Just thought this should be brought to the attention of those previously taken in by the unprecedented global warming fraud.

Climate Science Consensus: Last 60 Years of Global Warming Below Earlier Periods, Experts Say

The recently released UK's global HadCRUT4 temperature records show that in fact the earth warmed 0.58C in the 60 years 1894 to 1953, when CO2 was much less than today, but only 0.39C in the 60 years 1954 to 2013, despite the increased CO2 in our atmosphere.

This definitely proves any warming is not from the increased CO2 in the atmosphere. I wonder what bulldust the warmists will come up with to hide this decline

Hasbeen, post something worth reading, rather that your own "scientific" annalists. The warmists, what are they, so kind of hot communists.

Our fearless leader is being informed by CSIRO so no matter what Hasbeen says don't count.

Tony Abbott’s business advisor attacks “myth” of climate change
By Giles Parkinson on 17 September 2013
Print Friendly

Maurice Newman, the former chairman of the ABC and the ASX who will be the chair of Tony Abbott’s Business Advisory Council, has launched an attack against the CSIRO, the weather bureau and the “myth” of anthropological climate change.

In an opinion piece written for the Australian Financial Review, Newman said much of the public service infrastructure would be resistant to change because of their “vested interests” in the status quo.

Maurice Newman's thinking would sit well with Tony Abbott. I'm sure the Mad Monk would describe Newman as "My kinda guy!"

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/jan/07/maurice-newman-climate-change-denial-tony-abbott-roy-spencer

Now that the 'Usual Suspects' have added the dreaded Warmists to their hate list, I have come to the conclusion they now hate 437.18% of the population. Cop this, the hate list;

Communists 10%, Women 50%, Pinko's 10%, Fabians 90%, Unionists 20%, Public Servants 30%, The Seven Dwarfs 20%, The Unemployed 10%, Welfare People 50%,Boat People 10%, Friends of Boat People 30%,Warmests 50%, and the Mother In-law 20%

Not that it matters very much but I will remain skeptical until they
use the correct amount of available fossil fuels as input to the models.
The computer resultant temperature gives a rise about half what is claimed
by the IPCC on its lowest projection.

The elevation of Dr David Evans as a climate science adviser has a ring of familiarity.

Evans, a mining engineer with a PhD in mathematics, is not only a prominent climate change denier but subscribes to the conspiracy theory that “climate change is merely a cover for a massive power play”. His standing as a climate science expert is thus odd, but he is well enough credentialed for Tony Abbott. He is the person most likely to tell Tony Abbott what he wants to hear.

God you lefties are incredible.

I just reported facts, yes FACTS, put out by the IPCC favored authority. Yep, the UK Met, & the CSU, [climate science unit at the University of East Anglia]. That's the horses mouth of the whole fraud.

I have nothing to do with it. If you don't believe me, check the newly published HadCRUT4 data, you will find it there.

I'll bet none of you are game to do so, same as I'll bet none of you lot ever read a climategate email. Your fool belief system could not survive the truth.

Dear Hasbeen,

Okay mate, as trustworthy as you have always been on these matters I'm afraid you are going to have to provide a link to these so called 'facts'.

Here is my contribution.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1894/to:1953/mean:12/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1954/to:2013/mean:12

and it doesn't show anything like what you are claiming for the Hadcrut4 data.

Science
LATEST IN SCIENCE
Ice melt could bring virus back from the dead
20/08/2002 PIRATE: UNDATED : Young victim covered in sores from disease smallpox in undated photo. Medical

Test detects early stages Alzheimer’s
blood sample

Truth about out-of-body experiences
Truth about out-of-body experiences

$150m centre to combat space junk
$150m centre to combat space junk

Could climate change bring back smallpox?

15 minutes ago March 11, 2014 1:12PM

A young victim covered in sores from the disease smallpox.

A young victim covered in sores from the disease smallpox. Source: News Limited

SMALLPOX was eradicated in 1979. Having once been counted among the world’s most gruesome and deadly diseases, it’s supposed to be gone for good.

But some experts are worried that climate change could lead to smallpox making a comeback.

Before we get into that, here’s a refresher. Smallpox was an extremely contagious viral disease before it was stamped out. It caused fever and aches, along with an eruption of fluid-filled pustules.

