|
|
||||
|
By Jo Nova The poor today are even paying to help the very rich people of 2100 get slightly richer Matt Ridley In a droll, but scathing assessment, Matt Ridley calculates that even in a best case scenario, with the most generous estimate of how useful a wind turbine might be, the people in the UK are spending £25 billion a year to reduce global emissions of CO2 by 0.00002 or two hundredths of one percent. At that rate getting the world to net zero will cost £100 trillion a year – or the entire world’s economic output. The numbers burn like the Hindenburg, yet serious people keep a straight face, like we are living in an episode of Monty Python. The Parliamentarians pretend to save the world, the scientists research a pretend world, and the media pretend to be journalists. Excerpts from Matt Ridley on X: The climate boondoggle is one of the most regressive wealth transfers in history: never in the field of human commerce, or at least not since the sheriff of Nottingham, has so much tax been paid by people so poor to people so rich. Perhaps Ed Miliband is hoping that by giving lots of money to rich people, he can then impose a wealth tax on them in a sort of economic perpetual-motion machine.There appears to be no end to his generosity to the rich. He has recently announced an increase in subsidies for electric cars, electric heating and electricity bills, and this week he quietly let slip that he will raise the amount he pays for new wind farms and index-link the payment for an extra five years. What’s that? You don’t have a wind farm? Bad luck. Landowners who do can trouser £150,000 per wind turbine per year in rent for twenty to thirty years. One is arguing in court that £10m a year for his wind farm is not enough. … Ridley quotes the latest official State of the Climate Report and asks:”Wheres the horror, Ed?” The state of the climate report, which he presented to Parliament last week, says only that “recent decades have been warmer, wetter and sunnier than the 20th Century” with earlier springs and more “lawn-cutting days”. Mostly good news unless you hate lawn-mowing. There has been more warming in winter than summer, so less frost, less snow and fewer “heating days”: good news given that death rates spike in cold weather much more than in hot weather. It says we now have 10% more rain, most of it in winter but the report can only “suggest a slight increase” in heavy rainfall while finding a “downward trend” in both average wind speed and maximum gust speed. On balance, good news. The only bad news is that sea level is rising, still very slowly – about a foot per century – but perhaps with a slight acceleration. The inescapable pointlessness of the wind power boondoggle is there for all to see: …let’s do the sums: Britain produces 0.8% of the world’s emissions. Electricity supplies roughly 20% of our energy and wind supplied about 25% of our electricity last year. Let’s be generous and assume that windmills cut emissions by maybe 60% over their lifetimes compared with gas turbines… It follows that Britain’s wind farms are achieving a reduction of 0.008 x 0.20 x 0.25 x 0.6 = 0.0002, or two hundredths of one percent of global emissions. That is what £25 billion a year, paid by you in direct and indirect subsidies according to the Renewable Energy Foundation, is buying you. At that rate getting the world to net zero will cost £100 trillion a year – or the entire world’s economic output. He cites Richard Tol’s study showing that even if the world warms by (an unbelieveable) 3 degrees, global GDP will only be about 2% smaller than it would have otherwise been. And total GDP is expected to grow massively, either way. Alternatively, if we go by the IPCC‘s business-as-usual model, and if “…we forget about climate change and just let the fossil-fuel economy rip” the average person will be an “astonishing 9.8 times richer in 2100 even with the effects of rapid climate change, instead of 10.4 times without it”. Matt Ridley: So Mr Miliband is asking you to reduce your standard of living today to save a bunch of very, very wealthy future people from being slightly less – but still very, very – wealthy. Your prosperity is sacrificed to their posterity. This is therefore yet another way in which he is transferring money from the poor to the rich. Was he sheriff of Nottingham in a previous life? Read it in full on X, there is a lot more — or in a somewhat edited version in the Daily Mail, which Matt warns contains errors, introduced by editors while he was away. Image by emely krause from Pixabay
