Eric Claus, a very sensible man!

Quote. Cause an increase in droughts and typhoons in Australia.

Come on Graham, this utterly disproven garbage has no place on OLO. Clowns should be in the circus, not in print.

Well articulated, sensible and all too true.

The IPCC is a political pressure group, hoovering up our money for no good reason. The IPCC has a achieved diddly squat, apart from jacking up energy prices. What the rotters have done, in concert with our useless political class, is ensure that resource-rich Australia has some of the highest energy prices in the world. The IPCC is NOT a scientific organisation. They ignore the fact that the sun influences temperatures - something that has been known for a couple of millenia. The organisation was set up only to move money from rich countries to poor countries, which will blow it. Good management and bad luck is not why they are poor.

We have been hearing how we have 10 years to 'fix’ the climate from these charlatans for the past 30 years! There predictions are crap, and the climate itself has proved that they are crap.

Long, boring articles are not going to change the the truth

So refreshing to read an article that presents a holistic view of the environmental demise of the planet. Let's face it: humans caused the problems through a combination of their lifestyles and vastly excessive numbers. Take action by attacking their numbers and their way of life

A topic of interest to many but understood by few. What is the average person to believe. Retired 40-Year Veteran German Climatologist: ‘CO2 A Scapegoat’, IPCC ‘A Marketing Organization’

Hasbeen and ttbn seem to have missed the point here. Eric Claus' argument is that we face far more immediate threats to our environment than global warming, and moreover, ones that we can actually do something about regardless of what other countries do. For example, population growth acts as a multiplier for most of these problems, and it is overwhelmingly (entirely in the long term) coming from mass migration, since our own fertility rate has been below replacement level since 1976. We have the capability to vote out Big Australia politicians.

So far as anthropogenic climate change (AGW) is concerned, I am not convinced that it is a non-issue. The climate scientists have passed stiff examinations in mathematics, physics, and chemistry. They have studied climate on a full time basis with the best instruments our technology can provide for years or decades. List of learned societies that agree on AGW

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

There are really only 3 alternatives:

1. The scientists are correct. Climate is far from fully understood, but they know enough to see big risks from dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

2. The scientists are telling the truth as they see it, but are mistaken because they are overlooking something important. Always a possibility, but no one so far has come up with a convincing argument.

3. There is a vast conspiracy to lie to us. Who organised all those scientists from all over the world, and why is there no evidence?

Stabilise the population? Same old, same old from the same writer who never ever seems to allow the facts to get in the way of his promulgated propaganda and patent BS. For him and his likeminded ilk, all they really care about is the trees and the animals, the rest can go take a running jump, or starve in order to reduce population numbers?

He says climate change is on us and nothing can be done without population reduction? What is he suggesting? A cull?

Cause from where I sit this same de-humanized message is endlessly repeated by the same obsessed Idealogues with an agenda? Nothing we can do about climate change they endlessly parrot in broken record rhetoric?

And completely without factual foundation. What we need is CHEAP, SAFE CLEAN MSR thorium power, coupled to deionisation dialysis, to revegetate the deserts of the world If would truly not just limit population growth but reverse it!

We need to raise average incomes in the most poverty-stricken countries and also educate the population and must include the female demographic! And as shown elsewhere, this same fundamental change actually achieves outcomes!

As opposed to Idealogues, giving vent to their par for the course, inculcated obsessions? The self-evident changes we need to achieve this same Author's wish list, are the same he and his ilk resist to the last breath!?

Waste of time casting pearls in his direction cause next time will come out trotting out the very same smelly verbal diarrhoea?
Alan B.

past idiotic prophecies by the ipcc and warmist have failed miserably. Now Eric wants us to believe the pseudo science that somehow they have it right this time. Actually the absolute moral decay in our society will bring this country down much quicker than imaginery man made gw. I suspect that many of the virue signallers are morally corrupt resulting in pushing these very flawed pseudo science. I wonder how many planes they will fly to their next luvfest.

AB,
The best, and ONLY, way to successfully solve a problem is to do something about the cause.
So stop tinkering with band aids on wounds and accept that there are TOO MANY PEOPLE!
People cause problems.
Full stop.

