Meanwhile why not check out this reference:
http://www.commondreams.org/news/amoc-collapse-study

Check out this reference too re the most important natural resource
http://cribb.substack.com/p/rivers-of-death

‘Humour and showmanship’? In Australia, Bowen's clownish showmanship isn't at all humorous.

"Climate realism"?? Climate dreaming more like it!

Yes, we'd all like to wake up and discover that climate change isn't happening after all. How good would that be. We could get back to burning through the earth's resources and making our fortunes without a care about the consequences. Unfortunately, life today is not like that. Due to our reckless exploitation of the world's resources in our blinkered frenzy to feed our ever-spiralling consumption, we have damaged the planet and changed its climate. And as the majority of climate scientists are now warning, most of the changes are happening sooner and with greater severity than first predicted. This is the undisputed reality we need to accept and deal with.

How any one could be taken in by the "showmanship" of this denial fantasy is beyond me. That thinking people could write and publish this rubbish when we have an ever-closing window of time in which to act is an absolute travesty. Hopefully, these denialists are one day confronted by their grandchildren and asked point blank why they spent their lives obstructing the changes we could have made to avert the tragedy of bequeathing them an unliveable planet.

The biggest denialism is from the climate catastrophists in believing that handing out twenty billion a year of taxpayer's money to a bunch of koala clubbing environment smashing grifters and wrecking Australia's economy will make the slightest difference to the climate. Other nations observing the idiocy here would hardly be likely to swallow the renewable energy kill pill.

Check out the latest essay on this website:
http://reeswilliame.substack.com/p/mything-out-on-sustanable-development

Hi Daffy,

That link was to a page where every essay expanded on the "We're effed" theme. Hope I'm not being too pokey, but it's not a bad idea to view more cheerful stuff once in a while.

Fester,

I saw something about koala clubbing the other night. I wonder what the wind and solar activists think about that. Perhaps they are too naive/stupid to know what happens when natural vegetation and animals get in the way of people doing their dirty work for them. I also would like to know what that Cretin Bowen thinks about it.

ttbn,

About as keen to discuss murdering tens of thousands of unarmed protestors I'd imagine. The sad thing is that some are unaware that they are being conned and still await the miraculous transition. S'hole Australia awaits them as soon as Blackout and Magoo cut the ribbon.

I constantly ask myself “What are the climate denialists really scared of?”

Why do they deny smack-you-in-the-face evidence such as the 2 photographs taken by NASA astronauts of our only home Planet Earth. Taken over 50 years apart, the famous Earthrise photos clearly and undeniably show changes.

As for the outcry that addressing climate change will destroy the economic fabric of the world, I give you Exhibit A: the situation right now, today, as we speak whereby 1% of the world’s population own 95% of the world’s worth. That’s a fantastic outcome, definitely worth destroying the world to maintain – (Sarcasm)

And then of course we have the deniers who on this very forum openly state that they believe the birds in the sky, the trees and plants on the ground or the fishes and animals of the sea are of no value at all. One contributor to this forum even claimed what’s the good of an animal if you can’t eat it? Life in the shanty towns of Delhi, Brunos Aries, Jakarta etc. etc., is so much more preferable to being endlessly enchanted with the wonders of the natural world. The loss of this wondrous and beautiful and infinitely fascinating world is simply collateral damage to the deniers of climate change.

After much thought, I have come to the conclusion that the answer to my 1st question above is that the climate deniers have dug themselves so deeply into a hole that they are ultimately embarrassed to admit their mistake and fear the ridicule and scorn they so richly deserve

Its been clear for some time now that the great climate scare is on its last legs and that the planet is moving on. Increasingly scientists are finding that they can safely write papers contradicting the cabal of warming alarmists without having their career abruptly ended, unlike a decade or so ago when pointing out the emperor had no clothes was professional suicide.

While much of the planet never bought into the scare, even western nations, who were really the only ones pushing it, are starting to move on. So we see the US backing out of pretty much all net zero commitments and Europe increasingly putting standard of living above climate evangelism.

Of coarse, Australia remains an outlier with its continued adherence to the failed net zero policy. But this is more about politics that science with too many politicians and their parties having invested so much in the climate scare that admitting error is a bridge too far. We'll need to wait for them to move on or for the science to really smack them in the face.

Nonetheless, we do still have alarmists who are so wedded to the scare that they can write (with a straight face) that "...the majority of climate scientists are now warning, most of the changes are happening sooner and with greater severity than first predicted. This is the undisputed reality we need to accept and deal with", even though the claimed reality is very much disputed and even though there is no objective evidence as to what the majority of climate scientists say, good or bad. And that's before we even point out that science isn't a popularity contest, but a search for facts.

As the world moves on, hopefully Australia will eventually catch up.

Koala clubbing!!

