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

IPCC taps into Global Witchcraft: Stop fires, storms and floods with solar panels and windmills!

Current Witchdoctor Warning: Severe levels of Voodoo likely on all channels

The faith in Wind Power. It's like a religion.Climate Fear Week is Here.

Your car exhaust causes bushfires, your roast beef leads to droughts and the wrong lightglobes could flood the nation.

Hurry, hurry, it’s your absolute last last-chance after the last last-chance to save the world. According to an unaudited, unaccountable UN committee, It’s Code Red for Humanity! Rush and install Solar Special Protection Shields on your home today to be sure no one inside is at higher risk of Malaria, Asthma, Obesity, Eco-depression, and to save Nemo from feeling reckless. (Why haven’t you done that already, you evil reef killer?)

Despite installing more renewables than any nation per capita on Earth, Australia is failing to cleanse the Earth of pollution. Likewise the USA and UK which have both reduced actual carbon emissions by more than nearly everyone else are only leaders when they vote for socialists.  Too many windmills are never enough! (Don’t mention the eagles or the whales, but praise the Sharks, for they are the sacred spirit of Virtue Signalling.)

There are many things you can do to play your part to make the weather nicer for our grandchildren, or at least reinforce the religion. On ABC radio Perth 720 a caller rang in to say they’d stopped using tea-bags. (All hail the weather controlling activity of loose leaf tea!).

Voodoo face mask

The nonsense knows no bounds, and the Pagan faith runs strong, especially in Professors trained to mouth the advertising memes of General Electric, Panasonic and Vestas. They excel when investigated by ABC activist-journalists taught to toss fluffy-toy-questions at the feet of the ecologists who specialize more in grasshoppers and less in spaceweather. What do you say to Climate Deniers? —  sayth the ABC-voice. When did you stop believing in science, sayth Lesley Hughes, biologist who wonders how 200 scientists could ever be wrong?

Cliches will save the day!

Solar PV on rooftops in Australia, photo.

Protect your home against storms and fires!

How many solar panels does it take to stop a cyclone? The ABC-voice, didn’t ask, and the biologist wouldn’t know. But Bushfires in Greece prove that CO2 is dangerous, even if there is not one Climate Model on Earth that could tell us this time last year that the floods would be in Germany, the heat domes would be in British Columbia or that snow would fall in Southern Brazil.

It’s just bad, and all shades of badness are caused by CO2.

Neolithic shamans, chieftans, sorcerers and hofgothi all knew the secret of forecasting ambiguous-multipurpose-gloom. Modern professors are catching up with their astrologic wizard forefathers.

Perhaps we all should give up,
Using tea-bags when having a sup,
Better tea-leaves instead,
Which are easily read,
To forecast at the end of the cup.

—Ruairi

Reference for Witchdoctors 101

IPCC Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the AR6 WGI report (on the Physical Science)

Photo by hp koch on Unsplash

 

 

9.8 out of 10 based on 127 ratings

388 comments to IPCC taps into Global Witchcraft: Stop fires, storms and floods with solar panels and windmills!

  • #
    TdeF

    Ridicule is the only possible reaction to nonsense, the ridiculous. Well done.

    What I love is the admission that natural variations like the sun and the ocean currents might be masking the underlying warming so that, against all predictions, it actually gets colder.

    Everything about this report is negative. And making advance excuses for the cooling which is being reported from all over the world, including New Zealand in August as in the last posts. The world is cooling. And it is all due to Global Warming! Send money now!

    720

    • #
      TdeF

      And as the UN/WHO said so clearly in February last year, the Wuhan Flu is absolutely not infectious to humans. And it was not created in the military UN viral laboratory built by France and funded in part at least by the Americans. Nothing to see here folks. And 750,000 Chinese left China for America after this virus escaped. No harm done then.

      What part of the UN is not controlled by the Long March of communists through the institutions? They already own the education systems and the media. And every committee of the UN. That’s what the Belt and Road really means.

      One of the great ironies is that the WUhan Flu has mutated in India and come back as the killer Delta virus and Wuhan is in lockdown. Whoever sows the wind reaps the whirlwind.

      630

      • #
        TdeF

        It is also becoming clear that in the demise of the fortunes spent in newspaper advertising with the growth of internet media, anyone can buy opinions. And the Chinese government has not been slow to seize the opportunity.

        440

        • #
          RickWill

          A similar process for being opinions existed in the pre-internet world.

          Mining companies in Australia really never bothered with advertising because they supplied high volume to large customers under contract or into spot markets set by international exchange. They was no need to market their production.

          Once environmental regulations became common, the mining industry had to lift its game to promote a positive image to keep the public on side. Industry articles were presented as news but usually written or guided by industry insiders and payments, usually through some incidental advertising, were made for the articles to be published. The articles were not labelled as advertisements.

          38

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            Here is a prediction –

            The parasitic globalist UN wants humans kicked out of 80%+ of the earths surface. Its called “Rewilding”.

            What if the covid lie is just an intermediate lie, and it’s the cover to implement another lie, i.e. the earth being a fake false “goddess” called “Gaia” by the sat anic globalists?

            See, if the permit system for covid-restricted movement stays, we have people locked out of large parts of the surface of the earth.

            Now…if they then implement the lie further and say its time for a climate lockdown as well, they you have you proof.
            It UN rewilding, but they cant say that….and like thier spiritual father, Sa tan, they love lying.

            The main thing is to show covid is harmless , and it brings the whole house of cards down……this is why the hysteria to push the vaccine, as it propagates the covid lie through trauma based mind control and mass hysteria. When did you last see anything but vaccination hysteria in the news?

            Easy when you understand how they work.

            130

            • #
              OriginalSteve

              Oh and slightly OT but i notice in victoriastan, the 5yh reich are up to thier old tricks….

              Apparently they are dumbfounded by the “mystery cases”.

              Hmmm…a primary school kid could solve this – ask the people who have it if they are vaccinated or been around anyone who has been recently jabbed.

              The CDC are open about the fact vaccinated people can spread the disease. This isn’t hard…..but it does allow all those freedom destroying lockdowns to continue.

              Or they could blame climate change…that would be just as dumb.

              Nuremberg 2, anyone?

              90

              • #
                shannon

                I agree with you in regard to Covid cases that “dont add up” Id also like to be told of the people in ICU ..
                1) How many have had 1 dose
                2) Do they have any ongoing health issues.

                For Morrison to state Australia needs 70% before thinking of easing restriction is a total joke !
                My research up to including the 9th August 2021…..ONLY 5 Countries in the World have achieved 70%. ( 2 jabs)
                ie Cayman Is..Iceland..Isle of Man…Pitcairn Is….UAE…..and below

                Only one Country has achieved 89.53% …..Malta.
                Overall only 15.47% of the Worlds population has been fully inoculated.

                My predictions …Australia is going to continue with “rolling” lockups into mid 2022.

                90

              • #
                OriginalSteve

                Shannon…agreed…lockdowns are a form of waterboarding of an entire population….

                Hold them under…..

                Give up?

                No?

                Head under again….

                Give up?

                No…

                Head under again….and again…

                Its a form of ritualized torture upon the population, until they appease the evil globalist puppets.

                But the more you give them, the more they will abuse you.

                This is the face of evil. Until people push back on the bullies, it will continue.

                130

            • #
              gowest

              The people you quote must have been reading not enough SiFi – John Ringo’s/ David Weber’s pollution damnned Saints match that creed nicely and show the outcome of that fight.

              20

          • #
            Daffy

            I think we’re pretty cool with mining. No one has boycotted the products of mining: cars, mobile phones, surgical instruments, ambulances, batteries.

            I wonder if the Extinction Rebellion avoid using mobile phones (due to mining), paper (due to excessive water and tree use), pen and ink (due to petrochemicals), or plastic for their colostomy bags (same petrochemicals). No? Thought not.

            100

      • #
        Fuel Filter

        The UN was created by Communist forces in the USA with the all-to-willing dupes in Europe (and let’s not forget the so-called United Kingdom…).

        Please buy and read American Betrayal by Diana West. She will give all here a new perspective on WW II and the Communist infiltration of my .gov by Stalin’s agents long before Dec 7th, 1941.

        It will blow your mind.

        190

        • #
          Ian

          The UN was created by Communist forces in the USA with the all-to-willing dupes in Europe (and let’s not forget the so-called United Kingdom…).

          Not everyone is as smitten with West’s book as you appear to be

          A Kirkus review finds that she has a number of valid points but ends with the warning: “A frustrating mixture of incontrovertible facts and dubious speculation. Proceed with caution”

          Ronald Radosh, a well-known conservative scholar and an author of many books, including “The Rosenberg File: A Search for Truth” about the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg case, has taken on a book by conservative columnist Diana West titled “American Betrayal” that he says is not to be believed .

          According to Radosh, West writes without understanding historical context of the subject she’s writing about and, apparently, without familiarity with much of the scholarly literature. And she ignores findings when they contradict her “yellow journalism conspiracy theories,” he says.

          It appears West’s book does not seem to blow everyone’s mind not even the mind of a fellow Conservative

          812

          • #
            Fuel Filter

            Radosh is a partisan hack. He and others like David Horowitz just could not handle someone who told the truth about the “Sainted” FDR, aka Frank the Cripple.

            She blew the whistle on much of the false history of his mal-administration and the Soviet infiltration of our government.

            Perhaps, you should read M. Stanton Edwards or even the many books on the Vanona Files and their de-cripts.

            But, than again, that would entail you actually doing some reading…

            41

    • #
      TdeF

      Whatever happened to Rapid, Tipping point, crisis, Armageddon warming and rapid sea rises? They seem to have vanished? Now they are calling up ‘natural variations’ as hiding the real problem of Global warming.

      Besides, if California, Australia and Greece really wanted to end the terrible bushfires caused by ‘Climate Change’, what about planting different trees? After all, they are all recently planted Australian pyrophytic trees and the people who planted them knew the risks. Bushfires are a direct result of planting Australian Gum trees.

      530

      • #
        GlenM

        Ephemeral nonsense from usual sources. The sturm und drang of 21st century schizoid man politics. Sorry King Crimson.

        120

      • #
        Sceptical Sam

        TdeF asks:

        Whatever happened to Rapid, Tipping point, crisis, Armageddon warming and rapid sea rises?

        Exactly. Haven’t seen much action there since the beginning of the dirty industrial revolution have we.

        But that’s no reason for the IPCC to not double down on stupidity.

        As Brian Lloyd summarized in “The Australian” today – apparently having closely read the IPCC’s AR6 work of fiction:

        By 2100, sea levels are expected to rise relative to 1995-2014 by 0.28m to 0.55m under the very low GHG emissions scenario, 0.32m to 0.62m under the low GHG emissions scenario, 0.44m to 0.76m under the intermediate GHG emissions scenario, and 0.63m to 1.01m under the very high GHG emissions scenario.

        There is high confidence that, in the longer term, sea levels will rise for centuries to millennia because of continuing deep ocean warming and ice sheet melt, and will remain elevated for thousands of years.

        They’re delusion.

        And here’s the reality:

        https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/fort-denison-data-more-accurate-than-satellite-on-sea-levels/video/f6ad929c5225aedcd982330cd088d999

        180

        • #
          Ted1

          “Whatever happened to Rapid, Tipping point, crisis &c?”

          Hubris renders them redundant.

          WE live in a democracy. Where 50% + 1 carries the vote.

          As the Marxists pressed on with their long march through our institutions these were the tools they used in the face of our opposition.

          They now believe that they have 50% + 1 of the electorate on their side, so can afford to abandon those tools, pretending that they are giving us what we ungrateful sods asked for all along.

          They now tell us that their computer models were no good, because they believe they don’t need that lie any more. But those computer models have been the backbone of their “science” for 33 years. They must not be allowed to hide that.

          240

        • #
          TdeF

          Ice sheet melt? Yes, but the floating ice extent in the Arctic is average this year, not any less than 33 years ago. So how is this rapid sea rise being produced?

          Perhaps the direct thermal expansion of water, the alleged 1.5C in the air will eventually warm the water, but considering that the heat capacity of the huge oceans is 1400x that of the thin, light air above, the change in ocean temperature will be 1.5/1400 or 0.001C. Unless if someone has a theory of how a 50% increase in CO2 heats the water directly and rapidly.

          So what does 1.5C transferred to the ocean mean in thermal expansion?

          Total linear thermal expansion from 1C is 210×10-6(linear expansion of water) x3.4×10^6(average ocean depth in mm)x0.001(C) =714×10-3mm or 0.714mm. Run for your lives!

          341

          • #
            Maptram

            And lets not forget, 90% of the sea ice is already below the surface of the sea so the sea level already includes the 90%

            100

            • #
              TdeF

              The IPCC trade on the idea that when ice melts, you get water and sea levels rise. It’s not true, thanks to Mr Archimedes (apart from a tiny difference in salt water). The 10% out of the water joins the 90% under the water to form 100% water.

              I did this once in a talk. Filled a glass to the very top with water and floating ice, over the top in fact. Half an hour later, the ice was gone and the water had not risen.

              However I always thought that it was not Archimedes who decided to take a bath. It was someone else who said Eureka!

              160

              • #
                Analitik

                The smarter members talk of land ice sheets being destablized by disappearing sea ice. Still a load of speculative clap-trap, though.

                60

          • #
            RightOverLabour

            A very good analogy is a bathroom. Ask someone to run a cold bath and then put heaters in to heat the air to warm the water. Conversely when it’s cold run a hot bath and see what it does to the air temperature of the room. The atmosphere is exactly the same. Oceans heat the atmosphere, not the other way around. Further warm oceans degas CO2, cold oceans absorb it, that’s why there is usually a 1000year lag between temperature change and CO2 levels.

            170

          • #
            RickWill

            Expansion of water is highly non-linear with temperature and pressure. The thermal expansion co-coeeficent at 10C and atmospheric is 0.88E-4/K by volume.

            The oceans have notionally warmer 0.13C in the top 2000m since 1955 – when the first systematic measurements were made. So 2000mX 0.88E-4X 0.13KX3 gives 69mm over 65 years. The other half has been meltwater run off.

            It is physically impossible to get heat into the deep oceans from the surface in 65 years. The only way deep oceans can warm in that time is through a reduction in surface evaporation. That slows the rate of circulation of deep cool water from the poles to the tropics. The flow channels are well defined by the lower saline plumes spreading from the poles to the tropics between 500m to 2000m :
            https://www.ewoce.org/gallery/P15_SALNTY.gif
            Lower evaporation is consistent with reducing sunlight over the Southern Hemisphere where the majority of the ocean water is exposed.

            So reduced sunlight over the SH is not completely offset by the increase in sunlight in the NH because there is more ocean surface water in the SH than NH. That leads to a net reduction in ocean evaporation thereby reducing the flow rate of cool water from the poles resulting in the oceans warming. So the increase in deep ocean temperature indicates the opposite to what all the climate clowns actually think it means.

            The shoaling and steepening of the thermocline caused by higher evaporation is readily observed by comparing the temperature profile below the tropical ocean buoys. There is much higher net evaporation in the Nino3 region compared with the Nino 4 region -125W and 156E buoys.
            https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/cache-tao/sy1/jsdisplay/profile_sep8s125w_20210109_hf__eps20t_2021081017.png
            https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/cache-tao/sy1/jsdisplay/profile_sep0n156e_20210109_hf__eps20t_2021081017.png

            40

      • #
        OldOzzie

        A 1989 AP Report: Nations “Wiped Off Face of the Earth” by 2000

        While stories like the one below should not dismiss an intelligent discussion about the environmental challenges we face today, this 1989 report does raise legitimate questions about the apocalyptic and absolute predictions promoted by many who support a similar narrative in 2019.