Overall, the deadlier strain of smallpox is estimated to have killed about 30 per cent of its victims. It was responsible for 300-500 million deaths during the 20th century alone. This is a seriously dangerous disease.

the gw religion has never been interested in facts. It is figures they have been interested in and that is dollar figures. Only the sniggering gullible still hold to their unproven dogmas.

Hasbeen,

You quoted "The recently released UK's global HadCRUT4 temperature records show that in fact the earth warmed 0.58C in the 60 years 1894 to 1953, when CO2 was much less than today, but only 0.39C in the 60 years 1954 to 2013" I am sure this comes from a denier blog, but I haven't been able to identify which one, so I will attribute the statement to you for now.

I went back to the source
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

Global mean in 1954 was -0.128 and in 2013 was +0.486. That makes 0.614 degrees of warming by my math.

Yeah, I went to http://www.c3headlines.com/2014/02/climate-science-consensus-60-years-hadcrut-global-warming-those-stubborn-facts.html

and downloaded the excel dataset sheet used to generate the graph (link near bottom of post). Wow, what a bit of simplistic rubbish, designed to fool only the most credulous, kind of like those Nigerian scams I think. The numbers used for the calculation was highlighted for us in the sheet, it's a simple subtraction of single year datapoints.

If you do your own calculations and use 2010 as the start point instead of 2013, you get 0.721 degC warming for 1950-2010 and 0.245 degC for 1890-1950, or a nearly 3-fold increase in warming! However that doesn't fit the narrative does it, or in fact reasonable data analysis. Best you guys just believe what you want, like you always have.

The sad part is this is the second time I have seen this data trotted out on OLO. The first time I thought it was a joke.

60 years is nothing climate change will take a hundred years or more to catch up with what is in the atmosphere now. Shouldn't those two graphs be added together which makes the temp change about right.
We are now at 400 ppm , an all time high since industrialisation.

Thanks, Bugsy.

I was wondering where Hasbeen came up with that stuff.

"The recently released UK's global HadCRUT4 temperature records show that in fact the earth warmed 0.58C in the 60 years 1894 to 1953, when CO2 was much less than today, but only 0.39C in the 60 years 1954 to 2013, despite the increased CO2 in our atmosphere."

So easy to post a sentence like that with no link to source, data or method of calculation.

Most of us suspected it was from a denier source.

What you don't take into account our weather is reacting the co2 levels of 1914. Co2 stays in the atmosphere for many years. A time lapse of around 100 years is required for reaction time. Just because it was cooler yesterday don't mean anything.

579, It is useless trying to debate this issue with the non thinkers. I personally have no scientific knowledge on climate change, but base my belief on the evidence that has so far been put forward by the scientific community. The evidence in my view overwhelmingly supports the argument that climate change is real.
I don't believe the skeptics base their belief on any kind of rational scientific argument, but rather are driven by some kind of misguided philosophical notion that the pro line is being push by the left and therefore must be opposed at all cost, regardless of the consequences.

Paul 1405 You can pay up to the white coats and clipboards who squeal we are all going to die by drowning and then buy waterfront properties if you like. That's fine mate, it's just that lots of people say start taking funds from global warming alarmists and watch them all run away. The sooner the better I say!
Oh yes and do not forget to post a load of insults against me. I have no respect for you Paul so it is of no concern to me.

JBowyer, like as if your respect has some value to me, I hate to deflate your ego, possibly to your Mum, your respect would be worth something, and so it should be. I know your not going to believe this, but until you just mentioned it I had never given my need for your respect a thought, maybe I should have.
Nor, do I have the slightest desire or intention to post a load of insults against you. Did you want me to do that? Would it make you feel better if I did? I cannot recall posting anything to you in the past, ever.
All I can say is you are entitled to your opinion.

<< Newman said much of the public service infrastructure would be resistant to change because of their “vested interests” in the status quo. >>

And therein is the essence of the argument against AGW.

Vested interests in the status quo… and the overwhelming power of those with vested interests to influence the actions of governments and opinions in the general community.

Sorry Haz, but you’ve been commandeered by the wrong side of this debate.

