The current approach to energy and environmental policy isn’t just unsustainable—it puts us on a collision course with reality. When that collision happens, the economic and social disruption will be far more severe than it would have been had we taken a more measured, reality-based approach from the start.

WTF has this habit of trying to hide how bad his sources are by not mentioning them, even when called on to do so as I did in a previous thread. He just scarpers when asked.

So its difficult to know where he goes wrong when misinterpreting his sources. Although on this occasion just a glimpse of how he gets it wrong or deliberately falsifies it can be discerned.

He says 'The economy could be $2 trillion smaller by 2050 under a disorderly Transition Scenario" which he purports to be from the Australian Treasury. Now that is laughable on the face of it since the Australian economy today is barely more than $2 trillion. If true then it means the entire current economy would be gone. Again laughable.

What Treasury actually said was that "the economy is projected to be up to a cumulative $2 trillion smaller by 2050". Rather important that word "cumulative" and we can only speculate as to why WTF decided to leave it out.

On top of that the Treasury numbers have been roundly criticised because they buy into the government assertions, in the face of all evidence, that electricity prices will fall dramatically in the next few years. If that assumption is even partially wrong then all the claims about alleged losses goes out the window.

Dear Oh Dear mhaze.

I had such high hopes for you but your comprehension seems to be regressing.

You say "WTF has this habit of trying to hide how bad his sources are by not mentioning them..." But I gave you three different sources one of which you even mentioned in your post.

I schooled you a number of months ago about how to find the sources that people use when posting on OLO when they are left out for brevity's sake, but you seem to want everyone to do the hard work for you. I have little problem finding people's sources unless they are behind a paywall or are some youtuber's rantings. I thought you understood that but alas I was too optimistic.

Well of course the Treasure figure is a cumulative figure - it is a projection up to 2025. I thought that was obvious but then we do know how you look to build an argument around your own obscure word definitions and interpretations.

The only thing missing here is you research and comprehension skills.

Unhinged Australians are not the only people threatening our economy and security with climate hysteria: the UN we know, but worse, freelancers (rapporteurs) funded privately are getting in on the act; this time in the form of a woman called Astrid Puerto Riano.

This woman has spent the last 20 years fighting in an international court to get a lead smelter in Peru shut down. She now has her sights on Australia's Woodside plan for expansion of gas extraction on our North West Shelf.

The MWS has been producing since the 1980s. Prior to the recent election, Albanese delayed the expansion to keep sweet with the Greens.

Rapporteurs have been described as “friends of the court” rather than being directly involved with the court themselves. They give advice: this time to the UN and international courts involved in the “slippery notion” of international law, interfering with the sovereignty of individual countries: trying to usurp the role of elected governments.

As for the UN, there is growing concern about its connection with people not directly involved in the UN, and the organisation ‘s acceptance of ‘philanthropic’ funding by private corporations, including Bill Gates, Microsoft and George Soros. And their stooges: so called rarapporteurs.

We will probably never know which activist group is paying this one, given that we don't have a government prepared to protect Australia, its interests or its people. The Albanese government doesn't need to be usurped. It will just do nothing - as always.

Back to the unhinged Australians.

This one, Amanda McKenzie, CEO of the Climate Council, has slobbered that the Coalition's decision to drop Net Zero by a certain time, but still cling to the stupid idea that climate change can be stopped, will cause “more fires, more floods, more deadly heatwaves. It’s saying to hell with our kids' future".

What an idiot! What a demented fear-monger.

But, I suppose if your salary depends on idiocy and fearmongering, that's what you do. Particularly if you are not good enough to get a proper job.

And, Albanese, also incapable of getting a proper job, got all shouty about it too. The fool also added the ‘right wing’, as if wanting cheap, reliable power without ruining the environment is right wing.

Hang on. It is. It's the left wing that wants - and is giving us - expensive, unreliable power whilst wrecking the environment.

I'll bet Albanese is changing his underpants more than he did before he took on a job that he is not capable of doing.

On the other hand, I'll bet that Xi, Modi, Trump and other big emitters are also pissing their pants - with laughter, not fear, like Albanese.

"I schooled you a number of months ago about how to find the sources that people use"

Well I highly doubt that. But I suspect asking for a link would be futile.

And I'd point out that just leaving people to try to guess your sources is highly suspect. But it does allow you to hide your true sources like you did when you made your climate claims a week or two back.

"Well of course the Treasure figure is a cumulative figure - it is a projection up to 2025."

Well why did you try to hide the fact that it was cumulative by doctoring the quote and trying to hide the source? Was it because it made it all sound so much more scary or did you just not understand the economics of it?

Oh and its a projection up to 2050 not 2025!! Good to see how well you understand this stuff.