Excuse #101: Denying Climate Change is an Evil Depraved Sin so we don’t need to bother coming up with reasons anymore
Why is Krugman sticking pins into Denier Dolls? It makes him feel better.
He said it himself — if people disagree about climate change in good faith, it means climate believers need to be more persuasive. But if they are just evil, there’s nothing you can do. This is the end-days desperation. And after thirty years of propaganda, there’s nothing left in their communication toolbox. The awful truth is that in the muted, lopsided debate, they had all the money and institutions but they still lost.
When you can’t convince people with polite discussion all that’s left is to agree with your opponents or demonize them. So that’s what Krugman does. Change the goal-posts — he’s saying these evil people are not even worth talking to.
Humans are incredibly good at rationalizing stupid things. Pace Paul Krugman, who wrote this in the NY times last week. This week, the Sydney Morning Herald became the copy-paste late repeater of junk analysis and naked smear by a failed economist. Bravo.
Denying climate change is evil
Climate denial is rooted in greed, opportunism and ego. Opposing action for those reasons is a sin.
Paul Krugman
Denying climate change, no matter what the evidence, has become a core Republican principle. And it’s worth trying to understand both how that happened and the sheer depravity involved in being a denialist at this point.
Spot the projection. Believing climate change has become a core Labor-Democrat principle.
Next comes the bait and switch: Krugman pretends to be reasonable…
>Wait, isn’t depravity too strong a term? Aren’t people allowed to disagree with conventional wisdom, even if that wisdom is supported by overwhelming scientific consensus?
Then he ignores every argument any skeptic ever made:
Yes, they are – as long as their arguments are made in good faith. But there are almost no good-faith climate-change deniers. And denying science for profit, political advantage or ego satisfaction is not OK; when failure to act on the science may have terrible consequences, denial is, as I said, depraved.
But hey, his evidence is a pop-psychology book written by a climate scientist who invented a “trick” to “hide the decline”:
The best recent book I’ve read on all this is The Madhouse Effect by Michael E. Mann…
As Mann explains, climate denial actually follows in the footsteps of earlier science denial, beginning with the long campaign by tobacco companies to confuse the public about the dangers of smoking.
Why would anyone go along with such things? Money is still the main answer: almost all prominent climate deniers are on the fossil-fuel take. However, ideology is also a factor: if you take environmental issues seriously, you are led to the need for government regulation of some kind, so rigid free-market ideologues don’t want to believe that environmental concerns are real (although apparently forcing consumers to subsidise coal is fine).
More projection of his own ideology — if you are a collectivist, climate scares are the top excuse to “collect”. What could be better. Pay up or I’ll wreck the weather? Storms a’ coming, give me your super (your 401k). Feed me or there’ll be floods? This game of extortion is good to go as long as we don’t get perfect weather forever. Exactly. It’s such a good game it’s been going on for thousands of years, but now the druids wear lab coats.
As for the old smear that all prominent deniers are fossil funded, hello, where’s the evidence? Skeptics are the grassroots volunteers funded by mums and dads (thanks to all who keep me writing through donations here). Believers get 3,500 times as much (and even more since then). Who are we kidding, if skeptics got the kind of money believers get, tens of thousands of skeptics could attend two-week-long international junkets — and for the next 24 years in a row. Will the SMH do some research, interview some “prominent climate deniers” (in their unscientific namecalling jargon). Will they give me right of reply?
If you take environmental issues seriously, you look at the evidence, not for any excuse to call in Big Gov. That’s what a collectivist ideologue does.
Big Krug accidentally gives his motives for character assassination away
And these motives matter. If important players opposed climate action out of good-faith disagreement with the science, that would be a shame but not a sin, calling for better efforts at persuasion. As it is, however, climate denial is rooted in greed, opportunism, and ego. And opposing action for those reasons is a sin.
This is a fake national policy “debate” by character assassination. It might as well be neolithic witchcraft. How do we decide what generator to use in national energy grids? Obviously, use evidenceless smear, cast aspersions, do no research, and poke pins in a mythical anti-science denier doll. How many MegaWatts is that?
