Alternatively we could ask why has the problem gotten so bad? The RFS has said it is not greenies preventing fuel reduction burns so the problem lies elsewhere. If it's firebugs how come they were unsuccessful in June and July. The main factor has to be high temps, low moisture and strong winds for which neither greenies nor firebugs are responsible.

Instead of a new RC perhaps Morrison could distil the findings of the previous 57 enquiries. He is about to flog some more coal to India so that may be a clue to the problem.

The RFS has said it is not greenies preventing fuel reduction burns
Taswegian,
That is the clearest sign yet that the hierarchy in the RFS needs replacing by sane people who're not seeking limelight & want to be of help to the community !

The most interesting aspect of Charles Essery's article is that his sentiments would not even have made it into print, thirty years ago. Mainstream media thirty years ago was so busy selling their media by scaring the bejesus out of the public, that it simply was not interested in publishing an opposing view to HIGW. Sceptics' were universally derided in the media as "deniers", and likened to Holocaust deniers.

But the times, they are, a changin' and Human Induced Climate change sceptic views have now become mainstream. The mainstream media is now publishing the opposing view and what the sceptics say makes a lot of sense. Especially since the hysterical predictions of the HIGW activists, that the polar bears would all drown, the Arctic completely ice free by 2013, and New Orleans, New York, London, and Miami would be 3 metres underwater by 2014,has proven to be laughably inaccurate.

And especially so now that the desperate climate change cultists have realised that they can not use reasoned arguments to support their position, so they have resorted to acting like screaming 2 year olds and doing whatever it takes to get attention. Using children as your foot soldiers hardly impresses the voting public either. The sight of 16 year old Greta Thurnburg sneering "How dare you!" to the representatives of every nation at the UN was more worthy of hilarity than serious consideration. Every parent has seen such adolescent disapproving and lecturing behaviour before, and this from kids who can't even keep their bedrooms tidy.

My advice to all of those educated elitists gluing themselves to busy roadways to prove how intelligent and nobly virtuous you are, is to switch sides now, as the whole HIGW hoax is coming apart. If you do it now, maybe nobody will remember how you made an absolute idiot of yourself by angrily claiming that you and your caste were the font of all wisdom and the epitome of nobility, while your opponents were stupid and selfish.

Well put LEGO. Its going to be interesting times in next few years, as more and more of the anthropogenic climate change cultists predictions fail. They have tried their damnest with the bushfires being a holocaust like proof.

I predict/hope the Royal Commission may offer a more realistic and balanced view.

Yes, the CCCer's whose activism and political blackmail have in effect, I believe, stood proud and tall over this predictable disaster!

Fuel load reduction by traditional mosaic burning is limited in both scope and application, only available in normal conditions for just a few weeks a year! Where could this have been practised in recent years some of which include three years without decent rain, bone dry dams? Whereas one could have put herd animals into this fuel load and safely reduced the hazard 24/7 and 365 days a year!

Goats are great giving their diet is not just grass! Other than that we need people armed with hoes in there hoeing out feral weeds not palatable to any ruminant! Burns even cool ones come with CO2 emissions and risk of sudden wind changes or acceleration

This CCCer's are on the front foot with their advocacy and already getting in with concerns for platypi. We've always had some species extinction and as millions, due to the changes in the environment, they couldn't adapt to! And our future environment needs to be far better-managed to harbour scarce water resources in the driest inhabited continent on earth!

If that includes some species reduction? That may be the price we need to pay to prevent history from repeating itself, again and again, each time possibly more catastrophic than ever?

CCCer's will object on imaginary or rabid emotional grounds, knowing as they do that part of the management plan has to include dams all over the joint mostly upland and small just to force more water into the landscape and extend normal flows up to three years? Plus force the salt table further down in the water table!

Recent research has established that broad-scale irrigation lowers localising temperatures and are a firebreak And are carbon sinks as well some of which is permanently sequestered in the soil!

