It seems the author missed this:

http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/how-tony-abbott-killed-the-australian-climate-sceptic-movement-and-schooled-them-in-realpolitik/

Do try and keep up.

'Al Gore was mistaken. He didn't hear "the voice of the people of Australia" on 8th November 2011; but if he's listening he'll hear it "loud and clear" on 14th September 2013.'

luv it John. Democracy having its say and the slimy Greens/Independants and Labour reaping what they have sown. The man made gw industry has been exposed however the likes of Gore and some prominent Australians have lined their pockets with their deceitful evangelism among the gullible. Pity their pride blinds them to the fact that Queensland and NSW will get rain again and it been one big useless and deceitful tax.

Oh dear, runner,

Haven't you heard that Mr Abbott has come over to the dark side.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/latest/a/-/article/16795581/abbott-to-win-over-g4-on-climate-action/

"Opposition leader Tony Abbott has plans to play a lead role in convincing China and the United States to sign up for a global climate change deal if he wins government.

Opposition climate change spokesman Greg Hunt said under a coalition government Australia would still be part of a UN climate change process but would pursue action with key members of Group of 20 nations."

Even the so-called "skeptics" acknowledge that good old Tony has turned.

http://joannenova.com.au/2013/04/australian-conservatives-going-labor-lite-pandering-to-the-green-vote-or-just-confused/

You must be pleased Poirot, that the AGW stupidity is contagious and has apparently infected ABBOTTABBOTTABBOTT.

Alternatively AAA could just have learnt something from the Gillard duplicitous manual and be merely saying he believes to placate the Nancy's in his own party like Greg and Malcolm and to keep the soon to be gutted abc on side.

I think Abbott is much smarter the some might give him credit for. If I were writing his green policy I would grab as many green votes as possible. I would offer those still tentatively clinging to CAGW but who do not feel comfortable with radical green policies, something to cling to. That way they get to have a bob each way.

In the meantime the great green revolution crumbles at an accelerated pace, nicely timed to let Abbott off the hook by the time he gets into office.

For this collapse we are eternally grateful to Al Gores disciples for stuffing up an otherwise attractive new religion of political conservation.

As the collapse advances the disciples have no choice but to escalate their exaggerated projections, increase the volume and the frequency. This is delectable irony as this is what brought about the collapse in the first place.

Hands up all those who think Abbott will spend anything on green policy that he hasn’t already taken away from green policy several fold?

The warmers bought the CAGW religion so Abbott is absolutely sure they won’t spot this one coming. In fact my bet is that we will know the warmers have bought it when we hear them spruiking Abbotts message to them.

I just love it when a plan comes together.

The article asserts Australia is a minor direct contributor to world emissions therefore shouldn't act alone. It follows that people shouldn't vote for a change of government Sept 14 since individual votes are insignificant.

There are a few things happening that may raise doubts before then. One is possibly the worse wheat crop in years, another is poor hydro that means our renewables figures won't be as good as last year. Another is the possibility that not just the summer and autumn is unusually warm but winter and spring as well. Yet another is Greg Hunt continuing to fluff the arithmetic on Direct Action.

Poirot

Lol you really do have a sense of humour after all.

Tony Abbott goes to the election promising their will be no Carbon Tax under the government I lead and after the election, becomes the champion of climate change.

Lol that is staright out of the socialist political play book.

He won't have to sell out us Australians to the likes of the Greens like the commie Gillard.He'll have a huge majority and the anti Australian parties will mostly be on the scrap heap for generations to come.

Or

is it possible you are a Tory plant in the green movement now spruiking Tony for PM among the alarmists.

lol. whatever Poirot.

Lol, yerself, imajulainutter,

It wasn't I who made that statement. It was the Opposition's spokesman on climate change.

If you prefer to believe that he's pulling our leg and pouring guff all over the MSM, that's rather telling.