        From a June 29, 1989, Associated Press dispatch:

        UNITED NATIONS (AP)—A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

        Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of “eco-refugees,” threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.

        He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

        As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.

        Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study. . . .

        Shifting climate patterns would bring back 1930s Dust Bowl conditions to Canadian and U.S. wheatlands, while the Soviet Union could reap bumper crops if it adapts its agriculture in time, according to a study by UNEP and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

        120

      • #
        Daffy

        I’m certainly with you on the trees idea. I’m a bit sick of the ubiquitous scratchy bark eucalypts with their dry sclerophyll leaves. I’m all for majestic oaks, pretty liquid ambers, delicious sugar maples, and the good ol’ Queensland Black Bean.

        All of which would make great fuel breaks.

        60

    • #
      clarence.t

      “The world is cooling. And it is all due to Global Warming!”

      Yep, that will be the AGW theme from now on !

      Non-science for the hangers-on and the mentally deficient.

      590

      • #
        TdeF

        Yes, but please consider there are good people who trust scientists like they trust doctors. Except Climate scientists are not real scientists. Almost none are meteorologists. And their excuse is that Climate is not the weather, so they are expert in something meteorologists know nothing about. If you believe that, you believe in the tooth fairy.

        540

        • #
          TdeF

          In Australia, we have people with no tertiary sciences who get a PhD in Science. These people find a home in ‘Climate Science’ like our Chief Climate Commissioner, Professor Tim Flannery who has been wrong on absoutely everything on which he has had an opinion. I even had to listen to him talk about Nuclear power. His expertise, if you call it that, is on long extinct Australian native megafauna including kangaroos and wombats and the like.

          And no one in the world can disagree with him in his unique field. So he clearly understands physics, chemistry, mathematics, computer modelling, engineering, microbiology and the rest because he has a Doctorate in Science without any tertiary training in the ‘hard’ sciences. So called because they take real skill.

          I blame the new ‘education’ system. You used to have to be really good at science to get a Doctorate. Now it is b*stardized by science pretenders like Flim Flannery who recommended investment in ‘hot rocks’ because the ‘technology was straightforward’. It failed of course and took at least $100million with it, $93 Million of which was government money (our money). And of course the money just vanished.

          590

          • #
            Jojodogfacedboy

            Heard a very appropriate phrase…

            “In the history of our species, never before have we willingly set out to self-destruct our whole species with the current path we’ve constructed.”

            Even those electic vehicles our governments want us to use gives off high doses of radiation and can electrocute you as well as explosive and flammable.
            Welcome to our governments mandated future.

            361

            • #
              RicDre

              “In the history of our species, never before have we willingly set out to self-destruct our whole species with the current path we’ve constructed.”

              I am reminded of a line from Jeff Wayne’s version of War of the Worlds

              JOURNALIST: Never before in the history of the world had such a mass of human beings moved and suffered together. This was no disciplined march – it was a stampede – without order and without a goal, six million people unarmed and unprovisioned, driving headlong. It was the beginning of the rout of civilization, of the massacre of mankind.

              https://www.lyricsondemand.com/soundtracks/w/waroftheworldslyrics/foreverautumnandthethunderlyrics.html

              90

              • #
                ColA

                The whole report needs to be read while playing an audio loop of David Bowie

                We’ve got five years, what a surprise
                We’ve got five years, stuck on my eyes
                We’ve got five years, my brain hurts a lot
                Five years, that’s all we’ve got

                We’ve got five years, what a surprise
                We’ve got five years, stuck on my eyes
                We’ve got five years, my brain hurts a lot
                Five years, that’s all we’ve got

                Five years
                Five years
                Five years
                Five years

                VERY LOUD AND PROUD!!!!

                60

          • #
            GlenM

            Well he blamed the so- called originies the fire changers. He wrote a few books and to be honest they were full on – like dumb. What a clown.

            120

          • #
            Wet Mountains

            Well said TdeF! PhD’s are now for sale! No academic achievement required. Become an expert in any field with only a rudimentary understanding of that field. You can appear on TV and be acclaimed as gifted, a visionary

            290

        • #
          Doc

          TdeF. Listening to the continual harangue from the BOM, day in and day out, one would think, whether or not they are properly credentialled, it doesn’t seem to matter. Any minimal excuse to exclaim ‘Oh!My’ over some incidental high temperature, fire or flood and it’s all about ‘We’ll all be rooned!’ It’s never anything to do with human incompetence in global husbandry. It’s always related to anthropogenic global warming.

          The new acceptance that there has really always been natural variation which can’t be defined in software, surely destroys the foundation of their ‘science’. The IPCC found it easier to declare natural forces were always a constant and hence could be ignored in their ‘science’. This comes at the same time that they have tossed aside computerisation except to define the extent of human influence on the climate. This is done by creating a DIGITAL earth, applying various influences and defining the difference in outcomes between on digital world with no humans versus one with.

          Now, I’m not qualified as many are here to speak, but to me this is laughable, except for the fact it is the basis on which our Chief science officer advises our politicians about climate ‘facts’, and forms the basis for those politicians to destroy our economy and standard of living. Furthermore. it is also the basis that the EU – which can’t wait to get its hands on Russian gas – is going to use to throw import duties at our exports unless we toe their line on the climate. The people of the Democracies have to wake up and realise these fear campaigns have more to do with powers seeking global dominance than anything to do with climate!

          90

    • #

      NO CO2 MEANS NO PLANTS

      NO PLANTS MEANS NO FOOD

      NO FOOD MEANS NO HUMANS AND NOT MUCH ELSE

      The cost of this Analysis was 50 cents and I have used my School Boy General Science Education as Scientific Rigor…….

      QED

      230

    • #
      Tilba Tilba

      And making advance excuses for the cooling which is being reported from all over the world, including New Zealand in August as in the last posts. The world is cooling.

      “The world is cooling – and if we don’t burn some more coal, we’re going to have an Ice Age next Thursday fortnight – or by 2030 at the latest!”

      We keep reading such statements, but where is the evidence? All the available data is the other way, with the ten hottest recorded years being since 2005. For example:

      Global temperature data document a warming trend since the mid-1970s. The warmest years globally have all occurred since 2005, with the top ten being 2016, 2020, 2019, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2014, 2010, 2013 and 2005 (tied), respectively.

      https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/projected-ranks

      And eleven days of chilly August weather in New Zealand does not constitute climate data.

      236

      • #
        RightOverLabour

        Tony Heller would disagree on your 10 hottest recorded years.

        180

      • #
        William

        You are cherry picking using a minute portion of the earth’s history, as does NOAA and other alarmist spruikers. And they are still relying on a warming that occured last century as for the last two decades or so, the warming, what little if any there has been, has been negligible, with periods of cooling.

        So if alarmists in the late 1990s used that 20 years to prove their theory, we should be able to use the graphs of the last 20 years to laugh at their stupidity.

        120

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Tilba Tilba.
        Roughly 65% of ‘reliable long term data’ comes from North American stations (NOAA in fact took over what the Weather Bureau was doing) so the long term warming trend must have started there after 1979 which was the coldest winter of a seies of cold ones. Proof is that Dr. Jim Hansen of NASA noted that 1981 had been only 0.15℃ cooler than 1944 (he changed his mind and a lot of old temperatures later).
        Of course you could argue that 1975 and 1976 (particularly) were hot summers in the UK and Europe. The summer of 1976 is listed as the warmest in the UK although in just England alone it was 1846 (which had the warmest June, with the warmest July 2006 and August 1895 but 1976 was consistent warm and dry). 1911 was also a hot summer in England and France.
        Curiously 2014 is listed as the warmest year in England despite not being the warmest in any month, although 2015 was the warmest December. So those 2 & 2006 are the only ones listed as particularly warm in England. Where did you get your figures from?

        60

        • #
          Tilba Tilba

          Where did you get your figures from?

          This is the first sentence in the NOAA link above.

          Using data from tens of thousands of stations worldwide, NOAA scientists have developed a method to estimate how the average global temperature may rank year-to-year in subsequent years. The method indicates a strong probability that future years will continue to be among the hottest on record.

          26

          • #
            William

            Tilba, much of the historical data for the Southern hemisphere’s contribution to global temperature records is from Australian records, and they have been rendered utterly unreliable by the travesties known as ACORN-Sats 1 and 2 and the BOM starting the official record in 1910, conveniently omitting the Federation drought that if included, would have shown remarkably little change then compared with now.

            80

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘And eleven days of chilly August weather in New Zealand does not constitute climate data.’

        That is true, but also indicates the weather is not behaving according to the script.

        ‘We keep reading such statements, but where is the evidence?’

        Its a big picture item, have to go back to the end of the Eemian Interglacial to test the hypothesis.

        ‘The decrease in summer insolation at high northern latitudes thus led to a series of feedback mechanisms, which gradually became stronger as ice sheets grew larger. The initiation of the bipolar see-saw mechanism at around 110–112 ka seems to have triggered the series of abrupt and recurrent shifts between warmer interstadials and colder stadials that characterised the last glacial.’ (Wohlfarth 2013)

        If we think of the LIA as a stadial and this Modern Climate Optimum as an interstadial, then the earth may have already entered the new glacial. Its already passed its due by date.

        80

        • #

          July 2021 joins July 2020 as the third warmest July on record globally, less than 0.1°C cooler than July 2019 and July 2016.

          someone is lying

          113

          • #
            GlenM

            Well GI if you set out a foundation that says that CO2 is going to heat the planet as to endanger all life, and then find out it’s not happening what do you do? Admit you are wrong? No, there is too much invested in this so we’ll manipulate the historical record. Go back and look at the evidence- it’s irrefutable.

            130

          • #
            bobn

            Yep Geee. The liars who falsely claim July 2020 and 2021 were warmer than they are are lying. Those months were not very warm in the northern hemisphere but apparently its a record sunbathing month in Aus this july 2021 so you sources say. So you seem to have some bullpoo from somewhere since we havent got warming even in the top 10 to be found. Glad you have your air-con on for the record heat in Aus and NZ.

            70

            • #

              hmm, oh yes, aha, hmmm, very interesting.

              13

              • #
                el gordo

                While we are standing around watching temperatures jump up and down, thanks to ENSO, it would be far more productive to look at extreme weather.

                ‘Equally curious is that the report now sees a man-made component in extreme weather quite definitely. That’s pretty crazy, because most extreme weather has no trend at all over the last 150 years. And the models of Friederike Otto and colleagues regularly fail in the task of mapping extreme weather trends over the last pre-industrial millennia. These flawed models are then used to make the “attribution” i.e. assignment of man vs. nature. It’s like driving without a license.’ (Notrickszone)

                30

          • #
            cohenite

            Anyone who believes the official, totally homogenised (corrupted) temperature records is either a useful idiot or part of the ideology (communism) behind AGW.

            Which are you hee haw?

            110

      • #

        I have always wondered how the Dinosaurs managed to survive for those many millions of years with CO2 levels so much higher than today. And how did the Ice Ages occur? All before Humans started getting going and way before the Industrial Revolution. Thoughts?

        Just leave CO2 alone and just do what Mother Nature has always done…………ADAPT !!!!!!!!!

        60

      • #
        bobn

        Are you on drugs? You seem to be in fantasy land. 10 hottest years – according to a streetcorner witchdoctor. Get real mate and see the fakery. Start with TONY HELLER FOR SOME FACTS INSTEAD OF FANTASY. 10 hottest years – pull the other one. So no snow in Aus, Europe, USA, …. Ooops record snow in all in last 10 years and Greenlands got record snow to. Wake up sleepy!

        80

      • #
        clarence.t

        LOL, you don’t seem to understand that the NOAA surface data is totally unfit for any purpose whatsoever.

        It is a hodge-podge of highly urban affected, sparse, irregularly spaced erratic non-data.

        On top of that it undergoes agenda driven mal-adjustments to get rid of any semblance of historical relevance.

        The 1930s, 40s were probably much the same temperature as the El Nio affected 2015-2018

        And basically all but 500 or so of the last 10,000 years has been warmer than now.

        We are actually a rather cool period in the current interglacial.

        80

      • #
        Doc

        You can do anything with homogenisation, particularly when you refuse to reveal the methodology and the original temperature data.

        60

      • #
        Lance

        NOAA has tampered with the data. It is that simple.

        https://realclimatescience.com/erasing-americas-hot-past/

        PS: Tilba, M. Mann and G. Schmidt want their gilded portraits back.

        20

    • #
      Dennis

      I thought the world ended in 2000, or whatever dates predicted by the climate hoaxers?

      30

  • #
    anne simon

    That’s shamans, not “shamen” — and don’t diss them by lumping them in with fakers!

    [OK. Accepted and fixed. Thanks. – Jo]

    151

  • #
    clarence.t

    Paul eviscerates IPCC… with data. !

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2021/08/10/the-ipcc-summary-for-policymakers/#comments

    “All that is left in the IPCC report is a host of highly subjective projections of what might happen in the future.”

    Projections made using unfit-for-purpose, un-validated, scientifically unsupportable, computer games.

    380

    • #
      Sceptical Sam

      aul eviscerates IPCC… with data. !

      Indeed he does.

      But even more amusingly, the IPCC eviscerates itself with its nonsense on cyclones. Paul screen shots the AR6 take on Tropical Cyclones which says:

      “A34 It is likely that the global proportion of major (Category 3-5) tropical cyclone occurrence has increased over the last four decades…”

      Proportion? Proportion of what? What’s the base?

      Ah! But according to their ABC, the oh so infallible CSIRO maintains that the number of cyclones will decrease by as much as 50% in “our” region and then suggests that the number of “intense” cyclones could increase by 10 – 15%.

      https://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-04-04/global-warming-could-make-cyclones-stronger/2628496

      So the total number falls by 50% and the number of intense cyclones increases by 10-15%.

      These people are mathematical idiots.

      I’ll leave one of the many green polymaths that visit this site to do the sums on that, and work out what it means.

      But, in recognition that they are innumerate, here’s the hint:

      A 50% reduction in any number means a subsequent 15% increase in a subset of that number cannot be greater than that subset was initially.

      So, the conclusion?

      The number (as opposed to the proportion) of Cat 3-5 cyclones will decrease.

      Slime bags. All of them.

      251

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        S.S.

        One of the requirements of becoming a Climate Believer** is to be innumerate (along with an inability to think logically) so your very clear explanation will go right over their heads.

        ** that’s C.B. third class. In C.B. second class you appear on the ABC and first class is what you travel in to Climate conferences.

        100

      • #
        Strop

        It’s possible to have a 50% decrease in cyclones but have a 15% increase in a subset.

        e.g. if one third of cyclones are cat 3-5 and that subset increases by 15% while the total number of cyclones decreases by 50%, the number of cat 3-5 cyclones becomes 76% of cyclones.

        Total cyclones 100
        Cat 3-5 33

        Total cyclones becomes 50 (reduced by 50%)
        Cat 3-5 becomes 38 (increased by 15%)

        Cat 3-5 are now 38 out of 50 cyclones.

        Overall cyclones reduce but the number of intense cyclones increase.

        I’m not arguing the claim is correct. Looking at the BOM’s cyclone trend info it doesn’t look correct. Just showing the 50% reduction and 15% increase claims don’t make it impossible.

