By Jo Nova
The Great Unwinding of Climate Change is upon us.
Even the US Democrats have realized that times have changed and talking about “climate change” has become toxic to voters, but the Australian conservatives can’t figure it out.
Even as Sussan Ley, the Opposition Leader, contemplates taking a baby step away from “Net Zero” targets (pushing it back to 2060), the latest advice for Democrats is “Don’t say Climate Change”.
The Democrat leaders say they’ve seen the light because of a recent Searchlight poll, but polling numbers have been the same for the last ten years. Voters have always said climate change is a catastrophe, because it was social-death to say anything else, but they also rank climate change near the bottom of their ToDo lists. They never cared, and it didn’t matter — not until their electricity bills caught fire, and the smelters started closing. Then it mattered, but in a bad way.
The field is ripe for a real opposition to pick up this dissatisfaction, instead the Australian Liberals tinker with a different shade of pagan fantasy, while the world moves on, and the left gear up for a flanking manouver.
Don’t expect to hear a nano-quark of a mea culpa, or any lessons learned — the people at the front of this political wagon are not admitting they were wrong, they’re just agreeing to hide their obsession with weather-changery, and then lie about how the Republicans are making electricity expensive.
They’re still patting themselves on the back, and telling themselves they’re smarter than the voters. Listen to Rep Sean Casten (D) as he softens the bad news for the genius Democrats:
“There’s no obvious electoral upside in being really smart on energy and climate policy.”
Shucks it must be hard to be so gifted…
H\t to Willie Soon for the link:
Why Democrats aren’t talking about climate change much anymore
By Kate Yoder, Grist
Nearly a year after the 2024 election, Democrats are still trying to figure out what went wrong. In the midst of this soul-searching, a new piece of advice has appeared: “Don’t say climate change.”
Having hammered us with righteous Climate Fear for twenty years, the Democrats are just starting to realize that the voters know the party cares more about the climate than it does about the voters…
That’s the takeaway from a recent poll by the Searchlight Institute, a new Democratic think tank. Americans said they see climate change as a problem, but it’s rarely one of their top issues — voters in battleground states are more concerned with affordability and health care. But when asked which issue they think the Democratic Party prioritizes, climate change was number one.
The Searchlight poll shows that half the population will still call climate change a serious sort of crisis, but only a pitiful 1 to 6% actually think it’s the top issue.
If only US Democrats had been reading skeptical blogs they would have known this years ago.
SearchLight
So this is a win for skeptics, but gird your loins, the battle is just shifting to a new front — “cheap” energy:
Advocacy groups are on board, too, with the League of Conservation Voters, Climate Power, and others running an ad blitz this summer blaming Republicans for increasing energy costs.
So conservatives had better sharpen up their knives explaining how unreliable energy is a vandal on the grid, that pushes up the cost of every other generator. They need to start talking about the cost of the whole system, not just the 5-minute bids.
Australian conservatives still think they need a “Net Zero” policy to impress the voters, but as Barnaby Joyce says, it’s the liability that cost them the last two elections.
Half of Australia doesn’t want to pay a single cent on Net Zero targets. Who do these people vote for?
Not the Liberals!
A few past polls:
- World to burn by 6pm, but only 3% of young voters say Climate Change is the top issue
- Half of America doesn’t even want to spend $1 a month extra on green electricity or fuel
- 2019: 50% of Americans don’t want to spend *even one more dollar* on renewables
- 2015: Only 3% of US people think climate is most important issue
- 2014: Gallup poll: Voters rank “climate change” last
Nothing new here. Consider the Inflation Reduction Act was actually the green new deal in disguise. Then Kamala Harris barely mentioned climate but gave a wink and a nod to the climate community in her 2024 campaign. I would further argue that climate activism is more of a tool to claim broad regulatory powers than it is to save the planet. Bureaucrats love nothing more than be gatekeepers for most things done in the economy..
