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

Shock-me-not: CO2 doesn’t cause multiple back-to-back disasters in Australia

Multiple Cyclones, Fires, Floods and Heatwaves striking Australians at same rate for last 55 years

Gissing et al looked at insurance losses and plotted all the times multiple disasters piled up on each other in a three month period in Australian history. Despite the monster headlines and three quarters of all human CO2 emissions occurring since 1966 there was no trend.

Three new studies affirm there has been no significant change in natural disasters, precipitation, or bushfire across Australia for the last several decades.

Kenneth Richard, NoTricksZone

From the paper:

“Here we utilise an Australian natural disaster database of normalised insurance losses to show compound disasters are responsible for the highest seasonal financial losses. … There has been no temporal trend in their frequency since 1966. “

The predominant and most predictable driver of climate-related disaster events is not anthropogenic global warming, or CO2 emissions, but the El Niño Southern Oscillation.

Bad things happen:

Compound natural disasters in Australia. Graph.

Global levels of CO2 rose from 320 to 405ppm and made no difference to Compound disasters.

h/t Neville and El Gordo

REFERENCE

Gissing et al (2021) Compound natural disasters in Australia: a historical analysis, Environmental Hazards, https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2021.1932405

9.9 out of 10 based on 70 ratings

151 comments to Shock-me-not: CO2 doesn’t cause multiple back-to-back disasters in Australia

  • #
    David+Wojick

    No surprise but it is very important to keep refuting the alarmist hype with real data. Skeptics own the blogosphere!

    564

    • #
      PeterS

      I agree it is worth standing firm and holding the line but the push for reducing emissions is so strong and unrelenting that at some point we have to realise our stance might very well come to naught but at least we will never ever submit to their lies. Regardless of what happens, we must not give up nor give in. Resistance is not futile.

      510

      • #
        David+Wojick

        So far we are doing pretty well in preventing serious damage.

        263

        • #
          PeterS

          Serious damage yes but some damage has already occurred and I don’t see anything as yet to prove to me that the tide is turning. In fact, the tide against us is accelerating thanks to our governments’ insistence on reducing our emissions to zero or near zero.

          230

          • #
            David+Wojick

            No tide has to turn as we are playing for a draw and pretty much getting it. And targets in 2050 are just a way of doing nothing now.

            364

            • #
              PeterS

              As I keep saying they have won many battles but as to who will win the war remains to be seen. I’m convinced that they will lose the war but it won’t be without a lot of pain. Much more pain to go through before it’s all over. I’m a realist.

              250

              • #

                Agree PeterS, eventually the limitations of technology will overcome ideology.

                70

              • #
                PeterS

                Actually, I’m more thinking that the limitations of evil people will be overcome by the good people. That’s typically how it eventually works. There will come a time though even that won’t be enough as the forces of evil from heavenly places will gather all their energies in one final battle. They will fail by the more powerful heavenly forces of good.

                52

            • #
              OldOzzie

              Europe’s Climate Lesson for America

              As wind power flags, energy prices are soaring amid fuel shortages.
              By The WSJ Editorial Board

              Sept. 14, 2021

              Energy prices are soaring in Europe, and the effects are rippling across the Atlantic. Blame anti-carbon policies of the kind that the Biden Administration wants to impose in the U.S.

              Electricity prices in the U.K. this week jumped to a record £354 ($490) per megawatt hour, a 700% increase from the 2010 to 2020 average. Germany’s electricity benchmark has doubled this year. Last month’s 12.3% increase was the largest since 1974 and contributed to the highest inflation reading since 1993. Other economies are experiencing similar spikes.

              Europe’s anti-carbon policies have created a fossil-fuel shortage. Governments have heavily subsidized renewables like wind and solar and shut down coal plants to meet their commitments under the Paris climate accord. But wind power this summer has flagged, so countries are scrambling to import more fossil fuels to power their grids.

              European natural-gas spot prices have increased five-fold in the last year. Some energy providers are burning cheaper coal, but its prices have tripled. Rising fossil-fuel consumption has caused demand and prices for carbon permits under the Continent’s cap-and-trade scheme to surge, which has pushed electricity prices even higher.

              Russia has exploited the chaos by slowing gas deliveries, ostensibly to increase pressure on Germany to finish the Nord Stream 2 pipeline certification. Vladimir Putin last week took a swipe at the “smart alecs” in the European Commission for “market-based” pricing that increased competition in gas, including from U.S. liquefied natural gas imports.

              This underscores how fossil fuels are a U.S. economic and strategic asset. The Biden Administration’s plan to curtail oil, gas and coal production by regulation would empower adversaries. especially Russia, Iran and China, which are the world’s three largest gas producers after the U.S.

              Americans are already feeling the pain of rising energy prices. Electricity and utility gas prices were up 5.2% and 21.1%, respectively, over the last 12 months in August. Higher energy costs are bleeding into inflation. Some analysts predict that gas prices could double this winter if U.S. production doesn’t increase and global demand remains high.

              Europe is showing the folly of trying to purge CO2 from the economy. No matter how heavily subsidized, renewables can’t replace fossil fuels in a modern economy. Households and businesses get stuck with higher energy bills even as CO2 emissions increase. Europe’s problems are a warning to the U.S., if only Democrats would heed it.

              270

        • #
          Ted1

          David there’s plenty of serious damage being done in Australia with windmills and solar “farms” built and being approved on the back of Clive Palmer’s “protection” of the Renewable Energy Target in cahoots with Al Gore.

          00

      • #
        Serge Wright

        We need to remember that the CC religion is all about politics and not about science, meaning we need to focus on playing the game, especially now that we have the lunatics running the asylum in the US. In my opinion the best play would be to align all of our climate targets with China after 2030, but stress it would be based on China’s actual emissions reductions performance and we would bring our targets forward if China were to bring forward their targets. This position would allow Morrison to deflect media and protest groups to the Chinese embassy if they wanted to get stronger and earlier commitments and he could easily justify this policy as a means of creating political pressure on the world’s largest emitter and encourage other tiny 1% emitter countries to follow suit to make a real difference to the world climate. Of course we all know that China has no intentions of reducing emissions so it’s purely a political commitment that will never happen.