        BOM info
        http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/images/tc-graph-1969-2012.png?fbclid=IwAR30hVcwYO1rLiw23CD6OP17UW22kAG6075_15jcnQl70F25__hfBCM7Xjg

        41

        • #
          Sceptical Sam

          No Strop.

          Your error lies in not reducing your Cat3-5 numbers in line with the overall decrease of 50%.

          After you have reduced them by the 50% you can then add on the 15% increase.

          Taking your example:

          50% of 100 = 50; which includes the reduction of your 33 by the same proportion, ie., your 33 Cat 3-5s becomes 16.5.

          Then you increase the 16.5 by 15% to get 18.0 (rounded) for the Cat 3-5s.

          The number of Cat 3-5s is reduced by 15 from the initial number (33-18 = 15).

          21

          • #
            Sceptical Sam

            We’ve a red thumber who doesn’t do arithmetic apparently.

            Oh well, that goes with the religion I guess.

            After all, the RCC had the same problem for a while there, about 400 years ago. It eventually caught up.

            00

          • #
            Strop

            I haven’t made an error. I’ve used exactly what you said.

            So the total number falls by 50% and the number of intense cyclones increases by 10-15%.

            A 50% reduction in any number means a subsequent 15% increase in a subset of that number cannot be greater than that subset was initially.

            I’ve shown how that is possible.

            However, I have now read what the CSIRO person was quoted as saying in the ABC article and your paraphrasing changes what they’re saying.
            Based on what they’re actually saying your assessment is correct. The number of severe cyclones will reduce.
            Based on what you wrote my response was correct.

            20

            • #
              Sceptical Sam

              Thank you Strop.

              You also are now correct.

              The number of intense cyclones will decrease.

              The IPCC’s A34 statement is yet another example of its proclivity to tell untruths.

              The proportion of Cat 3 -5 cyclones might increase, but they will be fewer in number.

              They don’t want the dopey politicians to know that. And, the media has lost all capacity to think critically about the IPCC and its works of fiction – with the exception of Graham Lloyd from “The Australian”. No doubt they’re working on getting him cancelled as we speak.

              10

      • #
        Tilba Tilba

        A 50% reduction in any number means a subsequent 15% increase in a subset of that number cannot be greater than that subset was initially.

        That is assuming a uniform reduction pattern. It could be the case that Scenario A has 100 cyclones, of which ten are majors, but under Scenario B, there are 50 cyclones but 11 or 12 of them are majors.

        27

        • #
          clarence.t

          There is no evidence in any trend in cyclone numbers or energy.

          There is no evidence that human CO2 affects the weather or the climate.

          If you think you have the evidence, then produce it..

          … or stop making inane anti-science comments.

          80

          • #
            Strop

            Tilba’s not making an anti science comment. It’s a comment relating to Sam’s notion that a 50% reduction in the total means there can’t be a 15% increase in a subset. But there can.

            What this discussion excludes is the actual total cyclone numbers and the portion that are intense. The actual data might show it is impossible for cyclone numbers to reduce by 50% and intense to increase by 15%.

            Some numbers can be taken from the BOM chart I posted at 3.1.2 but it’s a chart based only on the Aus region so can’t be relied upon as representative of all cyclone patterns. Even the north west and north east of Aus has different patterns.

            10

            • #
              Tilba Tilba

              Tilba’s not making an anti science comment. It’s a comment relating to Sam’s notion that a 50% reduction in the total means there can’t be a 15% increase in a subset. But there can.

              Quite right … I was just questioning the logic and arithmetic in the original assertion. I know rather more about maths and statistics than I do about climatology … but have a fairly sensitive detector for dodgy cherry-picking.

              13

              • #
                Strop

                If you read the ABC article, which I initially hadn’t done and I had just used what Sam wrote, you will find the cherry picking is by the ABC or CSIRO.

                The ABC and CSIRO shouldn’t focus on the proportional increase of severe cyclones. They should spell out that severe cyclones will decrease.

                Based on the CSIRO example percentage figures, if we currently have 40 cyclones a year then 4 would be severe. In the future we would only have 20 cyclones in a year and only 3 of them would be severe.
                An increase in proportion but an actual lowering of total severe cyclones.

                So, given the CSIRO example percentages, to focus on an increase proportion is cherry picking by the ABC and CSIRO. Instead of the total number.

                30

              • #
                el gordo

                ‘There is substantial evidence from theory and model experiments that the large-scale environment in which tropical cyclones form and evolve is changing as a result of global warming.’ (BoM)

                In fact cyclones are in decline under global warming.

                10

        • #
          cohenite

          That is assuming a uniform reduction pattern. It could be the case that Scenario A has 100 cyclones, of which ten are majors, but under Scenario B, there are 50 cyclones but 11 or 12 of them are majors.

          You obviously know nothing about ACE which is based on number and strength and ACE is declining:

          http://climatlas.com/tropical/

          http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/climatology/trends.shtml

          50

  • #
    Neville

    Dr Pielke Jnr is starting to pull apart the IPCC AR6 report and finding some very useful models etc to scrutinize.
    Apart from the stupid, lazy MSM ignorant comments Pielke has shone some early light on some of the data and I think we can be more optimistic as we move forward.
    Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones were very good tonight and Morrison seems to be making more sense today as well.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/09/pielke-jr-on-ar6/

    210

    • #
      Neville

      I should have mentioned that Jo’s SW corner of OZ is the only place that is expected to suffer from more drought in our country according to this latest report. See above link.
      See the map of the world with the brown colours in the various countries and Sth Africa is also likely to suffer increasing drought. At least according to this report. Who knows.

      70

      • #
        GlenM

        Yeah, yeah.. but try telling that to the thought police and they will tell you that it’s ” unprecedented “.

        80

    • #
      Strop

      It’s possible to have a 50% decrease in cyclones but have a 15% increase in a subset.

      e.g. if one third of cyclones are cat 3-5 and that subset increases by 15% while the total number of cyclones decreases by 50%, the number of cat 3-5 cyclones becomes 76% of cyclones.

      Total cyclones 100
      Cat 3-5 33

      Total cyclones becomes 50 (reduced by 50%)
      Cat 3-5 becomes 38 (increased by 15%)

      Cat 3-5 are now 38 out of 50 cyclones.

      Overall cyclones reduce but the number of intense cyclones increase.

      I’m not arguing the claim is correct. Looking at the BOM’s cyclone trend info it doesn’t look correct. Just showing the 50% reduction and 15% increase claims don’t make it impossible.

      BOM info
      http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/images/tc-graph-1969-2012.png?fbclid=IwAR30hVcwYO1rLiw23CD6OP17UW22kAG6075_15jcnQl70F25__hfBCM7Xjg

      20

  • #
    Senex

    Of course, CTV News in Canada duly highlighted the latest IPCC report with full-on scare tactics, references to this year’s “extreme” weather, etc. Most telling was one of their choices of commentators – a spokeswoman for 350.org.

    100

    • #
      Sommer

      And this story also appeared Monday morning:

      https://globalnews.ca/news/8089039/gulf-stream-collapse-study-canada-europe/

      “According to University of Toronto professor Kent Moore….. as for how to prevent or slow the stream from collapsing, Moore said that it would be very unlikely for humans to find a way to “engineer” their way out of it. Instead, he pointed to mitigating the effects of global warming as being the only approach.”

      Does this mean more industrial scale wind turbines and solar panels?

      60

  • #
    Flok

    All new roads lead to a windmill pole.

    Icebreaker ships still break ice.

    90

  • #
    Global Cooling

    Our climate is inherently unstable when Earth wobbles through the Solar system and Galaxy. Water in oceans, glaciers, clouds and moisture form a feedback system that has long delays. We have ice ages and inter-glacial periods. Optimum weather that only man can destroy does not exist.

    Climate is a complex system that large number of overlapping non-linear contributing factors with feed backs and delays. It is not driven by CO2 or any other single contributing factor.

    Climate models are simplified approximations of the real climate system. Variation of model runs with each other and with observations shows that error bars are too wide. The same implausible message is repeated in 2021 and 1989.

    Climate modelling for policy making is impossible. We do not understand the physics of the climate. Observational data is sparse and unreliable. We have some data from last 20 years and we try to extrapolate that decades ahead. How do we know that cold times in the last 12 000 years do not come back? Grid size is larger than the size of the important phenomenon like thunderstorms. We do not have enough computing capability to avoid the accumulation of systematic errors in computing.

    180

    • #
      RickWill

      Climate models are simplified approximations of the real climate system.

      Climate models are expanded weather models. They are very complex and useful for projection about 7 days ahead in most locations. Though have literally thousands of tunable parameters. That allows them to match the ups and downs of past conditions. Most are self-tuning these days.

      The main add-on that transforms a weather model to a climate model is sensitivity to CO2. The ocean-coupled models now include the thermal inertia of the oceans after James Hansen found his missing heat. In fact all coupled climate models can be reduced to a black box with a single factor for CO2 sensitivity and ocean thermal inertia. I did that here:
      https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aq1iAj8Yo7jNgnXLo5LnjuHhohGM
      This response to doubling of CO2 then no more. This one for tripping:
      https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aq1iAj8Yo7jNgndJfO2SWEmL3C2o

      This model determines the so-called CO2 forcing from the measured deep ocean temperature rise so it notionally has some basis in reality. However it is physically impossible to warm the deep oceans in 65 years through surface flux. In reality, deep ocean warming in that time frame can only occur through reduced rate of cooling as result of lower evaporation rate. This has been happening since 1585 as precession moves the orbit and Southern Hemisphere getting less sunshine and being mostly water.

      The extended weather models essentially dither around the trend I have shown. For example, this from the Australian ACCESS model:
      http://climexp.knmi.nl/data/icmip5_tas_Amon_ACCESS1-3_rcp85_0-360E_-90-90N_n_+++_a.png
      Just a little dither on the trend I can produce with a single unable parameter.

      13

      • #
      • #
        bobn

        Rick.
        Climate models are simplified hypothetical approximations of the imagined but misunderstood and as yet unknown real climate system. Hence they bear no relation to reality.

        70

        • #
          RickWill

          But climate models are not simplified models of the climate. They are complex computer code too involved for anyone to understand but their output can be simply replicated by a single tunable parameter linked to increase in CO2.

          The Earth has existed for billions of years. The ocean surface temperature is thermostatically limited to the range 271K to 303K due to powerful negative feedbacks. No climate model, despite their complexity, is able to replicate the formation of convective cloud in response to surface temperature

          10

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘How do we know that cold times in the last 12 000 years do not come back?’

      We are at the end of the Holocene Interglacial and this Modern Climate Optimum is the last hurrah.

      40

    • #
      RickWill

      How do we know that cold times in the last 12 000 years do not come back?

      I can guarantee the process of glaciation is in its early stages. It actually began in 1585 when perihelion last occurred before the austral summer solstice. SH is cooling and NH is warming. The increase in evaporation in the tropical North Atlantic will lead to higher snowfall during the colder boreal winters.
      https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aq1iAj8Yo7jNhEUPzdLmLlSCh3_I

      10

  • #
    Ruairi

    Perhaps we all should give up,
    Using tea-bags when having a sup,
    Better tea-leaves instead,
    Which are easily read,
    To forecast at the end of the cup.

    370

    • #
      TdeF

      Tea-riffic.

      190

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Ruari:
      Youve made me see the error of my ways; I’ve been using leaf tea for the past 30 years but filtering the leaves out when pouring. If only I’d left them in then I would be able to predict what the climate will be like in the future – cold, wet and soggy as per the forecast for today.

      40

      • #
        GlenM

        The big question for Ruairi fans is he going to make a comment here. Who is this mysterious, secret man( or woman) who contributes here?

        10

    • #
      Earl

      Is that tea reason or treason?

      30

  • #
    Deano

    Sorry if this was posted recently, but this 1973 ABC clip shows a computer prediction of how bad the Earth will get by 2020.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCxPOqwCr1I

    Computers might have changed but the old saying still holds, “Rubbish in. Rubbish out.”

    240

    • #
      R.B.

      Straight to the poolroom.

      50

    • #
      Geoffrey Williams

      This video shows clearly that the climate and environmental scare goes right back to this time.
      I never saw this video at the time and I have to say that it is a revalation. Today the message from these same people has not changed despite the fact that after 50 years their computer predictions have failed to materialise.
      GeoffW

      80

      • #
        Deano

        It’s also interesting to note that many of the YouTube comments actually praise the accuracy of this 1973 prediction (no doubt ABC fans mostly). For instance, many seem to believe that life expectancy has plummeted. They apparently prefer Greta Thunberg’s description of the world, to the actual world what I’m standing on right now!

        The Cult of Climate Change demands total obedience of thought and deed.

        10

    • #
      Richard Jenkins

      You can have software likes Mann’s hockey stick that turns whatever you put in provide the result you aimed to get.
      The IPCC had to remove the hockey stick.
      They left all the references and conclusions based on the legally discredited hockey stick in their documents.
      That makes ignorant zeal into dliberate fraud.

      80

      • #
        el gordo

        Many years ago Mann invented the AMO but now he disowns it. He’ll get a shock when it drifts into neutral.

        21

    • #
      Serp

      It’s an early example of the ABC buying into Club of Rome shtick (https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/profecias/esp_profecia77.htm). Back then I hadn’t recognised that as the gods sent serpents after Laocoon our controlling cliques sent the ABC after us (https://mymodernmet.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/laocoon-and-his-sons-statue-1.jpg).

      00

    • #
      Lawrie

      They were hopelessly wrong then and are just as hopelessly wrong now. The Club of Rome started with a premise and ensured the computer projection adhered to it hence the total error that we see in this video. Likewise the IPCC starts with a premise that they want confirmed so the programmers make it happen. The MSM are not smart enough to ask the right questions so publish whatever rubbish gushes forth from the UN , the pinnacle of wisdom if you are a believer. It is easier to be deluded than to be educated.

      10

  • #
    StephenP

    After seeing all the hype about the wildfires in Greece supposedly caused by climate change,it was interesting to read a balanced report from the FAO about forestry and fires in Greece
    Apparently only a low number of wildfires (3%) are due to natural causes, the rest have some human influence.

    http://www.fao.org/3/ad653e/ad653e64.htm

    Maybe it would be interesting if similar reports were written about all countries, but will not, as their conclusions would likely not support the current narratives.

    180

    • #
      John F Hultquist

      In the Western USA about 84% of wildland fires have a human influence. A recent example near where I live was when a boat trailer had a tire come off and the steel-on-pavement produced sparks flying into dry grass at the edge. The study investigated thousands of fires. It is now several years old. Arson also happens, but is not the big source of ignitions.
      Often the “human influence” sorts of ignitions (many preventable) are known immediately and quick response limits the spatial extent of the fire.
      Lighting often starts fires in hard to reach mountains where the use of crews and equipment becomes difficult. Fires from these ignitions are often the ones that “blow up” rapidly from strong winds and high fuel volumes.

      110

      • #
      • #

        you realise that “fires caused by climate change” does not refer to ignition?

        25

        • #
          Serp

          Some further explication please Gee Aye; don’t leave your audience hanging.

          30

        • #
          Tilba Tilba

          Yes – “fires caused by climate change” is not referring to ignition.

          It is referring to how they occur much more readily and more intensely in hotter, drier conditions, not how they start which can be a wide range of ways – from lightning to downed power lines, to sparks from machinery, a thrown butt, or arson.

          In the Western USA about 84% of wildland fires have a human influence.

