The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > We need to talk about climate now > Comments

We need to talk about climate now : Comments

By Lyn Bender, published 21/10/2013

It seems that no time is the right time to discuss global warming, even as people are suffering from our failure to address climate change.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  9. All
More irredeemable drivel from a soft science type trying to buff up their Virtue quotient with her mates, to raise Global Warming is false and evil.

The current fires and consequent damages and deaths are due to Greens and other adult children stopping the RFS carrying out effective back-burns after two very wet years, a very wet first half this year followed by some dry months on top of a decade on Byzantine and purposely obstructive Green-Tape.
Posted by McCackie, Monday, 21 October 2013 9:51:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
After 25 years of warnings about global warming, all Lynn can point to is a set of bushfires that started much earlier in the season than usual. Granted they are large, but so were the 1939 fires and Ash Wednesday bushfires in Vic - and there was considerably greater loss of life back then. After three very wet seasons followed by a dry season what did anyone expect in the Australian bush?
Posted by Curmudgeon, Monday, 21 October 2013 10:11:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is unfortunate that Lyn has written this article, especially on OLO because it will drag all the trolls and shills out of the woodwork screaming that there is no such thing as AGW and it is all a plot and so on.
It really is a waste of time and effort to bring it to the attention of the sheeple when there are people who actually make a living from muddying the waters on behalf of big business.
While I am in complete agreement with Lyn about climate change, it really is inevitable and is not going to be stopped now.
There are too many people who do not want to see "their way of life change" ( like the US way of life is not negotiable) and if they admit AGW it will mean the end of their macmansions, SUV's, multiple giant TV's and a suburban paradise life.
They are easily swayed by the promises of bought and paid for pollies and vote for the last big offer in the auction/election.
So there will be no change and therefore no action.
The best that can be done is to find a good place to hide out and build a "lifeboat" for survival and hope to last as long as possible WTSHTF.
Good luck.
Posted by Robert LePage, Monday, 21 October 2013 10:24:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Other than talking what is being proposed to 'do something about climate change'? If human activity is causing climate change then it must have an enormous momentum. It won't suddenly stop happening because you switch off the light. Such simplistic thinking is part of the reason the issue has such a polarising effect. Lefties are trying to show how morally superior they are and the non-lefties are determined not to be preached to. Stop Stupidity; Now!
Posted by citizen, Monday, 21 October 2013 10:37:47 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More tedious liturgy and double standards from the church of climatology.
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Monday, 21 October 2013 11:21:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You would have thought by now and after the disastrous bush fires that ravaged Victoria, nobody living in the bush, would be allowed to live without six foot high colourbond fence around the house, (the first line of defense, around the house proper, or with roof top sprinklers installed, (the second line of defense.) I listened in spellbound disbelief to one gentleman complaining, that he didn't have time to fuel up connect and start the pump or the genie!
After the fire storm has started is already far too late.
Besides, petrol and diesel can sour and or evaporate, not so gas!
And these things need to be run a couple of times a month to ensure the battery,(long life marine) is fully charged and ready. and or, the backup compressed air tank is fully charged!
A steel frame ought to be mandatory, along with won't burn bricks in all new housing! Timber might look nice, but if it burns it should be banned!
Electric shutters would also assist, in preventing the heat entering the home. Some of which, along with the rooftop sprinklers, could be remotely controlled, with your mobile phone!
One would think the insurance industry would offer low cost fiance packages to install some or all of the above, as it would quite massively reduce the claims,(tens of billions) they might have to cough up with in the future.
As for talking about climate change, the time for talk is already been and gone Lyn!
What we need now is action.
None of which, (cheaper than coal thorium, broad scale very low water use algae farming, in-house biogas and power production) need ever harm or slow our economy!
And broad scale low water use algae farming/bio-fuel production, is exactly what we need to save both the Murray and all those who currently depend on it for their sustenance or livelihoods!
To reiterate, none of what is proposed, would ever harm or slow our economy!
In fact, just the opposite!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 21 October 2013 11:47:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A bit of perspective would not go amiss for this authoress, before wading into confected angst. Here is an edited selection of previous fires from Andrew Bolt’s blog, this morning, Oct 21:

1957: Bushfires in the Blue Mountains

1964/65: Major fires occurred in the Snowy Mountains, Southern Tablelands and outer metropolitan area.

1968/69: Widespread damage occurred over much of the eastern part of the State.