        350

        • #
          Bad Samaritan

          Let’s get back to the purveyors of the scare, and of the scam….

          CSIRO scientists are constantly shrieking about how ruinous and disruptive ACC is going to be. Meanwhile the CSIRO has a Ski Club which reports that it expects no change to Ski Club + Lodge operations in coming years (the Club is booked out; has no memberships available for years to come; has two lodges instead of the original one, and is going gangbusters) I also know two CSIRO scientists who own waterfront houses (say 1-2 metres above high tide) in tropical north QLD who have no intention of selling….despite the coming inundations, combined with catastrophic mega-cyclones, and raging tropical diseases as the climate changes. Interestingly, these two, are also keen sailors and divers…..going out almost every week… regardless of the reef and islands having been D-Stroyed by ClimateChange long ago, or else gonna be. Go figure, eh?

          200

        • #
          PeterPetrum

          Serge, that is brilliant! Pity Scomo will never see your comment.

          70

        • #
          Binny Pegler

          They’ll just divide by population – They do that anyway, the only way Australians can be portrayed as sinners is per capita. The actually amount of CO2 we put out is insignificant.

          80

        • #
          Ted1

          An email from The Daily Telegraph (Sydney) just now Scott Morrison will be making an announcement at 7am on security issues. Joe Biden will be speaking at the same time. Recent and impending travels of ministers are apparently connected.

          00

    • #
  • #
    clarence.t

    The only thing extra CO2 in the atmosphere causes is better plant growth and resilience.

    I really can’t see how that could effect “climate” disasters, or any sort of disaster for that matter.

    310

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      Excellent.

      As discussed a few days ago, atmospheric CO2 levels have no effect on the final temperature reached by the atmosphere at the end of each day, month or millennium.

      If CO2 was totally absent from the atmosphere it would make absolutely no difference to the dreaded “atmospheric temperature”.

      That’s the physics, thermodynamics and full integrated analysis of the matter: as far as temperature of the atmosphere is concerned, CO2 is Irrelevant.

      The real question is why this fact has been heavily suppressed and misrepresented and now being wrongly linked to bushfires.

      Who did this?

      190

      • #
        Ted1

        Who did this?

        That’s a question that we need a lot more of. e..g. Who banned legacy drugs? Who scoffed at masks. And, until this morning, who banned nuclear powered submarines?

        Australia’s opposition to nuclear energy was never founded in science. It was whipped up by the communists among us for the purpose of hindering western nations in the cold war nuclear arms race. That Cold War ended over thirty years ago. It has taken that long for sanity to prevail.

        20

  • #
    Simon

    The intent of the paper is to show that compound (i.e. concurrently occurring) disasters are the most difficult to recover from. Fortunately, there is some negative correlation between events, e.g. the pairing of Bushfire and Tropical Cyclone occurs far less often than would be expected by chance.
    There is no analysis on the severity or cost of individual events, which appears to be increasing.

    144

    • #
      David+Wojick

      Dollar severity is often increasing because of inflation plus increasing wealth. Studies that normalize for these factors show no increase in severity that I know of.

      432

    • #
      clarence.t

      “which appears……”

      Simon, yet again, shows everybody what we already know.

      Facts and data are never part of AGW mantra.

      290

    • #
      clarence.t

      “pairing of Bushfire and Tropical Cyclone occurs far less often……”

      LOL.. that’s because they occur in different parts of Australia.

      Bushfires always pair with either a major storm or a cyclone, so your negative correlation statement is basically just nonsense.

      70

    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      Yes Simon, the devil is in the definition – particularly the 3 month window.. Very difficult, for example, to have a flood, and then within 3 months a fire.

      This means that although the frequency of disasters are increasing, the frequency of double whammies is not.

      One disaster is still devastating if you experience it, and these are becoming more common

      243

      • #
        R.B.

        Read the paper. Most of these are tropical cyclone then storm , storm/storm, bushfire/storm at third. Much less frequent was bushfire/flood, only more often than flood/flood. It’s a big country. Areas are still parched when there are floods elsewhere.

        370

      • #
        clarence.t

        Again PF has not read the link. It actually confirms what the topic is all about.

        Even uses the graph that Jo has posted.

        Also shows insurance cost doing.. not much.

        https://naturaldisaster.royalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-11/report-image013.png

        Then there is BoM temperature data…. lol

        …and climate model projections… double LOL !!

        250

      • #
        David+Wojick

        PF your royal commission reference is a list of falsehoods. Especially the litany of “things are expected to get worse”. Unless they are referring to the models, or perhaps their own state of mind. Neither is science. I think the few factual claims are also false.

        322

        • #
          clarence.t

          They have a series of cracked and broken crystal balls.

          They choose whichever they think shows something scary.

          Its really quite hilariously anti-scientific.

          200

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          You assert, without any evidence that the Royal Commission is lying? Facts are lies, to paraphrase your last sentence, all very1984. Srsly

          230

          • #

            Expectations are facts ? Wow ! That’s a good one 😀

            180

          • #
            el+gordo

            I think the Black Summer Royal Commission extrapolated on flimsy evidence.

            ‘The commission published “interim observations” in August which said “further warming over the next 20 years appears to be inevitable” and warned of “cascading, concurrent and compounding” disasters.

            ‘It estimated Black Summer’s health costs totalled $2 billion. A medical study estimated smoke caused 417 excess deaths.’ (SMH)

            60

            • #
              GlenM

              Fires getting hotter also. .05 degrees hotter in fact! Noted and eminent( cough..) climate scientist Joelle Gergis sagely forecasts big grass fires duhhh.. 1974 grass fires burnt more area than the 2019 one.

              150

          • #
            clarence.t

            Still waiting for your “facts” PF

            They are non-existent !