Finally, the asinine prohibition on nuclear energy has to be removed. given this CARBON FREE energy has to be part of any practicable solution we can actually afford not dependant on sunlight or intermittent wind!
Alan B.

The right decisions on bushfires were made back in the 1970s and 1980s. Since then, the Greens and people wearing uniforms better suited to Banana Republic dictators (that's the regularly rotated and replaced heads of state volunteer fire services), plus bureaucrats who've never ventured into the bush, have decided that they know better: hence this year's inferno.

If there are still enough people around with the gumption to put a proper bush fire mitigation and control regime back into place (which I very much doubt), any new, inevitably expensive, bun fight masquerading as a Royal Commission will be as sensible as pissing into the wind

You don't need to burn it all, just the last 5 kilometers around the periphery of these noxious weed growing Feral pest harboring national parks.

With these buffer zones to stop the fires getting out into the real world, & the greenies can be left to kid themselves about the rest. Burnt every 3 years or so, & the rest naturally burnt every decade or so, & the country will be much better.

The other requirement is for landholders to get back the right to make their properties safe using their chosen method. Fire, bulldozer or axe, it must be a landholders right to tell greeny council bureaucrats to go to hell where their & their property safety is concerned.

A very succinct and accurate essay examining major factors in tackling bush fires. Firstly; congratulations to Ross Garnaut for being the ONLY expert to have a climate ‘prediction’ actually come to fruition! and what was that prediction? That Australia would suffer a bush fire in 2020 Hah!. The 2020 bush fire that has burnt out 1/9th the area of the 1978-79 bush fires.
Selective logging in national parks and reserves will result in the creation of a network of fire tracks sufficient for heavy vehicles access, at NO cost to government. Reintroduction of ruminant grazing in forests will result in lowering the fuel load again, at no cost to government.
The reduction/elimination of stultifying local government regulations will encourage ‘on site’ land managers, like the Taewegian farmers and braziers along the east coast and Western Tiers who successfully managed local bush until councils stopped it with resultant terrible fires.
The brain dead CCCr’s, greens and elites are already organised for the Commision and have already scored a ‘trick’, with PM Morrison already stating that the Coalition will ‘re-visit’ policy regarding emissions; effectively pre-emptying’ the commissions outcomes.
Those sceptical of CO2 being either the cause or even a contributing factor in the fires will need to organise immediately and harness all the scientific and experiential evidence to put before the commission.

Hasbeen, yes the nearest 5 kms would work for humans.but if we continue to have fuel loads build up, it would not do much good for the animals and habitats, so we must have prescribed burning in native forest as well.

Also as Prompete states, selective controlled logging would introduce fire trails that would give access for more effective monitoring, management and controlled burning.

That way people would be happy, animals would be happy, but we would have to find an island somewhere which served 'smashed avo toast', skim soya milk lattes, and vegan burgers.

Anyone know anywhere or country would take them,.... maybe Mars on a wind powered, hemp space craft perhaps!

gumption to put a proper bush fire mitigation and control regime back into place
ttbn,
Yet another perfect opportunity reason to establish a National Service or for want of a better description a Community service for the many unemployed & offer a once in a lifetime opportunity for many presently unemployable to become employable !

Oh Dear; taking it all into account means it is totally useless
arguing about how co2 is the cause of everything.
The amount in the atmosphere that we put in makes no difference.
No difference to the temperature and no difference to the bushfires.
So why argue about it ?
If you want to argue about it go and knock on the doors of the US
Chinese and Indian embassys.
Best we can do is get the fuel load down in the bush.

There is even an argument that co2 can make little or no difference
but that has to be an argument for another time, after the big
emitters have cut down. We may be saved from having the arguement anyway.

My prediction is nothing of value will result from the expected bushfire royal commission.
It'd cost nothing to exclude private property from biodiversity and habitat preservation laws. It'd also cost nothing to admit the Australia Clause was a mistake. But it won't happen.