And somehow deep down I think you know it. The vehemence and frequency with which you express your views on this suggests to me that you are desperately trying to convince yourself that AGW is cr*p.

The evidence points strongly the other way. But ultimately, we just don’t know! And therefore we should all be sceptics and be erring on the side of caution. All but the most vehement denialists should be advocating the same thing – that we should be doing what we can to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels and onto renewables.

And we need to realise that quite aside from any climate change consequences that our addiction to fossil fuels might have, that this would be a damn good idea anyway!

In short, the whole AGW debate should be redundant, as we should simply be doing the same things anyway regardless of whether it is real and critically serious or completely bogus.

The site won't let me post the graph, & I can't get a link to work. However if you are game check out the graph of Hadley Global Temperature Graph with trends by none less than Phil Jones, posted on JoNova's blog today. Even you lot have to believe the great god Jones, surely.

The graph of the older Hadley figures shows the same rises over the same periods. In fact the rise in temperature rise was fastest back in the later 1800s. Some of this stuff does depend on your starting point of course, a fact more exploited by the warmists.

Report back why this graph is wrong, or I'll know you are desperately avoiding the facts.

If he is any relation to Alan Jones i would take no notice at all.
The denialists say they can see back 540 million years, NASA says any farther back than 800,000 years can not be believed.

Dear Hasbeen,

Bloody hell mate you need to snap out of it. Just look at the damn graph. Are you really telling me that all you see is similar trend lines and not the fact that the underlying temperature is increasing?

It is like you climbing in an aircraft, doing a series of climbs then falls with little regard for your initial height each time, then claiming you can't be getting higher as the rate of climb was the same each manoeuvre.

Open your eyes and engage your brain.

People, please.

As often is the case, if you really want to find out what is happening, see what The Economist has to say on the subject.

http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21598610-slowdown-rising-temperatures-over-past-15-years-goes-being

"BETWEEN 1998 and 2013, the Earth’s surface temperature rose at a rate of 0.04°C a decade, far slower than the 0.18°C increase in the 1990s. Meanwhile, emissions of carbon dioxide (which would be expected to push temperatures up) rose uninterruptedly. This pause in warming has raised doubts in the public mind about climate change. A few sceptics say flatly that global warming has stopped. Others argue that scientists’ understanding of the climate is so flawed that their judgments about it cannot be accepted with any confidence. A convincing explanation of the pause therefore matters both to a proper understanding of the climate and to the credibility of climate science"

The article proceeds to provide the various explanations that have been required to put the position into perspective.

But - here's the thing - despite/because the article is balanced, it is unlikely to change your mind. But will at least leave you better informed than before. For those too lazy/time poor to go through it, here is the bottom line.

"The solar cycle is already turning. And aerosol cooling is likely to be reined in by China’s anti-pollution laws. Most of the circumstances that have put the planet’s temperature rise on 'pause' look temporary. Like the Terminator, global warming will be back."

So, everyone is right. Happy now?

Long-Term Warming Likely to Be Significant Despite Recent Slowdown

Five new NASA Earth science missions are launching in 2014 to expand understanding of Earth’s changing climate and environment.
NASA's "Earth Right Now" website
A new NASA study shows Earth's climate likely will continue to warm during this century on track with previous estimates, despite the recent slowdown in the rate of global warming.
This research hinges on a new and more detailed calculation of the sensitivity of Earth's climate to the factors that cause it to change, such as greenhouse gas emissions. Drew Shindell, a climatologist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, found Earth is likely to experience roughly 20 percent more warming than estimates that were largely based on surface temperature observations during the past 150 years.
Shindell's paper on this research was published March 9 in the journal Nature Climate Change.
Global temperatures have increased at a rate of 0.22 Fahrenheit (0.12 Celsius) per decade since 1951. But since 1998, the rate of warming has been only 0.09 F (0.05 C) per decade -- even as atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to rise at a rate similar to previous decades. Carbon dioxide is the most significant greenhouse gas generated by humans.
Some recent research, aimed at fine-tuning long-term warming projections by taking this slowdown into account, suggested Earth may be less sensitive to greenhouse gas increases than previously thought. The Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was issued in 2013 and was the consensus report on the state of climate change science, also reduced the lower range of Earth's potential for global warming.
To put a number to climate change, researchers calculate what is called Earth's "transient climate response." This calculation determines how much global temperatures will change as atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to increase – at about 1 percent per year -- until the total amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide has doubled. The estimates for transient climate response range from near 2.52 F (1.4 C) offered by recent research, to the IPCC's estimate of 1.8 F (1.0 C).Cont..