            40

          • #
            clarence.t

            Where did you get the word “lying” from ?

            Badly and scientifically misinformed , would be a better description.

            120

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            The Left lecturing us on truthfullness…what a laugh….

            140

          • #
            Raving

            Covid infection trajectories around the world are all over the man. All very 2021 and no conspiracy theory.

            I’ve been trying to understand why this is so … For example: Why aren’t NSW cases rising more quickly rather than falling

            All ssems to defy empidemological models and science..

            Then the reason for the huge diversity occurs to me. PEOPLE ARE FICKLE. They react differently to rising andfalling covid cases from place to place.

            Victorians react differentlly to those in NSW. Different responses at different stages, interpreded differently. Mask on, mask off, avoid like the plague. party time!

            There is endless variety … and the same will hold truee with carbon pricing, electric crises and CO2 concentration and climate fetishm. It’s all style

            00

      • #
        clarence.t

        “and these are becoming more common”

        And your evidence for this is where ? non-existent ?

        190

        • #

          Facts and Evidence are foreign words for people part of the Climate Church.

          80

        • #
          GlenM

          I’m afraid not clarence.t as these characters get their information from the ABC and have little situational awareness.

          100

          • #
            PeterS

            Funded and supported by our tax dollars and the federal government. Can someone remind us on whose side the LNP is on? Oh, of course – silly me. The answer is obviously the same side as the ALP and Greens. So, those who vote for either major party actually support the CAGW scam. Well done those jelly backed Australian voters who can’t be bothered to turn their brains on for at least one minute when voting. You are helping along the climate change alarmism. In that case stop complaining, bend over and get spanked given that’s what you want.

            60

    • #
      R.B.

      The intent of the paper was to investigate the frequency of the events.

      Simon comes up with the most inane, pseudo-intellectual drivel I’ve come across in comments.

      230

      • #
        R.B.

        While Fitzy tries hard to out do him.

        190

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        Read the definition again, and try to understand that they are talking about 2 disasters occurring within 3 months of each other. If the time span was 3 months and one day, it would not be counted. That frequency has not changed, but the frequency of individual events has.

        227

      • #
        Simon

        Please read the paper before commenting.

        121

        • #
          clarence.t

          It is apparent that you haven’t.

          Either that or just don’t understand it.

          200

        • #

          A wise advice you should act on 😀

          160

        • #
          clarence.t

          All the actual data in the report shows nothing much happening.

          There are a few unproven random AGW mantra statements

          All predictions are based on cracked and shattered crystal ball gazing.

          BoM temperature data is known to be a total mess and not much related to reality .

          80

        • #
          PeterS

          I see you are now talking to yourself. May I suggest you try a different approach? How about telling the truth for a change.

          130

        • #
          R.B.

          You wrote

          The intent of the paper is to show that compound (i.e. concurrently occurring) disasters are the most difficult to recover from.

          That is not the intent.
          In a first of its kind, this study examines the prevalence of compound disasters in Australia based upon normalised disaster losses recorded in the Insurance Council of Australia’s natural disaster database

          That was the intent.

          Can I ask you to refrain from making up facts then pretending others didn’t read the paper?

          20

    • #
      Binny Pegler

      Bush fires and cyclones happen in difference climate zones Australia is a big country.
      You can have bushfires in the south of Australia – dry summer / wet winter. At the same time as floods and cyclones in the north – wet summer / dry winter

      120

      • #
        Binny Pegler

        It’s also possible to have 1/100 years extreme weather/storms, far more often in the same greater metropolitan area. These events usually only have a foot print of 1 or 2 km.
        So a a city that covers 50 or more kms can have one of these event somewhere with in it’s area every few years.

        100

    • #
      clarence.t

      “There is no analysis on the severity or cost of individual events”

      You apparently missed the insurance costs graph.. Which shows just random variability.

      https://naturaldisaster.royalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-11/report-image013.png

      30

    • #
      clarence.t

      “pairing of Bushfire and Tropical Cyclone occurs far less often……”

      LOL.. that’s because they occur in different parts of Australia.

      How about you look at “storms” and “bushfires.”

      At least then you might stand a small chance of being in similar geographic regions.

      20

  • #
    TedM

    “There is no analysis on the severity or cost of individual events, which appears to be increasing.” Of course the cost of individual events is increasing, in direct proportion the the quantity and value of infrastructure in the area of the event. Nothing to do with CO2.

    140

    • #

      Nothing to do with CO2.

      Of course not, not even with what ever Climate Change, as prosperity increases, the monetary dammage increases, that’s all.
      Warmer climnate is better, healthier, less desasters, more crops, also thanks to CO2.
      Not to understand, what these climacterias, a special form of a disease, always have to hand wave and to cry.

      120

  • #
    R.B.

    It’s fine to have an argument on whether climate-change has increased floods or cyclones. Its very hard for humans to deliberately cause those other than to get everyone in the world to jet to a climate conference.

    Bushfires are different. Just one spotty activist can cause immense destruction with one deliberate action on the worst possible day.

    The Adelaide Hills were under worse bushfire conditions than King Lake and other areas near Melbourne 12 years ago. Nothing happened because no fires started. Not one.

    Of all the supposed crimes of expressing an opinion that impacts negatively on others, linking bushfires to climate change would have to come out on top.

    170

    • #
      el+gordo

      Mustn’t forget unprecedented mice plagues.

      ‘Vast tracts of land in Australia’s New South Wales state are being threatened by a mouse plague that the state government describes as “absolutely unprecedented.” Just how many millions of rodents have infested the agricultural plains across the state is guesswork.’ (Apsnews)

      70

  • #
    David Maddison

    It looks like they haven’t yet got around to altering the Insurance Council of Australia Disaster List database and it actually shows true data.

    That one must have slipped through the “homogenisation” process.