Individual and ttbn, yep, definitely problems where you mention. After the Dunalley fires here in Tas the situation is worse thanks to the new level of reactionary hyper risk aversion. Few will bother with fire permits when the permit period begins, which is increasingly too early and lifted always far far too late. When the permit period starts the smoke stops.

LEGO, indeed it is coming undone. Exquisitely revealing the HICC activists always propose more government.

Alan, Wethers thrive on burned country. It could be said much of Australias ride on the sheeps back was over burned ground. It requires active management of understory which is all but prohibited today. Autumn's about the best burning time to encourage growth of desirable palatable species over other types. It's part of why I'm so critical of the EPBC act. Under that law you're not allowed to alter the understory of any forest type listed as threatened, and the list is long and very dubious. A look at the forest types listed as threatened quickly reveals the whole process has been used to quarantine the largest area possible with forest types that aren't in any way rare or under threat. I've not looked at the mainland but here in Tas some of the most common forest types have been listed. On all tenures.

Alison, Share your hope but not holding my breath for a rational outcome. The slightly more left side are already staking their positions and the less left side in usual nervous managerial style will pick a position halfway between the nutcases and the rational.

Well, here's the truth.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YCnYsy7B40o

I learned this fact from a logger named ray;
You don't cut timber on a windy day;
Stay out of the woods when the moistures low;
Or you ain't gonna live to collect your dough.

Wisdom of old!
Nothing new under the sun really.
Can the RC, waste of dough.

Dan

Well argued Prompete.

And Dan, old wisdom learned from on the ground practical, tried and not found wanting, is the wisest wisdom.plus all experience generated wisdom, is generally good wisdom.

Always providing it never ever comes with a closed mind (we allus did it that way) to even superior experience-based wisdom.
Alan B.

more of the stuff that influences me.

https://www.npr.org/2020/01/15/796651503/2019-was-the-2nd-hottest-year-on-record-according-to-nasa-and-noaa?utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews&utm_campaign=npr&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR1R9-6Nj2NonrGbqwtAVv4WjdRH_Z1BSjbKolVQ8XjgJCX3PiUK1vBNQnQ

more interesting material

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/13/world/climate-change-oceans-heat-intl/index.html?utm_term=link&utm_content=2020-01-18T16%3A30%3A04&utm_source=fbCNN&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2CiZAwIxBzzHLi0uYNticGvYvOOO3-jsqG3q8AUadj67f-DfuVJ1WLXVQ

actually, such news stories are quite depressing.

It's fake news Chris Lewis. It's intended to upset you. Damn hard to find anything else lately.
Our problem right now, the one to do with the intensity of the recent fires, is a fuel load issue.
Decades of discourse dominated by the environmental catastrophe theme has resulted in policy as misguided as it could possibly be. The results we've all seen on our screens

Correct Jamo.

For decades now our media, schools and universities have promoted the AGW cults views based on shonkey climate models and "hockey stick" graphs prompted by Al Gore.

Its about time the worms turn and start pointing out the REAL costs of CCCers policies built on misinformation.

Lets start with the impact of limiting native forest fuel management, starting with this bush fire and all back to 1995. The cost in life's, property, forest, habitats and animals can be calculated. More so than the intangible costs inferred by the climate models.

Then there is the cost due to renewables, coastal planning, RET schemes……. That would be a fun and large cost benefit analysis.

Shamefully, the only group who gets funding to do such analyses are the like of the pro climate change groups like the IPCC. Don't think any academic would get past the 'bin file' in their grant applications for funding!

Not fakenews, but definitely contested news. Here are some links to cheer you up Chris.

https://notrickszone.com/2020/01/02/unsettled-scientists-find-ocean-heat-content-and-earths-energy-imbalance-in-decline-since-2000/

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2020/01/new-80-year-deep-ocean-temperature-dataset-compared-to-a-1d-climate-model/

https://www.thegwpf.com/ocean-warming-not-as-simple-as-headlines-say/

The measurement of world temperature is fraught. I only use the satellite data because it is the only dataset with global coverage and transparency. Everything else is constantly, and inexplicably, being adjusted.