290
It’s the first time I’ve seen these instructions discussed in public. They’re not just doing it on the quiet behind party room doors. They have to let the minions know now….
370
“Shucks it must be hard to be so grifted…”
There, fixed it for you.
30
First it was “Green Nude Eel”.
Then it changed to “Bing Bang Bong, Build Bigger Boondoggles”.
Then they went with “Inflation Production Act”.
All of them were just ways to do the Solyndra debacle over again … which made seriously big money for the people with the right connections. They don’t just want power, they also want to cash in.
10
The desire to save the world is always a front for the desire to rule it. Always.
30
America is not the world, where 86% of the population understand the risks and threats of climate change.
America is only 4.2% of the worlds population
I hope these facts help you to cut through the propaganda pushed by vested interests and republished without attribution by MSM
373
That’s all you’ve got? Population data and ad homs?
You don’t realize Grist is a leftie outlet.?
610
Fitzroy has it backwards and inverted. Using OECD population as a proxy for climate “believers,” believers are (were?) 17% of the world’s population.
In 2000 the US’s carbon dioxide emissions were a third more than the combined emissions of China and India. Today the combined emissions of China and India are three times the US emissions. All developing countries are more interested in economic growth, which usually means more coal, than they are in the climate. So 83% of the world’s population are not worried, and we “advanced” countries have lagged, but we are now following the lead of the 83%.
410
do you also disregard the Searchlight poll, quoted above? as to your assertions I don’t understand how you can both dismiss my data and then rely on the same data to make your point
since you didn’t cite any reference here is one
Mind you china and India represent 2/5 of the world population, so if you were to look at per capita the US stands tall alongside Australia as having higher than average emissions
149
Not the per capita emissions furphy again. Then a very small island in the Pacific that has the highest emissions per capita needs to be severely castigated for not doing more to reduce its emissions l
240
I thought the panic around the imaginary weather problem was all about the AMOUNT of carbon dioxide emitted, so per capita calculations are pointless, just like all the anti CO2 measures.
340
“Per Capita” emissions. Hmm. Usually, you reference total emissions, but that isn’t a good look to that claim. Again, there is no actual “evidence” that CO2 emissions drive anything but politics and money/graft/corruption/power.
Since you like OWID, have a peek: World, China, US, India, and AU. Looks like China dominates. China + India are 3 times US emissions and some 100 times greater than AU.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country?country=USA~CHN~IND~AUS~OWID_WRL
In your world of “emissions”, China and India “drive the bus”. AU emissions are insignificant.
Remember, Models are not Evidence. Neither are Polls.
270
China is around 20% of the world population, and India is also around 20% of the world population. but they are not allowed to pollute (and it is pollution) as much as the USA with 4.5% of the world population?
What you are asserting is that population or size of country does not does not matter
And by the way, I never refer to ‘total’ emissions
“Remember, Models are not Evidence. Neither are Polls.”
this whole post is based around a poll conducted by the searchlight institute. but there are no negative comments about that.
015
This whole post is based around what some democrats said to other democrats. Can you read?
The new poll matches the old polls for the last 15 years, and the truth of it is simply self-evident. Only a few percent of the rich West indulge in this fantasy that they can control the climate and it’s worth spending the money. Only a few percent buy carbon credits to offset their flights.
Plant food is not and never was pollution. A tiny bit of warming is a good thing, and even the dumb models don’t use per capita emissions to calculate temperatures, they use total emissions.
PS: China emits twice as much as the US, and the US doesn’t give a damn (and never did).
180
Per capita emissions is quite interesting if you look carefully at the data. The EU, UK and North America have declining emissions while emissions rise in Asia.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita
But look at what the per capita emission are for the entire world. While individual countries and regions see increases and declines, the worlds per capita emissions has remained relatively stable at 4-5 tons per capita worldwide. The world’s population is projected to increase until about 2060 or 2070 which suggests that emissions will continue to rise for at least the next 40 years. It is also an indication of how little has been accomplished on the climate front with respect to CO2 emissions for the last 3 decades.