1969/70: The Roto fire burnt some 280,000ha in a three week period.

1972/73: The south-eastern corner of the State suffered the worst fires since 1968 with over 200,000ha burnt.

1974/75: The severest season for perhaps 30 years in the far west with 3,755,000ha burnt, 50,000 stock lost and 10,170km of fencing destroyed. 1.5 million ha were burnt in the Cobar Shire in mid-December and 340,000ha in the Balranald fire. The Moolah-Corinya fire burnt 1,117,000ha and was the largest fire put out by bush firefighters. Its perimeter was over 1,000km.

1976/77: In early December, 9,000ha were burnt and three homes destroyed in Hornsby Shire, and 65,000ha were burnt in the Blue Mountains.

1977/78: In the Blue Mountains area 49 buildings were destroyed and 54,000ha burnt.

1978/79: Serious fires occurred in the Southern Highlands and South West Slopes regions. Over 50,000ha were burnt, five houses were destroyed and heavy stock losses were inflicted.

1979/80: Following severe drought conditions over most of the State, major fires were widespread. In Mudgee Shire, 55,400ha were burnt and one life was lost. … Fires occurred in the majority of council areas within the State burning a total of over 1 million ha.

1982/83: $12 million worth of pine plantation was destroyed in southern NSW in a fire, which burnt 25,000ha in only two and a half hours. The Grose Valley fire burnt 35,000ha.

1984/85: This was the worst fire season for ten years in the grassed western areas of the State. On Christmas Day more than 100 fires were started by lightning strikes and 500,000ha burnt as a result.

1987/88: Over 115,000ha were burnt in the Bethungra and Warurillah/Yanco fires with three lives lost at the Bethungra fire
Posted by A is A, Monday, 21 October 2013 11:48:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
From the first paragraph - climate change is the most politicised issue in the country alongside the tragedy of refugees arriving by boat.
Get ready for those two to start marching hand in hand across the global stage. I suspect we ain't seen nothing yet.
Posted by halduell, Monday, 21 October 2013 11:50:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A is A,

Have you any figures from past years where massive firestorms have erupted in October or generally very early in the season.

Not trying be a smart with that question - I'm genuinely interested in that aspect.
Posted by Poirot, Monday, 21 October 2013 11:53:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>"We need to talk about climate now"

We've been talking about climate for 25 years. Most of the talk has been little more than extremists beliefs like religious zealotry. The talk has comprised exaggeration, misinformation, group think and herd mentality together with a great deal of straight out dishonesty. And much of this has come from academics, like the high profile Australian climate science academics. The Climate Commission and the Climate Commissioners were an utter disgrace.

The policies that were advocated by climate scientists, NGOs and the Labor and Greens Parties were/are bad policies. For example, the Labor-Green carbon restrain policies cost us $19 billion this year and would cost $22 billion per year in 2019 (abolut the same as our entire Defense budget). And they would have zero effect on the climate, so there would be no benefits from these really bad policies and huge expenditures.

It is becoming apparent (a concenusus!!) that global warming would be net benefitical up to about 2.2C increase from now (3c above preindustrial):

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9057151/carry-on-warming/

http://www.lomborg.com/sites/default/files/Congress_testimony_April_2013_3.pdf

It's time to get rational. Stop the religious and ideological advocacy and get rational instead!!
Posted by Peter Lang, Monday, 21 October 2013 11:59:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It would seem that the public needs to start talking
about living in bushfire-prone areas and planning
for ways to minimise the impact of an extended fire
season. Catastropic events such as the fires in NSW
should come as no surprise due to a dry winter.

Researchers from the Climate Change Research Centre
at the University of NSW used an index based on the
temperature, wind speed, relative humidity and fuel
availability to find that fire risk had increased
at 16 out of 38 locations in Australia between 1973 and
2010. Of the sites surveyed, none were safer from
severe fire conditions than they were 40 years ago.