The problem I have with the ocean heat figures is that it is the oceans that heat the globe, and if they are cooling, how is the atmosphere getting hotter? The satellite record confirms that it is, so perhaps everyone's ocean heat figures are wrong, or maybe it is an artifact of surface temperatures increasing, but deeper temperatures decreasing. Or something no one else has thought of.

ps, last sentence is missing words, should read "anti-AWG academics"

The solution is at hand!! GO VEGAN!!

Peta have the answer, it's not the old farts that are the problem but the new ones.

http://www.peta.org.au/news/bushfires-and-climate-change/?utm_source=PETA%20AU::E-Mail&utm_medium=Alert&utm_campaign=0120::gen::PETA%20AU::E-Mail::Bushfires::::aa%20em

“In the 2008 Garnaut Climate Change Review, which examined the scientific evidence around the impacts of climate change on Australia and its economy, he predicted that without adequate action, the nation would face a more frequent and intense fire season by 2020.” ABC

Well it looks like this is the future for this debate. Every prediction which is realised will be an excuse to double down. You lot of recalcitrant deniers will scramble for any bit of flotsam to stay afloat and seemingly get more shrill as the tenuousness of your positions becomes harder and harder to ignore.

As to Dr Roy Spencer his take on the Australian bushfires was “My personal opinion, based upon the available evidence, is that any long-term increase in wildfire activity in any specific location like Australia (or California) is dominated by the increase in human-caused ignition events, whether they be accidental or purposeful.”

So nothing about the long term drought nor the record temperatures. So what does he believe in? Well this opening remark at a Heartland Institute conference will give some idea;

“The purpose of this event is to promote and expand energy freedom in the United States, as outlined in President Donald Trump’s bold America First Energy Plan, a proposal first released during the 2016 presidential campaign.”

Steel Redux, You calling climate change realists (you try to insult/demean us by calling use delusional, deniers) as recalcitrant. NOW that really is the kettle calling the pot BLACK! Almost made me choke on by black coffee, brewed in freshly filtered rainwater from my own water tank, all of which are full.

Thankfully, the BoM predictions on no rain till late March April were wrong.. but of course they use down scaled global climate models don't they!

As for Garnaut, his a bob Hawkes lackey economist whose career was revived by Ken Rudd for goodness sake. AND who makes his money on Boards of renewable energy companies. If he got that ONE prediction write ( not difficult as we always have fires and he missed prediction the 2009 one!).. As always never let a good story line like AGW, get in the way of reality and facts

Dear Mr Steelredux.

Is the climate changing? Answer, Yes. The climate has always changed. Specifically, our planet warms and cools, warms and cools, in regular, cyclic events roughly every 1000 years. The last warming period was the Medieval Warm Period 1000 years ago, followed by cooling in the Little Ice Age, 500 years ago. Our planet is now in another scheduled warming period. If the last 9 warming periods are a reliable guide to our present warming period (they should be) then our planet will warm another 2 degrees before it reverses into a serious ice age.

And you know what? There is not a single, solitary climate scientist who does not know that. It is part of the historical record, and in our present free democratic society, the State can not just air brush the historical record away.

The planet it warming. I don't even know why the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, or NOAA are "adjusting" the figures to prove it is warming. I suspect it is because it is not warming fast enough to scare entire populations to turn away from free market democracies, and instead submit to socialist totalitarian control.

Whether climate change has anything to do with our present bushfire crisis is something that nobody can answer. Increased temperatures might cause increased desertification, or it might cause increased precipitation through increased evaporation. Or it might be that this is just another bad drought and bushfire season of which Australia has already had plenty.