20
The largest emitter by far is the ocean. Obviously we must prevent this somehow. Something that uses CO2 that floats? Coral reefs? If we can get a negative feedback loop going we will destroy all carbon life on land. Gaia would then be placated.
170
what is wrong with population data?
and if I inadvertently created an ad hominem then these must be also
“Australian Liberals tinker with a different shade of pagan fantasy”
046
“Inadvertently “? You introduced the “industry shill” ad hominem when you stated “vested interests”. And you did that knowingly, not “inadvertently “. Sheesh.
250
“Accidental done on purpose” ?
80
By my national population analysis, countries with active policies towards net zero count for 94% of global population. Those actively chasing net zero are 6%.
Geoff S
40
Curiously, only 86% of emissions aren’t going to be regulated i.e. 86% of emissions come from countries who are NOT going to do anything about them.
And of those most “enthusiastic” about doing something like Germany where garbage is burnt in winter for heat but is “Green”. Or Ireland where they banned burning peat but still burn lots -but that is imported so not their problem. And DRAX importing millions of wood chips which isn’t counted because burning foreign forests saves (even if it means more CO@ is released).
400
They ‘interviewed’ 59,000 people across 63 countries – less than 1,000 people in each nation, out of a population of millions.
And they would have been the kind of folks eager to give their opinions to a lefty outfit.
150
> 86% of the population understand the risks and threats of climate change.
People believe what they’re told. Eventually. After decades of flooding the entire information spectrum with constantly repeated and reinforced subtle messages, fake facts, and fear-mongering.
So don’t be surprised.
Bernays detailed how marketing works and also refined propaganda, both branches of manufacturing public opinion.
Responding to a survey and giving the answers which correspond to the information you’ve been exposed to is not the same as understanding the risks and threats of climate change.
140
Should we “thumbs down” Peter, or give it no feedback at all? I have chosen the latter – apart from this contradictory comment…
161
The “vested interests” are the renewables industry carpetbaggers (including a certain former Liberal PM’s family) and grifters who can’t get enough taxpayers’ money via subsidies.
Why should we, the public, enrich millionaires and billionaires at our expense even further?
100
Most of the world is just trying to get from one day to the next, they dont give a rats about your personal fantasy, let alone understand or agree with it. That is a ridiculous statement.
50
1. We have been told by the anti-science Left that burning fossil fuels will destroy the planet and coal is by far the worst.
2. China burns 5.0 billion tons of coal to produce electricity. India burns 1.3 billion tons and the US 368 million tons. You say the US pollutes the most. Why are you lying?
3. Hey Fitzroy, why has no one ever seen a protest by Left Wing Know Nothings like you at any Chinese Embassy or consulate anywhere in the world at any time? Greta Thunberg ever outside the Chinese Embassy in Canberra? Paris? London?
4. Hey Fitzroy, why don’t you buy a drum, go to Canberra’s Chinese Embassy and bang on it until China stops burning coal.
5. Everyone here knows you won’t do that, because you don’t believe a damn word you are saying, because if you did you would protest the CCP’s coal usage.
70
If it’s a vote based on population … then China and India would swing it, and neither of those countries has shown the slightest bit of interest in abandoning fossil fuels.
Do you want to come up with a different hand-waving justification, or happy to admit that this is a lost cause?
40
The good news is overshadowed by the Australian government’s involvement in the UN driven Global Shipping Tax. Apparently Albanese and Bowen support the idea although it is the Australian consumer that will be paying the price and the money raised will go to the UN bureaucracy to be spent on their pet projects. Trump won’t pay it and has threatened to impose tariffs on those countries that do.
380
And the 35% CO2 tax, hidden in everything. Even flushing the toilet. (MMBW). The Trans Tasman ferry. All trucking. Flying. One of the biggest costs in flying is the cost of fuel, so add 35%, double it and put it in airfares. Tasmanians will not be able to afford travel or supplies.