'So stop tinkering with band aids on wounds and accept that there are TOO MANY PEOPLE!'

feel free to make yourself extinct but leave the rest of us to enjoy this wonderful creation.

Alan B,

Apart from aquatic species, humans and their domestic animals constitute 96% of all mammal biomass. The biomass of domestic poultry, mostly chickens, is approximately 3 times higher than all wild birds put together.

http://www.pnas.org/content/115/25/6506

Why do you want to make humans and their domestic animals 100% of mammal biomass? When is enough enough? No one is proposing a cull outside of your fevered imagination. In any case, foreigners don't have to pay any attention to what we think. (I am not saying that we shouldn't help them if it is effective and they will accept the help.) What we can do is end Big Australia and not let other countries use Australia as an overflow barrel for their own overpopulation.

The most effective thing that an individual can do to combat global warming is to have one less child - by orders of magnitude.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/want-to-fight-climate-change-have-fewer-children

Never realised you were so religious runner........

feel free to make yourself extinct but leave the rest of us to enjoy this wonderful creation.
runner,
No need for silly remarks about extinction, all we need is the religious morons staying out of other peoples' lives & get out of the way of birth control. Don't have children if you can't afford to feed them.
Stop relying on others to feed your families.
Govt too needs to be on the side of birth control if they can't manage a welfare system. get rid of that insidious sponge that is Centrelink & all will be well again, Climate change fast or slow.

'all we need is the religious morons staying out of other peoples' lives & get out of the way of birth control. '

actually in my experience Individual it is irreligous bigots that want to push perversion down peoples throats, kill the unborn and preach pseudo science based 'religion' to others. You prove that fact.

*…Hasbeen and ttbn seem to have missed the point here…*. (divergence).
Obvious by the responses, not many actually read the article it would seem.

This article is “perspective writing” at its best. And that is exactly the problem in all the global warming debate; it has totally lost its grip on reality, and morphed itself into a blunt instrument reeking enormous damage to this country, and to too many of its citizens.

This author lists many more urgencies before global warming at number five in the list.
There is nothing this country can achieve more than looking after its own back yard.

As the climate ideologues clamber for world stage places to broadcast their imagined superiority to nobody, the sum total of all who listen, they have rewarded Australians with the embarrassment of the most expensive and unaffordable power prices on the globe.

Not content to parade this arrogance to the world, the global warming alarmists managed to divide the country along the lines of “haves and have-nots” by pushing for taxpayer subsidised solar power, rewarding those resourced with a roof on which to install solar reflectors, and penalising those without resources, with unaffordable power bills.

Flying over the electorate of Wentworth, the seat of this nonsense, and looking down on a sea of back yard swimming pools, and roof top solar panels and rainbow flags, no suffering for their cause is even slightly visible

Gawrd, we are still arguing this Its True; No its not; argument.

There is not enough economically accessible oil & coal to cause the
predicted warming !

Latest news; Shale oil fracking companies in US are all losing money.
Saudi Arabia's reserves now believed to be 70% less than claimed.

Shell now starting a program to fit EV chargers to all their service stations world wide.

And this is just the beginning.

runner,
Ok then, how much are you willing to offer to the victims of religious zealots like yourself ?

'Ok then, how much are you willing to offer to the victims of religious zealots like yourself ?'

which 'victims' might these be Individual? Unborn babies in the womb?

runner,
include them if you like, so how much will you provide /

Divergence – Excellent points on the assessment of the three alternatives. The third one seems to be the most common regarding the IPCC.

3. There is a vast conspiracy to lie to us. Who organised all those scientists from all over the world, and why is there no evidence?

The implication is that the IPCC is one big omnipotent organisation in a big office tower in some big city where all the scientists sit around a table and plot how to lie to the public for massive profits. As you say the IPCC is composed of thousands of scientists from all over the world, most of whom never speak to each other. Many don’t receive global warming research funding, they are researching other issues such as the spread of plants and insects and the times of year that they flower, changes to life cycles, etc. Through this seemingly unrelated research they’ve found that natural ecosystems have been changing as climate has warmed. The IPCC then includes this with other research to come to its conclusions.