Another day — another setback for the Mega Green Hydrogen DreamThe The Australian Renewable Energy Hub (AREH) started at 6GW, grew to 11GW and then to 26GW as the mania spread. Such was the vision — it would produce five times the power of the whole Western Australian grid system. It would be the star of “exported renewable energy”. Once pitched as the largest renewable project in the world — the fantasy is that 1,753 wind turbines, and nearly 11,000 megawatts of solar power will fill 6,500 square kilometers of the Pilbara in Northwest Western Australia.  The cable plan of 2018 to Jakarta and Singapore Originally, the plan was to build a giant DC undersea cable to Jakarta or Singapore, but when that didn’t work they decided it would churn out 1.6 million tonnes of green hydrogen and 9 million tonnes of ammonia every year for export to Asia. The project was so ambitious they were going to have to build a whole new small town on the coast, with it’s own desalination plant — because rainfall is so low. “We need to have lakes” he said. Sure. Funny how the same thing that makes a site great for solar power is exactly the reason the area is largely uninhabited, sparsely farmed and thus “available” for acres of solar panels. (Things like this are just another hidden cost of collecting “free” solar power). BP controlled a whopping 63% of the AREH and while it still “believes wholeheartedly in the project”, it will take its money and run far, far away. Clearly, it doesn’t “believe” it’s profitable. Not long ago, bizarrely, for an oil company, BP had a target to cut its own oil production by 40% from 2019 levels by 2030. Not surprisingly this led to an existential crisis where in February it was on the brink of being a takeover target. It’s now planning to reopen Libyan oil and gas fields instead. The AREH project may still theoretically go ahead. (The other parties haven’t pulled out yet). But green projects are being cancelled all over the world. Just in the last week, Andrew ‘twiggy’ Forrest dropped plans to spend $900 million on hydrogen in Arizona, and confirmed that the billion dollar Gladstone PEM50 hydrogen project would definitely not proceed. Things are so bad, the Labor government has even asked “Twiggy” for the money back. But if (when) the Pilbara mega project falls over, it will do Australians a favour. As well as the subsidies, the project also needed a 260km transmission line called the Pilbara Green Link, which taxpayers would have to pay for, at a likely cost of a billion dollars or so. BP walks away from epic $55bn Pilbara hydrogen dreamBy Colin Packham and Brad Thompson, The Australian
“Despite BP’s withdrawal, its holding was 63 per cent, the project’s remaining partners appear to be pushing ahead.” The costs of hydrogen are obscenely high: “In June, InterContinental Energy conceded today’s cost for delivering green energy was estimated at between $8 and $11 a kilogram, exceeding the price of rival energy sources it aimed to unseat. It expected green hydrogen costs to eventually fall to about $4 a kilogram, but even at those levels experts said it was unviable.” Hydrogen is “The valley of disillusionment” says Portuguese Energy chiefThe AREH project is symbolic of the bad news for hydrogen around the world: Green hydrogen retreat poses threat to emissions targetsThe gap between ambition and reality in Europe shows the extent of the reset happening within the industry, said Jun Sasamura, hydrogen manager at research company Westwood Global Energy. Only about a fifth of planned hydrogen projects across the European Union are likely to come online by the end of the decade, he said. That equates to roughly 12 GW of production capacity against an EU target of 40 GW, Westwood Global Energy data shows. Even with all the subsidies, no one wants to buy the hydrogen:
“Green hydrogen was an inflated expectation that has turned into a valley of disillusionment,” said Miguel Stilwell d’Andrade, chief executive of Portuguese power company EDP (EDP.LS)
“What’s missing is the demand. There are 400 million euros ($464.2 million) of subsidies for hydrogen in Spain and Portugal, but we need someone to buy the hydrogen.”
It is at least three times more expensive than natural gas as a fuel for power generation, for example, and twice as expensive as grey hydrogen. The latter is produced from natural gas and coal and is already used in industries such as oil refining and production of ammonia and methanol.