The Big Lie being propagated to naive and easily led people like your good self, is that climate change is caused by increased human induced atmospheric CO2. That is total bunkum. If anthropogenic CO2 is the main reason for climate change, then what anthropogenic increases in CO2 caused the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, or every other preceding warm period going back millions of years??

HIGW is the biggest hoax since The Stolen Generations, or Hitler's claim that the Jews burned down the Reichstag. And you fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.

Dear Alison Jane,

Yes I can understand your reaction. Getting called out on your blithering denialism can be confronting.

Just a quick question if I may. What would it take for you to accept that the predictions are valid? 50% more days over 35C? 100%? 150%? 200%. Are you able to put any kind of figure on it. It doesn't even have to be around temperature, just something that would tip the scales for you.

Graham Y is correct re temperature data. We only got access to digital satellite data in the late 1970’s and having spent all my life running networks of point measurement stations, the only way to get global views is via the satellite networks. Seeing a electrostatic facsimile map roll of a met office machine was an insight, but 5 years later seeing my first multispectral 1-20 metre resolution SPOT satellite pre-launch pilot study image was truly eye opening, particularly once you started manipulating it with a mainframe computer.

The point measurements are essential for validation, but when I started using them in the mid 1980’s, it was amazing how the previous “models” for extrapolating point sources to produce areal/regional/global distribution maps of data were distorted compared to the actual satellite images when they became available. Satellites are not perfect, but when likes to reliable point sources, they offer objective global perspectives.

Also remember, global climate models operate on 100km square grids, satellites operate from 10m to 1km squares (pixels).

The El Nino/ La Nina has produced drought in Australia. This has been caused by and made worse by Climate Change. The bushfire season has lengthened in Northern and Southern hemispheres. What this does is to reduce the time in which cool burning can occur without is getting out of hand. Arsonists are a convenient distraction just like downed electricity lines.
The real reason for the ferocity of these recent bushfires is the fact that hazard reduction could not occur in the small window of time available.

MJO, Enso, SAM and the IOD were all contributors to the drought. They are natural weather systems. The effect of these systems left Australia dry and hot as result of unfavourable wind patterns and the land being surrounded by anomalously cool ocean (less evaporation with consequent cloud/rainfall reduction).

If someone can explain how global warming caused this I am all ears. I would have thought that if the oceans were warmer we would get more rain, not less.

It's not about choice. Both need to be acted upon.

At the one level we can have measures to control the fuel loads by bush clearing, backburning, development controls, etc. This can be handled by State and LGAs.

At the other level we need Soot 'Beam up me Scotty' Morrison and his team of born-again climate change warriors to put pressure on the big greenhouse gas emitters of the world to reduce their levels of emission in order to limit the extreme heat and dryness that is making Australia a constant victim of global warming.

We cannot expect Soot and his mates to blank out sun spots or stop volcanoes from erupting or alter the Milankovitch cycles but can can take action on the burning of fossil fuels producing the greenhouse effect. Actually his political career now depends on it.

Fester,

It is easy to see from your comments above that you do not understand the mechanics of the greenhouse gas effect, which explains why you belong in the AGW denialist camp.

If you think that there is no such thing as AGW then you have nothing to worry about.

Unless of course you believe that the planet is actually warming but that the causes are outside of the burning of fossil fuels. If this is the case then I assume you believe along with your other AGW denialists that these causes are things like sun spots, volcanoes and Milankovitch cycles.

What is it that you believe Fester?

Hi Mr O,

I see from your comments that you have little understanding of weather. On the matter of warming influencing Enso there is little consensus:

https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2016/02/02/el-nino-and-global-warming-whats-the-connection/

I am not in any camp. I am interested in a good standard of reasoning. As a global warming enthusiast you demand urgent action. What action? How long will it take to be effective? By what mechanism will such action change Australia's weather patterns? One action taken was to re-vegetate Australia, a geoengineering exercise that went horribly wrong when the extra vegetation caught fire, yet Morrison gets the blame. How so? Then there is the widespread opposition by global warming enthusiasts to nuclear power and geoengineering (other than tree planting), both rejected for ideological reasons, yet they are perhaps the most effective tools available.