Are you saying that the Opposition's integrity is a mere fiction? spindoc seems to think Tony's so "clever", he's a having a bob each way merely to capture the Green vote.

Now that's a principled politician for you - or do you reckon it's just more of the same old same old? Say what you like irregardless of whether it has any belief or principle attached to it.

If, as it appears, Tony is in for a landslide win, why would he release a statement like that?

Surely, if it's bulldust, it's not necessary.

Nonsense, regardless of who wins the political battle in terms of seats won, Abbott's degree of pragmatism, essential to any half-decent politician, also reflects his real concern about the environment.

How his govt balances eco and environmental considerations will be an important component of his PM legacy.

'"Opposition leader Tony Abbott has plans to play a lead role in convincing China and the United States to sign up for a global climate change deal if he wins government. '

Yea Poirot and Rudd/Gillard are fiscal conservatives.

So no doubt now you will be voting for Tony since he has joined the 'enlightened'.

Spindoc said:

>"In the meantime the great green revolution crumbles at an accelerated pace, nicely timed to let Abbott off the hook by the time he gets into office."

Some facts that would seem to support that statement:

- As stated in the article, the Australian public has turned strongly against CAGW doomsayer beliefs and against the carbon tax.

- The UK voters recently sent a clear message to the major parties they no longer believe in the doomsayer stuff or wasting money on purported climate policies like wind farms and carbon pricing.

- The EU carbon price has fallen from €25 per tonne CO2 in 2008 to €4 per tonne CO2 in 2013. (At that average rate is will be €0 in 2014.)

- The Chicago Carbon Exchange collapsed and was shut down.

- 20 years of UN climate conferences have achieved virtually nothing (in fact, during that time, the rate of improvement of carbon intensity of the global economy decreased from improving at 2% per year in 1990 to 0.7% per year in 2009 - see Fig 2 here: http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com.au/2010/07/decelerating-decarbonization-of-global.html )

That 's fine with me, runner.

If you're telling me the "principled" Opposition are just spinning me a load of old cobblers to get elected....then I say - "What else is new?"

Poirot, you old closet tory,

Abbott is no Gillard.

lol.

You know, the great pity of it all is that a marvelous opportunity has been lost to dive headlong into an unprecedented surge of new and truly meaningful technological innovation - to reduce the world's stubborn and self-defeating reliance on fossil fuels, and particularly on OIL.
Figure: All world goods transported by fossil-fueled (substantially OIL fueled) vehicles - ships, airlines, trucks, cars, trains - and the bulk of industry and manufacturing relying on electricity derived from coal or gas fired (or nuclear) power stations. And all using OIL one way or another.

Oil may not be finite, given the potential for developing alternative, renewable sources - from plant or algal innovation or marine creature exploitation - but in the meantime we have to contend with deep-sea rigs, oil spills, tar sands environmental holocaust, CSG question-marks, and uncertainties regarding nuclear alternatives.
And all still relying on OIL, for exploration, development and exploitation.

What chance would there have been, back then at Kyoto, if OIL supply, and its projected future complications, hazards and limitations, had been identified as 'the greatest challenge of our times'?
A total 'no show', given the power of Big Oil and of so many interwoven multinational vested interests.

Given an alternative track, what might we now be seeing? Cheap efficient electricity for all in the first, second and third world, even at the remotest outpost, clear skies over Beijing, Los Angeles and so many other industrial centres, and the shelving of any further destructive ravaging of environment and ecosystems?
But, what do we have? Ultra High-definition TVs, iPhones and iPads, GFC and WARS.
Has the world simply focused on the wrong 'big picture'?

Tony Abbott speaks of improving our road systems, but not a word of the benefits of high-speed and urban rail. A convert? Luke warm at best it would seem, but not alone in not seeing the wood for the trees?

More evidence that interest in climate change is waning – see the activity time line here: http://climatechange.carboncapturereport.org/cgi-bin/topic?