Does any customer, anywhere, want to spend a dollar more to buy “Green Hydrogen”? July 25th, 2025 | Tags: BP (Beyond Petroleum), Hydrogen, Renewable Energy | Category: Global Warming |  Print This Post | |
By Jo Nova It’s a great day for lawyersA court at the top of the UN Faraway Tree has proclaimed that rich countries have an obligation to “protect the climate system”. In full Blob-propaganda mode, the BBC rushed to tell us how this was a win for the people, in “the worlds highest court”. The BBC-Blob doesn’t mention that the poor people of Britain (and the free world) will pay, and most of the poor islanders cheering in the South Pacific will get nothing. As the BBC says, dripping with Marxist-medicine: ““This is a victory not just for us but for every frontline community fighting to be heard.” When they say “us” they mean “the Blob”. When they say “frontline community” they mean the Blob rent-a-crowd protestors. They don’t mean frontline farmers, or small business owners or Christians. The ruling is “non-binding” which means any sensible government will ignore it, just like the USA, France, Israel and India have in the past, and even Australia did in 2002. China pretty much ignores it every year. But this ruling is very useful for patsy governments who want to do something anyway (like give back the Chagos Islands for no good reason). It will suit sell-out Prime Ministers who want to score a UN job “après politics”. It will suit China because no one will sue them for fear of sparking a trade war, even though it’s the worst “climate troll” on Earth, instead, it will just sell more useless wind turbines, batteries and solar panels to patsy nations that use this symbolic ruling to pretend they must do more “weather-changing” on their national grid (or what’s left of it). Top UN court says countries can sue each other over climate change“Tonight I’ll sleep easier. The ICJ has recognised what we have lived through – our suffering, our resilience and our right to our future,” said Flora Vano, from the Pacific Island Vanuatu, which is considered the country most vulnerable to extreme weather globally. The ICJ is considered the world’s highest court and it has global jurisdiction. Lawyers have told BBC News that the opinion could be used as early as next week. The UK put in a tepid effort to defend its own citizens from the latest UN phishing scam: But developed countries, including the UK, argued that existing climate agreements, including the landmark UN Paris deal of 2015, are sufficient and no further legal obligations should be imposed. On Wednesday the court rejected that argument. Judge Iwasawa Yuji also said that if countries do not develop the most ambitious possible plans to tackle climate change this would constitute a breach of their promises in the Paris Agreement. It is all about the money — ka-ching times a trillion: Previous analysis published in Nature, estimated that between 2000 and 2019 there were $2.8 trillion losses from climate change – or $16 million per hour. The only solution to the perpetual money funnel is to leave these unelected, unaudited, power hungry black hole institutions who serve no one but themselves and their Blob compatriots. It’s time to exit the UN. Turn off the taps. Axe the funding stream. This starts by embarrassing patsy governments who don’t serve their citizens and the schmuck journalists who serve the Blob and not their country. The whole world could potentially sue everyone elseIt’s a game of ideological roulette with unlimited plaintiffs. The Pacific Islanders can apparently sue us for warming the world, even if their islands are not sinking (and the sun probably caused the warming). But what if Russia, Poland or the ‘akistans decide to sue The West for trying to cool the climate which could harm their farmers and reduce their crops? What if France sued everyone else for not building nuclear plants. Or Africa sued the West for not giving them nuclear plants? Or Indonesia sued us for cutting back CO2 and reducing their rice yields. The list only ends when Donald Trump puts a tariff on nations that still feed the UN. We can feel the One World Government breathing in our ears. The ICJ threatens sovereignty — the unelected masters are making up their own rules. The money they eke out will be quietly siphoned through electricity bills and taxes in such a way that no one will be quite sure who paid what and when. Who decides what “Protecting the Climate” means? Whoever that is, they are the Kings that want to rule over us. The theatre of the absurdAs the BBC says, without so much as two minutes of analysis, “Campaigners and climate lawyers hope the landmark decision will now pave the way for compensation from countries that have historically burned the most fossil fuel”. As if. The country that has generated the most carbon dioxide, bar none, is the US, and it withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction from the International Court of Justice 40 years ago, and the ICJ can’t hear a case against the US unless the US consents. (That was Nicaragua v. United States of 1986). In 2005, the US just ignored the ICJ ruling that the US violated the Vienna Convention. (Even Australia withdrew from ICJ jurisdiction over maritime boundary disputes in 2002 — just before East Timor was about to sue it over the Timor Gap oil field.) The number two country on the global emitters list, — that has historically burned the most coal on Earth — is China, but good luck getting them to pay. They will, however, offer a Belt and Road climate loan, paid back in harbors, airports and railway lines or just pro-China votes in the UN. So who is this legislative theatre aimed at? The only suckers left — Europe, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. July 24th, 2025 | Tags: Lawfare, United Nations (UN) | Category: Global Warming, Lawfare | Print This Post | |