The basis for the hysteria? 0.8 +/- 0.4 degrees Centigrade of atmospheric warming and 0.3 degrees Centigrade of ocean surface warming in 170 years, and the belief that current computer models can accurately predict the climate decades hence.

With such an abysmal standard of reasoning my enthusiasm is considerably dampened.

Cheers

Steel Redux, don’t flatter yourself I have been insulted by professionals, compared to them, you are at amoeba level.

But seriously, your question is pointless for three reasons.

First, you don’t need to ask it twice.

Second, the article was about how to get a balanced answer re the cause of the fires, I think.

Third, re your obsession with “facts, Stats and References”. any stat on current temps etc are just that. Climate is used to be defined as a 100-year window, but now seems to be 30 years (or less) to suit CCCers and their GCM gods. Max, Min, Median (and their associated probabilities) temps may rise, but that’s just a sign of a warming cycle, not a proof of Co2, Ch4, NO ozone impacts.

Non-scientists (and weak scientists at that), believe statistics are the “proof of integrity”. As the old saying goes, “there are lies, damned lies and statistics”. Statistics are not a divine arbitrator of truth. They are a tool for looking at complex noisy data, when your data does not show a clear fundamental relationship. The authors of basic physical. electrical, chemical laws don't need statistics. They are fundamental relationships.

As a CCCer, I am sure you love the “Hockey Stick Graph” promoted by Al Gore, but contrived by a politically motivated scientist. That scientist had to splice incompatible data sets and process the data by using a statistical technique that I am very familiar with, known as PCA. Simply put, this takes multi-dimensional data sets and removes the main trends to leave behind “hidden signals”. That’s statistics for you. They are a great invention, but when used by charlatans, their akin to nuclear fission, they can be used for good, or mass destruction!

Ps, steelredux. I know you don’t read responses, but guess what, its not all about you. But thank you for your comments, as it allows the rest of us to clarify dubious issues/furphies you raise. Life would be so dull without innocent CCCers like you.

Dear Allison Jane,

My apologies, I didn't think I was insulting you at all rather I was putting a rational observation based on the objective evidence.

You say I don't need to ask the question twice, well it appears I do as you have studiously deflected in order to avoid answering it. Also it was independent of the article so we can park that lame excuse as well.

I will try again; “Just a quick question if I may. What would it take for you to accept that the predictions are valid? 50% more days over 35C? 100%? 150%? 200%. Are you able to put any kind of figure on it. It doesn't even have to be around temperature, just something that would tip the scales for you.”

Since you suddenly seem averse to statistics you don't even have to frame your answer this way. Come on, it can't be that hard.

Finally don't be getting your nose out of joint by the term denier, after all you continue to bandy around CCCer. All is fair...

Fester, you don’t need to be a scientist (in fact it may help not to be) to engage with the climate debate. What you need is what you have got, namely logical thinking. CCCers themselves can’t explain how their much worshipped global models work. They just know that they can be made to tell the story they want. Unfortunately, their story has so many logical and scientific holes, the swiss could sue them for breach of favourite cheese trademark!

Clean logical thinking is what works, and even the most intense scientists eventually come back to Occams Razor, where (to paraphrase) ‘the simplest, least complex solution most likely the best’.

The article on El Nino is a good summary of a complex phenomenon. And others should read it. I can’t help point out how the authors concern on how AGW scientist try to use GCMs to model El Nina/La Nina behaviour and their “results are all over the place”.

Not surprising as the water/energy involved in El Nino most likely swamps their atmosphere CO2 driven models. If we spent less on GCM/AGW research and more on ocean research, we might benefit a lot more not just re climate, but ocean dynamics and resources.

