The global climate change industry was estimated to be $1.5 trillion per year in 2013, and growing around 5 to 10 times faster than inflation.

It estimated the Paris promises would cost around 2% of global GDP per year by 2030 and achieve almost nothing in terms of reducing global temperatures if continued to the end of the century.

Huge cost for no benefit. Keeping people poor for nothing.

There are a lot of issues to discuss regarding climate change and how we will manage over time, but this article is filled with so many lies / errors that it sets the important discussions we need to have back 10 years. It would take hours to put together all the references contradicting those lies.

On the other hand I guess I don't need to do that, I can just use the technique the author uses. I just talked to a friend and he said most of the statements in this article are rubbish. Problem solved.

Peter Lang: Right on the money. If we, any of us believe in climate change!? And caused, at least for the most part, by record levels of CO2 now up in uncharted territory!?

Then the obvious answer would seem to be!? Stop burning fossil fuel to make power!?

But particularly, where it can be proven with established fact that. Nuclear power is safer, cleaner and vastly more affordable, as reliable, dispatchable, carbon-free power!

One could be forgiven for being completely bewildered by the fact, the geniuses running the country (down) haven't already tumbled to it? Or have they!?
Cheers, Alan B.

Very poorly researched article, with significant factual errors. For a start, it was Engie, not the Victorian government, that closed Hazelwood power station. Victoria's blackouts didn't extend to SA. And the storage capability of SA's Tesla Big Battery is in addition to its grid stability capacity. His comparison of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere certainly isn't "by volume" as CO2's atmospheric concentration is at 410ppm, and methane only 1.8ppm.

I could go on, because his reasoning errors are as prolific as his factual errors. But does anyone here actually want to know?

Alan B,

No informed person denies climate change is occurring. Climate change has been going on for 4.5 billion years on Earth. Always has, always will.

Human contribution is small. Furthermore, any warming we get this century will be beneficial not damaging. Efforts to curb global warming are massively damaging for two reasons: 1) the cost of the polices, 2) the loss of the benefit that would be gained by more global warming.

voxUnius

Rain bombs are something quite new, where a month or more of rain falls in a few hours, or days. Fifty years ago such events hardly happened, I was a young adult back then and do not remember continual extreme conditions being broadcast on the news.

An example of a film that had been periodically put out in relation to extreme weather events.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5lS_s6bETw&t=19s

The film encompasses the period 5th -19th November 2018.

Contents:
00:13 The USA: The Camp Fire, Woolsey Fire & Winter Storm Avery
20:13 Kuwait: Flash floods
27:12 Jordan: Flash floods
29:08 Saudi Arabia: Floods
31:06 India: Tropical Cyclone Gaja
32:50 Indonesia: Tasikmalaya & Dompu floods
35:54 Vietnam: Tropical Storm Toraji
37:40 Thailand: Southern floods
38:11 Brazil: Rio landslide & Belo Horizonte flash flood
40:54 Turkey: Bodrum flash flood
42:30 Spain: Flash floods
45:24 Temperature Data

If you are not happy for the term "wet microburst", I'm happy to use the term "rain bomb". I had been told on this forum to use the term wet microburst instead of rain bomb quite a long time ago! Although, in the comment you are critical of, I used both terms. I don't happen to like the term "wet microburst" on the basis it is not as descriptive as "rain bomb".

A quote from Mr Google, the last sentence being the most appropriate:

"Microbursts occur during thunderstorms. A storm can cause rain clouds full of water droplets or hail to mix with patches of dry air. When that happens, the dry air sucks moisture from the wet air. ... A microburst may also bring rain with it, often called a “rain bomb,” but these are relatively rare."

But, worrying about strict terminology, does not make any difference, anthropogenic climate change is happening.