I looked into it. The story is that there's a new solar farm being built in Queensland with requires the destruction of vast swathes of koala habitat. Those building it are required to do all possible to look after the koalas (and other critters) affected by the habitat destruction and that includes whacking them over the head if they are found to be too ill to survive relocation. So not wonton koala massacres, just a cost saving measure to help out the developers.

But the real story here is that over 1500 hectares of koala habitat is being destroyed to build solar farm. In a polity where we are constantly admonished to protect the critters from evil developers, suddenly its all okey-dokey for those developers to wipe out vast swatches of forest in the pursuit of net zero.

We had to destroy the village to save it.

That's pretty funny Aries. By looking at two photos taken half a century apart, you can discern unequivocal proof that climate is changing. It'd be interesting to hear what you thought you saw.

Aries also says the quiet part out loud - that climate alarmism is/wasn't about climate but about introducing socialism in the guise of saving the planet. Somehow he thinks that the poor of the world will benefit by crippling their economic development. Perhaps we should note that the actual poor of the world reject climate alarmism (unless it involves handouts) in favour of standard of living growth. From China to India to Africa and South America, economic development is their only concern and the climate doesn't even score a medal.

"“What are the climate denialists really scared of?”"
While not a denialist myself ( I've never denied that there's a climate) I'd say the only thing they're scared of is making the world poorer by following false science.

Oh, Mhaze the laughs are really on you this time.

The Earthrise photographs taken 50 years apart were examined by scientists and experts with access to much higher resolution images than I ever had with photographs published on television or in the newspapers. If you don’t believe they could ascertain changes, go argue with them.

You really are spooked by socialism aren’t you. You see it lurking in everything. How about this to demolish your crackpot theory that cleaning the atmosphere leads to socialism. London city was repeatedly ravaged by heavy and debilitating fogs in the 1940’s caused by burning fossil fuel (i.e. coal) in nearly every household. In the early 1950’s burning coal in household fireplaces was banned. And miracle of miracles, surprise, surprise, the air pollution ceased and the notorious fogs stopped killing people. And Mhaze, guess what didn’t happen. Socialism didn’t take over and London continued to be the great hub of capitalism that it still is today.

So sunshine, your assertions simply fail at the first hurdle.

Hi Aries,

There are two questions: One is about global warming and the second is about what you do if it's happening.

What flummoxes me is engaging in an environment and economy destroying con that will do nothing about global emissions. Many nations have been banging away at the wind and solar transition for decades for barely more than 20% supply, along with high costs and continuing heavy reliance on fossil fuels.

Remember that France built 150% of its electricity supply with nuclear in 15 years from the mid 1970s. If global warming is an existential crisis they why can't a multinational effort achieve the same or better half a century later?

"If you don’t believe they could ascertain changes, go argue with them."

I have no need to argue with them because they don't concur with your claims. Here's what was discerned...."The Apollo and Artemis images serve mainly as symbolic and illustrative tools that prompt reflection on how much the planet has transformed in a short human timescale" which is a far-cry from your ill-advised assertion that the "photos clearly and undeniably show changes."

"You really are spooked by socialism aren’t you. "

Well no. You're the only who raised it. I was merely pointing out that, as much as the alarmists seek to deny it, their real aim was attack capitalism rather than 'save the planet'. I could inundate you with quotes to that affect, but you're not interested in that, are you?

(OK just one...."“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all... Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”... Saikat Chakrabarti, Senior Advisor to US congress.)

"And Mhaze, guess what didn’t happen. Socialism didn’t take over "

Your story has nowt to do with Net-Zero

Mhaze you won't 'go argue with them' because you don't have the balls, or the evidence to support your crackpot ideas. Also, you're the one who equates a pollution-free planet with socialism, not me, so please grow up and own your own conspiracy theories.

"or the evidence to support your crackpot ideas."

I gave you the evidence. You just didn't understand it.

I'm not equating pollution-free with socialism. That's your utter misunderstanding. Indeed it is well established that socialist and poor countries are heavier polluters than capitalist countries.

But again you're confusing net-zero with pollution. They aren't the same thing.

'Triumphant climate change conference held in Washington DC'
- How many private jets did they fly in on for this conference?
(And are they being ordered to carpool in their private jets to save fuel, I think not)

I'm not opposed to doing things in a matter that's better for the environment.
But I won't support actions that cut our noses off to spite our faces.

Hi AC,

It's all the fraudulent claims of the grifters that gripe me. Remember Malcolm Turnbull, the coalition's first Labor pm, claiming a cost of $2 billion for Snowy hydro? The current estimate is $42 billion. And that sort of falsehood goes right down the line for any associated infrastructure, lifespan, subsidies, viability or harm caused. It's the communist miracle all over, and every bit as threatening to our well-being.