          If you mean they were started by human action (as per above) then that’s fine. If you mean that the severity of the fire, and the frequency of big fires from small ones, has human agency and therefore cannot be attributed to climate change, then I would disagree.

          There are two issues: (1) the degree to which the drought and heat in the US West is caused by climate change, and (2) the degree to which forest management could be better, at least in accessible areas near towns, so that the intensity of fires could be reduced.

          It seems to me pretty self-evident that climate change is playing a significant role in the heat and drought, and lots of scientific types agree with that. The second issue is more complex – and is similar to debates here in Victoria, which is also one of the most bushfire-prone inhabited areas in the world. There is a lot of “cool-burning” done in Australia – some people say too much, and some say too little.

          Personally I think it’s sort of nuts to build a place (even whole towns) in the midst of fire-prone eucalyptus forests, but people do … and they’re allowed to.

          04

  • #
    Eddie

    It’s the 10th Anniversary of the Convoy of No Confidence coming up on Monday, 16 August.

    https://joannenova.com.au/2011/07/the-convoy-of-no-confidence-is-amassing-towards-canberra/

    140

  • #
    Analitik

    Meanwhile, New Zealand has been dealing with blackouts for the past couple of days due to insufficient generation to meet the record electricity demand brought on by the cold conditions. Oops.

    Electricity demand reached an all-time high last night and, combined with insufficient generation, it resulted in blackouts to some parts of the country as power distributors responded to Transpower’s demand to reduce the burden on the national grid.

    Yesterday’s market conditions were highly unusual and the product of a number of factors that coincided with a significant spike in peak evening electricity demand due to the cold snap being experienced across the country.

    There was no third Rankine operating as there was sufficient generation capacity available to the market prior to the loss of generation at Tokaanu and sudden decline in wind generation that coincided with peak demand.

    South Australia’s 2016 blackout really has taught grid operators to quickly dump suburban networks to avoid total grid collapse

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/448852/power-supply-still-tight-as-transpower-delivers-apology-explains-situation

    270

    • #
      Analitik

      Oh, and before the usual suspects pipe up about thermal generators going offline, leaving renewables in the lurch, Tokaanu is a hydro plant.

      Genesis Energy had shut down its Tongariro hydro plant at Tokaanu because its intake screens got blocked by weed, in gale force winds.

      At least 20,000 households lost power entirely as high winds brought down lines and cold weather saw power use surge beyond generation capacity, Transpower said. And for nearly two hours, different power retailers turned to different tools in their kits

      For those that had power, wholesale prices soared above $300,000 per megawatt hour.

      Looking at the wholesale price spike, you have to wonder if Genesis Energy didn’t commit more thermal capacity in the lead up to game the system as it looks like the NZ wholesale market has no price cap. Rick Will talks of how they do it here to generate viable income in the face of renewables mandates and this would have been a jackpot for Genesis Energy.

      https://www.newsroom.co.nz/electricity-grid-operator-warns-of-more-emergency-outages

      160

    • #
      Ronin

      “South Australia’s 2016 blackout really has taught grid operators to quickly dump suburban networks to avoid total grid collapse.”

      One would have reasonably thought that was SOP.

      40

      • #
        Analitik

        It is now.

        Prior to that, no major grid had been destabilized quite as much so the grid operators thought they had the usual luxury of bringing on more thermal peaking plants or hydro (as well as shedding industrial loads) when seeing demand slowly ramp up and/or a generator falling offline.

        Now, with all the “transition to renewables” there is so much less inertia in many grids plus the generation output can collapse (or spike) when conditions for renewables suddenly change. This means the response time for load shedding is far shorter and the amount needed to be shed is greater than industrial demand, especially outside working hours.

        50

  • #
    donone101

    Our world today lives and breathes sensational and baseless headlines. The latest IPCC report is a fine example of this kind of tomfoolery. If Michael Mann signs off on the efficacy of the UN’s conclusions, then one can definitely assume the fix is in.

    200

  • #
    Serge Wright

    The climate change “last chance” message has developed over time into a tale that draws from of the fable of “The boy that cried wolf”, except in this real life tale there is a large group of ideologically challenged people that always believe the lie, no matter how many times it gets repeated and no matter how many times the scary predictions fail to eventuate. In contrast to the 40 years of false predictions, in 2021 we have the lowest number of people living in poverty, the lowest number of people being killed by extreme weather, the highest crop yields and a greener planet with no measurable difference in the rate of sea level rise. Essentially the extra CO2 has provided a boon for the planet and human life has prospered, just as it did before during similar warm periods noted in human history.

    Of course the report is not really about science and instead all about politics and the aim here is to convince wealthy western democracies to destroy their economies so as to allow China to take full control of the global political landscape and enforce a new totalitarian age of oppression. We know this to be the case because today we saw the full squad of the communist ER team painting our parliament house with fake blood, demanding we remove our 1% emissions, and not one of those protesters venturing down the road to the Chinese embassy to protest about their 30%.

    240

    • #
      TdeF

      ” large group of ideologically challenged people that always believe the lie”

      To be fair, this group is made of teachers, themselves students just twenty years ago. And Greta Thurnberg’s generations is simply one which has been told it is all true. Even if it is transparently not true. After all, scientists would not lie. Would they?

      220

      • #
        Doc

        That crude paper that manipulated its way into the universe just long enough to poison science forever, provided the politicians with what they needed to pursue AGW and force its destruction on the Democracies. That is, the paper that stated ‘The science is in!’ The destructive intent of those pushing this delusion on the world could never be more plain when the huge generators of CO2 ie Russia, India, China and the 80+ nations that promise the world and do little to fulfil those promises, get away with nary a complaint from the UN (which China now seems to control much of). They will also never submit to the UN, and the UN knows it. These nations expose the duplicity and hypocrisy of the activists attached to the IPCC, and the fraudulent nature of those pushing the entire AGW movement. The ‘ifs and buts’ that have increasingly become part of the UN climate reports are there, imo, to indemnify those providing the reports from legal attack when the ruse collapses.

        This particular report seems to be particularly carefully written as though the end game is nigh.

        This report, with its new acceptance that natural variation could produce most of the outcomes seen, but is unprovable by adaptation to software, and the outing of the incompetence of the current computerisation methodologies, must be seen – from the point of view of the IPCC – as the beginning of the end of the gravy train.

        30

    • #
      Tilba Tilba

      Of course the report is not really about science and instead all about politics and the aim here is to convince wealthy western democracies to destroy their economies so as to allow China to take full control of the global political landscape and enforce a new totalitarian age of oppression.

      After accusing the IPCC Report of being full of craziness and catastrophism, you then make similarly wild claims that its authors want to aid and abet world domination by China? Where is the evidence for this, and more to the point, what on earth would the scientists – either individually or collectively – gain from such a project?

      While I firmly believe that the ongoing burning of fossil fuels is very detrimental to the climate on much of the planet, I do share some concerns about the usefulness of these sorts of red-alert type reports. I am particularly concerned that we (in this case Oz) go through all sorts of gymnastics in order to meet “emission reduction targets” but meanwhile sell vast amounts of coal and natural gas to those who do not.

      So huge nations like India and China are not similarly meeting such targets. But the Report isn’t a part of a nefarious plot for Chinese world domination.

      13

      • #
        clarence.t

        “While I firmly believe that the ongoing burning of fossil fuels is very detrimental to the climate on much of the planet,”

        What you “believe” is totally irrelevant.

        Bring “science”, not your brain-washed fantasies.

        The use of coal has allowed the existence of every developed human society in the world. It is the cheapest, most abundant energy supply there is.

        If you can’t cope with that fact, and think getting rid of coal would be a good idea, then go somewhere they have to exist only on intermittents or nothing, depending on the weather.

        But you won’t will you.

        You love your society comforts, and the huge benefits that a fossil fuel powered society has to offer.

        20

        • #
        • #
          Tilba Tilba

          If you can’t cope with that fact, and think getting rid of coal would be a good idea, then go somewhere they have to exist only on intermittents [sic] or nothing, depending on the weather.

          You’re quite wrong clarry – and like all passionate zealots you make all sorts of assumptions about those who have different views – without a shred of evidence. It is classic ad hominem from those who won’t tolerate argument.

          I actually hold the view – that I have stated on here – that I think a rush to wind turbines, solar, big batteries, and other exotics is unrealistic, and fundamentally irrational. At least while we are exporting so much fossil fuel. I think demonising and shuttering power stations before time is also nuts.

          I also think the rush to meet wildly unrealistic (and essentially self-imposed) emission “deadlines” is a cross between virtue-signalling, hubris, and basically pandering to the voters – and anyone else who needs to be pandered to.

          The rush is nuts. I think Global Warming should be treated as at least a half-marathon … and we recognise a long emergency and have a very measured reduction in CO2 emissions, and while we’re at it, curtail a wide range of other destructive practices (such as de-forestation, wasting of water, and trashing the world with single-use plastic rubbish).

          And we use clever technologies to extract CO2 from the atmosphere in whatever feasible ways are devised that don’t send societies broke. Plus Peak Oil (ie, the decline in affordable oil) is going to bring about technological change, specially in transportation, but also much else.

          But having a state government demand that everyone get a $50,000 Tesla EV by next decade – or else! That is insanity. How are we going to charge all these things?

          02

        • #
          Alice Tozer

          I don’t think coal is the cheapest fuel anymore. And sunshine is more abundant than coal.

          00

      • #
        clarence.t

        And no, burning fossil fuels has absolutely zero scientifically-provable affect on climate.

        Get back to reality, .. enough of your fairy-tale nonsense.

        10

        • #
          TdeF

          It actually has (almost) no scientifically provable effect on CO2 levels. And if we humans cannot change CO2 levels, what exactly is the problem? Whether CO2 induces warming, something which is clearly disproven over the last 33 years, is quite a different idea to the idea that we humans have control over CO2 levels.

          10

      • #
        Serge Wright

        After accusing the IPCC Report of being full of craziness and catastrophism, you then make similarly wild claims that its authors want to aid and abet world domination by China? Where is the evidence for this

        You must have missed the deal made between China and Obama / UN in 2014 that allows them to do as they please until 2030. If CO2 was a threat to the planet then the last thing you would want is for the world’s biggest emitter to be able to continue unrestrained. This deal effectively gave a free pass to all other developing nations to follow suit (which they have) and when you consider that 85% of potential emissions are in the developing world, the politics here are all to easy to see. This is why 2/3 of all emissions now come from the developing world and why 100% of emissions increase since 1980 has been from the developing world. These countries are exempt because they are not the target of the left. It’s also why there are no protesters outside the Chinese embassy in Canberra worrying about the 30% and growing CO2 emissions, because the 1% and shrinking target down the road is the main political game.

        40

        • #
          Tilba Tilba

          This is why 2/3 of all emissions now come from the developing world and why 100% of emissions increase since 1980 has been from the developing world. These countries are exempt because they are not the target of the left.

          I have a fair amount of agreement with your overall points – particularly the exemption of China from short-term targets. But they – and certainly the rest of the developing world – have a very solid argument, that the OECD have developed advanced economies unhindered, and have done most of the damaging emitting in the 200 years up to 1980.

          But it’s got nothing to do with the “left” – who would that be anyway? I can’t think of any genuine social-democratic party that is in power anywhere really. Our friends across the ditch led by Jacinda Ardern are sort of lefty, but they’re hardly heavy-hitters.

          Anyway – whatever you think about the “left”, and China, India, and many others getting a free pass – it does not constitute evidence that a big bunch of evil climate scientists, in cahoots with the UN no doubt, are aiming to provide a clear pathway for China’s world domination. LOL.

          02

  • #
    Serge Wright

    I also note the image of Pachauri added by Jo, which is an amusing reminder of what can happen when you get caught trying to fiddle with the models

    180

  • #
    Clyde Spencer

    “Your car exhaust causes bushfires, …”

    Well, it might if the catalytic converter touches some dead grass!

    110

    • #
      David Maddison

      I don’t think modern ones get hot enough to do that. Original type ones did.

      70

      • #
        Chad

        Grass fire under the car is a common , well known, problem on Toyota 4×4 s used off road.
        Especially in the Aussie outback with tall Spinnifex that ignites easily.

        50

        • #
          Klem

          Aha! So that’s why Leftists like to drive Toyota 4×4’s, it saves them all that trouble of having to get out of the vehicle and light those planet-saving forest fires by hand.

          20

  • #
    Raven

    I must say, I do love a good Jo rant.
    It’s invigorating.

    All this, of course is determined using the IPCC “Calibrated language” . . . with Moderate Confidence, Low Evidence, but High Agreement
    😉

    100

  • #
    Curious George

    How 200 scientists could ever be wrong?

    That’s twice the Hitlers’s masterpiece “100 German scientists against Einstein”. Of course, he was limited to Germany only.

    80

  • #
    Fuel Filter

    Anyone here know what happened to Mark Stein’s lawsuit against that fraudster Michael Mann over the original “Hockey Stick” graph?

    60

    • #
      Simon

      Start reading the AR6 WGI Full Report. The evidence is incontrovertible.

      234

      • #
        Pauly

        Simon, you must be joking! I always look for the attribution chapter, to see what evidence has been unearthed since the previous report. In this WG1 report, it appears to be Chapter 5. But reading that chapter, and trying to find actual evidence is proving difficult.

        The word I’ve used below is impenetrable. The methodology appears to be to swamp readers with citations, but not actually present either their data or their key figures in the report. What is presented is a summary of the data, and then the IPCC’s take on that summary.

        Of course, no controversial findings are presented, nor is there much discussion on uncertainty. And the truly difficult aspect is that it is impossible to determine what papers, findings or conflicting data has been simply ignored.

        Easy enough to do, given that climate science is now an industry, with over 10,000 “new” papers being generated every year. But as a science report, only providing one side does not make it incontrovertible. Quantity does not supplant quality.

        270

        • #
          RicDre

          “Quantity does not supplant quality.”

          And related to lack of quality:

          … the climate models that help them project the future have grown a little too alarmist. Many of the world’s leading models are now projecting warming rates that most scientists, including the modelmakers themselves, believe are implausibly fast.”

          Ahead of each major IPCC report, the world’s climate modeling centers run a set of scenarios for the future, calculating how different global emissions paths will alter the climate. These raw results, compiled in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), then feed directly into the IPCC report.

          This pretty much sums up the problem:

          For now, policymakers and other researchers need to avoid putting too much stock in the unconstrained extreme warming the latest models predict, says Claudia Tebaldi, a climate scientist at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and one of the leaders of CMIP’s climate projections. Getting that message out will be a challenge. “These issues don’t translate very well in practice,” she says.

          Already scientific papers are appearing using CMIP’s unconstrained worst-case scenarios for 2100, adding fire to what are already well-justified fears. But that practice needs to change, [Gavin] Schmidt says. “You end up with numbers for even the near-term that are insanely scary—and wrong.”

          But, in their defense:

          … the modelers hope to do better next time around.

          https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/07/un-climate-panel-confronts-implausibly-hot-forecasts-future-warming

          60

        • #
          GlenM

          That’s ok Pauly, he’s scarpered.

          00

      • #
      • #
        Andrew Wilkins

        Let’s go back to the stuff the UN was saying in 1989 (they kicked off the whole IPCC fandango)

        A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

        Nope, nothing has been wiped off the face of the earth, and it’s 2 decades after the 2000 deadline

        As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations,

        Maldives is still here and that 3 feet of sea level rise has failed to happen

        The most conservative scientific estimate that the Earth’s temperature will rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years

        Those conservative estimates were dead wrong. I wonder how wrong the non-conservative estimates were.
        Now Simon, what’s that you were saying about “incontrovertible” ?