The intelligensia at the SMH are going to hate it when history shows they slavishly and gullibly sided with Big Money and Big Governments, acting as a propaganda tool …
The Crash Test Dummy accelerates. Australia is steaming ahead in the forced transition to unreliable energy
A lot of the reason for the growth in renewables is the Renewable Energy Target (the RET). Renewables must supply 16% of our electricity in 2018, and even more in 2019.
Strap yourself in. Buried in the AEMO summer readiness plan was the news that our intermittent renewables capacity is forecast to increase by fully 50% this year. All the renewables we had accrued in the two decade “transition” til December last year, we’ve added half again. We are already pushing the bounds of stability and setting price records, but you ain’t seen nothing yet. We are escalating the rate of change.
In toto, we have 56GW of generation of all sorts in the national grid on the east coast. The wind and solar component increased from 4GW at the end of 2017 to over 6GW by the end of 2018. But it doesn’t take much intermittent power to change the way the whole grid works.
Things are so fragile that a few weeks ago, when 240MW of reliable supply was suddenly not available for this summer, the AEMO had to issue a warning, and scramble to find some other spare capacity using the RERT (Reliability and Emergency Reserve Trader). That includes “demand response” — code for planned blackouts of industry players or other customers. So if a mere 240MW goes missing from a 56,000MW system we have to call in emergency action. The whole Australian grid demand varies from 18GW to 35GW each day. Why does 240MW of reliable power matter so much?
Generators that work by an Act of God now make up 12% of our generation capacity. Thanks to an Act of Parliament, we are forced to buy 16% of our electricity generation from renewables. (Which includes hydropower as well).
Ramping up renewables
In the last quarter (Q3) we added an astonishing 1.2GW of wind and solar power alone. The increase in large scale solar was so significant that in just that quarter we added more large scale solar than we had in entirety at the end of 2017. Though large-scale-solar generation was so tiny I use it as a joke in my presentations. So now it’s “tiny” times two. But make no mistake, the largest increase in national capacity by far was in the mass installation of small solar units on rooftops across Australia. An extraordinary 1.6GW of solar PV capacity will be installed by the end of this year, mainly by desperate households in response to electricity bill pain and with half the cost of installation subsidized by other households. It’s a death spiral. More on that soon.
Wind power and solar power exceeded gas powered generation (GPG) for the first time. AEMO, Q3, 2018,
Most wind power is in SA and Victoria, and while solar PV is increasing everywhere, there is more in Queensland than anywhere else. Note the increases in generation are a lot smaller than the increase in capacity.
With all these statistics, keep your brain engaged capacity is not the same as generation because intermittent renewables sit around doing nothing so much of the time. And though capacity has increased 50%, actual generation has increased only about 20 to 30%.
We are still testing new boundaries in this national experiment. Wind power still makes up the largest source of “variable” renewables, though solar is catching up. In the last quarter, for the first time wind power generation exceeded gas power.
Of course, if it’s cloudy or not-so-windy in the next quarter, gas power will rocket back up again, but the underlying trend is clear. The disruption is only going to get worse.
Unreliable generation in Australia is forecast to increase from 4GW to 6GW
Across the NEM, current commissioning schedules indicate that approximately 2,100 MW of additional new capacity will have been added in the year to December 2018, made up primarily of wind and solar generation, as well as some battery storage. For context, the NEM’s total registered generation capacity in July 2018 was around 56,000 MW, of which wind and solar represented around 6,000 MW. (p 10-11)
In just one quarter we added 1.2 GW of large-scale solar and wind capacity
Increased penetration of variable renewable energy
• Over 1,200 MW of new large-scale solar and wind capacity began generating during the quarter. The amount of large-scale solar capacity that commenced generation during the quarter is higher than the NEM’s entire large-scale solar capacity at the start of the year. This, coupled with favourable wind conditions, led to record quarterly variable renewable energy (VRE) output which contributed to:
[Gas powered Generation] or GPG continuing its downward trend in 2018: year-to-date GPG at the end of Q3 2018 was at its lowest level since 2006 and 21% lower than in 2017. Q3 2018 was the first quarter on record in which wind output has exceeded GPG.
Quarterly NEM emissions reaching their lowest level on record, both in terms of total emissions and average emissions intensity.
Thousands of Australian school students have urged greater action on climate change in protests across the country.
The students skipped school on Friday to highlight what they say are inadequate climate policies by the Australian government.