    80

  • #
    Neville

    Australia has had a lower cyclone trend since 1966 and so many bush fires( 47%) are deliberately lit today and ditto in the USA.
    Willis covered all these issues in his global coverage when he tried to find their so called Climate Emergency.
    Check out the Dr Pielke jnr data + graphs he linked to in his study and losses over time are also included.
    Of course there’s no climate emergency and everyone should check the data and start to WAKE UP.
    Dr Rosling also proved we are now living in the very best of times.
    And Dr Christy’s talk at the GWPF in London and later in Paris supports Willis’s study.
    It’s best to ignore the donkeys and leave them play in their delusional fantasy world.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/25/wheres-the-emergency/

    60

  • #
    David Maddison

    I don’t understand why people continue to build and rebuild in disaster-prone areas. E.g. on flood plains or surrounded by trees in the bush.

    I think part of the problem is that the government, i.e. you and me, THE TAXPAYER, partly funds them to rebuild in the same disaster prone area.

    Remember the Brisbane floods? Many people said that they were wiped out in the previous floods but still rebuilt!

    He’s a hint on avoiding natural disasters.

    1) Don’t build on flood plains.
    2) Don’t build in the middle of bushland surrounded by trees.
    3) Don’t build in earthquake prone areas or if you do build to appropriate earthquake codes.
    4) Don’t build next to a volcano.

    Etc..

    For any house I have ever bought, before purchase I checked if it was in a flood zone. Bushfire zones are obvious and easy to avoid.

    Why is any of the above so difficult for people to understand?

    170

    • #
      Greg in NZ

      Earthquakes? Volcanoes? Flood plains? Trees? David, welcome to New Zealand [you left out reclaimed swamp / tidal estuaries, ie. Christchurch].

      Guess there’s only one thing to do – go south, young man, Antarctica awaits your arrival!

      In other ‘news’, a double-shot MIQ nurse dies of the ‘rona. We’re doomed I tells ya, DOOOOOMED.

      140

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      G’day David,
      The other one that surprises me is the way so many people build on sand dunes next to the ocean. And then demand ratepayers foot the bill to rebuild their dune after storm erosion.
      Cheers
      Dave B

      90

    • #
      Chris

      People don’t always have choice as to where they can afford to live. It is cooperation between developers and councils that produces homes on flood plains and in rugged country that is impossible to protect from bush fires.

      30

      • #
        David Maddison

        I think that is a lame excuse. Australia has one of the lowest population densities in the world. There are plenty of places to build.

        Plus, people normally pay a premium to live in a bushfire zone or on sand dunes or other unstable land near the sea.

        60

        • #
          Strop

          Chris is correct. People can basically only build where the residential lots and services are constructed. Which is cooperation between developers and council.

          30

          • #
            David Maddison

            Then people need to demand that developments be put in safe areas. Or just don’t live in high risk areas. I refuse to accept that in a continent the size of Australia with such a low population density that there are no more safe places to live and we are now restricted to living on flood plains, bushfire areas or unstable coastal land.

            30

            • #
              Serp

              There’s always some poor devil who brings logical thought to post-modern society and is inevitably rebuffed; I suppose it’s important not to go quietly although the lessons I’ve drawn so far from Solzhenitsyn are not supportive of such antics.

              30

            • #
              Strop

              David, of course we are not restricted to living on flood plains and bushfire areas etc. David isn’t claiming that and nor am I. It’s just a case of it’s not as black and white as people choosing.

              e.g. You live in a regional area. Country town for example. You want to keep living in the district, have a job there, friends, family etc and the population grows a bit and you want to buy a home. Some developer has received approval to develop some lots that are on the edge of town near the bush. There are no other lots for sale and no other development proposals unless you move a significant distance. What do you do? Move back in with your parents or move a long way away. Technically you have a choice. But realistically it’s not much of a choice.

              As for population density and safe places. Yes, there is so much of that land but it isn’t necessarily zoned for development. To get that rezoned you have to justify or prove that land supply in the existing residential zoned areas is running short to get the council and state govt to approve a rezoning. Very expensive and it’s only developers who are going to do that if it’s profitable.

              There are now planning and building controls on flood areas that should limit the possibility of new builds being flooded. But much of the at risk properties are from historical lax rules or rule bending. Those existing at risk houses can’t just be rendered as uninhabitable or worthless because of events that may not happen or are sparse.

              30

      • #
        Binny Pegler

        Some what ironically only the wealthy can afford to live in the most disaster prone areas. AKA Water front and elevated bush land.

        10

  • #
    David Maddison

    Don’t forget many bushfires are deliberately lit, including as acts of terrorism.

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/al-qaeda-urges-firebombing-australia-20120505-1y62t.html

    Al-Qaeda urges firebombing Australia

    By Natalie O’Brien

    May 6, 2012 — 3.00am

    AL-QAEDA has named Australia as a prime target for terrorism by firebombing in an online terrorism and bomb-making magazine.

    A picture of the Sydney Opera House with smoke clouds behind it – captioned ”Sydney city on fire” – has been used to illustrate a story that promotes using bushfires as a weapon of terrorism.

    From the Inspire magazine and website. 

    The article in Inspire magazine, titled ”It is of your freedom to ignite a firebomb”, gives a step-by-step guide to building an ”ember bomb”, which it advocates as the best way to start destructive fires, and details the best times of the year to start fires in different parts of Australia.

    The article was condemned yesterday by Attorney-General Nicola Roxon, who reassured the public that there was no imminent terrorist threat against Australia.

    However, Ms Roxon said it was a timely reminder, one year since the death of Osama bin Laden, that the threat of violent extremism in Australia remained. ”I have instructed my department to draw this material to the attention of relevant authorities, including the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Communications and Media Authority,” she told The Sunday Age.

    SEE LINK FOR REST

    110

  • #
    M Allinson

    “CO2 doesn’t cause multiple back-to-back disasters in Australia”

    Well, I’m sorry to break the news but if the people who pull all the strings say that it does, it does – and they will insist we do something about it.

    The logical, rational, fact-based world is now a thing of the past.