Shindell's study estimates a transient climate response of 3.06 F (1.7 C), and determined it is unlikely values will be below 2.34 F (1.3 C).
Shindell's paper further focuses on improving our understanding of how airborne particles, called aerosols, drive climate change in the Northern Hemisphere. Aerosols are produced by both natural sources – such as volcanoes, wildfire and sea spray – and sources such as manufacturing activities, automobiles and energy production. Depending on their make-up, some aerosols cause warming, while others create a cooling effect. In order to understand the role played by carbon dioxide emissions in global warming, it is necessary to account for the effects of atmospheric aerosols.
While multiple studies have shown the Northern Hemisphere plays a stronger role than the Southern Hemisphere in transient climate change, this had not been included in calculations of the effect of atmospheric aerosols on climate sensitivity. Prior to Shindell's work, such calculations had assumed aerosol impacts were uniform around the globe.
This difference means previous studies have underestimated the cooling effect of aerosols. When corrected, the range of likely warming based on surface temperature observations is in line with earlier estimates, despite the recent slowdown.
One reason for the disproportionate influence of the Northern Hemisphere, particularly as it pertains to the impact of aerosols, is that most man-made aerosols are released from the more industrialized regions north of the equator. Also, the vast majority of Earth's landmasses are in the Northern Hemisphere. This furthers the effect of the Northern Hemisphere because land, snow and ice adjust to atmospheric changes more quickly than the oceans of the world.

579,

All these scientific facts, Emeritus Professors, even invoking NASA. Surely you are not seriously saying these people would know more about climate change than our very own Tony Boloney. Remember, Tony has a firm grip on it, and is not about to let go! Climate change that is, climate change!

Oh for gods sake SteeleRedux, of course the temperature is increasing, we are still coming out of the little ice age.

Just when have you ever heard me, or most skeptics I have ever heard or read say the temperature is not increasing?

What you & your mates would realise, if you ever actually read what was posted, is that we are saying it is now extremely well proven that it is not CO2 causing it. Just as it is not CO2 causing the current drop in world temperature.

It is the con job, that is destroying the west that we argue against.

If you read properly, you would know that I said was temperature has increased just as quickly at least once, & actually a couple of times as it is today. This despite the increase in CO2.

If you lot would just stop wasting billions on wild goose chances after a CO2 cause, we just might have enough money to research the really important mysteries of the weather & climate.

Hasbeen,

You can't have it both ways.

On the one hand you say:

"...of course the temperature is increasing, we are still coming out of the little ice age."

And on the other:

"....Just as it is not CO2 causing the current drop in world temperature."

But there isn't a current "drop" in world temperature.

There's a plateau in surface air temp at "record" levels.

Just like all the other plateaus which preceded previous rises.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics.php?g=47

Hasbeen: "Just thought this should be brought to the attention of those previously taken in by the unprecedented global warming fraud."

What he's talking about is weather. The following, regarding the "unprecedented" rate of temperature increase, is about climate over 11000 years:

http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics%207004/Marcott_Global%20Temperature%20Reconstructed.pdf

There's this on Marcott's analysis:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/for-the-record/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Perhaps something preceding the last ice age can be found to match the current situation, Hasbeen?
Posted by Luciferase, Thursday, 13 March 2014 1:54:38 AM

Dear Hasbeen,

Hells bells mate I have never pictured you as being someone who would so willingly chomp on this amount of bulldust but here you are gorging your self.

Your original post contained the heading “Climate Science Consensus: Last 60 Years of Global Warming Below Earlier Periods, Experts Say”. Of course as flagged by Bugsy this was from a climate sceptic's blog run by one Viv Forbes a character who we are discussing on another thread. So who are these so called experts? Why none other than Viv Forbes himself who is a geologist with no climate qualifications.