By Jo Nova The poor suffering Blob experts are losing the information warThey can’t seem to get a break, even with all the Governments, bankers, media, universities and the United Nations to help them. If only they had truth on their side, they could just explain it, but since they don’t — the next best thing is publishing concocted studies demonizing the truth-tellers as conspiracy theorists, and blaming profiteering Big-tech. Free speech is so dangerous, they warn, that “Elon Musk-owned X lacked fact-checks or Community Notes on 99% of the posts”. Ninety nine percent! Clearly, The Blob wants warnings and labels on every single damn tweet. No moment in the public town square can be left unguarded. We can’t have adults thinking for themselves! And that’s the thing isn’t it, there is something profoundly condescending and undemocratic about those who believe adults can’t be trusted to have conversations that no one corrects, live, one tweet at a time. The incredible unbridled smuggery of the Blobocrats is there for all to see, (as is the desperation) yet so rarely mocked, tarred and feathered as required. But it’s true, climate misinformation (put out by Professors) puts lives at risk — right now people are dying because they can’t afford air conditioning or heating. Climate sorcerers at universities took public money and told them the “science was settled” and they needed to redirect jet-streams with solar panels and windmills. It was a wanton electro-weather experiment that pushed the price of electricity up. Censorship is the real killerClimate misinformation can always be fixed if the skeptics are not censored Extreme weather misinformation ‘putting lives at risk,’ study warnsBy Anuj Chopra, Tech Explore Major social media platforms are enabling and profiting from misinformation around extreme weather events, endangering lives and impeding emergency response efforts, a research group said Tuesday. The report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH)—which analyzed 100 viral posts on each of three leading platforms during recent natural disasters including deadly Texas floods—highlights how their algorithms amplify conspiracy theorists while sidelining life-saving information. Just name-calling: “The influence of high-profile conspiracy theorists during climate disasters is drowning out emergency response efforts,” the report said, adding that the trend was “putting lives at risk.” The crime of writing something un-fact-checked! Nearly all of the analyzed posts on Meta-owned Facebook and Instagram lacked fact-checks or Community Notes, a crowd-sourced verification system increasingly being adopted as an alternative to professional fact-checkers, the report said. DeSmog are now “reporters on climate misinformation” (and prophets too): Following natural disasters, misinformation tends to surge across social media—fueled by accounts from across the political spectrum—as many platforms scale back content moderation and reduce reliance on human fact-checkers, often accused by conservative advocates of a liberal bias. “Climate disinformation costs lives,” said Sam Bright of DeSmog, which reports on climate misinformation campaigns. “As extreme weather events become more and more frequent, these falsehoods will only get more dangerous.”
Converting power stations to global air conditioners costs a trillion or two, and the price is not just money, but blood, sweat and tears. Mortality increases in rooms that are too cold or too hot, and financial stress increases death rates. For example…  Cumulative hazards for mortality across each level of financial strain are shown. The light blue line indicates severe financial strain, or those who reported not having enough monthly income to make ends meet. The orange line indicates moderate financial strain, or those who reported having just enough to make ends meet. The dark blue line indicates those with no financial strain, or those who had more than enough money to make ends meet. REFERENCEFalvey et al (2021) Association of Financial Strain With Mortality Among Older US Adults Recovering From an Acute Myocardial Infarction, JAMA Intern Med Published Online: February 21, 2022 Thank you Elon.
By Jo NovaPaul Homewood came across another die-hard believer still saying “What about all the subsidies!” He reminds us of the Guardian headline hand-wringing over $7 Trillion dollars of subsidies in support of fossil fuels. The main source of this meme is the IMF, so I went to their two year old report data to create the graphs that the IMF won’t. The IMF fossil fuel fantasy update of 2023…The trillion dollar claims of fossil fuel subsidies amount to nothing more than IMF wet dream. Literally, 80% of the “subsidies” are what they’d like to charge oil and gas companies for things like the imaginary damage that CO2 does on simulated Earths in broken climate models. The IMF calls this “implicit subsidies”. You can I might call it a brazen fake (or worse). The IMF has a budget of over $1 billion dollars a year, and they have 20 impenetrable super-graphs on their blog and report, but they don’t have the simple graphs like this, that I did below, showing that most of the subsidies are the “implied” imaginary sort, and that one country on Earth does all “the