Ignoring and not planning for ways to minimise the
impact of any fire season is just plain foolish.
If warmer than average days are predicted people must
be vigilant about their local fire conditions.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 21 October 2013 12:11:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's never a good time to discuss issues that are politically and financially inconvenient for those with a particular political bent and/or a vested interest.
The issue of Climate Change reminds me of the ever present issue of paying a fair amount of company and personal tax. When the economy is going gang-busters it's a case of "shhh, don't kill the goose that lays the golden egg" and when the economy is struggling it's a case of "how dare you talk about increasing taxes at a time like this?"
It appears it's NEVER a good time to talk about issues that are inconvenient for many people.
Interestingly, Climate Change doesn't care when is a convenient time to discuss it, it simply keeps marching on resolutely without a care for the wishes, desires and beliefs of fools.
Watch the video 'Last Hours' narrated by Thom Hartmann about the "time bomb" that is ticking underground, underwater and under ice… frozen methane that is now escaping and could trigger runaway climate change. www.lasthours.org
Posted by Elephantidae, Monday, 21 October 2013 12:24:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A is A:

Bolt has left out all the floods, drought, cyclones and as usual has cherry picked what he wants to see.
Add to that crop failures, animal losses and I have no doubt there is more but I can't be bothered searching to answer this drivel.
Posted by Robert LePage, Monday, 21 October 2013 12:28:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Goats do a better job of fire hazard reduction, as well as reduce or remove feral weed species.
A few electric wires and quite intensive cell grazing, will ensure they concentrate their activities, within proscribed fire breaks or areas already inundated with feral weed species!
Very short term very intensive cell grazing doesn't compact the soil, but rather breaks it up allowing more of the rainfall to soak in rather than runoff!
Fire as a traditional means of reducing fuel loads, should be reserved solely for actually fighting fires with manageable back burns, due to the permanent loss of valuable soil nutrients, the millions of tons of annual Co2 produced; and or, the the hardening of the top soil making it far more impervious to rainfall, when it does come. Thereby adding to the runoff, erosion and or flash flooding.
When we last allowed grazing and selective logging in our national parks, we had less hazardous fuel to worry about, more fire breaks in the bush, and many more experienced eyes on the job, looking out for small spot fires and or, the mass murdering mongrels who start them?
The death toll in the disastrous Vic bush fires was quite significant, as were the deliberately lit fires!
If we stop with the annual burning, we might encourage the less fire tolerate species to progressively return, and then do what other rain forest species do! Attract rain!
And permanently damp or sodden rain forest, is less likely to burn!
Think, not all that long ago, before white settlement, our land was covered from coast to coast in verdant forest!
Only quite disastrous land management practices changed it to what we have now, a vast arid inland surrounded by a tiny green fringe, which seems to be shrinking!
Doing what you've always done, will get what you've always got!
Change might be extremely unpalatable, but nonetheless, absolutely essential!
And people now living as virtually permanent welfare recipients, bored stupid, might prefer to accept a similarly small stipend, to work as tent dwelling migratory/sober goat herders, in the national estate?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 21 October 2013 12:31:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
interesting how the new religion blames fossil fuels for every evil while ignoring the reality of what led to Noah's flood and the destruction of Sodom. Certainly history shows that man is a moral creature. When the Creator is rejected you always come up with wrong conclusions (true morality is replaced with outrage). The gw disciples certainly demonstrate this clearly.
Posted by runner, Monday, 21 October 2013 1:24:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Remember the bloke who was fined $50,000 I think it was, for clearing the bush around his house, BEFORE the Victorian bush fires?

Yep, that one, the only one in his district who's house survived.

Fool councils, pandering to the greenie vote, promoting this rubbish, & making criminals of sensible people who clear highly flammable scrub from around their homes, destroy peoples lives

It is the idiot Greens, & fools like this author who keep pushing the green garbage who are responsible for most damage. Them, & the fools who want a nice leafy, bushy "paradise", but don't think past the view.

The aboriginals, with their fire sticks converted Oz to a highly fire prone landscape. I do find it amazing that, thanks to geeenie stupidity, we are less able to successfully live in it now, than when we first settled the place.
Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 21 October 2013 1:36:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'It is the idiot Greens, & fools like this author who keep pushing the green garbage who are responsible for most damage. Them, & the fools who want a nice leafy, bushy "paradise", but don't think past the view. '

strangely enough it is quite likely kids of undisciplined parents (Greens voters etc) who then light fires or lightening that causes such destruction because the proper burning never took place.
Posted by runner, Monday, 21 October 2013 1:48:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"We need to talk about climate now."

Quite so. Perhaps you should pass that on to the LA Times, to prominent warmist websites, to active leftist bloggers like PZ Myers and Jerry Coyne, who have all banned or threatened to ban any comments by people who don't accept the received wisdom on AGW.