    Science, as we knew it, has gone.

    Telling these people that they have got it all wrong by rational argument will simply bring a faint smile to their lips as they push on with their plans to reach “zero carbon to avoid the “climate catastrophe”.

    And we peasants ARE that superfluous carbon to be eliminated.

    People will eventually be individually monitored for their carbon footprint – how far they drive, what food they buy, what clothes they wear – every part of your life will be measured and assessed.

    Those who exceed their CO2 budget will have their footprint reduced.

    Once cash has been eliminated – and it won’t be long now – every single purchase you make will be on record.

    Did you want to travel interstate next month? Oh dear, you shouldn’t have bought that diesel generator, since it has pushed you over the limit. Maybe next year.

    110

    • #
      Chris

      Allison, all that is happening now. Every time you use a loyalty card or a bank card, someone is collecting your data. Woolworths got slammed a few years ago for congratulating a young woman on her pregnancy. It was not what she was buying but what she had stopped buying that caught their interest. Unfortunately the young lady herself did not realise and had not had her pregnancy confirmed at that stage.

      I have just received a letter from ‘MainRoads’ to let me know that “my household has been ( randomly) selected to take part in the ‘Perth Area Travel & Household Survey”. Everyone over the age is 12 is required to carry a GPS for 5 week days.

      They assure me that my privacy will be maintained, just like the QR codes where the WA police used information from the codes to track persons of interest.

      120

    • #
      clarence.t

      And of course, “certain people” will be “allocated” a carbon footprint a magnitude or more higher than the mere plebs.

      40

  • #
  • #
    Neville

    Biden has stated a week ago that their climate threat is real and we must take action on his EXISTENTIAL threat.
    But Humans have never been safer from EXTREME WEATHER disasters and the DATA proves this is the case.
    Look up the DATA from Willis and Dr Christy since 1920 and the DATA graphs are very easy to understand.
    Just to strengthen their claims we should never forget that the Human population was just 1.8 billion in 1920 and in 2021 the population is now 7.8 billion. DUH?
    What is it that the silly donkeys can’t understand about the REAL WORLD DATA?

    https://www.thegwpf.com/putting-climate-change-claims-to-the-test/

    60

  • #
    Neville

    Dr Pielke jnr and Lomborg actually link to the DATA about extreme disasters at the link.
    The FACTS are that a richer world is a much SAFER world. Please WAKE UP.
    AND there definitely is NO CLIMATE EMERGENCY At ALL.
    In fact the reverse is true.

    https://www.climatedepot.com/2021/09/11/bjorn-lomborg-higher-incomes-safeguard-people-more-from-climate-richer-means-mostly-safer-relative-weather-costs-decreasing-globally/

    30

  • #
    Ronin

    That was good news, totally expected and why am I not surprised.

    30

  • #
    Neville

    BTW here’s a recent summary from the Guardian about Australian farmer’s heading for another RECORD year.
    Last year gross income was 66 billion $, but this year could exceed 70 billion $.

    Just more evidence to prove how lucky we are to be living in the 21st century and in Australia, even though we have clueless donkeys who want to flush our good fortune DOWN the DRAIN.
    And for a GUARANTEED ZERO RETURN.

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/15/australias-farmers-set-for-record-70bn-year-but-labour-shortages-and-covid-rules-threaten-harvest

    60

    • #
      Ronin

      For once the weather and the markets are in the farmers favour, just the government to step on their toes and stuff it all up.

      60

  • #
    Neville

    Just to remind our donkeys that the entire global population is moving to higher URBANISATION every year.
    Even Africa ( 53 countries) is heading that way, although their population has increased by 1,000 million people since 1970. THINK.
    But WEALTHY OECD countries are now well above 80% including OZ and NZ. Look it up.
    Then THINK about how wonderful our climate is today.

    90

  • #
    Neville

    I know that stating the obvious doesn’t sink in today, but here goes AGAIN.
    Dr Rosling used 120,000 data points to prove that we are much better off today than 30, 50, or 100 or 200 years ago. And we need a lower % of farmers to grow our food compared to earlier periods, YET for a much higher population.
    And everyone is much HEALTHIER and WEALTHIER today and famines today are very rare around the world.
    And not just in wealthy OECD countries.
    The largest famine occurred in China about 60 years ago and probably 50 million + people lost their lives.
    This happened in 1958 to about 1961 and is the largest loss of life in recorded history.
    But famines were common all around the world for thousands of years even though the farm workforce was at record numbers until more recent times.
    AGAIN THINK how lucky we are today.

    100

  • #

    the author of the article you cite refutes the claims you make

    You are completely correct, this article is looking at the historical occurrence of compound disasters. It is not looking at future climate change and should not be used to make any assertions about it.

    Cheers,

    Andrew

    Andrew Gissing
    Risk Frontiers
    General Manager – Resilience
    33 Chandos St, St Leonards, NSW 2065

    Website: http://www.riskfrontiers.com

    Risk Modelling | Risk Management | Resilience | Disaster Management | Social Research
    Australia | New Zealand | Asia Pacific

    This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the sender. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily the views of Risk Frontiers.

    On Wed, 15 Sept 2021 at 11:23, Cr Barney Langford wrote:
    Hi Andrew,

    Not sure if you’re aware but your article on Compound Natural Disasters in Australia is being used as an argument against the notion of anthropomorphic climate change at this conservative website:
    https://joannenova.com.au/2021/09/my-shocked-face-co2-doesnt-cause-multiple-back-to-back-disasters-in-australia/

    33

    • #

      Thanks Barney. It’s good to get feedback from authors.

      So he agrees that CO2 is not associated at all with compound natural disasters in Australia. 🙂

      Good to know.

      110

      • #
        barney langford

        What he’s saying is that he’s researched a particular aspect of disasters and you have attempted to extemporize from the conclusions obtained about those compound disasters a wider analysis about climate change. Your claim in this post is fallacious. I’ll see myself out

        310

        • #
          clarence.t

          Easy Barney..