Interest in carbon credits is also waning – see the activity timeline here: http://carboncredits.carboncapturereport.org/cgi-bin/topic?

Hardly a pulse, eh?

"Tony Abbott speaks of improving our road systems, but not a word of the benefits of high-speed and urban rail."

I suppose the fast-train, wheeled out by this duplicitous government as a distraction from its perfidy and incompetence, would run on wind and solar power.

"The article asserts Australia is a minor direct contributor to world emissions therefore shouldn't act alone. It follows that people shouldn't vote for a change of government Sept 14 since individual votes are insignificant."

What a stupid thing to say; one is an election in a democracy where everyone should value their vote and rights; the other is a scam, a lie and a vehicle for ideological and financial subterfuge

Poirot

'If you're telling me the "principled" Opposition are just spinning me a load of old cobblers to get elected....then I say - "What else is new?"

Yea its unfortunate how all are corruptible Poirot although Abbott has a million miles to catch the Greens/Labour/ Inndependants who have made a habit of lying to the electorate. Abbott should of stuck with his instincts knowing that man made gw was c-ap. Those instincts have proven a lot more reliable than the charlatons who continue to use the issue as a cash cow. They have no shame and its a pity Abbott plays the game. Personally I would think more of Abbott if he said it for how it is. I think he has learn't from Gillard and her mob.

cohenite,

You sadly disappoint with your hasty, ill-considered and unnecessarily malignant comment.

With my comment I was trying to suggest that there is greater merit in striving to harness the efficiencies of trains for mass people and cargo movement than aiming simply to put more and more oil guzzling and pollution spewing vehicles (private and heavy transport) on new bigger and better roads.
If you see no merit in this suggestion, then why not put forward a counter proposition, rather than going off half-cocked?
And, I was referring to possible action by an Abbott government, and not to any plans, 'in train' or otherwise, of the current ideologically bereft mob.
So, to what pray tell does your retort of "a vehicle for ideological and financial subterfuge" actually refer?

Then, to add insult to injury, you conflate, and rant on at someone else's comment, (derived from some source I have not identified) regarding the value of voting in a democracy?
Confused and confusing.
Not one too many beers perhaps?
Definitely not up to standard.

That's odd, runner.

You seem to spend an inordinate amount of time on this forum urging people to transcend their "instincts" in favour of following the tenets handed down from on high.

I do appreciate the fact that you follow "your" instincts in declaring AGW "crap"...it's certainly not based on evidence.

Btw, looky here - http://scienceblogs.com/significantfigures/index.php/2013/05/10/the-last-time-atmospheric-co2-was-at-400-parts-per-million-humans-didnt-exist/

..........

Saltpetre,

cohenite's specialty is unnecessarily malignant comment.

The problem for the greens has been their blinkered approach!
Their make it more costly to pollute first up, completely ignored the 40% or so, already living just above or in varying degrees, below the poverty line, with absolutely no more fat able to be trimmed from an already meagre budgets.
The second, the number of businesses merely treading water on 3% or less margins.
That would include many already debt laden farmers, most restaurants and some still independent supermarkets. The latter only able to continue, thanks to freehold premises and volume trade?
Thirdly, there are cheaper than coal carbon free alternatives, and alternative fuel types that quite literally suck the carbon straight from the atmosphere.
All of which failed, the make it more expensive mantra, that supplants pragmatism for most greens.
Many of who are anything but conservationists.
Who's lock it up and leave it principle policy paradigm, saw millions of hectares destroyed in the worst fire-storm we've witnessed in living memory; and millions of our furry and feathered friends, many already on the threatened or endangered list!
And rather than build more dams to mitigate against flooding and the tide of tons of alluvium, routinely and repeatedly destroying millions of hectares of sea grass and all who depend on it, they want to tear down already existing ones!
The real myth is that the greens are anything but realist conservationists, but rather recalcitrant wreckers, who made certain, that Rudd was replaced; simply by blocking his ETS!
And ditto Gillard, with their too high price for the green labour alliance?
Unfortunately, it's not them that is going to be decimated in the forthcoming federal election!
Rhrosty.