There are plenty of people prepared to talk about climate change now; what we have on the hysterical left is a drastic shortage of people who are prepared to listen.
Posted by Jon J, Monday, 21 October 2013 1:54:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Bolt has left out all the floods, drought, cyclones and as usual has cherry picked what he wants to see.
Add to that crop failures, animal losses and I have no doubt there is more but I can't be bothered searching to answer this drivel.Posted by Robert LePage"

The "drivel" you are concerned about comes from the NSW Rural Fire Service, not Andrew Bolt. See here: http://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/dsp_content.cfm?cat_id=1180

In any case, the argument in the article was about fires, not about the other climate catastrophes you cited. Please try to keep your comments relevant and vent your spleen on more worthy sources.
Posted by A is A, Monday, 21 October 2013 2:37:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"After 25 years of warnings about global warming, all Lynn can point to is a set of bushfires that started much earlier in the season than usual. Granted they are large, but so were the 1939 fires and [1983] Ash Wednesday bushfires in Vic - and there was considerably greater loss of life back then. After three very wet seasons followed by a dry season what did anyone expect in the Australian bush?"
Posted by Curmudgeon, Monday, 21 October 2013 10:11:32 AM

Yet the 1939 and Ash Wednesday fires were in mid-late summer - Jan and February.

So NOT early!

-

"The current fires and consequent damages and deaths are due to Greens and other adult children stopping the RFS carrying out effective back-burns after two very wet years ... "
Posted by McCackie, Monday, 21 October 2013 9:51:12 AM

That bare assertion is unlikely to be true: Pls don't misrepresent!!
Posted by McReal, Monday, 21 October 2013 3:20:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sigh

A few points

No single weather event can be used to prove the existence or absence of climate change, whether it be unseasonably early bush fires or cold snaps. This week's fires may well have happened regardless of any global warming.

The science does, however, predict that extreme weather events will become more frequent as the global temperature increases. Therefore we should expect more fires, floods, cyclones etc. And regardless of whether or not global warming is caused by humans, we should be preparing for these events - and planning accordingly.

No actions (or inactions) by Australia can affect the actual temperatures in the short term. That doesn't mean that we should do nothing. Just because my throwing junk into Sydney harbour will have little effect on the cleanliness of the world's oceans doesn't mean that I have a right to carry on doing so.

Australians, per capita, emit more carbon dioxide than almost anyone else. Therefore if anyone has a duty to cut emissions, it is Australia. And if we can do it without the sky falling in, that will make it easier for other countries to follow.

This is actually a very good article. Unfortunately, unless the predictions of change can be made less broad and more personal, it is extremely hard to get anyone to take notice and act - particularly if it might cost them money.

The exception, of course, is the insurance companies who have to put their money where their mouths are. They are actively changing their models and prices to take climate change into account. And they are far from stupid.
Posted by Cazza, Monday, 21 October 2013 3:24:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Congratulations to Lyn for another outstanding article, to Rob LePage for his sensible comment, and Elephantidae for the film he or she linked to which should be viewed by all intelligent contributors who care about our world and our grandchildren.

P.S. That excludes Runner, Hasbeen and Jardine for reasons which everyone is painfully aware of!
Posted by David G, Monday, 21 October 2013 3:24:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A is A,:
I assumed that when you mentioned Bolt in your previous post that you were inferring the data was from him and was to say that there had not been many "extreme weather" events.
My reply was to point out that it only included fires and not any other "climate extremes".
Posted by Robert LePage, Monday, 21 October 2013 3:28:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lyn,

There is little point in posting to OLO.

As most of the credible press worldwide are now refusing to print the drivel from deniers because it is no longer opinion (other than the Murdoch rags of course). This month the Los Angeles Times letters editor, Paul Thornton, did just that with a story on letters from climate-change deniers. He said he would not print letters that asserted "there is no sign humans have caused climate change" because "it was not stating an opinion, it's asserting a factual inaccuracy". The SMH has just implemented the same policy (paraphrased).

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/climate-change-a-note-from-our-letters-editors-20131021-2vvjd.html#ixzz2iKapwPeT

So we are left with the 'usual suspects"; runner, Hasbeen, Jon J et al. spraying forth on this forum.

They will spend eternity patting themselves on the back about how clever they are in fighting off the "leftie", "greenie", socialist AGW scam but the rest of the world is not listening to them and the only point in visiting OLO is for a laugh. Nearly as funny as reading Bolt's diatribes but at least his is eloquent (sometimes) drivel.

The debate on the science has been fought and they have lost...simple really.