The second implication is that the IPCC is somehow behind every goofy claim or overstatement that is made about global warming. Certainly there are goofy claims but they are not made by the IPCC. The IPCC produces well reference detailed reports that are available on the internet. Anybody with patience can read them and make assessments. Critics of the IPCC rarely quote passages of the IPCC reports and then show through detailed research why they are false. It is much more common to quote some wacky claim made on a blog or TV show and then say “see this isn’t true.

Also rarely mentioned are the scientists who lose status and money by supporting global warming science against the wishes of their University or public agency. This happened to the professors at the University of Western Australia who opposed Tony Abbott's "research centre" headed by Bjorn Lomborg.

The third part is the implication that the big fossil fuel companies and other opponents of action to reduce global warming are simple shopkeepers struggling to put a crust of bread on the table for their families who have been abused by the powerful IPCC. The big global fossil fuel companies have much more power than the IPCC and they use it. See the link below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy

ericc, f.y i.

On this site you can make a hyperlink active by deleting the s off the https.
Try posting your link again without the s.
Cheers.

As thousands of CC scientists understand, climate change impacts are directly linked to the concentration of green house gases in our atmosphere.

The longer taken reducing emissions to zero, todays dangers get worse and worse. The IPCC report - GLOBAL WARMING OF 1.5C - details numerous outcomes should warming increase to 2C. We should not exceed 1.5C. The following is but a subset:

1. Global warming likely to reach 1.5C between 2030 and 2050

2. Warming greater than global average is being experienced in many land regions, including 2 to 3 times higher in the Arctic

3. Warming from anthropogenic emissions from the pre-industrial period to the present will persist for centuries to millennia.

4. Risks from droughts and precipitation-deficits are projected to be higher at 2C than 1.5C global warming

5. The fraction of the global land area affected by flood hazard is projected to be larger at 2C....

6. Sea level rise will continue beyond 2100 even if global warming is limited to 1.5C

7. Increasing warming amplifies the exposure of small islands, low lying coastal areas and deltas to sea level rise risks for many human and ecological systems

8. Of 105,000 species studied, 6% of insects, 8% of plants, 4% of vertebrates are projected to lose over half ... of their range with 1.5C warming, and 18% of insects, 16% of plants and 8% of vertebrates for 2C warming

9. Limiting global warming to 1.5C compared with 2C is projected to reduce increases in ocean temperatures and ocean acidity and decreases in ocean oxygen. Consequently reducing risks to marine biodiversity, fisheries and ecosystems

10. Warming of 1.5C is projected to shift ranges of many marine species to higher latitudes, increase damage to ocean ecosystems, loss of coastal resources, reduce productivity of fisheries and aquaculture

11. At 1.5C coral reefs projected to decline another 70%, and >99% at 2C

Note that limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5C seems almost an impossibility.

The world is heading towards more than 4C. Frightening.

The thoughts that ecosystems can be preserved without addressing Climate Change is farcical.

Well then, it appears we are doomed.
The politicians and their mates, are too greedy and evil to do anything which will mean a reduction in the money they steal through all these false projects and grants.
So unless we change our system of govt, we are doomed.
One of the things we can change which will help OUR situation, is to control population levels.
It does not mean stop immigration, but it will mean the monotoring of how many deaths/births, and whenever there is a shortfall, we can let some people in.
Until our infrastructure and services are elevated to a level where we can have a sustainable supply of basic necessities, like water and power, we cannot/must not allow our numbers to swell beyond a serviceable level.
As for our population reproductive graph.
It appears that Aussies aren't having kids at the rate they once did, which is a good thing, because unlike our stupid brainiac economists, who keep pushing for more people, I don't, not untill we can find the means to employ, feed, fuel and even provide enough water for ALL our needs.
Until then, forget it, there is no more room on this bus.
Now if only we could convince China and India to come on board with this concept, we would see the world population problem solve itself.

It seems to me that this whole AGW project is coming to a slow end.
Seas not rising, Islands getting bigger or remaining the same for last
70 years (Auk Uni Coastal Inst), ideal co2 level for plants a little
higher than present level, declining cyclone rates and strength (BOM).

Horrible predictions not occurring, etc etc.
It has all become rather boring.