow mixing, and would dramatically improve the numbers of reef fish on the GBR, plus their ability to recover from periodic major disturbances.

      Plus this would massively improve tourism options and the dive industry in particular in the process, and provide more reef food for humans as well. What an investment! What a thoroughly sensible and practical rapid ‘solution’, to a non-problem imaginary crisis!

      The range of possible practical affordable ‘solutions’ to the actual imaginary problem with the GBR, are so simple and affordable to enact, that it’s almost child’s play to do this! A crew of trained monkeys could save the Great Barrier Reef with a half a billion buck budget.

      Alternatively, the even more permanent and rigorous systematic “solution”, would be to use $450 million of Mal Turnbull’s $500 million, donated to completely time-wasting reef-savior™ NGOs, and buy a large fleet of barges plus an old coastal quarry, and some heavy loading and unloading machinery. Then fill the barges with large ballast rock blocks, and spend this money on a 20 year program building-up scores of new permanent submerged barrier-reef coral substrates.

      Which permanent reefs would provide all of the above benefits but would also provide jobs, and keep the money in local communities, rather than going to global shipping companies to dispose of hulls. Or a combination of both, sink ships for a very rapid response, and rock substrates for the permanent ‘solution’.

      But oh noes! This half a billion in Team Mal & Scotty Easy-Bucks™, must never be spent wisely or effectively on actually removing any alleged ‘risk’ to the health of the GBR or provide real benefits to the environment and to humans and the economy, or to permanently ensure the reef could not possibly be wiped-out by some worst-possible-case imaginary CAGW endless-bleaching event. … EEK!

      No. That magic-pudding pot of disposable taxpayer supplied scam-funding must only be spent on completely feckless useless bureaucrats and agencies and pontificating time-wasting climate-change scammers talking absolute rubbish about the GBR and its ‘health’, while trying to harm Queensland and Australia.

      Solving any suggested ‘problems’ must not occur under any circumstances as that would in fact be seen as a true ‘waste‘ and misuse of public money. It must be spent only on more totally unnecessary pointless political ‘research’ funding.

      Now I don’t mind that a young heroic post-grad or arrogant professor or AIMS staff member wants to experiment with audio to attract fish – that’s fine! But just do it on your own coin rather than taking a parasitic 6-month all-expenses paid ‘working’-holiday on Lizard island, that actual working people’s collective taxation bill then has to pay for, due to our very crap current Canberra Government.

      Now if you look at the money spent on GBRMPA alone since the early 1990s it’s obscene, and at no point has GBRMPA ever proposed to do something like the above, which would actually work and completely eliminate any such imagined hazard the continuously whine about. Because if they ever solved their imaginary Climate-Apocalypse™ reef crisis these parasites would be out of a job, and QLD Labor governments and Greens clowns would be without their biggest political fake hobgoblin, and doom ‘apparition’. If that money was all spent instead on the options I just mentioned above, there would be and could be no such threat to the Great Barrier Reef, or any need for a “Marine Park”, or a marine park “Authority”‘s completely wasted annual budgets. And this does not even include the vast sums spent on AIMS and JCU marine ‘science’ research every year.

      ABC ‘Journalism’ for deepening Climate-Scammer’s™ chaff-bags.

      30

  • #
    PeterW

    I am woman hear me roar…. about how weak and unable to deal with change, we are.

    Women can do anything….. except walk as far as men.

    Women are inherently equal….. but they are far better at being victims..

    And no….. I do not have women. I have identity-politics and double-standards.

    30

  • #
    EasilySolved

    All women only need to transition into men and voila, the problem is gone.

    30

    • #
      WXcycles

      I 100% want a woman, I just don’t want any twisted feminists or their sobbing, pathetic optionally-male ‘defenders’.

      30

    • #
      Annie

      Did you see that very sobering cartoon on the front of The Spectator a few weeks ago? Little baby girl, surgeons hovering with knives ready to ‘abort’ this full-term baby. Little girl trying to call out ‘Stop, I identify as male’.
      A few nails on the head with that one…it was brilliant.

      20

  • #
    Greg in NZ

    Who would’ve thought ‘divide & conquer’ still existed in 2019…

    But anyway, enough of this borax! The ‘hottest year on record’ (or the 2nd or 3rd according to the WMO boss-hog in Madrid) has caused snow to fall on the hills surrounding Queenstown in the South Island today:

    https://www.snow-forecast.com/resorts/Cardrona/webcams/latest

    50

    • #
      PeterW

      Who would’ve thought ‘divide & conquer’ still existed in 2019

      Anyone having a passing familiarity with left-wing politics.

      Dividing the world into groups and encouraging conflict is SOP according to Socialist dogma.

      30

  • #
    pattoh

    “Too bad if it comes at the expense of third world men”

    If Agenda 21/30/50 achieves even 1/2 of it’s goals; the whole world will be a mixed race third world of serfs working for & living at the grace of the Bilderbergers.

    20

  • #
    Zane

    Poor old climate, it can’t do anything right! :) .

    10

  • #
    Paul Miskelly

    Hi All,
    I see that Jo quotes the article as mentioning the prospect of “landslides due to stronger monsoons”.
    Well, um, I see in the GWPF feed this morning that there was a link to the following article:
    https://www.thedailystar.net/business/news/indias-wettest-monsoon-25yrs-lift-wheat-yield-record-1834066

    On the GWPF page reporting this article, at:
    https://www.thegwpf.com/indias-best-monsoon-in-25-years-to-lift-wheat-harvest-to-new-record/ ,
    they rather cheekily include a headline prediction made back in 2009 that “Climate change threatens India’s monsoons”.

    Seems that the most difficult problem facing India at present is what to do with this food glut.
    Cheers,
    Paul

    20

  • #
    Tel

    The traditional phase is, “World to End Tomorrow; Women, Minorities Hardest Hit”

    There’s some question over who came up with this, you are welcome to search it out.

    10

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>