The only real question is what actions the global community can and will take and the time scale for unraveling the carbon lobby's influence
Posted by Peter King, Monday, 21 October 2013 3:32:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A is A,

This also comes from the Rural Fire Service,

"The Rural Fire Service has called the bushfire threat an "unparalleled" emergency, and warned a potential mega-fire could stretch hundreds of kilometres."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-21/live-blog-nsw-bushfires-create-state-of-emergency/5034410
Posted by Poirot, Monday, 21 October 2013 3:36:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes we do need talk about reducing our contribution to climate change the scientists way back the late 1970s forecast this likely but certain to happen. since the the science has firmed the data up its about 95% certain.

In big business decisions made that where 70% certain have been good enough to take action. So what the problem. Start reducing your personal emissions.
Posted by PEST, Monday, 21 October 2013 3:42:44 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The climate is changing, it has always changed, so what ? Get used to it, after all many of you tolerate stupidity so why not tolerate climate change as well ?
Posted by individual, Monday, 21 October 2013 4:22:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
individual,

".....after all many of you tolerate stupidity...."

Yes,.....we do.
Posted by Poirot, Monday, 21 October 2013 4:25:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Poirot, the Rural Fire Service talks up every fire threat. It's their one chance to have a moment in the sun and obviously they're aware that the bigger they can make the threat sound the more funding they are likely to receive. I don't begrudge them their effort, but after listening to them for twenty years I now take them with a very large grain of salt. Every bushfire that does damage is 'unprecedented'; if it was precedented they would have known how to stop it.
Posted by Jon J, Monday, 21 October 2013 4:38:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jon J,

"Every bushfire that does damage is 'unprecedented'; if it was precedented they would have known how to stop it."

Refer to my penultimate post.
Posted by Poirot, Monday, 21 October 2013 6:35:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
At least CO2 was not mentioned in the article.

Perhaps the author has enough courage to provide a sensible answer to that single unanswered question.

Has AGW – IPCC science measured and assessed photosynthesis-linked warmth in ocean micro and macro algae proliferated by sewage nutrient and land use nutrient pollution?

Surely that question deserves a proper answer.

And some icing for the cake so to speak:
http://www.livescience.com/29589-huge-ocean-blooms-dont-wait-for-spring-study-finds.html
Posted by JF Aus, Monday, 21 October 2013 6:54:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A similar thing happened in NSW a few years ago, Halduel. One of the most dangerous situations for householders in the bush to be in, is to live in a house on the top of a ridgeline. Fires move much faster going uphill than down.

One resident was one of a whole street of houses on top of a ridgeline, and he had an idea. Being a brickie by trade, he erected a brick wall at the bottom of his property which he figured could force the rising heat from the bushfire upwards and over his house. The Greenie Lyn Benders in the local council screamed blue murder and demanded that he remove the brick wall for aesthetic reasons.

The man refused, and the matter went to court. You guessed it, the predicted bushfire erupted while the matter was still in court and every house on the street was destroyed except our brickie mate. The "Daily Telegraph" newspaper reported that fire officials were very interested in how the wall did exactly as planned and protected the house, and they suggested that the brickie's idea should be part of the building code for all new houses in that situation.

One of the reasons why the Greens are so much on the nose at the moment is because the "sheeple" (as Green advocates sneer at ordinary people) are not as stupid as the Lyn Bender clones want to believe. Most people know that the reason why we are having so many high intensity fires is because of Green opposition to burn off's.

The more that the Lyn Bender clones sneer at ordinary people, and the more they endanger the community with their stupid ideas, the less likely anyone will believe anything they say.
Posted by LEGO, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 4:00:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"We face annihilation"

This coming from our resident climate psychologist.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 4:33:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The idea that adverse weather or other natural events are caused by man's sin is the oldest superstition. It is amazing that in this day and age it is still current, but then so are all the other religions, so there is no limit to some people's credulity.

All the other arguments of the warmists have been refuted in here over and over and over again, and they have nothing new, no logically coherent argument, just endless harping and comical foolery.

When they actually come up with climate models that can correctly predict the past, let alone the future, will be time for anyone to take them seriously. Failing that, all they have is the corrupt billions that governments have stolen from the world's productive classes to pay for their anti-human doomsday cult. Shills and trolls indeed
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 6:36:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Man’s sin?
Religion aside, what about human impact lsuch as man and also woman eating out natural food supply , leading to starvation, unrest and war?
Should people worldwide wait for a data model of past and present before acting on interesting and challenging sensible solutions?