On Monday, Australian PM Scott Morrison rebuked their plans for “activism” during school hours and insisted his government was tackling climate change. …
The idea started with Milou Albrect and Harriet O’Shea Carre, both 14, in the state of Victoria. … Milou said: “We want our government to acknowledge publicly that climate change is a crisis. Stop digging coal, stop making new coal mines, switch to renewable energy.” …
Jean Hinchcliffe, 14, saw the idea to protest grow in Victoria and decided to start one in her home city, Sydney. … “Everyone, all young people, we can see that climate change is a real issue and we’re completely sick of politicians’ inaction.
Like with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, what would change their minds? How can we convince them they have been misled?
When eventually the carbon dioxide theory is proved to be quite wrong, what will this generation think? Will they ever trust the government again, as they sit in their rented apartments with zero heating and pray for the Sun to come out and warm them?
Would any of the protestors know of this: Here is a recent graph with the only reliable temperature data we have — from satellites. Satellites cover almost the entire planet, they do not rely on thermometers in artificially warming locations, and past readings are not adjusted so as to exaggerate recent warming.
The actual trend warming is 0.13 degrees per decade for the last 40 years. The climate models, from 1979 (when they first “went public” in the Charney Report) until today, predict that our rising carbon dioxide should cause a warming trend of about 0.30 degrees per decade. Indeed, the oldest firm prediction of the IPCC is from 1990, and was for 0.30 degrees per decade — at least 0.20 and at most 0.50 degrees per decade. Something is wrong, isn’t it?
What if the temperature rise of the last three centuries (the coldest time for centuries was about 1680 and the trend has been up since then) was due to indirect solar forces, and is now pooping out and going into reverse?
Who is responsible for brainwashing these kids?
UPDATE: From Avi Yemini via Tim Blair’s blog (thanks Popeye26)
On June 26, 2018, Ocasio-Cortez won the Democratic primary in New York’s 14th congressional district covering parts of the Bronx and Queens in New York City, defeating the incumbent Congressman, Democratic Caucus Chair Joe Crowley, in what was described as the biggest upset victory in the 2018 midterm election primaries. Ocasio-Cortez is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America.
When she takes office on January 3, 2019, at 29, Ocasio-Cortez will be the youngest woman to serve in Congress in the history of the United States.
Many say she is the progressive future of the USA — socialist, young, brown, female, outspoken, but not overly bright.
Nicknamed “occasional-cortex” by some for her comments on economics, she is influential and receives a lot of attention. From a recent article on her climate change pronouncements:
Newly elected Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is doubling down on her first week’s agenda in Congress, calling on her colleagues in the House of Representatives to pass a “Green New Deal” because “people are going to die” from climate change.
Ocasio-Cortez cited a report released Friday by the U,S. Global Change Research Program, a voluntary committee of scientists from 13 federal agencies and a number of outside pressure groups, that warned that thousands could die, and the United States could suffer a striking 10% reduction in its gross national product by the end of this century if humans do not curb their fossil fuel consumption. …
“People are going to die if we don’t start addressing climate change ASAP,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote. “It’s not enough to think it’s ‘important.’ We must make it urgent. ” …
The U.S. Global Change Research Program makes no recommendations on how to curb “climate change,” but it’s quite clear that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez believes the only way to make real in-roads on the subject is to enact a massive, socialistic environmentally focused legislative package, using taxation and other “incentives” to help Americans cut down on fossil fuel usage, while pouring millions into “green jobs” and “alternative energy.”
What can we do? Is it possible to convince her that increasing carbon dioxide is not a mortal threat? How? What would you tell her?
PS Joanne gave her talk in Oslo Monday, and it went very well. She is now flying to the UK, on her way to have dinner at Westminster with Matt Ridley on Tuesday, and delivering her speech at the GWPF on Wednesday.
Joanne’s talk at the European Institute for Climate and Energy’s (German acronym EIKE) 12th International Climate and Energy Conference in Munich was well-received, she reports. It was live streamed, but I cannot find it on YouTube yet. (If anyone finds it, or something else interesting at the conference, email me and I’ll post it.) Here’s a description beforehand of the conference in English.
She met with lots of the organizers and speakers, and — paraphrasing — reports that they are aware of us and like us here in Australia, but kind of forget about us, though they are always impressed when they notice us.