Poirot,

Your links get sillier and sillier.

It’s been pointed out to you before but it needs to be said again. You don’t like it so you refuse to recognize the reality.

If your links to your science had any validity there would still be a Kyoto, there would still be emissions trading market and there would still be a renewables industry on a global basis.

You continue to promote the links that have not only failed your warmer cause; they have also utterly destroyed the global infrastructure that was built to support your cause.

It is not our science that destroyed your cause, it is you own. Much as would like to blame you for your role in supporting this futile con, I’m actually quite grateful. I would like you to continue to send your failed scientific links to the wrong audience for the wrong reasons.

When you continue with your personal folly, trying to get the proverbial CAGW dead cat to bounce, there are many watching you who quietly muse to themselves, there goes another ideology at the expense of intellect.

At least in your case I can’t be accused of playing the man.

Get a life Poirot, find something else to fill the vacuum between your ears, you only have until Sept 14.

'I do appreciate the fact that you follow "your" instincts in declaring AGW "crap"..

Poirot

with only pseudo science to back anything you say about man made gw I think it is you who display a great lack of instinct. Are the left intentially gullible?

Yes, spindoc and runner,

I must say that it's overwhelming to come up against such towering intellects as yourselves on the subject of climate.

It's what keeps me coming back - the mere spectacle of so much denialist clap-trap all neatly powdered and primped - and all contained on one Aussie forum.

Surely the ultimate objective of 'The Greens' would be to use the carbon tax, and more importantly the ETS, as leverage for a sound argument to maintain and rejuvenate our environment - in forestry, agriculture and national parks - to maintain a truly 'green Australia'?
And surely there are no better carbon offsets, from our personal perspective, than to green our own backyard?
AGW or not, such a proposition has merit.

On the other hand, it appears clear (at least to me) that Labor's clear objective, and Gillard's in particular, was merely socialist engineering to redistribute wealth, and thereby to accumulate votes.

When you get down to it, the same goes for the Mining Tax.
If greater revenues could be gained from mining, then all that would be necessary would be for the States to negotiate higher royalties.
But then, States have a wider interest in mining than mere royalties, for there is the question of construction, jobs and infrastructure, and all that goes with these. States are not about to stab their benefactors in the back, but Federal Labor just could not resist attempting to dip their noses in the trough. This, even though Fed Labor always retained the mechanism of GST distribution as a 'leveler'.
'Rainbow chasing' and misguided muscle flexing.

But what may we hope for from an Abbott government?
We surely don't want a carbon tax (or ETS) or a mining tax, but I'm sure we would all appreciate lower electricity charges, and I would certainly like to see the home solar scheme reintroduced.

I would also like to see a substantial reduction of live animal exports (if not its entire elimination), for we could well do with more and better abattoir facilities, and the jobs these would garner, even to the point of having dedicated 'halal' facilities etc, employing 457 visa holders, including suitably qualified managers and supervisory staff. Two birds with one stone - jobs and cultural exchange, and a brave step forward to embrace 'the Asian Century'.

"cohenite's specialty is unnecessarily malignant comment."

Wrong as usual burqa girl, my specialty is NECESSARY malignant comment; it's the only way to deal with the persistence nonsense of commentators like your good self.

Saltpetre; I have no idea what your are talking about; I asked before in response to your panegyric about trains what do you think trains run on, wind or solar 'power', and you ignored this point.

Trains run on either diesel or electricity supplied by fossils; what do you envisage, a few locos with sails on their roofs?

Belief in renewables is a 'modern' version of a cargo cult; there is no rationale or sense in its acolytes. If renewable and AGW believers had an ounce of sense they would concentrate on making fossils and nuclear more efficient and safer until the exotics, thorium/fusion/ ZPE come on tap.