350
“hidden in everything”
That is the beauty of it. A transaction tax.
The Holy Grail?
230
But not directly on petrol or electricity. People would notice. Secret government business. And they negotiate directly with people like steel makers for concessions on condition they do not inform the public.
It’s a 35% Sales Tax and hidden by agreement. The public is not to be told. To save the planet of course. Government control their local weather as all scientists know. Except deniers.
250
My key read of this is”the party cares more about climate change and its ideology, than it does about the voters”. Surely this is a mantra the LNP can use.
210
It is already the mantra of the Liberal Party.
200
Nice try Jo, but it seems you can’t even shame the Liberal Opposition into acting sensibly and as politicians. We have been trying to motivate the Victorian Liberals for years and telling them that they are not public servants, that they are politicians and they should act like them. However, it hasn’t worked to any extent and now the federal Liberals have caught the same disease. Possibly it is a long-term symptom of a dysfunctional education system which produces graduates who are unable to think for themselves, but whatever it is it is having a very bad effect on Australia all over, so I hope we find a solution to fix it soon.
380
A significant part of the reasons why were written in 2006 by journalist Peter Walsh in The Bulletin Magazine about the then recent appointment of Labor Opposition Leader Rudd and Deputy Gillard, about union control after a “corporate-style takeover of the ALP” and plan to dominate governments of Australia.
The other interesting source covers the rise of the Liberal left (LINO) and leader and much more at the website – stopturnbull.com
140
As we know from the defenestration of Tony Abbott, who won in a landslide on this issue, the Liberal party does not care what the electorate wants. Politicians of both sides of the house now believe that the battle is about political power itself, not representing the electorate. They just wait for the automatic transfer of power on the next disaster. Political ping pong, not policies. Whatever it takes. Meanwhile who has to work? It’s a cushy job either way. No work, no responsibility, great pensions. Why bust a gut fighting?
290
The Uniparty approves this comment.
160
The Uniparty may indeed approve, but hates the idea that its cupidity is exposed to daylight.
Auto
20
I received an email from Sussan Ley asking for My Support
I replied
To:Sussan Ley
Mon, Oct 20 at 1:56 PM
Sussan Ley Leader of the Opposition Labor Lite Liberal – LINO Not Worth Voting For!
Net Zero Fairyland Fantasy (Emporer has No Clothes) is as President Trump succinctly Described – “A Con/The Greatest Scam Ever”
When the Sun Don’t Shine & The Wind Don’t Blow, You cannot restart an Electrical Network without Spinning Baseload, but you can Bankrupt Australia & Destroy the Environment!
101 of 2nd Year Sydney Uni Electrical Engineering
Sensible Liberals need to Dump Labor Lite Liberal Party – LINOs, and join National Party, who in turn should run National Candidates in all State & Federal Electorates in upcoming State/Federal Elections
The Liberal Party is Dead & Needs to be Buried, and as should the Bakrupting Australia Net Zero Fairyland Fantasy, as China buuids 2 Coal Fired Power Plants per week using Australian Coal then sells us their Junk Windmills & Solar Panels.
Vale
430
The Liberal party should go into the next federal election promising to reduce power bills by $285 per annum, it worked for the Labour Party.
The Labour Party could then claim that it isn’t possible to reduce power bills, just like it wasn’t possible to “stop the boats”.
210
How about “$286” so it is bigger and not a direct copy cat?
80
Thanks to Jo Nova for trying to unmask these liars and con artists, but we have to keep trying to get the Coalition to wake up and demand the scrapping of net zero before the silly season starts.
But can anyone please explain what is so wrong or dangerous about the global climate today and then how to mitigate their so called problems?
And please use data /evidence, not barking mad lunacy.