Apparently the German audience was very interested to hear that Australia is making a contest of it with Germany, into who can plunge fastest and furthest into climate economic-suicide. There seems to be some notion that the Germans are doing it partly out of a sense of guilt from WWII, incredibly enough — surely it’s past time to dispel that sense? Also out of a sense of duty, they say. Our excuse? Just general virtue signaling and feeling wealthy on the part of our opinion-forming elites I suppose, coupled with a complete lack of due diligence.
She’s off to Norway for a talk today, then to London where she will be delivering a talk at GWPF entitled “How to Destroy a Perfectly Good Electricity Grid in Three Easy Steps”.
Joanne called today from Doha, on her way to give a speech in Germany. I mentioned that Bill Shorten was promising to a rebate of up to $2,000 per household to install residential batteries … and a quarter of a second I heard “what a brilliant way to waste a lot of money!”
Bill Shorten has unveiled a $15bn program for driving the transformation in Australia’s energy system to low-emissions sources, declaring climate change is no longer an emergency, “it’s a disaster”. …
Labor is proposing an emissions reduction target across the economy of 45% and aims to have renewables achieve a 50% share of the electricity market by 2030.
Eight coal-fired power stations are set to close over the next two decades because they have reached the end of their operating life, and Labor’s higher emissions reduction target will drive a faster rationalisation.
What do you think? Is Bill Shorten’s climate plan a disaster for Australia? Should the Federal Government have conducted some due diligence before heading down this path?
The Greens want Australians to start treating coal like asbestos, with the minor party announcing its policy to make the energy resource illegal.
Yes, because asbestos kills people, which is a lot like coal which saves lives, feeds plants, keeps us warm and earns us $23 billion dollars a year. (And that’s just thermal coal).
Greens MP Adam Bandt outlined the policy on Friday in Hobart, which makes it illegal to dig, burn or ship thermal coal from 2030.
Individuals and corporations could face up to seven years’ jail for using thermal coal after that date, the Greens propose.
Life is death, money is poverty, and fires are a secret code from Gaia:
Against the backdrop of catastrophic destruction in California, Bandt will tell his audience Australia’s biggest chance of avoiding climate catastrophe is by ceasing coal exports. — The Guardian
The Greens are a danger to the nation. They’re killing people through stone-age reasoning.
It’s an anti-science theology that ignores the evidence and unquestioningly lauds unaccountable foreign committees.
Whoever you vote for at the next election don’t vote informal and lose your chance to put The Greens last.
I’m travelling this week, so can’t get to this event, but promised I’d give it a free advert. For people interested in the history of Western Civilization and the role of the Classics and Education in the future of The West. These events are always thought provoking. Stephen Hurworth’s knowledge of the to’s and fro’s and strategic cycles of history is par excellence…
How to Destroy a Perfectly Good Electricity Grid in Three Complicated Steps
It takes skill, money and blind faith to trash decades of good engineering.
Find out how to achieve state-wide blackouts, flying squads of diesel generators, and a tripling of wholesale electricity prices in just five years. Admire the virtue signalling ambition of a nation that controls just 1.5% of human emissions yet is trying to change the global weather by sacrificing its largest export earner and main source of electricity.
Australia once had some of the cheapest electricity in the world to one of the most expensive, even though it has more coal and uranium per person than almost any place on Earth. As renewables go in everywhere, businesses are closing. Even in a sunny and windy nation, seductive free “clean” energy turned out to be a poisonous gift because of all the hidden costs. Hospitals are turning off “spare” lights. Retailers are paying customers not to use electricity and national assets that took two generations to build are being blown up.
The quest to stop storms in 2100 leaves a trail of political turmoil — it has already unseated three Prime Ministers and yet there is no solution in sight.
The Times: Lorry drivers joined the protest movement today as ministers struggled to restore order with at least 35 motorways partially or completely blocked, along with at least 18 motorway sliproads. Barricades were erected across dozens of other roads around the country. — h/t to GWPF for the latest
The climate change collectivist overlords were always going to overdo it
Changing the global climate is such a ridiculously ambitious task that there was never any real limit to the imposts that would be demanded. So the zealots and the rent seekers would take what they could get, and then ask for more in escalating cycles, until the people finally rose up in revolt.