        90

      • #
        TedM

        If it were evidence.

        30

      • #
        Analitik

        The evidence is incontrovertible

        Of fraud

        120

      • #
        clarence.t

        And yet cannot produce any.

        You say so.. you must be right.. LOL..

        … even though you have proven time and time again that you are totally clueless as to what “science” actually is.

        Come on simple one, produce one actual piece of real science to support you mindless simpering to the IPCC.

        CO2 warming.. Waiting for scientific proof

        50

    • #
      Simon

      See Figure SPM.1 in the AR6 WGI Full Report.

      120

      • #
        PeterS

        Why read all that BS? We get enough of it from you here.

        70

      • #
        el gordo

        Is that the page which states that the ‘IPCC AR6-WGI is a scientific view on climate change from the past through to the present day, and into the future.’

        This is a summary for policy makers and has no scientific credibility. Paleo climate history gives us a glimpse of the past, present and future, which is becoming cooler.

        90

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Simon:

        In the past I read 2 scientific reports (AR3 & AR4) and came away quite unconvinced. This was about the time a book Weasel Words was issued and that was my reaction. The whole thing was ‘might’, ‘could’, ‘may’, ‘possible’ etc. nothing definite at all. And it was plainly obvious that the Summary for Decision Makers had nothing to do with the vague waffle inside.

        No, I have no inclination to waste time on reading what apparently has convinced you, assuming that you have read it.
        Fortunately I don’t think there will be another report as the scam/hysteria collapses in the face of reality. 30 years of failure for the IPCC.

        30

      • #
        cohenite

        See Figure SPM.1 in the AR6 WGI Full Report.

        Why? If I want to look at meaningless abstract art I’ll look at this:

        https://medium.com/@gowithyamo/art-made-by-animals-f0b91bd1bc15

        20

    • #
      Murray Shaw

      Re the Mark Stein /Michael Mann lawsuit, guess that that is on hold after his other suit against the Canadian scientist Tim Ball, was thrown out due to the fact that Mann would not furnish the court with his working papers.
      Mann was engaging in “Lawfare” in an attempt to silence his critics, He soon realised that Ball had an extensive witness list, and that he himself would need to take the stand, evidently he got cold feet and stopped answering at the discovery stage.

      150

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Apparently the Courts have decided that none of Mann’s preferred experts are relevant, and the only expert Mark Stein has is a statistician who was rudely critical about M.M.’s work some years ago.
        I think even M.M. could read the writing on the wall.

        50

        • #
          Analitik

          And yet “our ABC” still present him to provide “scientific evidence” whenever they screen one of their CAGW scare series.

          40

        • #
          TdeF

          It wasn’t about expert witnesses. Michael Mann won the right to call the data he used for his hockey stick his personal property, not that of the university. However that was under American law, not Canadian. So he agreed to the court to supply the data to win an adjournment. Except he never did.

          This was clear contempt of court. So Mann just let the time run out and the case was thrown out. One of the major unintended but unavoidable consequences of this is that in not winning, in Canada the statement that Mann belonged in the State Penn not Penn State cannot be contested.

          40

    • #
      RickWill

      This is the latest motion before the courts dated 22 Jan 2021:
      https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10973.pdf
      This is the essence of the summary judgement sought by Steyn:

      Summary judgment dismissing Mann’s libel claim against Steyn should be granted for any one of four independent reasons: Steyn’s blog: (1) was true; (2) lacked “actual malice”;
      (3) was protected as part of a polemic about an important public issue; and (4) caused Mann no damage. On that last point, while Mann claims he was defamed by Steyn’s linking him with the Sandusky case, in his just-published book The New Climate War, Mann thanks one of the convicted criminals in the Sandusky case. ¶ 185.

      30

    • #
      Richard Jenkins

      Many delays and appeals. Mark remained amused and happy as he waited for the ruling to be upheld.
      Mark continued to win and it is over after years of garbage.

      30

      • #
        Richard Jenkins

        Thank you Rickwill. You added some detail to my overview.

        00

        • #
          Richard Jenkins

          Mark Steyn is delighted that this case is going to a trial. At last. Announced 28th July 2021.
          Mark has sued Michael Mann for $10,000,000.
          Tim Ball won 1 million in court but Mann has not paid.

          40

  • #
    Pauly

    I wonder how an organisation like the IPCC make their landmark report so impenetrable!

    Nearly 4000 pages in the report.
    The Summary for Policymakers is over 200 pages.
    There is no useful Table of Contents.
    The WG1 report appears to be in draft mode, with bold watermarks across every page making reading difficult, and no figures or tables in their correct position. You need to hunt through each chapter’s supplementary information to find the relevant data.

    My quick take away is that the IPCC continues to rely on an historical temperature reconstruction that looks very similar to Mann’s 1998 Hockey Stick graph. But it was hard to tell where this graph was sourced, as no citation was provided with that chart.

    Also, deep in Chapter 7’s supplementary material were the ECS and TCR values generated by the models used in CMIP6, and a comparison of the ECS values generated by models in CMIP5:

    CMIP6: ECS mean 3.78, std dev1.08;
    CMIP5: ECS mean 3.28, std dev 0.74;

    What does that mean? Either the models are getting worse, or the scenarios are getting worse, or both. What the latest “research” is proving is that these experts are getting further away from a definitive value for ECS. That’s not the way science should work, unless, of course, the property simply doesn’t exist, and simply can’t be found.

    70

    • #
      PeterS

      The real science has already proven them wrong several times over. Hence, the IPCC is merely spreading fake science.

      60

  • #
    Simon

    If you don’t have time to read it all, there is a summary here:
    https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2021/08/ar6-of-the-best/

    015

    • #
      Travis T. Jones

      Gavin Schmidt, point 1:

      “Western Central Europe is one of the few regions where both an increase in extreme precipitation and drought have already been documented.”

      Q. If carbon (sic) causes both extreme precipitation and drought, sometimes simultaneously, how do you know when it’s fixed?
      A. Check your wallet, you’ve just been diddled.

      210

    • #

      Why always present us GIGO ?

      60

    • #
      PeterS

      Don’t need to read it. We get enough of the BS from you here.

      40

    • #
      el gordo

      Simon they have failed to mention the new hiatus, its not a ‘temporary’ phenomenon.

      ‘The observed slower global surface temperature increase (relative to preceding and following periods) in the 1998–2012 period, sometimes referred to as ‘the hiatus’, was temporary (very high confidence). The increase in global surface temperature during the 1998–2012 period is also greater in the data sets used in the AR6 assessment than in those available at the time of AR5.’

      22

    • #
      GlenM

      Why bother Simon, you’re a vacuum looking for some space.

      20

    • #
      clarence.t

      LOL, Gavin trying his best and failing totally as usual.

      Every one of his statements is just wrong…. and every one of his “predictions” is based on GIGO models that have zero skil at a scientific level.

      1. Extreme events are not increasing
      2. Sea level rise has not accelerated is still just below 2mm pa
      3. Yes the climate glitterati do totally abuse the farcical CHIMP6 computer games
      4. Radiative forcing.. LOL… OLR has been increasing, total opposite of what they said should happen
      5. Drought and flooding .. yes complicated, but nothing unusual is happening at all.
      6. Its the coming cooling that we may need to worry about.

      And no, there is no scientific evidence that CO2 contribute to warming.

      That only happens in the fantasy world of “climate non-science”

      30

  • #
    Penguinite

    Let’s just ignore them or better still laugh at these ignorant soothsayers. Especially the ones that build and buy houses in potentially tidal zones!

    70

    • #
      Ronin

      ‘Especially the ones that build and buy houses in potentially tidal zones! ‘

      You mean like Krudd, Gillard and Obumma.

      10

  • #
    Murray Shaw

    Yet the bottom line on AR6, behind all the catastrophic headlines is that the IPCC Committees confidence is “low” as to the outcomes as to floods, wind, rainfall (except Australia), heat, SL rise etc, etc.
    One wonders where they dig the headlines up from.

    90

    • #
      PeterS

      They did it up from the minds of liars and cheaters. It’s certainly not science as the real science has proven them wrong time and time again over the past 2+ decades. We’ve been through the proof many times on Jo’s blog for a very long time. One could write volumes on it and it would even be bigger than the IPCC report.

      30

    • #
      Ronin

      They cherry pick leftist university output.

      00

  • #
    David Maddison

    Since the Left are degenerating society to a time before science and reason I have no doubt they will soon be making actual sacrifices to their gods like Gaia.

    Only, because they also worship and love animals and plants, they won’t be sacrificing them, they will sacrifice humans, whom they hate (except for the Elites) instead.

    But WAIT! They are already sacrificing humans through energy poverty (especially in the Third World) due to the creation of expensive or unaffordable energy. Now, also add sacrifice of humans via covid (by prohibition or restriction of known antivirals) plus the overall destruction of science, reason and Western Civilisation which will lead to even more poverty, disease, chaos and death.

    120

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      G’day D M,
      Something distracted me as I reached the end of your first sentence and I saw “Greta” where you wrote “Gaia”. Sure you didn’t make a mistake?
      Cheers
      Dave B

      30

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        i think shes a minor “prophet” in the climate false religion….

        One of many useful idiots , perhaps ..

        10

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Actually, I believe in Sat. anism, human sacrifice is important.

      I guess they have that covered.

      “The thief comes only
      to steal
      and kill
      and destroy.”

      ( John 10:10)

      Sound familiar?

      But instead :

      “Take no part in the worthless deeds of evil and darkness; instead, expose them.
      ( Eph 5:11)

      10

      • #
        David Maddison

        I prefer Isaiah 5:20

        20 Woe to those who say of the evil that it is good and of the good that it is evil; who present darkness as light and light as darkness, who present bitter as sweet and sweet as bitter.

        כ ה֗וֹי הָאֹֽמְרִ֥ים לָרַ֛ע ט֖וֹב וְלַטּ֣וֹב רָ֑ע שָׂמִ֨ים חֹ֚שֶׁךְ לְאוֹר֙ וְא֣וֹר לְחֹ֔שֶׁךְ שָׂמִ֥ים מַ֛ר לְמָת֖וֹק וּמָת֥וֹק לְמָֽר:

        30

        • #
          Doc

          Human nature hasn’t changed in thousands of years. Bit depressing really. The more we know the more we stay the same.

          30

  • #
    David Maddison

    Which Australians were involved in the report?

    Name and shame.

    80

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    I note that this post is filled under religion and Pseudoscience – which when looking at the comments, is for once, completely accurate.

    I also note that unable to fault the science, the post does the usual false dichotomy argument, one which is lifted directly off the pages of the Heartland/Exxon playbook.

    434

  • #
    Bruce

    Speaking of “witchcraft”:

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/08/fauci-know-people-like-individual-freedoms-need-vaccine-mandates-certain-circumstances-video/

    If you listen through the miasma of buzz-phrases and stomach-churning platitudes (and thinly-disguised defamation of “wrong-thinkers”) displayed CONSTANTLY on the LSM and notably, THEIR ABCess, a synchronised theme is obvious.

    But it also “turns on a dime”, as out American cousins would say. EVERYTHING is “situational” including their “ethics”.

    Seeing the psychos of “Extinction Rebellion” getting a tongue-bath on TV from the “opinion-shapers” is a sure sign that the “timetable has been amended (shortened. Could it be that certain folks want their “glory” whilst still treading this mortal coil? Impatient, or not entirely convinced about the “religious” details of their death cult?

    70

  • #
    Ronin

    These UN clowns should read about King Canute, who realized no matter how powerful a person thought they were, nature would continue doing it’s own thing.

    100

    • #
      sophocles

      You understand that, I understand that, but what makes you think the UN minds can understand it?

      They haven’t yet.

      10

  • #
    another ian

    For the record

    The video linked in this comment

    “mark stevens
    August 10, 2021 10:26 am”

    at

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/10/silly-season-at-the-un-1989-vs-2021-climate-doomsday-its-all-politics-now/

    40

    • #
      another ian

      Also this further down in comments

      “Mike Maguire
      August 10, 2021 10:26 am
      Great topic.
      I’ve been using that AP story from 1989 for the last decade to show the exact same thing.

      However, what people may not realize is that 1989 story was changed to try to hide it. They got rid of the year and got rid of the title earlier this year.

      I discus it more here:

      https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/70534/

      “Correct and they’ve been saying it constantly since the late 1980’s…..but there’s been a change in one of the earliest articles of the United Nations stating this below. What is it?”

      U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not CheckedPETER JAMES SPIELMANN June 29, 1989:

      https://apnews.com/article/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0 “and more

      50

      • #
        Doc

        yep, I think the IPCC is on the run and cleaning up before it all falls over and the hurt come to collect.

        11

    • #
      Ronin

      1989, that’s 32 years ago.

      20

  • #
    PeterS

    IPCC taps into Global Witchcraft.

    Jo, don’t you mean IPCC traps into Global Witchcraft, meaning they have boxed the likes of PM Morrison into a corner? Either he has to keep following the IPCC recommendations as before, ie, mission reductions, which means close down our coal and gas fired power stations ASAP, or he can come clean and refute it all and stop playing games with us by doing what countries like China, India and Japan are doing and start building new coal fired power stations, or where viable refurbish exiting ones. There is no other option left for him. If he does neither then it proves that he is playing games with us and telling big fat lies.

    60

  • #
    Neville

    Here Andrew Bolt responds to the Greens idiotic claims that Australia faces a death sentence because of climate change.
    And he uses the IPCC AR6 report and finds we are much better off etc. Big surprise, NOT.
    His summation using logic+ reason + DATA is as good as it gets and all he asks is that you THINK for yourselves.
    The best 10 minutes you could spend to quickly understand the latest IPCC report. Pielke, Lomborg, Koonin, Shellenberger, Christy, Spencer, McIntyre etc others will weigh in and further pull this apart in the following weeks, months and years ahead.

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

    100

  • #
    Ronin

    “Transpower says nationwide demand for electricity is at an all-time high.

    “Insufficient generation has been made available to meet demand and manage a secure system. ”

    So we’ve all been told to move to electrical appliances throughout our households, but it seems the clowns in charge haven’t received the memo.

    70

  • #
    another ian

    “betapug
    August 10, 2021 1:35 pm
    “Brown suggested that compensating Brazil, Indonesia and Kenya for preserving rain forests may be necessary.” looks supremely ironic in view of NASA’s 2019 startling admission that they were wrong, tropical rainforests are actually major sources of CO2, not sinks.
    Five years of analyzing data from the OCO2 satellite (launched with great fanfare “to pinpoint the sources of CO2”) seems to now reveal the reason it was suddenly disappeared from public view:
    “For as long as we can remember, we’ve talked about Earth’s tropical rainforests as the ‘lungs’ of our planet,” …But that’s not what’s being borne out by our data. We’re seeing that Earth’s tropical regions are a net source of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, at least since 2009. This changes our understanding of things.”

    https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2915/the-atmosphere-getting-a-handle-on-carbon-dioxide/

    The admission that “scientists” were completely wrong is a welcome addition to the evidence that “Science” like “Climate” is a dynamic process, not an authorized canon. Unfortunately new discoveries or insights are unlikely to change policy because reality does not drive policy.