350
If I was a Liberal politician , I wouldn’t vote for myself based on the party’s current set of policies and management. I suspect there’s many in the combined LNP like that, but they’re just keeping up appearances. There would have been many in the Democrats thinking the same. Would barely recognise their old party, particularly during Biden’s tenure. Hoping that Trump was going to make huge blunders and turn off the voters. Didn’t happen, time to change course. The LNP need to do the same, quick smart, but like nearly all politicians in Canberra they’ve been brainwashed by the climate blob.
170
The problem will be “solved” as current policies lead to economic disaster.
Look at France where they have spent more than the nation earns for over 20 years, by handing out money to all who want it. It certainly looks like the WHOLE political spectrum refuse to believe – until the fifth? sixth? French Revolution starts. Or the UK where they got rid of one horrible example of politicians and found that the current one is even worse. Or Canada, where the States which make money want to leave those who want to spend more.
So will Australia slide downhill until there isn’t enough money to keep the system going. Many of the younger ones, joining the Public Services as safe employment, will find out that expenditure can only rise to the level of income.
140
>So will Australia slide downhill until there isn’t enough money to keep the system going.
Or continue to be steered downhill into debt until the only hope is to plead for China to take over, disenfranchise us, modernise our infrastructure, extract our buried sovereign wealth, make the trains run on time, and increase Australia’s wealth and income disparity, sweeping us aside.
110
“So will Australia slide downhill until there isn’t enough money to keep the system going.”
Well the aim is to become a cashless society where the only thing of value are numbers in a ledger somewhere.
Apparently it is impossible to run out of “numbers” so debt is either reduced or increased by just adding or subtracting.
Gets rid of any blackmarket economies, allows government to strictly control everyones shuffling of “numbers” from one column to another and apparently some will have greater access to more :numbers: than others.
Can’t wait!
90
Why doesn’t Susssan Ley-landP76 poll the 18 to 40 age group and ask what are your issues, might help them formulate a policy or two.
80
‘ … the 18 to 40 age group … ‘
They have been brainwashed into thinking a harmless trace gas causes global warming.
191
Sussan Ley is too busy trying to patch the rent in her own party and the coalition which is growing wider by the day!
80
A new PR SLR study by Dutch engineers has shown no acceleration in global SLR and this is now just 1.5 mm a year or the same as the 20th century.
You can find a link to the study in the following article.
Amazing what real observations tell us and why we shouldn’t rely on their modeling fantasies.
BTW 1.5 mm a year would be about another 6 inches by 2125.
https://dailydeclaration.org.au/2025/09/04/no-global-acceleration-in-sea-level-rise-exaggerated-predictions-by-ipcc/
210
over 70 years ago I learnt to swim in a tidal pool on Sydneys northern beaches. Thoses pools are still filling and emptying just like they did all those years ago.
321
High tide gauges at Sydney Harbour Fort Denison 1800s remain accurate as does the gauge at Tasmania Port Arthur former penal colony wharf area.
And around 1900 a British scientific expedition sailed around Australia and carved high tide marks at various locations that remain accurate now.
250
Port Arthur’s modern tidal gauge was installed in 1998, so cannot provide historical tide data. However, there is a tide mark carved into rock on Point Puer, Isle of the Dead, put there in 1841, and still functioning as the tide mark today.
Also where are these other tide marks located around Australia? Haven’t heard of these before.
80
Fort Denison is built on a sandstone island, and the footings are built from heavy sandstone blocks. It’s all quite permeable and the high tide mark is obviously visible because of the way the water soaks into the stone and various things grow … algae, shellfish, etc.
None of this has changed since it was built … and there’s plenty of historical photos. That gives at least 100 years, and the stone/water method effectively provides good day-to-day averaging meaning it doesn’t matter exactly which time of day the photo was taken.
If it really was going up a few millimetres per year then over 100 years you should see from 10cm to 20cm change which should be very easily visible.
30
Sea level fell momentarily when Australia became a sponge.
From 2010 to 2011, enough rain fell on Australia to fill the lower part of Lake Eyre almost completely, and the upper portion at least 75 percent. Australia got about 30 cm more rain than normal over that period.