          There is no evidence of any anthropogenic signal in climate disasters since 1966.

          “There has been no temporal trend in their frequency since 1966.”

          This is a statement straight from the paper.

          60

        • #
          clarence.t

          “Your claim in this post is fallacious.”

          Wrong! Everything Jo has said is totally in line with the findings of the paper.

          Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

          51

        • #

          Be careful of linking personal details!

          36

        • #
          clarence.t

          I hope his company are looking at the risks from the cooler period ahead…

          … and not just blindly following AGW mantra and climate computer games.

          40

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          Hi Barney,

          As usual, any vague linkage between events nominated as being “caused” by CO2 induced atmospheric disturbances and reality is entirely coincidental.

          There is unfortunately no scientific truth to the idea that human origin CO2 in the atmosphere can influence its temperature.

          After the Sun has impregnated the earths surface with high energy UV radiation, at the end of the process there’s a small amount of remnant energy looking for a home.

          Some parts of the radiation spectrum of this PW IR may be absorbed by CO2 and H2O in the first 30 metres or so above ground level but from there up to 11,000 metres or so the CO2 behaves strictly in accordance with the universal gas law, P.V=nR.T.

          H2O has an additional mechanism not available to CO2 which cause rain and less frequently, hail.

          It’s complicated but rest assured that the pinging you occasionally hear on your roof top is hail and Not the mythical photons that the UNIPCCC claims are being sent back to earth from the dreaded CO2.

          The idea that human origin CO2 can cause Global Warming is a leg pull of exponential proportions, besides the associated get rich quick schemes attached to it, and will go down in history as one of the greatest scandals of all time.

          But, we have all voted to continue to live in fantasy land, so that human progress can be delayed indefinitely.

          10

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          I can’t see anything phallacious about what was written.

          00

      • #
        Simon

        You could always ask for feedback before posting an article, especially when the article conclusion has no connection to the objective of the research.

        09

        • #
          clarence.t

          Jo’s article states just what the paper said,

          ““There has been no temporal trend in their frequency since 1966.””

          If there is no trend there can be no anthropogenic signal.

          We can wait, and wait for you to produce evidence of anthropogenic global warming by increased atmospheric CO2.

          But we know you will never produce any.

          60

    • #
      David Maddison

      Not sure if you’re aware but your article on Compound Natural Disasters in Australia is being used as an argument against the notion of anthropomorphic climate change at this conservative website:

      Barney, you talk about a “conservative website” as though it were a bad thing. Plus, what is wrong with an argument against “the notion of anthropomorphic climate change”?

      We need more conservative websites! I’m sick of Leftist anti-science drivel.

      90

    • #
      Strop

      being used as an argument against the notion of anthropomorphic climate change

      It is not being used as an argument against the notion of anthropomorphic (or anthropogenic) climate change. In fact, Jo actually embraces the notion of anthropogenic climate change in the statement, “The predominant and most predictable driver of climate-related disaster events is not anthropogenic global warming, or CO2 emissions, but the El Niño Southern Oscillation.”
      It is being used to show the pattern of compound climate-related disasters doesn’t support claims that anthropogenic warming is a driver of climate related disaster events worse.

      the author of the article you cite refutes the claims you make

      No, he doesn’t. He simply says, “It is not looking at future climate change and should not be used to make any assertions about it.” Which is not a refute because Jo isn’t looking at the future climate change. She’s simply quoted the author in that there is no trend in the recent past.

      It may not have been the purpose of the report to basically refute alarmists claims that we’re already seeing the effects of worsening disasters in Aus. But that doesn’t mean the data can’t be used as an indicator of that. History shows science is full of unintented discoveries.

      Your claim in this post is fallacious.

      The claim is basically what Gissing wrote. There is no trend. If that’s fallacious then write to Gissing again and tell him he’s wrong. There’s no wider climate analysis. Just a showing that Gissing’s data refutes alarmists observations of the same recent past.

      20

  • #
    Strop

    The following medical organisations have written an open letter to the Australian Prime Minister asking for action on climate change for health reasons and saying “The health, wellbeing and prosperity of our future generations depends on it”.
    .
    The AMA, Doctors for the Environment Australia, (DEA) and many medical colleges: The Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA), The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP), The Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (ACRRM), The College of Intensive Care Medicine of Australia and New Zealand (CICM), The Royal Australasian College of Medical Administrators (RACMA), The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP), The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP), The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG), The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists (RANZCOG) and the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM).

    .
    They claim we are experiencing the effects of climate change in the Australian 2019/2020 summer bushfires and the recent northern hemisphere floods. Maybe they should look at the chart in the above blog of Jo’s.
    .

    The letter.
    https://www.ama.com.au/sites/default/files/2021-09/Open%20letter%20to%20Prime%20Minister%20Scott%20Morrison%20-%20Australian%20doctors%20say%20climate%20emergency%20is%20public%20health%20emergency%20%281%29.pdf
    .

    Interesting they cite “health, wellbeing and prosperity”. Given all those things have been vastly improved thanks to reliable energy sources … fossil fuels. Something the renewables can’t offer. Or maybe these medics will advocate for nuclear?

    150

    • #
      David Maddison

      Too bad they didn’t have the same concern about banning Ivermectin for C19 treatment.

      170

    • #
      Mark+Allinson

      “Maybe they should look at the chart in the above blog of Jo’s.”

      No chance – these people have absolutely no interest in the facts of the matter, they are “progressive” idealists who use their positions to change the political culture, from Capitalism to Communism.

      Virtually every “professional” body today would support “climate change” action and argue for harder and longer lockdowns.

      In short, most physicians today have swapped their allegiance from the principles of Hippocrates to those of Joesef Mengele – party before people.

      80

  • #
    Ruairi

    Though the weather be filthy or fine,
    Though the seasons be kind or malign,
    Climate changes, science knew,
    But not from too much CO2,
    Which for life on Earth is benign.