What is a warmist?
Is a person a warmist because they raise subject of warmth these days, such as warmth caused by algae in a stock watering trough or creek gully waterhole?
I do however agree with most of what you say there (above).

You can see my posts on OLO and accordingly I think warmth in ocean algae involves new and coherent anthropogenic weather change logic that no scientist or anyone can refute.
Posted by JF Aus, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 7:28:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My post above was intended to be directed to: @ Jardine K. Jardine.
Posted by JF Aus, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 7:32:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"When they actually come up with climate models that can correctly predict the past, let alone the future, will be time for anyone to take them seriously," says Jardine, one of the Kings of the Flat Earthers along with Runner, Individual, Hasbeen, Neverhasbeen, Fruit Loop Stupe, etc.

Correctly predicting the past must be a new science. It is especially important for people who look backwards. I mean, no one wants to be shocked by something that happened in the past just coming out of the blue, do they?

People who wear Alfoil Hats don't want to get a heart attacks from suddenly hearing about the Great Flood, do they, especially if they can't swim? And what about the Great Plague? We need to know when that will happen in the past, don't we, so we can get prepared with lots of aspirin and hot water bottles?

Yeah, OLO is a great forum. It attracts all the great minds!

And quite a few Lesser Minds!
Posted by David G, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 9:22:52 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Psychologists and Comedians becoming climate experts is a real worry. Its even more of a concern that no-one questions their ability to make judgements about issues of science they know nothing about.

Lets hope they don't start having opinions on the possibility of the presence of subnuclear particles or whether or not Pluto should be called a planet. If science is worried about its image it should look carefully at who is representing it in the public gaze.
Posted by Atman, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 9:33:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Parrot,

Trust you to try and nit pick one irrelevant factoid and try and make it the main issue.

Whether the man was fined $20k, $50k or $100k for taking rational action to protect his family and property, the point is that he was punished for doing the right thing simply because of stupid laws put in place by city based morons that value their ideals more than human life.

That this man's house was just about the only one standing is proof that these regulations are idiotic, and the moronic greens that pushed this through should be horse whipped.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 11:43:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We wouldn't be as argumentative about the adverse
impacts of climate change if we had the appropriate
scientific understanding, if we had the necessary tools,
and if we were marshalling them to solve the problems.

Instead we're politicising the issues and
allowing the threats to mount up without
fashioning the appropriate tools and seeking real solutions.

We need tools of persuasion, the right
incentives, and (where necessary) strict laws.

Bush fires are real - they're not about to disappear any time
soon, and if there is the likelihood of
hotter and prolonged conditions continuing in this country
as experts are predicting then certainly ignoring these
predictions would be irresponsible
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 1:03:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy my sweet, we have spent tens of billions, yes billions, of public money trying to prove that CO2 is a dangerous gas. If there was any evidence at all, that amount of research should have found it.

The mere fact that the IPCC was set up to prove CO2 was heating the world, & not to research if it could or was, should give you a clue to what has been going on.

They have tried tipping points, positive feedback, they even launched 3000 Argo temperature sensing buoys to try to find some heat that had snuck past them, & hidden in the ocean. They didn't, but still talk about it hopefully.

The best they could do was find less than a degree per doubling of CO2 air content, diminishing as percentages increased. To do this they have to ignore the negative feed back now proven for the increased clouds warming would generate. In fact for years they were pinning their hopes for catastrophe on positive feedback from clouds.

The wheels are falling off their gravy train all over the place. Time now for you to recognize you have been had, just like we all were at first. Time to get angry, & go get these conmen, that have put their careers above the public good. Time to help get them, not protect them.
Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 2:18:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lego,
Could you post a link to the Tele article and any others that you have on Bender, the court case etc., please?

"The man refused, and the matter went to court. You guessed it, the predicted bushfire erupted while the matter was still in court and every house on the street was destroyed except our brickie mate. The "Daily Telegraph" newspaper reported that fire officials were very interested in how the wall did exactly as planned and protected the house, and they suggested that the brickie's idea should be part of the building code for all new houses in that situation.
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 3:23:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I would like to know what part of science the warmist don't understand that when fuel builds up from heaps of unpredicted rain and then dries out it becomes lethal. Please explain why we should not create decent firebreaks and sensible burning. Maybe the 'science ' of unpredicted rainfall led the warmist to believe that this much fuel would never exist again. Now that what us to bow down to their next lot of prophecies. Thankfully we now have adults at the helm instead of Milne/Gillard/Bandt etc.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 3:44:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Hasbeen,

We must fund a federal initiative to actively
manage fire risk by reducing flammable load.
There should be a competent organisation making
that decision. The past 12 months have been the
warmest documented while 2013 is set to go down as
the hottest calendar year in Australia according
to a report published as year in the "International
Journal of Climatology," which found bushfire risk
had increased in Australia since the 1970s and that
the fire season could potentially be getting longer
in Australia's south-east.