51
Lomborg looks at countries’ electricity prices and finds that the more W & S the higher the cost of electricity.
And batteries are a super expensive joke, and they provide very little support, when you run out of toxic, unreliable W & S.
https://www.climatedepot.com/2025/03/26/lomborg-the-global-evidence-is-clear-not-a-single-country-that-relies-heavily-on-wind-solar-power-has-low-average-electricity-costs/
170
I just wish people, present company excepted, would stop asking how much more stupid can politicians and public servants get, because they are starting to see it as a challenge.
210
Lol, I think you read a recent Facebook post of mine. (Not original of course but I’m just demonstrating that great minds think alike ;))
100
Possibly I did, thought it was too good not to share.
60
With USAID money to NGOs slashed and the $30 billion EPA slush funds snatched back by DOGE, leftist activists in the US seem short of cash and limiting themselves to fewer issues.
For some bizarre reason they have chosen trying to prevent the deportation of violent illegal aliens and demanding free healthcare for illegal aliens. I’m not sure these are winning issues…
140
Again, here’s the global death rates from extreme weather events since 1900. Deaths rates per 100,000.
This is the safest period in Human history and yet the sheeple still want to believe their BS and nonsense?
Never forget just 1.6 billion people in 1900 and 8 + billion today.
Death rates are 99% lower today than 100 years ago and yet the loonies still want to believe their BS and con tricks.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/natural-disaster-death-rates?country=Wildfire~Flood~Extreme+weather~Extreme+temperature~Drought
130
Andrew Bolt interviews Daniel Fitzhenry about SLR at Fort Denison NSW since 1914.
Again nothing to worry about at all. Takes just 5 minutes of your time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mjOmsqIibk
90
And there you have it. Couldn’t agree more with the final comment. May I add that I believe we need to focus on rock-solid SLR measurement sites such as Fort Denison and Fremantle, and ignore the alarmist predictions of CSIRO, who don’t seem to get anything right these days.
40
Again the Deltares Dutch study found that 76% of the world’s sandy beaches were either accreting or have remained the same over a period of 30 years.
Only 24% of beaches have eroded over the same period. Here’s the abstract of that 33 year period”.
Abstract
“Coastal zones constitute one of the most heavily populated and developed land zones in the world. Despite the utility and economic benefits that coasts provide, there is no reliable global-scale assessment of historical shoreline change trends. Here, via the use of freely available optical satellite images captured since 1984, in conjunction with sophisticated image interrogation and analysis methods, we present a global-scale assessment of the occurrence of sandy beaches and rates of shoreline change therein. Applying pixel-based supervised classification, we found that 31% of the world’s ice-free shoreline are sandy. The application of an automated shoreline detection method to the sandy shorelines thus identified resulted in a global dataset of shoreline change rates for the 33 year period 1984–2016. Analysis of the satellite derived shoreline data indicates that 24% of the world’s sandy beaches are eroding at rates exceeding 0.5 m/yr, while 28% are accreting and 48% are stable. The majority of the sandy shorelines in marine protected areas are eroding, raising cause for serious concern”.
30
Here’s the link to the Deltares Dutch SL study.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24630-6
00
FWIW
“Aussie Professor: Trump is Forcing Allies to Reject Renewables and Buy Expensive US Gas
But
“So why is President Trump pushing to ink long term US gas export deals with customers?
There is a simple explanation which you would think someone who studies energy economics would know about. The world will shortly be awash with new gas supplies.
The end of this decade, early 2030s at the latest, will see an enormous influx of new Argentinian gas onto the global market.
The United Arab Emirates also recently announced $150 billion dollars of new investment in gas exports.”
More at
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/10/21/aussie-professor-trump-is-forcing-allies-to-reject-renewables-and-buy-expensive-us-gas/
50
Didn’t know that U.S. fracked gas was expensive. The states using gas seem to all have low electricity costs.