    In the words of former EU Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard,

    “Let’s say that science, some decades from now, said ‘we were wrong, it was not about climate’, would it not in any case have been good to do many of things you have to do in order to combat climate change?.”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/10/silly-season-at-the-un-1989-vs-2021-climate-doomsday-its-all-politics-now/

    50

    • #
      Maptram

      Another of NASA’s revelations earlier this year was that they managed to extract oxygen from the 96% carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of Mars.

      https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-perseverance-mars-rover-extracts-first-oxygen-from-red-planet

      The process separates the oxygen and leaves carbon monoxide. That suggests the technology only extracts half the oxygen

      Perhaps the technology could be further developed to extract all the oxygen and leave carbon, and to apply the technology in an atmosphere with carbon dioxide levels lower that the 96% that Mars has.

      00

    • #
      Chad

      Ian, .. i noticed this paragraph in that Nasa Climate document..

      …..scientists know the increases in carbon dioxide are caused primarily by human activities because carbon produced by burning fossil fuels has a different ratio of heavy-to-light carbon atoms, so it leaves a distinct “fingerprint” that instruments can measure. A relative decline in the amount of heavy carbon-13 isotopes in the atmosphere points to fossil fuel sources.

      That seems to contradict what has been said here previously,
      in that i understood the isotope analysis indicated little retention of the FF sourced CO2 ?
      …comments ?

      20

      • #
        TdeF

        Yes, that’s the C13/C12 argument. It is wrong. The one which is genuinely irrefutable is C14/C12. C14 is radioactive and a marker missing from fossil fuel CO2. It is the basis of Radio Carbon dating. And with Radio Carbon dating you can date the CO2 in the air and measure fossil fuel CO2 vs biosphere CO2 which has C14.

        That has proven since 1958 as published in the Royal Society. There is only a tiny amount of industrial CO2 in the air. It has a proven half life of 5 years in the atmosphere and all the CO2 increase is therefore due to outgassing of slightly warmer ocean surface as expected. So called ’emissions’ are harmless and CO2 is vital to all life on earth and it is non polluting. Whether there is any warming is unlikely, but in any event the idea that humans control CO2 levels is ridiculous and disproven.

        30

        • #
          TdeF

          And I have challenged people like Professor Will Steffen, industrial chemist and now Climate Scientist with what he knows to be true. He would not answer and just told me to read the IPCC reports. I did. They have no answer. In fact they disagree about the lifespan of CO2 in the air, in one place using it as their standard at 80 years and in another claiming that fossil fuel CO2 stayed in the air for ‘thousands of years.’

          They know if CO2 is rapidly absorbed, which is the truth, they can all pack up and go home.

          50

  • #
    Dipole

    I love the timing….

    IPCC

    “When should we release it, Tarquin ?”

    T “Def after the Olympics, can’t let that afterglow keep spinning”

    IPCC “Not enough impact”

    T “Fires in Greece and Canada ?”

    IPCC “Looking warmer (falls off chair in peels of laughter)”, but, what day of the week ?

    T “Gotta be a Monday, trad quiet news day, media crying out for bad news”

    IPPC “Brilliant Tarquin, they won’t know what hit them, but, what about a catchy one liner ?”

    T “Code Red and keep repeating it”

    IPPC ” Tarquin, if you weren’t a bot I would give you a bonus, get ready to launch”

    130

  • #
    another ian

    And for something different

    “Learn A Second Language: Bidenese”

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2021/08/10/learn-a-second-language-bidenese/

    50

  • #
    PeterS

    PM Morrison claims this is a very serious matter on par with the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison discusses climate change and IPCC report

    His speech explains that coal has no future not only here in Australia but in every advanced country, with technology to solve the problem of climate change. There you have it, straight form the horses mouth. He is dead against coal fired power stations. Not really a surprise to me as I knew that for some time now. Only people with heads in the sand don’t see it.

    He is either a con man and speaks with a very big forked tongue, or he is so delusional he really should seek the help of a psychiatrist. Either way he has gone over to the dark and evil side.

    120

  • #
    Neville

    Here Chris Kenny interviews Prof Peter Ridd about the latest IPCC report etc.
    Another top interview as they tease out more of the data etc. But the first few minutes tells us we have some seriously idiotic people + hypocrites and even in parliament.
    And even a super HIPPO ex Pres of the USA, who even thought he could command the seas to stop rising etc.
    And people actually voted for these clowns?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbdvI72ZbRc

    60

    • #
      PeterS

      Good to see Prof Ridd come out and say those things. Trouble is I always find the commentator Kenny a fence sitter. He won’t come out and agree that all this CAGW BS is just a pack of lies. Instead he says there so much to debate and we must remain sceptical. In other words he hasn’t bothered to go over the real science and decide for himself years ago that the CAGW issue is a scam and a hoax. That’s one reason why I’ve stopped listening to people like him on Sky News. They are all fence sitters and not much better that the talking parrots of the ABC and other TV stations – a little better but not worth the angst. I have become tired of it.

      72

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘Kenny a fence sitter.’

        That is what journalism is all about, they tease out the truth from the guest and avoid having an opinion themselves.

        50

        • #
          PeterS

          Exactly why I’ve stopped listening to them. except for the occasional visit to keep reminding me that they are just talking parrots, or more appropriately should be called news anchor, with just about as much intelligence as a real anchor – or a robot as the Japanese have been playing with for some time.

          41

          • #
            el gordo

            Me too, over the pandemic, but Ridd wouldn’t get a chance to say this on the ABC, SBS or other commercial stations. So credit to Sky for being there.

            ‘Marine Scientist Peter Ridd says the IPCC report on climate change is “not really a proper scientific document”.

            “There is very little that’s different from previous ones, but the big thing is that it’s one-sided and it presents no contradictory evidence to what they want.

            “Essentially, it’s like there’s a trial of carbon dioxide for crimes against humanity, but there’s only the prosecution case.

            Mr Ridd argues “the whole thing is not a proper scientific document, totally unbalanced, they just skirt over the fact that carbon dioxide is the second most important thing for plants next to water.”

            50

      • #
        Chris

        Peter, I have sympathy for the Sky News crew, because I believe that the Murdochs are on the dark side with the other information platforms. For example Fox News called Arizona for Biden long before the counting was over. A whistle blower stated that one of the sons informed his father who replied ” that will fix the Bast**d, referring to Trump. This resulted in ‘Fox News’ losing a significant percentage of its conservative viewers to ‘Newsmax’ so they extended Tucker Carlson’s programs and format to draw the viewers back.

        ‘The Australian’ went woke and also anti Trump when the election race began and has not recovered, it is no longer the conservative newspaper it once was. SkyNews was recently banned by YouTube for week. I think the conservatives at Sky are on very thin ice.

        Chris Kenny did ‘environmental science’ at uni and worked for several years as a park ranger, I think he has enough nouse to be aware as to what is going on.

        60

    • #
      Serp

      Thanks for posting this; well worth watching.

      20

      • #
        Chad

        Lucky that Sky released it also !
        It seems that even Sky are beginning to bend to the flow of pressure and have deleted some of the videos containing critical opinions of various topics like Covid and alternative medications etc.
        Expect this to increase as the debates become more focussed.

        20

  • #
    another ian

    More Clarkson and farming

    ““So what made you choose it?”

    Links at

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2021/08/10/so-what-made-you-choose-it/#comments

    And remember that life on the land is even harder in Oz because black swans are native

    40

    • #
      beowulf

      “Don’t know, don’t know, don’t know, don’t know. Oh more buttons. Don’t know, don’t know. Oh 6 knobs.
      Is this your only tractor? It’s rather big for what you need. So what made you choose it?
      It’s a Lamborghini.
      Right.”

      Classic.

      Although he isn’t arrogant, Clarkson reminds me of the arrogant famous chefs and food critics who buy farms out here and imagine that they are going to show farmers of 40 years how it should really be done, only to come unstuck every time they try to do some simple task. As everyone knows, being a famous chef gives you omniscience in all fields. Skyscraper collapsed here? It’s OK, stand back, I’m a trained chef.

      40

      • #
        another ian

        A word that needs to be more widely recognised and used (IMO)

        “ultracrepidarian

        [ uhl-truh-krep-i-dair-ee-uhn ]SHOW IPA

        adjective

        noting or pertaining to a person who criticizes, judges, or gives advice outside the area of his or her expertise:”

        50

        • #
          Chad

          Clarkson is certainly no farmer…or even a competant tractor operator, but this series is bringing a better understanding of some of the issues that face farmers generally.
          Clarkson will obviously make plenty of money from Amazon for this series, but it also shows him as a far broader character than the old motoring shows ever did

          30

          • #
            beowulf

            Yes. Any show like this is good if it pulls back the veil of farming for city folk. Farmers don’t ponce around on a horse all day like Marlborough Man or stand around chewing on a bit of straw while the wheat grows itself and the sheep tend to their own needs. Food doesn’t miraculously appear on supermarket shelves.

            I frequent some YouTube farming channels (as an ex-farmer) and the comments from adults are quite enlightening. They never knew farming was so complex or required such diverse management skills. The disconnect is great.

            We used to have school groups visit and the thing I remember most was a 26 year old school teacher from Sydney who had never seen a live cow, horse or sheep before in his life, only pictures.

            50

        • #
          GlenM

          Yes cobbler keep your opinion to your shoes.<code

          10

  • #
    Neville

    More about all those idiotic forecasts of their so called climate crisis in 1989.
    Why anyone would ever again believe these fools is beyond understanding.
    And Ehrlich and all the other Earth Day donkeys have been wrong since 1970 and yet they still believe.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/10/silly-season-at-the-un-1989-vs-2021-climate-doomsday-its-all-politics-now/

    61

  • #

    The good thing is that you do not need to actually install solar panels, wind-turbines, buy an electric car or stop flying. You just have to talk about doing that and throw in the Polar Bears and Koalas as well and you and the World will be saved. It is just a religion after all, not science.

    80

  • #
    the sting

    The people who support the myth of man made global warming will not be convinced by using data to change their minds ; you have to ask questions like the Andrew Bolt classic . For instance ” by spending all these trillions of dollars trying to reach net zero ,by how much are you going to lower the temperature ? ” No one has ever answered his question .

    130

  • #
    Ronin

    This UN BS has been going on as far back as I can remember to 1973 when our Whitlam Labor govt signed us up to the Lima Declaration then ratified it in 1975, the effect of that was to decimate our industry sector, with no ones knowledge or approval, just that if you voted labor it came with the package.

    Now fast forward to 1987 and the retarded IPCC with their fake climate models and their dodgy train engineer overseer, have constantly badgered us to ‘save the planet’, but the oceans have barely moved a millimeter, the climate goes on being variable, but we keep being battered by the UN selling us their latest drama.
    I’m over it.

    110

  • #
    Yonniestone.

    Earths climate is in danger, Covid 19 is a dire threat to humanity? but elites pushing these fears get a free pass when it suits,

    https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2021/08/10/rules-for-thee-and-not-for-me-uk-to-relax-travel-restrictions-for-un-climate-conference/

    70

    • #
      Lucky

      and
      There is a big argument in Australia about returning Olympic athletes sent into quarantine. .. so cruel and heartless since it is ok for elites to evade restrictions.

      10

  • #
    Neville

    That NOAA co2 level graph says it all and of course nothing will change for decades.
    Just ask China, India and developing countries why they want to live longer, healthier + wealthier lives just like the wealthy OECD countries? Again BIG surprise, NOT.

    https://www.thegwpf.com/content/uploads/2021/08/Screen-Shot-2021-08-09-at-07.57.03.png

    41

  • #
    PeterS

    In an ironic twist this video actually demonstrates that Obama’s birthday party shows the CAGW scare and the COVID-19 sare are really just one and the same.

    CLIMATE FEAR Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep150

    60

  • #
    Neville

    Andrew Bolt also asks Prof Michael Asten about the latest IPCC AR6 report.
    He has been involved with previous IPCC reports and brings another cool,analytical approach to the debate.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT_auGYW57E

    41

    • #
      PeterS

      So the observation is we are back to the same temperature as it was 15 years ago and the report ignores that fact. That one fact alone smashes the notion we must stick to the emissions reductions nonsense right here and now. PM Morrison if you are reading this, please take note; if you are ever to regain even an ounce of credibility, stop stalling and pull your finger out and smash the scam, and encourage the building of coal fired power stations with big incentives if necessary, so we can catch-up with countries like China, India and Japan in maintain a viable power grid. Oh, I just remembered, you can’t because in your response to the report you agreed with it and stated we must continue to go away from fossil fuel. PM Morrison you are clearly part of the scam.

      90

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘ … encourage the building of coal fired power stations with big incentives if necessary …’

        Incentives won’t be necessary, the China Infrastructure Bank is buying up old, yet still operating, coal fired power stations. They said they will close them down in 15 years.

        By that time the AGW facade would have crumbled, because the world is cooling, so they will put in tenders for new state of the art coal fired power stations to replace the old. Beijing is playing the long game.

        31

        • #
          PeterS

          You are dreaming. By that time it will too late anyway. In fact it’s probably already too late. Also, you have been saying that drivel for too long now, just like the CAGW alarmists clamouring about how the world will suffer an imminent heat death going back a long time. The time to act is now, not next year when Liddell is scheduled to start closing down. You follow?

          20

        • #
          Serp

          In the meantime inside our unpowered houses during the long game we keep up our morale by adding verses to the climate song and await arrival of the weekly message stick.

          40

  • #
    Epicurious

    The IPCC and its associated dregs have been spreading so much propaganda for so long that the great mass of sheeple, apart from we thinkers, believe them. So we can bellyache as much as we like this but it will never change until a cost is put on each insane policy proposed. I don’t think rabbiting on about the science will persuade the sheeple, it has to be about their personal cost.

    I do believe there are some very talented people on this site and elsewhere, for example Steven Koonin et al, that could team up and develop a strategy to counteract the utter BS promulgated by the traitors. But we need to agree a strategy and then be absolutely focused on it. The message to the sheeple, I believe needs to be simple, e.g. your family can’t afford the cost. Unless there is a strategy and focus then we are piddling in the wind.

    Someone brighter and younger than me needs to take up the mantle which we can assist with. First of all he/she needs to document the proposed strategies/schemes/plots of those proposing the insane policies then put a team together that can research the true costs then get the message out. But the message has to be simple yet cutting. Rafe Champion the elder comes to mind or he probably knows who should be on the team. The opposition has the numbers, people and finances, but we have reason and passion which can triumph if focussed.

    As Seneca once said “If a man knows not to which port he sails, no wind is favorable” and also “Sometimes even to live is an act of courage.”

    In the military we had the 7P’s, Prior Proper Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance, something the bureaucrats and pollies don’t understand. Now can we get on with it or do we remain piddling into the wind?

    70

  • #
    Liberator

    Why are the media so lazy and keep using the word decarbonise? Do they not really know what that means? Are they not really referring to the reduction of Carbon Dioxide? If we decarbonise, the first step to “decabonise” (and the rest will follow) is remove humans from the equation. We’re made using carbon, we breathe out Carbon Dioxide so we’re the problem. Easily solved. A 100% lethal pandemic will solve the worlds carbon problems, no humans, no problems.

    50

    • #

      I’ll pretend you are not a parody troll.

      Yes they mean carbon dioxide and other carbon based GHGs released by human activity (other than living and breathing). It is jargon and it doesn’t mean the thing which I hope you were making a joke about and not really seriously considering as a problem.

      06

    • #
      el gordo

      They are using ‘decarbonise’ in a cavalier way.

      ‘The short version of how we’ll decarbonize is through massive electrification–of all transportation as well as heat for buildings and industry — and that electricity will come from wind, solar, hydroelectric, and nuclear.’