Apparently, the French have hit that point. Its spontaneous chaos, violence, and blockades. But the protest is supported by nearly 4 out 5 people:
Saturday: 227 protesters were injured, the majority of which were caused by drivers attempting to force their way through blockades; one 63-year-old woman attending the gilets jaunes protest in Savoie was killed after a driver “panicked” and accelerated into protesters. 117 people were arrested and 73 were later taken into police custody. Police in Paris deployed tear gas to disperse blockades.
A number of French petrol stations joined the gilets jaunes protest, with branches in Brittany, Dordogne and Normandy closing for the day. The SGP Police-FSMI FO police union urged its members not to issue any tickets on Saturday, in solidarity with the protest. Several high profile politicians, including Jean-Luc Melenchon, attended gilets jaunes blockades.
By Saturday evening more than 1,400 blockades were still active, with protesters declaring their intention to stay overnight. The gilets jaunes protest has drawn strong support from the French people, with 78 per cent saying they believed the blockades were justified.
This is also a story about the power of free speech
A woman gets fed up with the hypocrisy of being told to buy diesel cars to help the environment, only to find that now she is punished for the exact same thing after diesel manfucturers got caught cheating on their emissions tests. But it’s about many other ways too, like by a “forest of radars”. That was October 18th. Then Jacline Mouraud’s video went viral and Saturday over a quarter of a million French people walked the streets in protest.
This is world where Youtube gives enormous power to people to say something that rings. The mainstream media gives up on this kind of power every single day. Youtube is now well known for censoring non-PC organizations and groups and demonetizing them. But as long as anyone can post a video, anyone can start a revolution.
As long as we have free speech…
You can switch on subtitles and auto translate (it’s only so good)
This is about renewable energy
It’s a giant leaderless group wearing yellow vests — a symbol of workers against the overlords. The irony is the French government apparently commanded car drivers to carry them, so everyone is “equipped” with protest material:
Alex Ledsom, Forbes
The French have taken to the streets today in a mass protest against the government’s increase in petrol taxes. President Macron has defended the plan as part of a wider movement to shift France towards a transport policy based on renewable energy sources. The question is, who will win?
The ‘gilets jaunes’ — so named after the high-visibility orange vests motorists are required to wear when they break down — parked up their cars in the early hours of this morning on all main arterial routes through major cities. Leaving just one lane open for most of the day, thousands of French people have been hanging out on motorways all day, protesting at what they perceive to be year-on-year hikes hitting the people hardest who use their cars to get to work. Interestingly, the ‘gilets jaunes‘ have no discernible leader, and no political support; it was organised by a series of Facebook groups talking to one another, which has made it difficult for the police to understand where they should have stationed officers this morning.
Monraud’s video
Mouraud’s video went viral, and has been viewed by more than six million people. “I have a thing or two to tell you,” she starts out. The stream of accusations includes the price of fuel, the “hunt” for diesel vehicles, the “forest” of radars, the number of traffic tickets, the possibility tolls may be charged to enter large towns and rumours of mandatory bicycle registration.
“What are you doing with the dough, apart from changing the china at the Élysée and building a swimming pool?” Mouraud asks Macron.
She is a hypotist and spiritual medium, so Macron’s team went for the standard tool, the ad hom attack:
A senior adviser to Macron spoke scathingly of “this Madame Mouraud who generates spirits from under her fingernails”. He expressed consternation that a video “stuffed with lies” has reached such a wide audience, saying: “I have the feeling that our democracy is also at stake.”
It’s a powderkeg:
A poll published by Ifop on November 14th indicates two-thirds of French people expect a “social explosion” in coming months.
According to the IEA, France is sitting on 80% of Europe’s frackable gas – enough to keep the country self-sufficient in energy for centuries. But the Macron government has just banned, not only fracking, but any extraction of any fossil fuels whatsoever on mainland France.
The left in France has been tying itself in knots, supporting the popular movement against rising fuel prices and at the same time calling for a rising tax on carbon. Even the productivist communist party is resolutely green (in anti-capitalist way, of course.) Already the Rassemblement National (ex- Front National) is the most popular party among working class voters.
There’ll be blackouts this summer if nothing is done, AEMO report warns
Stephanie Dalzell, ABC News
Victoria and South Australia are at a high risk of forced blackouts this summer if no action is taken, according to the latest report by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO).