Instead we have this stream of moralising amphigory about a brave new world of fresh air and pixies on each corner while good old mother nature tucks humanity into bed every evening.

Really, it's like talking to nasty little 10 year old children

"Really it's like talking to nasty little 10 year old children."

That's given me my best laugh of the evening, cohenite.

Here's the guy calling people "burqa girl" and "Tinkerbell", who finds it difficult in the extreme to hold up an argument on this forum without resorting to childish name-calling.

Come to think of it, a forum comprising only nasty little 10 year old children would be about your speed.

"Come to think of it, a forum comprising only nasty little 10 year old children would be about your speed."

I thought so to, but I was banned from Open Mind; perhaps I should retry the other kindergartens at Sks and Deltoid.

As I say Poirot, until you and your fellow youngen's can understand that islam is bad and that there is a difference between fossil and nuclear energy and the corporate mongrels who own this energy you'll remain dancing in the moon-beams.

The climate doomsayers have had their day. The climate scare campaign has lost its effect.

And carbon pricing is over too. There can be no global carbon pricing scheme, and without a global carbon pricing scheme, local carbon pricing schemes cannot survive. With less than full participation the cost penalty for participants would be huge.

For evidence of the waning interest see these Activity charts.
Climate change: http://climatechange.carboncapturereport.org/cgi-bin/topic?
Carbon credits: here: http://carboncredits.carboncapturereport.org/cgi-bin/topic?

These charts show the interest is waning world wide since the peak at Copenhagen in 2009. The charts show the interest in climate change and carbon credits in the English speaking media world wide.

Click on the headings at the top of the page to see the activity charts for alternative energy, biofuels, geothermal, solar, wind, hydroelectric, nuclear, coal, natural gas oil. Interest in alternative energy is declining.

Further evidence the declining interest is the collapse of the EU and Chicago carbon markets:

EU carbon price: €25 in 2009 to €3.37 today.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2013/02/carbon-trading

Chicago Carbon Exchange (CCX): $7.40 in 2008 to $0.05 in 2010. Then the CCX was closed.
https://www.theice.com/ccx.jhtml

Taken together, there is persuasive evidence it’s all over bar the shouting. No fancy statistics needed.

All the doomsayers have achieved by advocating irrational policies that would not be acceptable to rationalists is to delay progress by twenty years.

The next step will be for the rationalists to take over.

Consider that mankind has been busily releasing all manner of toxic chemicals into the ecosystem since the industrial revolution whilst at the same time destroying as much as humanly possible of the natural CO2 regulation mechanism (yes Martha, trees & stuff really do have a purpose), its hardly surprising that something had to break eventually. One doesn't need to be a member of any particular pressure group to appreciate the concept of mankind being a mob of feral bogans. That said, the political approach using total <male bovine dropping> solutions like carbon taxes and what-all doesn't wash with anyone possessing a plurality of functional grey cells. The red-headed witch & her dying duck sidekick are unquestionably a few sandwiches short of a picnic & the RAbbott is no better. Whether or not one subscribes to the AGW paradigm, there is every reason to clean up our act but using AGW purely as an excuse to whack on another tax is merely another proof of the abysmally low level to which our elected representatives have sunk.

'I must say that it's overwhelming to come up against such towering intellects as yourselves on the subject of climate.'

Yea Poirot must irk you so much that even the simple can see how faith based your unintellectual position is. I don't know where you were edcuated but it certainly has not made you any smarter.

Yes Poirot, I’m sure it is overwhelming for you however, if you cannot explain why your “science” is no longer good enough to support your global response to your global problem then there seems little point in banging on about it here.

It’s curious that the sceptics have been told we are flat earthers, deniers, low on intelligence and mentally ill and yet it is the might of your intellect and that of your fellow elites who have failed, odd that?

Why do you think the global CAGW response infrastructure has collapsed and what do you think should be done about it?

A simple questions really.