    130

  • #
    David Maddison

    Another matter to consider is that “green” councils refuse to allow clearing of fire hazards around bushland properties. These policies have killed many people and caused massive property damage. Individual greens responsible for these decisions should be sued.

    180

  • #

    Jo
    The problem is that you keep assuming that the average Australian politician is rational related to climate (non) issues. They are clearly not and are simply incapable of understanding what you have posted here, and the plethora of other proof right in front of them. Or if they do understand they deliberately ignore it in a rush to the bottom to supposedly chase votes.

    Its increasingly clear there is no climate crisis at all. What there is is a crisis of science, where all sorts of rubbish related to climate is peddled as fact by Leftists who’s only motive is political. And a crisis of leadership where despite being elected in the climate change election, Scomo follows his handlers at the UN and talks utter rubbish on “net Zero” which means net zero jobs for us here in Australia.

    90

    • #
      PeterS

      This is no different to the current plandemic. Both are based on misinformation, lies, deception and exaggerations. The real goal must therefore be the same. Anyone who doesn’t still know that that goal is must be asleep. Those who are part of the scams know what the goal only too well because they are doing a great job of convincing the majority of people there is a climate change crisis and a pandemic crisis. No, there a only one real crisis and that is the war against the West and freedom loving citizens.

      110

  • #
    Global Cooling

    Is there a correlation with el nino southern oscillation? I found a graph that shows drops in 1960 and 2005 but visually there is no mutual trend. The image above is a flat line with a drop around 2005.

    If disasters are temperature related then I would expect the same disasters that we currently have in corresponding locations on Earth. Obviously there are no bush fires in Antarctica.

    40

    • #
      el+gordo

      ENSO has a mind of its own, Australia is a land of drought and flooding rains. At 2021 is going down in the history books as a bumper year in the agriculture sector across the entire continent.

      La Nina conditions should linger longer and if there are no floods we should enjoy the best harvest in living memory.

      20

  • #
    Hanrahan

    WOW I’ve just received my house insurance renewal and the bar stewards have bumped it up 35%. This must be a doubling in two years.

    OK I’m in the cyclone belt but according to this thread cyclone losses have plummeted in recent decades. OK the city had an expensive flood a few years ago but I an 20 m above that level with no high ground between me and the sea.

    I have no mortgage so I might just carry my own risk, I have never made a claim in my life. Even cyclone Althea just cracked a window and this house is tucked under a mountain so somewhat protected.

    120

    • #
      Kalm Keith

      It was obvious years ago why the insurance industry was supporting the Global Warming thing; no extra risk but they had a big excuse to put up premiums because of CO2 and death by incineration due to excess CO2.

      Win win for them.

      100

    • #
      OldOzzie

      Hanrahan Golden rule – ring them and complain – have been doing this for a number of years on different properties for house & contents insurance and it always works – including Mackay

      110

    • #
      clarence.t

      Maybe see if you can get cover just for fire and theft.?

      50

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    Heatwaves are NOT getting hotter in the 6 State capital cities that are home to 75% of our people.
    Example – heatwaves of 5 consecutive days, average of Tmax over those 5 days, ranked by year for the hottest top 40 years:
    http://www.geoffstuff.com/sydmel5.docx

    I once sent this data in full form to the BOM. they replied that they could not consider such data unless it was published, peer-reviewed, in a Journal.

    Seems to me that Science has gone backwards if peer review is needed for a paper in which the most complex part is taking the average of a string on numbers. You know, like primary school stuff.

    Yet, Australian policy makers continue with the myth that heatwaves are getting hotter. That is why critical people coined the term “Junk Science”.

    Same patterns apply to 3-day and 10-day analyses. Not getting hotter there. Perhaps the reason is that heatwaves form in central Australia, 1,500 km away, to be blown to Sydney & Melbourne on S-W winds occasionally in summertime. So the weather records from local Sydney and Melbourne stations have essentially no predictive value for the next heatwave. Geoff S

    110

  • #
    Ross

    Regarding cyclones in Australia, a couple of years I downloaded some data on cyclones in Australia 1971-2017. Then shoved it in a spreadsheet of my own to graph the data etc. All cyclones in Australia show a downward path in terms of numbers/year over that time period. Severe cyclones the same. We have gone from getting cyclones (all) in the high teens per year now down to under 10/annum. Severe cyclones as a % of all cyclones does show a slightly upward trend. So the major conclusion from that is – we are getting way less cyclones per year in Australia, but there is a greater chance that each cyclone will be a “severe type. So when you hear the disaster queens state that cyclones will be more severe due to AGW- there needs to be a huge qualification on their behalf.

    50

  • #
    Ronin

    A great way to stuff China up and make money for us, build a rail line across the centre of Australia, rail the coking coal from the Bowen basin west to the Pilbara, where the iron ore is , make the steel there, bring billets of steel back on the coal train return trip, for export from the East coast.

    60

  • #
    Earl

    Flinders Island Renewable Project Status.
    8pm Wed 15Sept
    Wind – off 0kw generation
    Solar – off 0kw generation
    Battery – off 0kw contribution
    Diesel – on 1060kw, 100% contribution

    For most of late afternoon and early evening when solar was generating it was contributing less than 5% while wind alternated from 5-15% – combined they never got above 20%. It is a great initiative and hats off but it is not and can never be the total answer even for a small populated island.

    https://www.hydro.com.au/clean-energy/hybrid-energy-solutions/success-stories/flinders-island

    20

    • #
      Graeme#4

      And yet the authorities don’t mention this on their website…

      10

    • #
      Ronin

      They were going well over the weekend when the wind was blowing close to 100kmh, they were 100% on wind with solar throttled back for trim, but now it is calm, they have been on 100% diesel for a couple days

      20

  • #
    Neville

    More proof that the Biden donkey is doing his level best to wreck the US economy and force consumers to pay higher and higher prices into the future.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/09/14/forbes-bidens-plan-to-expand-climate-disclosure-requirements-means-higher-prices-for-consumers/

    30

    • #
      PeterS

      Indeed but we are doing far worse. At least they still have lots of nuclear power plants. We have none so the gradual closing down of our coal fired power stations is economic suicide. The US have about 90 operating commercial nuclear reactors at some 50 nuclear power plants in some 28 states. The average age of these nuclear reactors is about 40 years old. Some are at various stages of decommissioning. In spite of that, they will have significant buffer to allow the US to maintain a reasonably consistent supply of power for some time. We on the other hand have no such buffer room. In that respect the US could more easily meet their emissions reduction targets than we could thanks to their use of nuclear power. What are we going to do? Build more wind and solar farms. As you can see our donkey is bigger than theirs when it comes to energy policies. Yes we will use more gas as well, which exposes the other scam in all this. Why not just go full gas instead of wasting our money on renewables? Oh, of course, we can’t do that since we would be still emitting lots of CO2. I wish they make up their minds. Do we go with no CO2, which means nuclear is the only real option, or do we just get off this slippery slope to disaster and just build coal fired power stations? The reality though is neither option will ever be adopted since Australians are either too scared of using real tech that the big boys uses, namely nuclear, or our politicians are convinced that coal is bad for winning elections. We are caught between a rock and a hard place.

      10

      • #
        el+gordo

        You might be interested in this poll.

        ‘Australians are split over the question of nuclear power, which has been prohibited in Australia since 1998. Almost half the population (47%) would support removing the existing ban on nuclear power, but the same number (51%) are opposed to that measure.’ (Low Poll)

        20

        • #
          TdeF

          Amazing. The Morrison government has just dumped the utterly stupid Green diesel submarine project and gone nuclear. And based in Perth, not Green South Australia, far from the action.

          Whether submarines make sense at all in the 21 century, nuclear is the only option. Watch for the Green Senate to demand we return to rubber bands. This was reported in Breitbart but they refernced a report by the ABC?

          20

  • #
    TdeF

    “Shell is causing dangerous climate change and must now stop it quickly.”

    Science ignorance is beyond imagination. Reportedly a court in Holland has ordered Royal Dutch Shell to reduce ’emissions’. This is an oil company! Now how do you do that? It’s like ordering the 7 billion people on the planet to stop breathing. Carbon dioxide is now legally a noxious ‘Emission’. Perhaps basic chemistry lessons should be ordered for judges? Someone should explain carbohydrates.

    In the Victorian period, people recognized the dangers of asbestos. Phosphorous. Cadmium. Lead. Mercury. All of which were commonplace. In the 1960s people recognized and fought the emissions of radioactive material and heavy metal pollution generally. Then sulphur dioxide and the consequence acid rain. At one stage Greenpeace banned the element Chlorine, an element of the periodic table.

    In the 1980s in America legislators pushed vegetable fats and forced many to switch from animal fast to deadly transfats.

    In the 2010s the Greens who had pushed for diesels realised they had legislated massive increases in Nitrous Oxide emissions, bringing back acid rain.

    Now the Greens are now fighting carbon dioxide, legally a deadly industrial emission from fossil fuels. This is causing rocketing energy prices, destroying economies, killing manufacturing. The Greens are effectively demanding people stop breathing, animals stop breathing and digesting and everyone stops the combustion of plant matter, fossil fuels. Demand the forests to burn naturally in uncontrollable bush fires and blame carbon dioxide and Climate Change for the massive damage and loss of life. And China, India, Russia, Indonesia are exempt.

    And at the same time Greens are demanding not only that we stop eating meat but and stop farmed animals from existing at all, because they fart methane. The chemistry ignorant inmates have locked us all in their asylum.

    Carbon dioxide is now an industrial emission. The people against everything demand that we aim not to produce CO2 at all, certainly not more CO2. Somehow. Despite the rapid growth in the population of the world, increasing x7 in 100 years.

    I cannot believe that judges and politicians happily accept Carbon dioxide is a noxious emission. Surely its deadly partner water is also a emissions. This is a failure of basic science education.

    And of the two elements of photosynthesis from which all life on earth comes, the combination of carbon dioxide and water, water kills more people each year. So why not ban water?. Tax it heavily. Maybe that is really why the Greens have banned dams?

    Water is also the enemy of mankind, an evil byproduct of industrial combustion and fossil fuels. Hydrogen, Oxygen and Carbon, the three horsemen of the Ecopolypse. Ban all three. At least tax them out of existence.

    With three of the 92 naturally occurring elements banned or taxed out of existence, there are only 89 more to go. But these three are the key to life on earth and life on earth is the problem.

    20

    • #
      TdeF

      Activist Green Judges are now trying to rewrite the laws of nature, chemistry and physics. Will someone please tell them the Laws of Nature are beyond their control and certainly beyond their understanding.

      Without Carbon dioxide, life on earth does not exist. Humans, trees, plants, animals, birds, fish, insects are made entirely from carbon dioxide. And the formation of carbon dioxide powers your brain and your muscles, everything. Old sunlight stored in plants.

      Luckily carbon dioxide has increased 50% massively increasing food supplies. And judges would stop that.

      30

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    If global warming carbon (sic) caused the drought that killed the fish, it also caused the water …

    After historic fish kills and drought Menindee Lakes hit capacity

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2021-09-11/menindee-lakes-hit-capacity-for-first-time-in-almost-a-decade/100452866

    Drought, [global warming] and mismanagement: what experts think caused the death of a million Menindee fish

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-01-16/what-caused-menindee-fish-kill-drought-water-mismanagement/10716080

    If carbon (sic) causes everything, how do you know when the climate is fixed?

    20

  • #
    CHRIS

    Unfortunately, it is going to take quite a long time before the climate change trash like Tom Foolery will be pulled into line. The reason being that true CC occurs well beyond the life span of humans. Intellectually challenged morons like Foolery cannot begin to perceive the total time-line of Earth’s history.

    00