Not enough supply? Put another million bucks on the BBQ:
To stop that from occurring, the AEMO has sourced emergency energy reserves, which are typically not available to the market and are only accessed when supply is not keeping up with demand.
Those emergency reserves — otherwise known as Reliability and Emergency Reserve Trader (RERT) resources — do not come cheap.
The demand for reserves has been increased this season by the loss of 240 megawatts of thermal generation that its owners have told the market operator will not be available to meet short-term spikes in demand or the loss of generation elsewhere in the National Electricity Market.
The Australian Energy Market Operator is seeking up to 930MW of reserve power to reinforce the NEM during what is expected to be a hotter, drier summer and an earlier bushfire season.
What if 5,000MW of wind or solar capacity was not available tomorrow? That’s not an emergency, it’s business as usual. Every day we pay for back up reserve power lest the wind and solar generators take the day off.
Emergency action includes …”recalling mothballed gas-generation plants in Tasmania, Queensland and SA, diesel generators, and “demand response measures’’ that pay users to switch off their power.”
What do we do when renewables cause instability and price spikes — add more:
But the system operator stated more energy generation and storage capacity would enter the market in time for summer. As much as 2100MW of new energy capacity — mainly from wind and solar generation — will be added to the grid by December.
Another 2GW of renewables coming in the next month. Just what we need!
A new grassroots group is forming to lobby to get Australia out of the Paris Patsy Agreement. The people who are fed up with us being The Crash Test Dummies of Renewables include movers and shakers, professors, farmers, MP’s, executive giants of the mining and medical research industry, engineers, and surgeons. It includes Larry Pickering (cartoonist), Hugh Morgan, Alan Moran, Ian Plimer, Jerry Ellis, John Stone, Peter Farrell (ResMed), Ron Manners, Gina Rheinhart, Geoff Bennett, Colin Boyce, Bob Bryan, Ron Pike, David Archibald, Prof Ivan Kennedy, Prof Peter Ridd, Bill Kininmonth (former head of the National Climate Centre) and so many more. Credit to Viv Forbes of Carbonsense.
My thoughts on why we need The Saltbush Club:
“Who speaks for consumers? Our elected reps are supposed to, but few are willing to speak up. There is a $1.5 trillion dollar global industry that wants Australia to accept Paris, but no debate about the vested interests that stand to profit while Australian consumers and businesses pay carbon taxes they have voted against every time they had the chance.”
Skilled and Thinking Australians concerned at the huge costs and unproven benefits of the climate, energy and infrastructure policies on both sides of Federal Parliament.
A new lobby group comprising scientists, farmers, consumers, small business and big business is urging both sides of Australian politics to put aside party interests and global agendas to focus on what’s best for Australian business, workers, consumers and the environment.
The Saltbush Club calls for Australia to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement and to cease financing or supporting the international bodies promoting it.
It challenges the whole idea of a consensus on man-made global warming.
Jerry Ellis, retired chairman of BHP, and Founding Chairman of the Saltbush Club says:
“It is clear that Australia’s push to meet the Paris carbon dioxide emission targets is leading to higher electricity prices and unreliable supply. We have lost the balance between working for environmental outcomes and working for economic outcomes. These things need to be balanced, and this balance is missing with the Paris Agreement. The world would be a better place with strong economies generating money to spend on poverty, health, infrastructure and the environment.”
Hugh Morgan, CEO of Western Mining 1990-2003 and a director of the Saltbush Club agrees:
“People think the Paris Accord is just about commitments to lower CO2. It is really about transferring wealth via the UN to the so-called Less Developed Countries. It’s about advancing centralised control of people’s lives on a global scale. This climate alarm movement has got so far because of backing by Western millennials who have been indoctrinated during their education. Enjoying living standards unprecedented in world history, they have embraced alarmism as a new secular religion.”
Ellis and Morgan are supported by a large, skilled and experienced group of other Australians calling themselves “The Saltbush Club”. The group was organised by Viv Forbes (with a few helpers), from a country farm-house in Queensland with no landline, no NBN and less than $3,000 in financial support.
Forbes says:
“The Saltbush Club has over 200 foundation members, plus a bigger group of “silent” members. It will be a voice for those who are rarely heard in the climate and energy debate – those consumers of electricity who are concerned that the war on hydro-carbon energy has increased the costs and reduced the reliability of electricity for industry and private consumers.