Reading the article, the Prof didn’t say that U.S. gas was expensive. He obviously thinks that renewables are cheaper.
30
Trump forced the wind to stop blowing in Germany?
He can also just wave his hand and black out the sun.
10
FWIW – might have been a bad choice by the dems!
“Wait — a Majority of Americans Want the Government Shutdown to CONTINUE?!”
https://pjmedia.com/scott-pinsker/2025/10/21/wait-a-majority-of-americans-want-the-government-shutdown-to-continue-n4945111
50
I don’t trust polls, but even so a lot of Republicans are hoping for small government. And the shutdown gives the administration the ability to fire hundreds of thousands of people. Not useless people but people doing useless things, like controlling the climate, monitoring farmers use of water on their farms, pushing and funding sex change operations and sending millions in taxpayer money overseas for thousands of insane woke schemes and a lot of straight theft.
And the Administration is being held up continually by Federal judges who pretend they can overrule the administration on administrative matters. Which they cannot but it is delaying the mass layoffs. In every case they have been overruled by the Supreme Court. Like Roe vs Wade, the Federal Administration headed by Donald Trump has no legal authority to be administering in many of these areas. Like Australia the Federal government is NOT in charge of health, policing, education. These are NOT Federal areas of responsibility. And Climate is not even in the Constitution of either the United States or Australia.
So even Republicans want the lockdown to continue, given the Republicans with only one exception vote against lockdown. Even the Democrat voters know it’s a Democrat lockdown for the explicit purpose of stopping the elected government from functioning. If Trump wants the lockdown to stop, he could stop paying the politicians. After all, they are out of work too.
70
FWIW
“HISTORIC: Louvre museum’s first female security chief, hired by first female director, become first women to lose French crown jewels”
https://notthebee.com/article/historic-louve-museums-first-female-security-chief-hired-by-first-female-director-become-first-women-to-lose-napoleonic-jewels?from_social=twitter
31
Not their problem. Clearly these women saw no need to protect Napoleon’s family Jewels.
40
This numerology website maybe gives a clue as to why Sussan chose 2060:
https://www.ifate.com/number-meanings/number-2060-meaning.html
BUT, on the downside, some negative words which may sometimes apply to number 2060
To speculate, looks like Sussan maybe concentrating on those positive adjectives but ignoring the downside negative attributes in forseeing 2060 as the new NetZero goal.
20
FWIW
“2014 – 2024: A Glimpse at Canada’s Rapid Decline”
Canada – 6th to 30th
(Oz – 7th to 11th)
https://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2025/10/20/2014-2024-a-glimpse-at-canadas-rapid-decline/
20
FWIW
“Beyond Ridiculous – EU Automakers Purchasing Carbon Credits from Chinese EV Makers to Avoid EU Climate Change Fines
October 21, 2025 | Sundance | 86 Comments”
“Put this in the ‘beyond ridiculous’ file that explains the current situation of a contracting European economy; specifically, in the auto sector.”
“Europe has fines associated with the production of gasoline powered engines if the auto company doesn’t hit targets for sales of electric vehicles. The fines triggered this year. In order to avoid paying the European fines the auto makers are forming alliances with Chinese EV makers to purchase carbon credit offsets.”
“In essence, EU car companies buy Chinese car company carbon credits, to avoid the EU fines. The Chinese car companies can then use the carbon credit revenue to subsidize lower priced Chinese EVs to the European car market, thereby undercutting the European EV car companies. BRILLIANT!”
More at
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/10/21/beyond-ridiculous-eu-automakers-purchasing-carbon-credits-from-chinese-ev-makers-to-avoid-eu-climate-change-fines/
“The EU economic offset plan? Let’s go to war with Russia.
Brilliant!”
Makes sense somehow?
70
Anyone know about this?