subsidies”. (Click to Enlarge…) Nobody mention China. The orange “subsidies” are the total fantasies here. It really is that bad. Fossil fuels cause car accidents, congestion and road wear don’t you know?Unbelievably, other parts of the “80% implicit subsidy block” even include things like the cost of traffic accidents, fatalities, congestion and wear and tear on the roads. Somehow when fossil fuels cause congestion, and we suffer a loss of productivity, that’s an implicit subsidy because the price of fuel was not efficient. (Congestion is when your car gets stuck and slows you down, and “efficiency” is when you spend an hour riding a horse, and 2 hours mucking out the stables?) The outrageous gall of this is so much that even hard-left Vox is uncomfortable and asks if this was a bit misleading of the IMF: “… things get weirder. For instance, about 39 percent of the “social cost” of gasoline in the IMF analysis comes from accidents, traffic fatalities, and congestion. It is true that these things are externalities. But they’re caused by automobile use, not by gasoline use per se. If we switched over to solar-powered electric cars tomorrow, we’d still have traffic accidents and congestion. It’s strange to argue that this is some sort of “subsidy” for gasoline specifically.” It’s true: The Government could have charged you more tax:Apparently, in the deep-climate-dimension — a Blob-academic can imagine that we’d have less congestion if we taxed fuel more and discouraged driving; therefore, a lower tax is a “subsidy”. I presume efficient pricing means people should be paying so much more that there is no congestion? I wonder if their model includes the cost of suicide and divorce when taxes are so high people spent an hour less at home each day because they have to catch buses, they give up taking the kids to soccer, and don’t eat fresh food from the farmers markets that they can’t afford to drive to? Maybe the IMF will accidentally solve congestion because everyone will give up and move to the country to grow cabbages? The IMF Gods-of-control actually flesh out their fantasies of what they think “efficient pricing” for coal, gas, and petrol would be, and in every country on Earth. Lo and behold, marvel at the Super-Graph below where the efficient pricing is laid out. Be grateful girls and boys, we only pay the red-dot retail price. When the IMF rules the world the real price will be the full bar. They are just practicing for when they are One World Government and can solve congestion, productivity, car accidents and stop storms with taxes! Imagine how many man-hours this took?  page 14, IMF I found it so hard to believe they did include road congestion and accidents, I will just include a few passages showing the intricate, vainglorious detail: Estimating Average Delays from Road Congestion Average delays are then multiplied by: (i) the relationship between marginal and average delays, which is estimated to be 400 percent (based on a review of the literature); (ii) vehicle occupancy (averaging over cars and buses); (iii) people’s value of travel time (VOT) which is assumed to be 60 percent of the nationwide average market wage in 2022;25 (iv) fuel economy (to express costs per liter rather than per km); and (v) the portion of the fuel demand elasticity that comes from reduced driving (and therefore affects congestion) versus the portion that comes from improved fuel economy/shifting to EVs (that does not affect congestion).26 And wear and tear on the road too: Externalities from wear and tear on the road network imposed by high axle-weight vehicles are based on highway maintenance expenditures by country (from IRF 2022 and OECD 2023) per unit of road diesel fuel use, an assumption that half of the expenditures are attributed to vehicle use as opposed to other factors (weather and natural deterioration) and scaled by the driving portion of the fuel price elasticity. Make these people beg directly to the voters for their salaries. It would end this nonsense in a minute…
July 22nd, 2025 | Tags: Economics, IMF (International Monetary Fund), Subsidies | Category: Academia, Economics, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming, Renewable | Print This Post | | By Jo Nova The Class with No NameMartin Durkin’s latest video exposes the stealthy rise of a secret new ruling class in society. The most powerful class in society has been anonymously invisible, unnamed, and unnoticed, and this is key to its success. If the ruling class is named, the masses would be able to discuss the common motivations and interests of its members. While it has no name, it can disguise itself as separate neutral parties working to help “society”. “An entire social class that has steadily grown in size and power over the past century — whose very existence, whose jobs and income depend on depriving the rest of us of our money and freedom.” That this cloak of invisibility, it turns out, is exactly the way the Soviet bureaucrats worked. We know this, because, as Martin Durkin explains, it was described in 1957 by a man called Milovan Djilash in his book called The New Class. His book was smuggled out of Yugoslavia and printed in the US. It earnt him 15 years in jail — obviously he was speaking a dangerous truth. Djilash had become appalled by the socialist system he helped set up. He had come to realize it did not represent a victory of the working class, but of a new oppressive parasitic, bureaucratic class. And for this New Class, he said, it was vital that it must deny its own existence. This, he said, was the biggest deception it must accomplish. ” The source of power for this new class was public administration — its power to regulate and control everybody else. The new class, he said, finds itself unavoidably at war with everything which it does not administer or handle and must deliberately aspire to destroy or conquer it. “ Gorilla Science