Nobody else is claiming what he is for the data. Just go have a gander yourself, look at the years he picked and the fact the 1893 was the warmest year in the decade surrounding it and the 1953 figure was the warmest in the decade surrounding it.

He has sucked you in mate and you have fallen for it hook, line and bloody sinker.

Now to the graph posted on JoNova's blog. You do realise that this was not “Hadley Global Temperature Graph with trends by none less than Phil Jones” as you claimed but rather JoNova's graph of some areas of the temperature record Jones was asked to comment on in an interview. But I'm glad you were able to seemingly hold up Mr Jones as an expert, this is what he said later in the interview;

E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible?
“I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8511670.stm

You don't have to agree with AGW but Forbes and Nova are shovelling this crap out at you by the bucketfull and you are lapping it up then regurgitating it here. Where on earth has your bulldust detector gone?

SteeleRedux and others, I don't think there is any value in trying to carry on a rational debate with Hasbeen about climate change. Like the vast majority of skeptics, Hasbeen's view is not based on scientific evidence, but rather philosophically based on the belief that climate change science is some kind of 'lefty conspiracy'. There is a rational amongst skeptics that climate change science is an attack on free enterprise and western values by those who wish to subvert society. To justify their belief, skeptics will clutch at any little bit of "good evidence" to support their line of skepticism.
In the 1950's an 60's at the beginning of the anti smoking debate, there was an element within the pro smoking lobby that actually seen the anti smoking side as being in some way 'Un-American', therefore a subversive element to be resisted. To this end the pro side often wheeled out junk evidence to prove smoking was good for you, or at the very least that there was no evidence that smoking was bad for you. By today's standards such thinking would be seen as laughable, but in the context of the times it was seen as perfectly reasonable. Maybe one day people will look back at the 2000's and view the debate on climate change as we view the debate on smoking as it was 50 years ago.

my lord hasbeen..HOW TYPICAL/THE MANY RESPONSES
YOU PRESENT INFO..but the info is ignored as they play the man

<<>.Hasbeen, post something worth reading, rather that your own "scientific" annalists. The warmists, what are they, so kind of hot communists.>>..[BY ONE WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER]

then pure deneyalism
..<<..no matter what Hasbeen says don't count.>>
[the dont mention the war facts brigade]..then/what seems like dispariging advice..by the numbers guy

<,..public service infrastructure would be resistant to change because of their “vested interests” in the status quo.>>

LEST WE FORGET..THESE SAME 'PUBLIC SERVANTS BEEN GIVING LONG TERM CONTRACTS TO BUY SOLAR/WIND POWER BACK AT 3 TIMES THE GOING RATE/BEFORE SETTING OFF TO DOUBLE THE PRICE OF POWER DELIVERY/GOLD PLATING SUBSIDIES..yep blame the bureaucracy

name-call blame shame

anyhow the long list of play the man/reject the facts go on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy

simply..PUT..I DECIDED NOT TO GET INVOLVED IN YET ANOTHER CARBON TAX ATTACK..by the hit sQUAD NO DOUDT GETTING A SHARE OF THE SOLAR BUYBACK SCEMES

yet we are the ones name called
an endless list of proof of lies ignored/guilt is a shamefull thing

need i quote bac to you mob..the nice things you say?
do i need trump out yet again the extensive list of lies sexing up the numbers and the lie of concensus[what has made good people do bad things

someone list the name deniers/smokers yep nothing they wont say
to make hasneens facts go away..but i hate how its so many against one

the ignoring of facts reveales closed minds
closed biased minds reveal tHEY GOT NO PROOF OF CONCEPT..EXCEPT REPEATED NAME CALlING

PLEASE FOLKS..READ YOUR OWN WORDS
JUST FOR ONCE..STOP AND THINK..just like the smoking lobby in their day[is the greenie gobal warming today]..then the moNEY lied ..today they decry and lie and namecall..but it boils down To money/..follow the money..the money buys the research..the money buys the spin..the money folks

FOLLOW THE MONEY..big..money wanted smokers
Big money..TODAY..[ge wants govt subsidy..to build the world ALL OVER AGAIN

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16076&page=0

yesTERDAYS..big money/special inytrest/lobby..
THEY NEEDED SMOKERS TO BELIEVE IT WAS SAFE..TO PROTECT AN INCOME STREAM