      01

    • #
      PeterS

      When you hear the term decarbonise consider it a Freudian slip – they probably mean depopulate.

      30

    • #
      RightOverLabour

      I agree. The easiest way to know if the writers have no idea is when they are not specific about CO2 as opposed to “carbon”. Carbon this, carbon that… Good luck “decarbonising” (whatever that may mean) the earth or atmosphere…..

      30

  • #
    Craig Thomas

    Speaking of “pseudoscience” how’s that “global cooling” coming along that we were promised?

    23

    • #

      according to many here it IS happening. There’s another pause you know and some sort of cycle is doing something or other according to some theories.

      27

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘ … some sort of cycle is doing something or other …’

        Yes the oceanic oscillations determine weather and climate, not CO2.

        The world will cool over the next five years as the PDO and AMO go negative.

        00

    • #
      RightOverLabour

      Ask 700 frozen to death Texans….

      70

    • #
      clarence.t

      Basically everything you say is pseudo-science, craig.

      Warming from persistent series of natural El Ninos after series of very strong solar cycles. (Grand solar maximum during latter half of last century)

      Cooling coming from quiet Sun, and a series of La Ninas. Let’s all hope it doesn’t last too long. !

      Some extra warming would be highly beneficial, maybe take us up to temps of the MWP when trees grew in places that are only now being uncovered by retreating glaciers. Will need a lot more warming before trees can grow in those glacial regions again.

      Cooling would cause serious issues, energy needs would climb, crop losses from frosts would increase (already quite bad this year)… etc etc

      CO2 has absolutely nothing to do with it.

      41

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘ … how’s that “global cooling” coming along …’

      It has begun, the LIA was not a DO Event so it must be some other mechanism in play.

      If we look at the end of the Eemian Interglacial you can see our future.

      00

  • #
    John of Cloverdale

    Don’t worry, Big Tech will save us by digging up Greenland. I never knew Big Green was pro mining

    30

    • #
      PeterS

      Goes to show the hypocrisy of it all. Stop mining coal but start mining lots of more hazardous minerals for the electrification of everything at much higher cost. When are most people going to realise that we are being treated for fools by our leaders who are dragging us ever so closer to the edge of the cliff only to throw us into the abyss as a sacrifice to their fake religion?

      40

    • #
      Serp

      The ridicule heaped upon Trump’s Greenland Purchase initiative wouldn’t have been authored by the stakeholders in this venture eh.

      20

  • #
    RickWill

    The obvious question is why AR6? All the science was settled way back in 1992 when the first IPCC assessment report was released – now digitised:
    https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/ipcc_90_92_assessments_far_full_report.pdf

    Surely it would be a simple matter of confirming that the predictions were entirely accurate.

    Atmospheric carbon is tracking about 10% under the business as usual that predicted 10Gt per year by 2020; close enough.

    Any reliable indicator of temperature shows no change. Nino34 index is simply the SST anomaly in the Nino34 region:
    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/indices.shtml?bookmark=nino3.4
    There is no trend. There are still El Ninos and La Ninas. Despite all models predicting perpetual El Ninos now.

    The change in sea level has not accelerated. Same trend for as long as tide gauges have been monitored for at least 200 years. This from 1990:
    https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/residual1980.shtml?stnid=680-140
    Where is the acceleration.

    This was stated with absolute certainty:

    The main greenhouse gas, water vapour, will increase in response to global warming and further enhance it.

    It has not.

    It is quite obvious to everyone with a moments thought that water in the atmosphere exists in three phases: gas, liquid and solid. A good number of the global population have experienced all three just above ground level. Picking only one phase and calling it a “Greenhouse Gas” is where these dingbats went wrong. Water vapour warms the atmosphere but high level ice clouds (solid water) cool the atmosphere. The response of clouds to surface temperature limit open ocean surface to maximum of 32C and 30C annual maximum. Sea ice forming on the surface limits the lower temperature to -2C. Thanks to modern satellites these conditions can be observed every day:
    https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/ocean/cdas-sflux_sst_global_1.png
    There will never be a need to change the scale – it covers the full possible range of open water. There are tiny exceptions like the Persian Gulf with near land locked water surface where convective instability cannot form.

    That same belief in “Greenhouse Effect” remains the fundamental reason why all these IPCC reports are wrong and why they will never end until they realise there is no “Greenhouse Effect” related to the surface energy balance. They persist with this unscientific drivel. Models will never produce meaningful results until clouds are responsive to surface temperature rather than parameterised junk.

    50

    • #
      RightOverLabour

      The whole premise was based on positive feedbacks as a doubling of CO2 would cause about 3W/m2 which is not sufficient to cause a runaway heating. The feedbacks, unfortunately for them, are probably negative as increased cloud cover would result in net cooling. Bugger. And the Greenhouse effect is very badly understood. (Believe it or not, there isn’t a large plastic dome over the atmosphere preventing conduction and convection from escaping – which is the way traditional Greenhouses work).

      40

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Atmospheric carbon is tracking about 10% under the business as usual …’

      Don’t fall into the trap, carbon dioxide is tracking …..

      10

  • #
  • #
    clarence.t

    Leftist glitterati on a CO2 production rampage ! 🙂

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2021/08/10/private-jets-jam-airport-for-presidential-birthday-party/

    Not one of them would cut back to “save the planet™” !

    40

  • #
    el gordo

    Barnaby wants to see the costings first, before signing off on net zero by 2050. Thank the gods we have Barnaby heading the Nationals, his accounting nouse is coming in handy.

    ‘Mr Joyce said the IPCC report did not tell Australians how a higher target could be reached and who would pay the price.

    “They said what the consequences were, they said what has happened thus far but they didn’t say how they were going to achieve it.

    “Therefore, you can’t put a cost on it.

    “See, everybody wants to do it but nobody wants to pay the price, and that’s the problem.

    “We have got to get a plan and a price that is specific enough that you can tell people exactly how this process is going to be achieved.

    “Otherwise, you’re saying to people: ‘here is a menu, you’re going to eat what’s on it, we haven’t told you what the dish is and we haven’t told you the price’.” (SMH)

    43

    • #
      PeterS

      “Otherwise, you’re saying to people: ‘here is a menu, you’re going to eat what’s on it, we haven’t told you what the dish is and we haven’t told you the price’.” (SMH)

      How about we forget the menu and just have a smorgasbord of a bit of coal, a bit of gas, a bit of nuclear and a bit of renewables, just like pretty much most other nation worthy of any mention?

      30

    • #
      Ronin

      Surely we all deserve to know what half a degree would cost or a whole degree, after all, we’ll be paying for it so we should insist.

      30

  • #

    Barnaby wants to see the costings first, before signing off on net zero by 2050.

    Barnaby says that but since he is in government he can direct someone to cost policy. Why doesn’t he ever say, “I am getting the costings”?

    18

    • #
      Chad

      Gee Aye
      August 11, 2021 at 1:53 pm · Reply
      Barnaby wants to see the costings first, before signing off on net zero by 2050.

      Barnaby says that but since he is in government he can direct someone to cost policy. Why doesn’t he ever say, “I am getting the costings”?

      ..because no body knows how or even IF it can be done, so it is not possible to cost it or put a time scale on it .!

      100

      • #

        Not what he has ever said so I don’t see the relevance.

        17

        • #
          el gordo

          Nuclear power is prohibitive.

          ‘Its costs are staggering and the worldwide pattern for the industry is one of stagnation and decline. In the US, the cost of the only two reactors under construction has skyrocketed to between $20.4 billion and $22.6 billion for one reactor.’ (SMH)

          05

          • #
            Ronin

            Mt Piper, west of Sydney has provision for two more units to be built, now is the time to get cracking on two HELE units.

            80

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘ … a new coal plant with stringent emissions controls would take at least eight years to be approved and built, and cost around $3 billion.’ (SMH)

          03

        • #
          el gordo

          The gas plant at Kurri Kurri will cost $600 million, according to government estimates.

          Don’t have my calculator, but you can work it out.

          21

          • #
            Doc

            Chicken feed compared to the huge renewables – wind and solar – McGowan is planning for the Northwest. From memory (yes, it’s fallible)that’s to cost a couple of billion and is to be associated with a hydrogen manufacturing plant.

            10

        • #
          Chad

          Gee Aye
          August 11, 2021 at 3:06 pm · Reply
          Not what he has ever said so I don’t see the relevance.

          Obviously you didnt bother to listen , or read e.g’s post…

          ‘Mr Joyce said the IPCC report did not tell Australians how a higher target could be reached and who would pay the price.
          “They said what the consequences were, they said what has happened thus far but they didn’t say how they were going to achieve it.
          “Therefore, you can’t put a cost on it.

          You dont have to be a genius to know you cannot cost something that you have no idea what it will be !

          50

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Why doesn’t he ever say, “I am getting the costings”?’

      That would be political suicide and besides he already knows CO2 doesn’t cause global warming.

      We could do the costings, starting with five nuclear power plants?

      21

      • #

        he already knows CO2 doesn’t cause global warming.

        he avoids this statement for the same reason.

        08

        • #
          el gordo

          Exactly, so on my costings we can build seven Hele coal fired power stations or one nuclear power plant. Shall we move onto gas?

          21

          • #
            Chad

            You can cost power plants , EV chargers, Hydrogen generators , etc etc ..BUT..
            That still wont be the cost of NET ZERO ….
            …because no one knows what that will require.
            Incidentally, i defy anyone to quote the official definition of “NET ZERO” ?

            60

    • #
      el gordo

      Sorry to be all over the place, now you see it and now you don’t. On the question of Mount Piper which supplies 25% of NSW energy, they have ben arguing for over a decade, coal or gas. They settled on improving the efficiency of coal.

      https://arena.gov.au/knowledge-bank/mt-piper-energy-recovery-project/

      31

      • #
        clarence.t

        “They settled on improving the efficiency of coal. “

        Next…. Bayswater, Eraring, Tarong North, Loy Yang, and Yallourn 🙂

        31

        • #
          el gordo

          No harm in seeking efficiency, the taxpayers will be overjoyed.

          The government will fund gas fired power stations to support Renewables and within a decade the market will build new coal fired power stations.

          This second hiatus in world temperature might be the catalyst.

          22

  • #
    Kalm Keith

    There are what seem to be cases of Stockholm Syndrome here on the blog and that is related to access to opinions and information.

    On a global scale the CV19 initial outbreaks in China, Italy and the U.S. appeared to have been overwhelming and dangerous at a quick glance.

    Unfortunately some have used the very unreliable data from those situations and extrapolated to nations and populations and helped to inflame the “lockdown” mentality seen in our leaders.

    We do need data, but it must be like for like and also should be useful.
    The chronic testing for cases with the PCR set up is bizarre on a number of levels apart from the obvious financial considerations that prompt alarm.
    When we accept that we hope to achieve herd immunity why is it a drama when we discover at great expense, that say six people tested positive?

    Surely a better use of resources would be to allocate the money to better hospital care for those who are seriously ill or symptomatic.
    The PCR test could then be used to locate contacts who may develop serious issues and help deal with those quickly.

    These lockdowns are out of all proportion to the threat posed by CV19: for heavens sale, look after the elderly in nursing homes and make sure that they have correct ventilation set up. Dan’s high rise incubators are another bizarre medical fix .

    Society has collapsed when young eager children are fed rubbish by the media, put through Home Schooling online for extended periods and fed on fear of the Big Bad CV19 Virus by politicians.

    I fear that we won’t live up to that politicians dream and Bounce Back. Just a big Squelch.

    100

  • #
    David Maddison

    I think the mismanagement of covid such as the refusal to seriously consider anti-virals or even Vit D is vastly more destructive than the anthropogenic global warming fraud, as destructive as that us.

    Together, they are being used by the Elites to destroy Western Civilisation.

    Orwell had it right in terms of the society the regressive Left are degenerating us into. It will consist of Party Members and Proles.

    H.G. Wells also had it similarly right with the future of society as Morlocks and Eloi.

    110

    • #
      PeterS

      I agree. It has been my thinking for some time now. The COVID scam is far more serious and deadly since it directly affects our very existence in so many ways. Together with the CAGW scam it’s going to be next to impossible to defeat the rabid officialdom. I’m also expecting a third major possibly even more serious scam to follow to seal our fait. It has to be that way as the real “cabal overlords” who influence our leaders will do anything and everything to take us down. They will win but only for a few short years.

      50

    • #
    • #
      Doc

      The Federal government announced this week it was getting 7000 doses of a new antiviral agent which was to be only used in emergent situations. It’s another specific antibody medication said to have been given to President Trump when he had COVID-19. This is a big change. It seems anything but Trump is changing. It seems those contracts such as the Pfizer one reported recently may have extended into the realm of use of those early therapeutics. Did the government think the vaccines it was to get would give protection equivalent to that of polio etc. The fact the action is more a protective one from extreme viral outcomes, but doesn’t solve the problem of infection makes one wonder if the penny has dropped and the use of any effective therapeutics is mandatory to get on top of this virus. That therapeutics must be a strong arm of controlling the viral load in society protection, along with the vaccines has been decided, regardless of the load of vaccines we are compelled to take under the contracts.

      Cuomo’s demise as governor of NYC shows any politician, outrageous actions like putting viral infected people into nursing homes can come back to bite on a personal basis. His behavioural noose just creates an even greater bloodthirst to see him pay. If the ban on therapeutics here was necessary to get the vaccines developed, at the cost of lives, there will be many people who have lost loved ones that could possibly have been saved by therapeutics that will be coming for those politicians and seeking justice.

      00

  • #
    Dennis

    Apparently Earth Cycles including ice ages and little ice ages take place as the planet cools and when it heats again (global warming) the snow and ice melts.

    So warming must be good for life on Earth as Carbon Dioxide is.

    sarc.

    20

  • #
    Dennis

    Rolls Royce the firm are moving into manufacturing modular nuclear generators.

    20

    • #
      PeterS

      They announced their plan to build them for UK late last year. Possibly the way we should go but all we would get from our politicians if we suggested it is effectively “talk to the hand” or if we are lucky “next century”.

      10

    • #
      PeterS

      Just had a look at their web-site. They claim

      The UK SMR consortium, led by Rolls-Royce, has announced it expects to create 6,000 regional UK jobs within the next five years and 40,000 in 15 years in a boost to green economic recovery.

      Isn’t that a lot more the the number of jobs from renewables?

      30

    • #
      PeterS

      After reading their literature, it’s a no brainer. Just need to wait for them to prove it can be done. Then we ought to get them here just to shut up the climate change alarmists, or possible make them go completely insane – don’t care which. Just need a leader who has the conviction and courage to do it. That rules out PM Morrison for now. It would be nice if he could be convinced at least to have a look at it. I will be sending a note to Barnaby to include this in his fight against the ding bats in the Liberal Party.

      60

      • #
        PeterS

        Note to Barnaby sent.

        50

        • #
          Chad

          Govmnt already aware of these RR modular systems , and various other similar options.
          They have been discussed in interviews, but obviously the initial obstical is the ban on Nuclear installations in Australia ……which has to be repealed first before any serious progress can be made

          40

          • #
            PeterS

            No harm trying. It might get through their thick heads one day. Meanwhile their focus on using renewables to reduce our emissions is insane. If other Western nations go with the SMRs then we will be left behind even more and our economy will keep going down the plug hole. This is a golden opportunity for PM Morrison to change course and avoid that. I doubt he has even the intelligence let alone the spine to do it.