“Just days left to have your say on country road speed limits”
https://www.beefcentral.com/news/just-days-left-to-have-your-say-on-country-road-speed-limits/
30
For two decades now, I have been amazed at the Political science that says humans control the climate. It’s such an amazing proposition, you would think it had to be proven, but many punitive laws have now been written without proof. Consensus is not science but good enough for the UN, who now want $42Billion just for themselves and they are not even a government.
However Australia under Chris Bowen really takes the prize. He is not only of the belief that humans control the weather, but that he controls Australia’s weather. Minister for energy, which is all about the weather it seems.
In science and engineering there are some very odd indices. Mohr’s measure of hardness is quite sensible. The mathematicians ranking of the size of infinities as a cardinal number is a little mad. But Chris Bowen’s belief that he alone controls Australia’s weather is creating the need for a ranking of stupidity far beyond simple IQ. Or is he trying to push the limits of what the Australian population are prepared to believe? Snowy II which started at $1.7Billion and two years for something which was a total waste of money is soaring over $20Billion now over decade, everyone on $300,000 plus and indexed 6% to do what? Pump water uphill at an energy loss of 40%? Even when finished, like three of the massive desalination plants for the drought which would not end, it will not be used. But if the idea was to bankrupt Australia while pretending to control our climate, it’s working beautifully.
Even the dills who pass B.Ec like Bowen will be hard pressed to explain why Australia is continuing to build Snowy II, officially to change our Australian climate. And damn everyone else, including most Australians who refuse to believe politicians control the weather and that we really have a minister for the Weather? And a massive tax on Carbon Dioxide, the essential sign of life on earth.
100
Seems we have a problem with intellectual discourse.
We had something like it since the Reformation.
That requires intellectuals to value discourse.
Almost entirely as result of Climate ideology, the intellectuals abandoned discourse for emotional symbolism.
Some of it is the runaway belief in ‘science’.
If emotional desire is unrealistic, science can do its’ thing and make an aspiration true.
Just believe and follow.
(I recall nearly 30 years ago, Stephen Hawking declaring that ‘science was on the verge of the TOE, and we would soon be able to produce materials with magical properties at will.)
‘Science’ can make weather controllable.
And make men women.
Give every child 30 injections of for profit chemical products before puberty and we will defeat disease.
Part of what’s happening is this era of aspirational science crashing into reality.
And the corruption of the elite managerial class.
Pandemic exposed it.
Their greatest challenge a catastrophic farcical failure.
60
The biggest item for me is the absolute silence, no fightback from the Democrats, since Trump declared anthropogenic global warming and every substitute bit of nomenclature that replaced it to refer to climate matters, a scam. Absolute silence! Not just in the USA but here and around the world.
That ‘fesses up the truth. The pushers of the scam know if they make a fight of it Trump can call on a very strong force of real climate scientists ready and only too willing to take up his fight and reestablish the honour of their profession.
The other factor in establishing the matter is a fraud would fill the Courts with demands for recompense from businesses, people and anyone reputationally destroyed by governments, activists, their forums and media. The reputations of everyone involved in this scam would be destroyed for all time and they will go down vilified throughout history.
Why the silence. It gives time for Trump’s remark to disappear in interest over time. The above problems are avoided.The scam can continue without distraction. Better to see it fail at the hands of the people on the basis of the expense and loss of standards of living without the necessity to front up to handling the precipitous outcome of fighting Trump over his definition of a scam.imo
90
Interesting that the naval battle of Schiphol in 1639 is now the largest Airport in the Netherlands.
The Dutch engineers are brilliant at reclaiming land from the sea and have done so for a very long time.
Today 200,000 visitors a day flow through Schiphol Airport and visit Amsterdam and other cities and sights across their country.
https://www.codart.nl/guide/agenda/battle-at-schiphol/
60
When a lot of the country is more than 7 metres below sea level, you have to wonder why people are worried about rising sea levels, more fake science from people who think politicians control the weather and the sea level and the Great Barrier Reef. Malcolm and Lucy should do the right thing and return the $444million, with perhaps some interest on the money?
80