Thank you Alison Jane. The oceans are a huge energy store, so if you want to cool the planet you need to increase evaporation and dissipate the heat in the atmosphere. There is a research paper suggesting that ocean fertilisation (OF) could delay global warming by fifty years from sulphate aerosols produced by the algae.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4543957/

The author used a similar computer model for the simulation as used by the IPCC to make its dire predictions. Interestingly, the objection of global warming enthusiasts is that OF may have adverse and unforeseen outcomes if tested in the real world, so even they sometimes doubt the predictive accuracy of the modelling, albeit for ideological reasons.

My ambition for OF is far more limited. I would like to see it tested for its ability to mitigate or reverse a positive IOD event. I suspect that a phytoplankton bloom may also trap more heat in the ocean surface, further enhancing evaporation.

Cheers

Fester,

You just said:

"I suspect that a phytoplankton bloom may also trap more heat in the ocean surface, further enhancing evaporation."

Goodness gracious, you just don't know anything about the mechanics of the greenhouse effect.

And this is the key to understanding how you AGW / climate change denialists think. If this was the 14th century you lot would be draped in religious paraphernalia walking around the place chanting magic spells to yourselves. SNAP OUT OF IT!

Whoopee another slap down form Mr Opinion for someone who simple puts forward and idea. If you have to be critical, at leats explain your logic and without insults. That way we might all benefit form your immense wisdom.

Any way there is no need for an RC now... Emperor Mal has gone to planet Zarg (the BBC) and to pre-empt his forthcoming masterpiece.

How many more million hectares of forest has to be burnt? How many more lives and home have to be lost before the climate change deniers acknowledge they are wrong?” he said.

“If a country like Australia is not prepared to grapple with these issues seriously – itself being on the front line of the consequences and being an advanced, prosperous, technologically sophisticated country with the means to do so – why would other countries take the issue as seriously as they should?” He also slammed the US President Donald Trump for playing a “very destructive” role in the climate debate".

Emp Mal also calls his own party like terrorists and Murdoch evil. Lame PR move, ie attacking Trump, liberals and Murdoch will hopefully boost book sales! I will buy form the bargain bins in about 6 months time, say $4.99, $1.99, no 50cents from the library sell offs

“Trump is trying to put a brake on global action to reduce emissions. The lack of American leadership is extremely damaging."

So there you have it, beg 'Supreme Leader Emperor' Mal back (with Queen Lucy) and all will be well.

Thank goodness we are too dumb to do that. Sadly a true global comic leader died from dementia today, Terry Jones (Monty Python for 'young ones'). Terry Jones RIP, and sympathies to his family and fellow Monty Pythons.

Hi Mr O,

Here is an explanation of latent heat:

https://www.theweatherprediction.com/habyhints/19/

You might also wish to learn about clouds.

Cheers

Well said Fester. As a meteorologist, I appreciate someone who understands the importance of Latent heat.

The article your link refers to is something beneath his HI brow intellect. BUT I recommend all readers take five minutes out and read this beautifully simple direct explanation.

No formulas, weird scientific terms, just an "Occam's Razor" like well thought out piece on one of the most fundamental processes that control our weather and home environment comfort levels. Its worth 5 minutes, go on!

I think that Mr O is hinting that I don't know that water vapour is the main greenhouse gas, but like most things in the real world, it is not so simple.

Consider this, Mr O: With a positive IOD there is less water vapour over the continent, yet it is hotter. With a negative IOD there is more water vapour over the continent, yet it is cooler. Why is the converse not true?

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/OceanClimate/ocean-atmos_chem.php

talking of more Royal Commissions is talking more waste of money. Has RC into sexual abuse decreased abuse in Indigeneous communities? Has RC into banking changed anything? Has previous RC's into bushfires changed the minds of foolish Green minded powerbrokers?

Maybe the Greens think they have enough dumbed down judges who have joined their religion. Oh but for a Trump here in Australia!

Dear Alison Jane,

A supposed meteorologist yet absolutely no idea of what state of the planet it would take to get you to acknowledge the threat of AGW was real.