“It welcomes anyone with a similar view, regardless of their political affiliations or leanings.
“We must reject the UN Agenda which is crippling western industry with high-cost unreliable electricity in a futile attempt to control global climate.”
“Our top priority is to have Australia withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement and to cease financing or supporting the international bodies promoting it.”
Jo Nova (a well-read blogger and Saltbush Media Director) added:
“Who speaks for consumers? Our elected reps are supposed to, but few are willing to speak up. There is a $1.5 trillion dollar global industry that wants Australia to accept Paris, but no debate about the vested interests that stand to profit while Australian consumers and businesses pay carbon taxes they have voted against every time they had the chance.”
Viv Forbes
To join, send an email to Viv Forbes <forbes AT saltbushclub.com>. Obviously replace AT with @.
Miners, scientists, farmers, business people.
The Australian mistakenly announced it as a “mining lobby group” because a few giants of Australian mining have added their names in support. But it is nothing of the sort. Indeed it says something that while former executives of mining companies are often skeptics, most current executives and industry organizations are avowedly not. Former executives have a freedom to speak their minds that current execs do not. Some in the media and in politics openly punish politically-incorrect views. CEO’s fear offending the likely next government and being called a “denier”, or pander to unscientific weather-changing policies because they profit from riding the Green Gravy Train. (Can we talk about the vested interests?) If there was civility about other opinions, and no renewable subsidies to skew the market, current executives might say something quite different.
Hugh Morgan, one of Australia’s most outspoken and influential conservative voices, has joined former BHP chairman Jerry Ellis to lead a new lobby group calling for Australia to leave the Paris Agreement and stop funding global climate-change efforts.
Mr Morgan, a Liberal Party member and former chief executive of Western Mining Corporation, said Western millennials had embraced alarmism over climate change as a new secular religion after being indoctrinated by the education system.
An update on the graph that is death to climate models
Good people of Earth are spending thousands of billions of dollars to prevent a future predicted by models that we know don’t work. The debate is over, climate spending is an unscientific, pagan, theological quest to change the weather. Just another iteration of what Druids and Witchdoctors have been promising for eons. Don’t expect the vested interests that profit from this Golden Climate Gravy Train to tell you this.
The top 23 global coupled climate models don’t understand the climate and can’t predict it. Our CO2 emissions are accelerating, the effect should be amplifying, but millions of weather balloons and satellites that circle the Earth 24 hours a day show unequivocally that the models are wrong.
TROPICAL MID-TROPOSPHERIC TEMPERATURE VARIATIONS MODELS vs OBSERVATIONS 5-Year Averages, 1979-2016 – Trend line crosses zero at 1979 for all time series
The Climate Study Group have placed this graph in an advert (why do skeptics have to pay to get graphs like this — a public service — printed?)
Acolytes and fellow parasites will say that surface temperatures measured by NASA and Hadley show the models are consistent within the bounds of estimates, and error bars, blah, blah, balony blah.
Grown ups will reply that the Hadley Met Centre uses thermometers near airport tarmacs and air conditioners (when they are lucky enough to even have thermometers). It’s a shonky, degraded dataset with barely any data before 1950, and it starts with freezing tropical islands and boats roaming around on land and then adjusts up the kazoo to make it even worse. The NASA set uses the same bad equipment, holey data, and adjusts by the kazoo squared. The past is constantly changing, the trends are fitted post hoc to the models and the results don’t fit historical records, or satellite data and the weather balloons.
They will protest and say their trends fit the RSS satellite data. They won’t tell you that UAH satellite dataset is better because it agrees with the weather balloons, tosses out inconsistent satellite measurements, uses three channels not one, and uses satellites free of diurnal drift to estimate errors in others. The RSS set is internally inconsistent, starts with model estimates, not observations, leaves in an error that creates artificial warming, then corrects it just in time to stop the exact same error from creating cooling. What do you call a dataset with part-time non-random errors? Junk.
The Christy Graph has all the data we need. It’s as close as we’ll ever get to proof the models are guesswork that failed.
Stop pouring trillions of dollars into a hole.
Thanks to Tom Quirk, John Christy and The Climate Study Group.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
Recent Comments