            40

      • #
        Dennis

        Morrison ministers lay groundwork for nuclear energy election plan
        The option of taking a proposal for nuclear power in Australia to the next election has been considered in cabinet-level discussions as pressure grows within the Morrison government to prepare for a nuclear energy industry (reports The Australian).

        25th June 2021

        Resources Rising Stars

        Share Article facebook sharing button twitter sharing button linkedin sharing button email sharing button
        The top-level political and policy discussions including Liberal and Nationals ministers involved the argument that the moratorium on nuclear energy could be lifted in the decades ahead to cut greenhouse gas emissions and replace reliance on fossil fuels.

        Politically, the option of the Coalition adopting a policy of future nuclear energy was considered too dangerous without bipartisan support from the ALP.

        Before attending the G7 summit in Cornwall, Scott Morrison publicly said nuclear power was not an option in Australia unless there was bipartisan support for lifting the moratorium.

        The cabinet-level discussions were not part of a formal cabinet submission but traversed the politics and strategy of taking advantage of a shift in public opinion about the role of nuclear energy in reducing carbon emissions.

        The conclusion was that politically the issue was too easily used for scare campaigns — as has been the case in the past — and there was still substantial public opposition in Australia to nuclear power.

        Australia is already part of the world nuclear cycle through uranium exports, and the Morrison government has included considering the latest modular nuclear reactor technology as part of its “energy road map” to create affordable, reliable energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions.

        Last year, Energy Minister Angus Taylor flagged the exploration of nuclear technology as a long-term prospect for reducing carbon emissions.

        The energy road map concentrated on the most recent modular reactor technology, which is overtaking the power stations of the past 70 years – the so-called Generation I, II and III reactors.

        There is now a strong push among ministers and backbenchers to promote nuclear energy as a greenhouse gas reduction measure and reduce Australia’s reliance on coal- and gas-fired power stations.

        In December 2019, Coalition MPs on a parliamentary committee tasked to look at the future of nuclear power said “Australia should be strategic in its consideration of nuclear energy”.

        “This requires us to think about the next 50 years rather than the next five, and also how we might enter the nuclear energy industry by learning from other countries while building our own sovereign capability,” the report said.

        The report also recommended that the Australian government “consider the prospect of its future energy mix” by adopting a strategic approach to nuclear energy.

        But it warned of the difficulty of achieving nuclear energy without public support and political bipartisanship.

        It said Australia needed to recognise the capabilities of nuclear energy to supply affordable and reliable energy “while fulfilling international reduction obligations”.

        The latest commodity outlook of the Minerals Council of Australia said uranium export revenue for Australia in 2019-20 was $688m and there was 290TWh of “zero-emissions electricity generated by Australia’s uranium exports”.

        The MCA estimated that nuclear reactors in 31 countries saved 2.2 billion tonnes of global carbon emissions in 2020.

        It also estimated that Australia’s exported uranium could generate “109 per cent” of Australia’s domestic electricity.

        20

        • #
          Chad

          There is now a strong push among ministers and backbenchers to promote nuclear energy as a greenhouse gas reduction measure and reduce Australia’s reliance on coal- and gas-fired power stations.

          Well they have failed spectacularly on that front !
          I have heard NOTHING from the govmnt on the need for nuclear , certainly not as a path to Net0 , or even as a possible option to reliable future energy . .?
          They just shy away from any issue that may be politically sensitive.

          30

  • #
    Raving

    (Getting to ‘Wichcraft’ and AGW later. Starts more clearly here)

    It is becoming apparent to me that the public and scientists too are suffering from MASS HYSTERIA when it comes to the covid-19 pandemic.

    Strangely ‘mass hysteria’ isn’t the correct term for it yetbit is exactly in that manner that the mob rushes off in panic and overzealous indulgence

    Extentend panic in an overly emotional group of people is mass hysteria. It almost always results in unfortunate and unpleasant excesses

    The public is acting hysterically with regard to covid … and maybe some experts who have forgotten themselves too

    Yet the wiki entry doesn’t match here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_psychogenic_illness

    People are hysterical about climate change. They want to burn the witches!

    All that is clear but what does one call it?

    30

    • #
      Serp

      If you can find a copy of Elias Canetti’s Crowds and Power there’s theorising aplenty but one’s appetite is only whetted it being an arcane byway of scholarship without much supporting literature that I’ve spotted over the nearly fifty years since I read it.

      10

  • #

    What gets me is that this erstwhile United Nations body has just flat out given China a pass on their CO2 emissions.

    IF (and see how I capitalised that word IF) these emissions of CO2 really WERE a problem in the first place, then they would be doing all they can to lower them ….. EVERYWHERE, so why does China, and India as well just get a flat out pass?

    Okay, so go and look at this chart shown at this link.

    The chart is interactive, but because I started the word search with China, it came up with China as the default.

    Note how the rise is exponential. (in almost the exact meaning of that word exponential)

    Okay, the interactive part.

    See along the top of the graph itself( directly above the imaging of the graph) you can see highlighted in blue the wording ….. Add country.

    Click on that and when the list of countries comes up, add India, and then as a further comparison, add Australia as well. Then X out of this Country list (top right)

    Again, India is also exponential.

    Okay, we here in Australia have been asked ordered by the UN to cut our emissions to Nett Zero.

    China and India get a flat out pass.

    And in 2030, well, they’ll still be Developing, with many many many more coal fired power plants, and hey, you can bet they won’t be closing those coal fired plants down, or in fact, being asked to close them down.

    Nup!

    They’ll just keep on building more and more of them ….. with impunity.

    IF (again, capitalised) this really was a problem, then they would be DEMANDING that they also shut them all down.

    And you wonder why question the IPCC, and their handlers.

    Tony.

    130

    • #

      So, from that graph, China adds an extra Australia every 14 days and 18 hours.

      The UN could easily have summarised the whole of this report with six words

      Send us all your money, now

      Tony.

      110

      • #
        Philip

        Problem is, they will do just that.

        40

      • #
        Chad

        Tony ..
        ..good to hear from you.. some of us were beginning to worry about your lack of presence !
        All OK ?

        40

        • #

          Thanks Chad.

          Naah! All good here.

          Had to break in a new Tee shirt!

          Tony.

          (Now that is so obscure. I had to wait almost six Months for my record guy to get that album for me. Holes And Mello Rolls by Gabriel Kaplan)

          70

    • #
      Ronin

      OZs emissions are 3/5ths of f-all and they are leaning on us, why, to use us as a Judas goat, to lead the pack to ‘salvation’.

      The recent repeat of 1989 by their UN, just a last chance to ‘warm’ us up for Glasgow.

      60

  • #
    UK-Weather Lass

    Sadly we seem, as a race, to have got very little right about anything in the twenty first century. At least some of that has to be to do with dumbing down, looking down, exercising thumbs and little else … who needs a tiny two dimensional screen when there is whole three dimensional world screaming at us that we are wrong … Get rid of the free loaders in politics, public service, education, much of commerce, and get back to hard work and serious leadership onto the road back to sanity.

    70

  • #
    Philip

    But but but…. the floods in Europe, the fires in Europe, surely that’s proof isn’t it ? Reeeeeee !!!

    00

  • #
    Tilba Tilba

    Lots of good reasoning (and data) here to demonstrated that CO2 levels and Global Warming temps have been in synch for the last 65 million years. Not sure why this isn’t pretty clear.

    https://mashable.com/article/co2-earth-history-climate-change

    09

    • #

      Two words missing “cause” and “effect”

      50

      • #
        Lucky

        A few more words missing-
        The scale used in that graph of points every two million years does not show the established link between temperature and CO2. The link is that CO2 lags temperature by some 800 to 1,000 years.
        Cause and effect, Henry’s Law.

        20

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      The time of Antarctica becoming icy is a guess. I’ve seen times from 38 million years ago to 14 million years ago – the latter after earlier ice had melted.
      Generally the “consensus” is between 35 and 25 m.y.a. and that was when CO2 was around 1000-1100 p.p.m. yet an increase in CO2 below that level would cause the polar ice to melt and drown us all. Very strange conclusion in that report.

      What they didn’t take into account is the periodic cold times on Earth, roughly every 135 million years.
      https://d1o50x50snmhul.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/28392301.jpg
      It is from the New Scientist so you can believe it.

      And if the Earth is cooling then the colder oceans will absorb more CO2, so the supposed ’cause’ may just be an effect.

      30

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Lots of good reasoning …’

      Tilba its quite clear that CO2 increases when the world is warmer.

      20

    • #
      clarence.t

      Vostok shows CO2 trails temperature.

      Also shows that for a long long time, atmospheric CO2 has been dangerously low for existence of life on the planet.

      20

    • #
      el gordo

      Closer to our own time, over the past 100,000 years, its possible to see that CO2 isn’t causing temperatures to rise and fall.

      https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Heinrich%20and%20Dansgaard–Oeschger%20Events

      00

    • #
      el gordo

      The bipolar see-saw.

      ‘The coldest phase of a series of Dansgaard-Oeschger events occurred at a time of rising CO2 levels and warming in the Southern Hemisphere. Lasting an average of 500 years, Heinrich events occurred on an average of every 5000–6000 years.

      ‘One hypothesis concerning the cause of Heinrich events holds that as a growing ice sheet reaches a critical mass, it becomes increasingly unstable. This has been termed the “Binge Phase.”

      00

  • #
    Philip

    Doesn’t matter folks, the argument is lost. The general populous is convinced now. Its all gone. I just hope and pray now they don’t start spreading aerosols in the upper atmosphere. And I’m losing hope there too.

    61

    • #
      Chad

      Cheer up bro’
      There is no “ argument” when it comes to Climate change….Nature will do her thing, and any fool who thinks they can change that is dummer than dumb .!
      The only loss that can happen is a few trillions of dolla’s down the gurgler with nothing to show for it.
      The fall out politically will be entertaining, so stack the fridge and grab some chips, then sit back and enjoy the show !

      71

    • #
      PeterS

      I’m afraid you are right, even if the general populous isn’t convinced. In fact I believe the general populous don’t give a damn, which is where our officialdom wants them to be – indifferent and gullible. Nothing will change, not unless most people wake up and stop voting those clown into power. I don’t expect that will happen so the train continues on its merry way until it reaches the end of the line or derails at some point before then.

      30

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘ … I believe the general populous don’t give a damn …’

        They accept what they have been told by the MSM.

        30

        • #
          PeterS

          Well that makes them fools as well for not doing their own research like any normal thinking person would do.

          10

          • #
            beowulf

            Normal people don’t think. Thinking beyond daily survival is a luxury to many. That is the issue. Most people just want to live their lives quietly and be left alone. The lawn needs mowing; the kids are sick; it’s a nice day for the beach; they’ve worked overtime and they’re buggered. They don’t have the excess energy to study the climate evidence or search out COVID evidence if they even knew how to interpret it should they find it. Many people now are struggling to just survive financially to keep a roof over their heads. Climate evidence is the last thing on their minds.

            Unfortunately there are those who exploit that live and let live code, those who are constantly on the lookout for a chance to seize power or impose their sick beliefs onto others.

            Mr and Mrs Average suck up what the media tells them. That may be their downfall, but it is mostly not of their making. To you and me they are asleep, but it is what it is. It’s like we are always saying here: until things get dire they won’t wake up. Unfortunately they’ll take us down with them.

            This vaccine thing may well be the end of many of us if our lives are throttled by controls over the Non-Vaxxed. Morrison is making noises. I see now that the UK government is considering doing away with currency too, going fully electronic so they can control the people even more. It never ends. I wonder who’ll be left standing.

            50

            • #
              el gordo

              There is also a very strong element among academics and professionals, they respect the work of other disciplines. That is, they won’t criticise other disciplines because its not their bag.

              So between the mindless cretins and the better educated, there is little difference.

              20

      • #
        Doc

        Maths and science don’t feature strongly in the education of most Australians, so much of it is dumbed down due to the disinterest; just enough education to stop most from being totally illiterate in the topics. Makes us easy targets to be manipulated any way the left – or right – desire. One gets the impression Asia is a different kettle of fish. The other problem it seems is that even highly educated people that do university courses requiring some mathematics and science understanding to understand their specialities, seem to lose interest or comprehension in applying that same maths and science they needed to complete their degrees. Otherwise, how do so many professional people fall for some of this AGW stuff when they have enough ‘how-it-works’ statistical and science background knowledge to question what they are being told to believe?

        10

    • #
      Chris

      Hang in there Phillip, if we give in all will be lost. As for aerosols be positive, I don’t know much, but I do know that we live on an extraordinary planet with a super intelligent mind behind it. For example when you look in the upper atmosphere where the air gets thinner, Oxygen and Nitrogen diatomic molecules break down and reform as NOx s these reflect light in the blue spectrum which gives us our beautiful blue sky. Lightening storms do the same thing, these not only makes the sky bluer and cleaner after a storm but transfers those NOx to the soil to aid plant growth. The dreaded methane is broken down by sunlight into the essentials H2O and CO2. I’m betting that all toxins in the atmosphere are not only dispersed and diluted by the wind but that sunlight will break them down to random atoms.

      50

    • #
      Annie

      Populace?

      20

  • #
    Single Malt

    Love this joke from irreverent comic Bob Zany ‘Boysie, Idaho has just recorded it’s hottest ever temperature of 106 degrees, beating the old record of 105 set in 1875. Scientists blame the excessive heat on global warming. In 1875, the scientists blamed the excessive heat on summer.’

    50

  • #

    Seems each UN IPCC Team TM product is just another ripoff of “Time Warp” from The Rocky Horror Picture Show.
    The Cult of Calamitous Climate has long passed their best before date.
    Old music such as “Oh Susanna” and the immortal pervert Tiny Tim’s “The Ice Caps Are Melting” encapsulate this State Religion.

    Must be something in Progressive’s psych,they must replace God,with their own image?

    Insanity,of the mass hysteria form has always been contagious to Herd Beasts.
    Stampede.
    Forward.

    That German Comedy show of a few years back,mocking the cost of the Grand Green Illusion,featuring a glorious rant and the branishing of “The whirling Crucifix of Gaia”,said it all.

    Garbage In Gospel Out..
    The constant use of “Computer Modelling” to bamboozle the gullible is a feature not a bug from our “Helpers”.
    This Dread Covid Theatre is built on the foundation of Climatology.
    Where a POLICY is chosen and then evidence manufactured to promote said policy.
    Fear.
    Uncertainty.
    Doubt.
    These are the prime tools of con artists for all of our history.

    Astonishing how small and ugly are current Emperor’s be.
    I wish they had kept their clothes on.
    For I can never unsee,how clueless,useless and dangerous to civil society these fools and bandits be.

    20

  • #
    CHRIS

    So we have Phase 2 of the Nostradumus – like predictions from the CAGW brigade. The “Hockey Stick” is back in favor with the IPCC/UN trash. Additionally, I see that our beloved BOM is still peddling the lie that Australia has warmed by 1.4 degrees C since 1910, when the actual rate is 1.2 degrees C since 1880 (thanks to Jo’s earlier article relating to ACORN 1 and 2). I’m just waiting for Tom Foolery to open his lying mouth.

    20

  • #
    another ian

    Willis has a look at

    “UN Eye PC Sea Level”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/11/un-eye-p-p-sea-level/

    10

  • #
    another ian

    “IPCC Enters “Into Thin Air”. German Scientists: IPCC “In A Hopeless Situation”…”Stained Scientists” ”

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/11/ipcc-enters-into-thin-air-german-scientists-ipcc-in-a-hopeless-situationstained-scientists/

    00