Now what you personally happen to believe is frankly
irrelevant because the facts speak for themselves.
Bushfires are not about to go away and the public
needs to start talking about living in bushfire-prone
areas and planning for ways to minimise the impact of
an extended fire season.

Severe weather manager at the Bureau of Meteorology said
warmer temperatures were being recorded throughout
Australia and ,"If over the next couple of months, we
continue this trend, which we expect we will, we expect
to see one of the hottest 12-month periods on record."

Therefore, now is the time that we need to plan for a
longer fire season - it's something we're going to
expect, looking to the future.
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 5:17:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More severe weather is more likely linked to more people causing more sewage nutrient matter to be dumped in waterways and oceans, proliferating more algae plant matter absorbing more warmth during photosynthesis.
It's a more likely and logical scenario than more CO2.
There has been a clear cut increase in ocean algae/phytoplankton in the past 100 years.

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijocean/2012/263946/

CO2 has been a problem today with at least one publican using it to pipe free beer for firefighters!
According to news the publican got into trouble for it, for being so thoughtful and generous.
Posted by JF Aus, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 6:11:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lyn, congratulations! You may have discovered another backward group, even more backward the Flat Earthers. I refer of course to the 'Sun Revolves Around The Earth' Crowd!

In the main they have semi-Neanderthal-type faces (much like Tony Abbott in fact, although this may be pure coincidence). Their knuckles tend to drag on the ground and they, in the main, seem to vote Coalition. Enthusiastic grunting is what they do when they are shown a bucket of money. It's a dead give-a-way!

Yes, this group of anachronistic, intellectually-challenged souls have been lurking in the background, trying to merge with the Flat Earthers in the hope they wouldn't be discovered.

But you, Lyn, have forced them into the limelight, a remarkable achievement and proof that psychologists have been small-noted for far too long.

What worries me is that the Flat-Earthers and the Sun-Revolves-around-the-Earth types will combine and fairies will once again live at the bottom of our gardens.

Jardine is French for garden, isn't it? Doesn't a Jardine already comment on OLO?

Help!
Posted by David G, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 6:59:32 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Lyn

Don't be discouraged, I don't get much past the first couple pages with the usual few who refuse to accept the science. Reducing CO2e is failry easy.

Not holding us up as a role model but it can be done, we went off the grid about 4 years ago, generate and store all our own power and water, moved to a milder climate (minimal heating cooling). I gave up my job, my partner cycles 20km round trip to her part time job. We have no meat eating pets and have given up flying. We moved to a rural area (cheap housing) grow our own fruit and veg, own chickens for eggs and meat etc and I live off a small stipend from selling my business and investments (no welfare).

We don't have to form an orderly queue to do the right thing, with someone else going first. This is the very argument every country uses for not doing the right thing. If everyone esle is being an arsehole or a racist or littering etc doesn't mean we have to as well (yes that is a analogy Jim, not an indictment of people here).

Don't give up ! :)
Posted by Valley Guy, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 7:05:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Foxy,

Much sense in your last post; we need fire proof houses and a lot less trees around dwellings and other buildings and far more on site water storage.

Frank Lloyd Wright designed fireproof homes in 1907; it's taking us a long time to catch up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fireproof_House_for_$5000
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 8:03:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here you go, folks...

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/10/22/how-dare-you-try-to-politicise-this-politicising/

First dog on the moon.

(It's a cartoon - so even the "skeptics" will get it:)
Posted by Poirot, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 8:07:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy my sweet, would that forecast by any chance be by the same bunch who a few years back told us it was never going to rain again? That would be just before the big floods wouldn't it?

They'd be our version of the mob who told the Poms it was never going to snow again, wouldn't it? That would be just before 5 consecutive very harsh winters, with considerable of dislocation due to heavy snow falls.