The New Deal in the 1930s led to an explosion in alphabet agencies and regulators and planners. Understandably, the people inside the class are only human, and they like their jobs and their junkets. Thus they become “a bureaucratic solution in search of a problem to solve”, in order to grow their own power. Verily, the bureaucracy expands to fill as much of the economy as it possibly can (and then some). The New Class is at war with the free individual:The new class, by definition, is absolutely at war with laissez-faire free market capitalism. For the new class, lower taxes and less regulation are a direct challenge to its livelihood. The new class, though it does not say it outright, is implacably against the notion of private property. It ought to be up to the state, the state run by them, to determine how much of our money, our earnings, and savings we will be allowed to keep. And so for the new class, it’s axiomatic that capitalism is cruel, oppressive, inefficient, corrupt. Martin Durkin points out that the State calls itself “democratic” to soften up the awful truth of the authoritarian power. “Instead of calling something “state control” it’s called “democratic control”. This mirrors what Mike Benz talks about with the US State Department and its “Whole of society censorship framework”. When we protest and complain about a state institution we are “attacking democracy itself” which justifies calling for censorship. It is as if democracy means the Institutions of a democratic country, rather than the power of the voters. Part of the reason the New Class has stayed so well hidden is because the very academics and people who define the Classes of society are a part of the New Class, and there are no benefits to them in being exposed as a class that serves itself. And of course, in an unholy alliance, the bureaucrats align with the corporate predators who are folded into the New Class too. The Big Pharma Giants work with the regulators they capture in a symbiotic parasitic relationship. I shall continue to call this new class The Blob, for want of any better, more apt sounding name. But we must have a name, for we cannot fight a vaporous foe. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to help tell the world about the new ruling class. Everything they want to hide, we must expose. My draft definition: BLOB (The) — The parasitic unholy alliance of Big Corporations, Big Government, Big Bankers and their entire fan club and cheer squad of supporters. Dangerously, this also includes the watchdogs: the Spy Agencies and large parts of the media. The Blob takes money from citizens, pays other parts of the Blob (eg USAID, The UN, The BIS, The World Bank etc), pretends to “help” some token victim group or environmental cause, or even to monitor or audit The Blob, but the outcome benefits The Blob more than the victims. They line their own pockets and increase their own privileges. The Blob also includes a special category of “useful idiots” who naively assist them in looting Western Civilization. These people are paid in status or an illusory sense of purpose rather than money. They may not realize they are part of the self-serving Blob, and in the long run are not only harming the trees, birds and whales they say they want to save, but are harming their own health, wealth, national security, and worse, that of their children. From the joannenova.com.au site list of Abbreviations and Terms.
The pushback is coming. Any word that gives power to the individual will be subsumed, relabeled, distorted and misused by The Blob in an attempt to neutralize it. I’m sure I saw the ABC mention it recently…
July 19th, 2025 | Tags: Blob (The), Language, The Blob | Category: Academia, Big-Government, Global Warming, Property Rights | Print This Post | | By Jo Nova Twelve thousand years ago sea levels around Africa rose much faster than todayIt’s another totally solid, non-controversial paper that will never be mentioned in the media or by 50 shades of climate experts. In extraordinary detail, Vecchi et al look at 347 datapoints up and down the west coast of Africa and find that, like everywhere else, sea levels were a blockbuster 125m lower at the depths of the ice age 25,000 years ago. Then seas rose in rapid bursts as the vast Laurentide and Eurasian ice sheets melted, until they finally stopped rising 8,000 years ago. It must have been twelve thousand years of mayhem for corals, mangroves and beach-side cave-dwellers. In the northern Gulf of Guinea seas were recorded as rising at up to 25 mm per year about 12,000 years ago — eight times faster than anything we see today. And given the difficulty of knowing sea levels 15,000 years ago, there were probably many short episodes of faster shifts that got washed away, never to be recorded. All our panic about the current crisis of a pitiful 3mm-a-year rise allegedly “due to man-made CO2” pales to nothing compared to what Monster Nature does. This study and hundreds like it, are like a stake through the heart of the vampire. For if the children understood the seismic shifts of the past, they would know that they were being sold a lie that the world had a stable and perfect climate or that current beaches have some sacred right to exist in perpetuity. Obviously, as commenters* pointed out, the Torres Strait Islanders ought to have a cultural memory of massive inundation, reefs shifting and the beaches being washed away. Like everywhere else in the world, Australian sea levels have been falling for 7000 years. Thanks to Kenneth Richard at NoTricksZone who wrote that Africa’s Atlantic Coast Sea Levels Were Still 1 Meter Higher Than Today 2000 Years Ago.  Click to enlarge | Nature | NB: The authors must be left-handers and run their graphs right to left — so in graph C, the present is on the left. And if natural rises can be eight times faster than what we see today, then how do we know the current rise is not partially or wholly natural? All we have are climate simulations… Sea levels have fallen by 1 to 4 meters in last 5,000 yearsImagine the amount of work to collect all these data points from so many locations? There were some sharp falls in sea level in the last 2,000 years. Keep reading →  Uncle Pabai Pabai, Boigu, in their video from The Australian Climate Case By Jo Nova Two men from a Torres Strait Island spent four years trying to sue the Australian government for “its duty of care” to change the global weather. Both sides agreed climate change will be a disaster, so the science was never debated in court. Despite this, Justice Michael Andrew Wigney said he accepted “many of the factual allegations” upon which the case was based, even though the claims were never tested, no one spoke against them and they didn’t get a fair trial, or even any trial at all. Thus Justice Wigney issued his prophecies of biblical hellfire, no doubt raising anxiety levels of the Torres Strait islanders even further, but who cares about their mental health right? They are just the mascots used by The Blob: Shock result handed down in Torres Strait climate caseBy Jack Nivison, The Australian The Australian government has no duty of care over the people or the islands of the Torres Strait with regard to climate change, even though there is a “real risk” the land could disappear entirely, the Federal Court of Australia has found. I’ve accepted the scientific evidence … concerning the devastating impacts that human-induced climate change has had, and continues to have, on the Torres Strait Islands and on the traditional inhabitants … their culture and way of life,” Justice Wigney said. “Severe erosion, the salination of wetlands and previously arable land, the degradation of fragile ecosystems … has become more frequent and more severe in recent times,” he said. “There is a very real risk that the worst fears of the applicants will be realised.” The defendant*, The Australian Government — could hardly disagree with “the science”. It is spending hundreds-of-billions to protect us from the climate gorgons, after all, so it can hardly argue that climate science is skill-less, unfalsifiable and based on unverified junk simulations. So the whole legal show is mere pantomime theater, and in the end, the ABC and other junk media get to breathlessly tell the world that in a smashingly big climate case, even the Judge has found that climate change is real. Gnash! Gnash! Gnash!  Judge as Weather Prophet So the Judge is reduced to doing free advertising for The Blob. And perhaps that was the whole point of the case, since it was always ridiculous, in a democracy, that a judge should be the one to set national energy policy. The islanders have been shamelessly wound up by activists, the ABC and CSIRO lobbyists to serve their own purposes. They were set up to expect something they could never get, and thus their crushing disappointment was just the third act in a badly written play. The Guardian, with no hint of irony, or any sense of what a democracy is, asked How can governments be held to account on climate? It’s like voters are irrelevant, eh? But the other point about this case is the way the science debate gets sidestepped yet again — so the judge issues his judgment, but makes a lot of wholly unnecessary statements of climate assumptions that were not tested in his court. And not only do these become free advertising on prime time TV but they will be used in subsequent cases as if they mean something. “Quoted as fact” they may also influence policy and legislation, and help to cement the profoundly unscientific “consensus” and all the Blob institutions that feed off that. So the world just got more cluttered. Science shrank, and everyone, bar the Blob, got poorer. The Blob pretends to care about the world while it uses and abuses the mental health of the Islanders in a quest to increase their own power and income. And The Blob pretends to care about “science” even as it destroys the tenets of the Scientific Method. The antidote, as always, is to tell the world and pop that smug-bubble in public. Their case is being supported by the Grata Fund, an Australian “strategic litigation funder” and the Urgenda Foundation, a Dutch group that uses lawfare to “help” the renewables transition. Obviously if giant industrial renewables firms and bankers, or the Chinese government were donating to these groups (with the best of intentions) we probably would never know. It’s not like The ABC will ask them hard questions like that, is it? *Not the plaintiff in this case! REFERENCES
July 17th, 2025 | Tags: Lawfare | Category: Australia, Global Warming, Lawfare | Print This Post | | |
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets
   
 
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2026 JoNova - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Recent Comments