So each fresh instance of a significant event showing a warming planet will be batted away.

And yes vale Terry Jones. Here is a little clip from him which is topical;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY-HOYTz-rs

Fester,

You do not understand the mechanics of the greenhouse gas effect and that is the underlying reason you are an AGW denialist.

I can't say it any simpler so stop asking me what it is I am saying!

Steekredux, I can only concur with your YouTube tribute t Terry Jones. A much under estimated member of MP team. My eys actually water in empathy with Michael Palins tribute. s Kylie would say, "we should be so lucky"

They, like all great minds, are tortured. Yet they make us laugh and 'catch a grip of our egos', heirs and graces. Life is so much better for them.

Back to Runner. Yes, I agree that a Rc is going to cover old Ground. BUT this time it better deliver Or head =s will roll!.

There are a lot of overpaid, underskilled, arse licking, pole climbing "professional" career bureaucrats in this mess and its their heads I am talking about.

ps SBS will do a tribute to Terry Jones. Hope its Good.

As a Meteorologist I measure the real world, its air, water and vapour. Climatology when I was trained was " an historical view of past weather trends across different regions of the planet. Climate s timescale was 100 years, not the 30 years now deemed by climate modellers and AGW advocates.

Two very different professions and approaches. Bothe equally valued but in the case of Climatology, its been hijacked by mathematical modellers who haven't even the practical skill to measure a fart!, let alone any real word temperature, rainfall, river flow....

HH Lamb was one of the founders of modern Climatology, he founded the now infamous, disreputable Climate Research Unit at East Anglia Uni ("Climate gate" remember that?). He wrote the seminal works on climate, used world wide. You should check out his last book from your local library or even buy it as climate is such an interest to you.

He is dead now, but lamented the work of the CRU when modellers like Phil Jones became director. That's why I am proud to be a meteorologist, and not a CCCer like you and your merry crew.

Alison Jane,

May I suggest you and Soot Morrison should get together since you are obviously of the same mind. Give him a buzz; his call name is 'Beam up me Scotty'.

Mr O. as always your advice is so inciteful. However, I try not to associate with pollies of any breed... because they are a unique sub-species who are ego-driven, self-serving and four-faced (every looked in the mirror Mr O).

Now something to entertain those who like to observe the antics of CCCers. This one is specially just for maxgreen and steelredux!

https://youtu.be/rvrsA0XlYGg

Steelredux, you really are obsessed and sick. On the day of Terry Jones death after a battle with dementia, you try to use a scene from one of his films to promote your position on climate change.

I do hope your parents are proud of your values, I doubt many others are. Take a look in the mirror mate!

And just for you, watch this on your climate facts

https://youtu.be/rvrsA0XlYGg

Dear Alison Jane,

And you have only now picked that up? Perhaps your rather garbled post after 6pm indicated you were well on your way through a personal wake for the bloke, so I shouldn't judge. Sherry was it?

As for Terry I'm sure he would have been tickled pink being used to puncture pomposity so he wouldn't have minded my employing the clip in the fashion he did.

As to youtube clips from Tony Heller I have already discussed how much he tortures things with GrahamY. The guy is a shocker. You must be able to find someone with a little more gravitas than him, surely.

Finally to our good Hubert, another of the dearly departed. He quite forcefully said of CO2 emissions in 1977 that they would "gain the upper hand in the next century unless stronger controls are instituted than any that are believed to be contemplated..."

Too bloody right he was.

One has to keep in mind that the AGW deniers do not know about a number of factors, including:

1. They do not know that the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas will create CO2.

2. They do not know that CO2 when trapped in the atmosphere will produce what scientists call the greenhouse effect.

3. They do not know what the greenhouse effect is.

4. They do not know that the greenhouse effect will cause heat to be trapped and stored in the atmosphere.

5. They do not know that the greenhouse effect exists.

Anything else?