It might even be a similar bunch who told us Antarctica was melting & all the sea ice breaking up. That would just before new records of sea ice, covering an increase area of one million square kilometers was measured.

Yes we certainly should believe & be guided by people with track records like that shouldn't we? How much more does it take for you to see you've been had?
Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 8:58:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry Mise.

The "Daily Telegraph" article was just something I read a couple of years ago which stuck in my mind because I have always been interested in council stupidity as opposed to people's common sense.

Another article which stuck in my mind was the incident involving a man in Nowra who had a large tree overhanging his house which he feared would fall on it. He asked the Nowra council for permission to remove the tree but was refused because of the council's tree preservation policy.

You guessed it, the tree fell on the house and killed the homeowner. The "Daily Telegraph" said that his family was suing the Nowra council for damages.
Posted by LEGO, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 4:07:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Do your best is all that is needed.
Avoid stress from too much thinking, too much incoming information.
Relax.
Ongoing stress can lead to anxiety that can lead to depression and nervous breakdown.
Some people seem unnecessarily upset over climate debate.
The is a book, Life Without Stress - by Ainsley Meares.

Genuine debate about climate or anthropogenic weather change should not bring people to tears.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24615946
Posted by JF Aus, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 7:48:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lego,

Thanks muchly; I went agoogling and found:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/01/1080544630712.html

and although the Greens are not mentioned it's common knowledge that the Council was Green influenced at the time.
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 11:41:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Is Mise,

Thanks for that.

There definitely should be planning regulations in place governing
the type of homes that are built in fire-prone areas.

I greatly admired Frank Lloyd Wright's architecture
and managed to visit some of
the homes he designed (Los Angeles, Arizona). My husband's an
architect and we lived in LA for close to ten years. I worked
at the University of Southern California and one of my colleagues
lived in the f
Frank Lloyd Wright house in the Hollywood Hills for
a time. It was very different to anything that I had ever seen.

Dear Hasbeen,

The information cited in my earlier post predominantly came from
the Severe Weather Manager at the Bureau of Meteorology as well
as the Bushfires Co-operative Research Centre . All reputable
sources
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 12:19:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes Foxy my sweet, all reputable sources, with a high & growing record of extreme failure as I pointed out.
Posted by Hasbeen, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 4:09:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is another one in today's "Daily Telegraph", Mise.

In Miranda Divine's column, she recounts how a man on Gosford was fined $55,000 dollars for clearing the brush from around his house. When the bushfire came, his house was the only one that did not get destroyed for a radius of 2Klm from his house.
Posted by LEGO, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 4:48:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Hasbeen,

On the contrary, all that can be done regarding
climate is to try to predict it - and that to date has
been done efficiently. The threat of human-induced climate
change, has been accepted as a genuine and very serious
threat because of the Stern Report released in October
2006. However "Wedge politics" deliberately creates a
division between sectoral interests - that's the name of
the game. There's a "them" and "us" rather than simply "us"
and much effort is employed in partisan politics which could
be much better utilised in positive pursuits.

Wendy Hamer stated it well:

"Whether or not it's unseemly for Green politicians to raise
the spectre of future cataclysmic climate change when
bushfires are still raging out of control, there's no doubt
that many of us who looked up to bruised and belligerant
skies swirling with ash and a drift of incinerated gum leaves
had to wonder 'is this what the future will be like?'"
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 9:05:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whilst everyone is here throwing around "facts" is someone able to tell me how much CO2 your overabundance of rotting vegetation is creating?
How many years do your "records" go back?
How certain are you that it isn't just a big cycle the earth has done before?
Posted by Bec_young mum of 2, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 9:36:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.....them and us, or just us?
What about real science?
What about real world ocean phenomena not yet formally researched and published?

There is division because climate change is one thing and CO2 is another thing. Chalk and cheese division.

It's possible for many people to agree climate is changing but a significant number do not agree the cause is CO2.

How does CO2 kill coral at the rate coral is vanishing, like 80% lost in 30 years?
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/coastal/programs/coral/threats.htm

How has CO2 caused stocks of the four main species of Pacific tuna to fall to historically low levels?
http://www.spc.int/en/employment/1074-getting-to-the-point-on-pacific-tuna-fisheries.html

The problem is algae, not CO2. The algae can be observed causing the damage and devastation.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_9070000/9070148.stm

The non-sense diatribe about CO2 is wasting time to achieve real solutions to overcome the real problem. Absolutely urgently.
Posted by JF Aus, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 10:21:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy