<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>JoNova: Science, carbon, climate and tax &#187; Steve Fielding</title>
	<atom:link href="http://joannenova.com.au/tag/steve-fielding/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://joannenova.com.au</link>
	<description>Tackling tribal groupthink</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 16:08:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Goldilocks graphs: not too close, not too far</title>
		<link>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/goldilocks-graphs-not-to-close-not-too-far/</link>
		<comments>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/goldilocks-graphs-not-to-close-not-too-far/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 15:44:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>JoNova</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AGW socio-political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic & Reason]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deltoid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lambert (Tim)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Recent Temperature Trend]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Fielding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tim Lambert]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2571</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Have you noticed, the scaremongers are being boxed into reusing the same graph over and over. We sceptics are not afraid of any graph, but alarmists just don&#8217;t want to look from too close or too far away&#8230;</p> <p>When skeptics debunk a graph we show the graph we debunk. Not so the carbon-is-a-crisis crowd. The latest trend in graphology-PR is to debunk sceptics graphs by ignoring the graph itself and putting up an entirely different graph.</p> <p>Here&#8217;s a classic from Deltoid who is trying to debunk Senator Fielding. Fielding mentions that temperatures haven&#8217;t gone up in the last 15 years, and Lambert tries to mock him: &#8220;Clearly there was never any chance of convincing someone who can look at a graph like this one and not see any increase in temperature since the mid 90s&#8221;.</p> <p style="text-align: left">Lambert appears to be having trouble reading the scales (time for bifocals Tim?) and the graph he shows starts 110 years before the era he is referring too. What kind of debunking is this? Look out Fielding, if you were as blind as me, you&#8217;d see how wrong you are? Devastating.</p> <p style="text-align: left"></p> <p style="text-align: left">If you cram enough irrelevant years into [...]<br /><div><img src="http://joannenova.com.au/wp/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/gfx.php?value=5.5" /></div><div>Rating: 5.5/<strong>10</strong> (2 votes cast)</div><br />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/goldilocks-graphs-not-to-close-not-too-far/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>278</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The antidote to 150 million quadrillion joules</title>
		<link>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/the-antidote-to-150-million-quadrillion-joules/</link>
		<comments>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/the-antidote-to-150-million-quadrillion-joules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 14:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>JoNova</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hammer (Michael)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oceans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Fielding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William Kinninmonth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2695</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Oceans are critical to proving that humans are having an impact on the climate.</p> <p>The big scary number of the week is 15 × 1022 (or 150 million quadrillion). It&#8217;s the number of Joules the ocean has apparently heated by since 1961. But convert it to degrees per year and suddenly the big scary 15 × 1022 becomes three thousands of one degree per year. Unmeasurably small. So realists everywhere, lets check the math, and get ready to spread the word. Everywhere you see the ocean heat capacity argument or graph, let people know the numbers just don&#8217;t add up.</p> <p style="text-align: center;">THIS POST HAS BEEN UPDATED SEE HERE FOR THE LATEST FIGURES.</p> <p style="text-align: center;">&#8230;</p> <p></p> The developing Bumper Sticker Message to cut and paste is:</p> <p class="greyborder">15 × 1022 Joules since 1961 = 3 thousandths of a degree warmer per year. Who cares? </p> <p></p> <p style="line-height: 1.2em; text-align: center;">&#8230;</p> <p style="line-height: 1.2em;">Below Michael Hammer goes through the calculations he started on the comments thread for &#8220;Ocean temperatures: The new bluff in alarmism.&#8221; Essentially he confirms Kininmonths numbers and calculates: </p> the total retained heat in the oceans amounts to 0.38 watts/ m2 IPCC carbon dioxide analysis [...]<br /><div><img src="http://joannenova.com.au/wp/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/gfx.php?value=2.5" /></div><div>Rating: 2.5/<strong>10</strong> (2 votes cast)</div><br />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/the-antidote-to-150-million-quadrillion-joules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>51</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scientists call for Royal Commission* into climate change science</title>
		<link>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/scientists-call-for-royal-commission-into-climate-change-science/</link>
		<comments>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/scientists-call-for-royal-commission-into-climate-change-science/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:51:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Joanne Nova</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AGW socio-political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Sceptics (in Australia)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Fielding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2603</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Released today. Four independent scientists respond in detail to the evidence that government scientists claim shows that carbon dioxide causes significant global warming. The real debate continues. After the return fire from the skeptical experts, there was not a single point left standing.</p> Carter, Evans, Kininmonth, Franks</p> &#8220;Our conclusions are: that whilst recent increases in greenhouse gases play a minor radiative role in global climate, no strong evidence exists that human carbon dioxide emissions are causing, or are likely to cause, dangerous global warming; that it is unwise for government environmental policy to be set based upon monopoly advice, and especially so when what monopoly is represented by an international political (not scientific) agency; and that the results of implementing emissions trading legislation will be so costly, troublingly regressive, socially divisive and environmentally ineffective that Parliament should defer consideration of the CPRS bill and institute a fully independent Royal Commission of enquiry into the evidence for and against a dangerous human influence on climate. We add, with respect to point 3 that the scientific community is now so polarized on the controversial issue of dangerous global warming that proper due diligence on the matter can only be achieved where competent [...]<br /><div><img src="http://joannenova.com.au/wp/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/gfx.php?value=0.0" /></div><div>Rating: 0.0/<strong>10</strong> (0 votes cast)</div><br />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/07/scientists-call-for-royal-commission-into-climate-change-science/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Funded arrogance</title>
		<link>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/funded-arrogance/</link>
		<comments>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/funded-arrogance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 05:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>JoNova</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AGW socio-political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic & Reason]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Argument by Authority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matthew England]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oceans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Penny Wong]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Fielding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William Kinninmonth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2437</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Professor Matthew England <p>The debate that Senator Steve Fielding started continues, this time between heavyweights in Australian climate science. Yet again, the side with the funding, the power, and the large claims is unable to answer basic polite science questions. The pompous arrogance is evident. Why not just answer the question?</p> <p>Professor Matthew England&#8217;s research teams have received nearly $2.5 million in funding from the Australian government, much of it for studying oceans and climate change. So when we need good answers on the topic, he would be the man. If a school student asked for help, we might expect only a two line reply passing on a link. But when the question comes from one of the most informed climate scientists in the country, with 12 years as head of Australia&#8217;s National Climate Centre, and it&#8217;s about a graph at the centre of legislative negotiations, it&#8217;s inexcusable that the reply was vague, poorly reasoned and didn&#8217;t answer the question. All this, in a conversation that England himself started.</p> <p>If indeed &#8220;a Nobel Prize is there for many of the ideas the skeptics champion if only they were true&#8221; as England claims, then opportunity is knocking, and England is [...]<br /><div><img src="http://joannenova.com.au/wp/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/gfx.php?value=0.0" /></div><div>Rating: 0.0/<strong>10</strong> (0 votes cast)</div><br />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/funded-arrogance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>311</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Wong-Fielding meeting on global warming</title>
		<link>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/the-wong-fielding-meeting-on-global-warming/</link>
		<comments>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/the-wong-fielding-meeting-on-global-warming/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:28:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Evans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AGW socio-political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climate Sceptics (in Australia)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emissions Trading Scheme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Penny Wong]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Fielding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2292</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p class="greybox" style="text-align: center;padding-left: 30px">Finally, the question we&#8217;ve all wanted to ask of the people in power: Where&#8217;s the evidence?</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px">Senator Fielding holds a crucial vote on the proposed Emissions Trading Legislation. Fielding and four independent scientists faced the Minister for the Climate Change and Water, Penny Wong, The Chief Scientist, Penny Sackett, and Professor Will Steffen, director of the Climate Change Institute at the Australian National University. Read what happened from someone who was there. Joanne Nova</p> <p style="text-align: center">Guest Post by Dr David Evans 17 June 2009</p> <p style="text-align: center"> Australia&#8217;s Parliament House</p> Introduction <p>Australian Senator Steve Fielding met with the Australian Minister of Climate Change, Senator Penny Wong, on 15 June 2009. Senator Fielding was seeking evidence that human emissions of carbon dioxide were the main cause of global warming; Senator Wong presumably wanted Senator Fielding’s vote for the upcoming Emission Trading Scheme legislation.</p> <p>I was at that meeting, one of four independent scientists invited by Senator Fielding. Many people have asked me what happened, so I am replying to everyone at once like this. These are my impressions of the meeting, with special attention to the way the meeting was conducted and to the [...]<br /><div><img src="http://joannenova.com.au/wp/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/gfx.php?value=5.5" /></div><div>Rating: 5.5/<strong>10</strong> (2 votes cast)</div><br />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/the-wong-fielding-meeting-on-global-warming/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>344</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Finally, a politician doing what politicians should do</title>
		<link>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/finally-a-politician-doing-what-politicians-should-do/</link>
		<comments>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/finally-a-politician-doing-what-politicians-should-do/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2009 05:11:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>JoNova</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[AGW socio-political]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science Communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ABC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fielding (Steve)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investigative Journalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jones (Tony)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Fielding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joannenova.com.au/?p=2180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>This is a big step. Steve Fielding in Australia holds a crucial senate vote on the proposed Emission Trading Scheme (ETS). Astonishingly (for a politician) he stands out from the crowd for simply saying the obvious. He wants to &#8220;hear from both sides of the debate.&#8221; </p> <p>A simple statement like this should not be remarkable—but it&#8217;s so rare. Steve Fielding assumed the mainstream thinking was right, but is now doing what anyone who hasn&#8217;t looked at the debate in detail ought to be doing. Some research. It&#8217;s a rare occasion when you can see the good side of democracy and free speech in action. He paid for himself to fly to the far side of the world to attend Heartland&#8217;s 3rd conference on Climate Change to hear from scientists who are not convinced carbon has a large role to play in our climate.</p> <p>The Australian newspaper covered it. And Steve expanded today in the Australian on why he went to Washington.</p> <p>His visit to the Heartland conference has given the Australian ABC enough reason to bother sending a journalist to it (unlike the two previous conferences). See their short coverage from Washington. (Look out for the glimpse of The [...]<br /><div><img src="http://joannenova.com.au/wp/wp-content/plugins/gd-star-rating/gfx.php?value=5.0" /></div><div>Rating: 5.0/<strong>10</strong> (1 vote cast)</div><br />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://joannenova.com.au/2009/06/finally-a-politician-doing-what-politicians-should-do/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>67</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 1/60 queries in 0.043 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 519/635 objects using disk: basic

Served from: joannenova.com.au @ 2012-05-25 00:51:53 -->