TODAYS BIG MONey needs a carbon credit..so they hype btribed their way..into what we are seeING RIGHT HERE ON THIS THREAD..THIS VERY DAY

THEY..control your fears/THUS CONTROL YOUR MINDs

think why you have closed your minds EVEN..to simple facts?
has-beens only crime has been to try to educate
the guilty/who took the lolly
BRIBE/SEE YOU GOT GUILTED

of course US..[smokers]..BACK THEN....believed
what we wanted to believe..JUST AS YOU GUYS TOO TODAY..
really NeED BELIEVE ITS US..[deniers]..that deserves your mob name calling..slander ridicules..and the name ignorant/working for big business[you lot are getting the CASH FROM]

ITS Mob insanity
were are those of you who are so fair..regarding other matters[you dont have a financial intrest in]?

WE [deniers]..KNOW ANY EFFORT TO EDUCATE YOU WILL RESULT IN name calling../gITS called denial..and you lot are in it..

im not getting a cent from no one[how much is your power bill in credit/

please note ..its us paying for your free lunch
we deniers are paying your way..into the hell your namecalling US PAYING YOUR WAY..brings by way of karma
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16086&page=0
IF ITS ALL TRUE
WHY THE LIES
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/climategate.php

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=NO+HOCKEY+stick+Gw+rejected&

ITS SAD..you think you know people
then they get richer than you..and change

man..you changed..when you beCAME ONE OF 'THEM'
now you got the taste of the free lunch..your NOW BECOME..what you FOUGHT AGAINST..till they began paying you/by free gifts/free light bulbs free solar free lunch for the next 30 years[OR SO YA THINK

SOON WE ALL WILL BE PAYING DOUBLE WHAT YOUR GETTING TODAY
THEN YOU TOO WILL PAY..I GIVE IT 5 YEARS WE ALL WILL BE PAYING..60 CENTS..OR RATHER THE RICH..THE POOR WILL BE LONG DEAD/PAYING FOR YOUR FREE POWER..its sic*..sad.sad sad

GOP AHEAD REFUTE WHAT I SAY
ANY NAME CALLING WILL BE PROOF

yes i know its futile to stop those chosing to ignore facts
PLEASE NOTE..COHENITES SATURATION POINT/FROM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16086&page=0

http://jennifermarohasy.com/2009/03/radical-new-hypothesis-on-the-effect-of-greenhouse-gases/?cp=11#comment-87599
The general Beer-Lambert law..which is usually written as:

A..=..a x b x c

Where A..is the measured absorbance,..
a is..a wavelength-dependent absorptivity coefficient, ..b is the path length, and c is the analyte concentration.

So as...c decreases..b increases.

The result..is that CO2 emissivity,..the measure of how/much heat-radiation..the concentration of CO2 absorbs,..DECLINES as the concentration..increases.

warmist..concepts
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
fLOATED WITH TRUMPETS..then quietly.allowed to die

The dead link/only collection

Acne,.Africa hit hardest, African summer frost, agricultural land increase,..Alaska reshaped, anxiety,..Arctic tundra to burn, atmospheric defiance, bananas destroyed, beer shortage, bird distributions change, blizzards,..boredom,..brain eating amoebae, business opportunities,..business risks, British gardens change, budget increases,..cardiac arrest,..cataracts, challenges and opportunities, cloud stripping, cremation to end, damages equivalent to $200 billion,..dermatitis, desert life threatened,..diarrhoea, disappearance of coastal cities, Dolomites collapse, drought in distant regions,..drowning people, early marriages,..early spring, Earth spinning out of control,...Earth wobbling, evolution accelerating, extinctions (bats, pigmy possums, koalas,..turtles, orang-utan, elephants, tigers, gorillas, whales, frogs,) fainting, fish catches rise,.flames stoked, footpath erosion,..glacial growth, global dimming,..god melts,..Gore omnipresence, Great Lakes drop, harmful algae, hazardous waste sites breached, high court debates, HIV epidemic, human health improvement,.ice shelf collapse, jet stream drifts north, lake and stream productivity decline, lightning related insurance claims,..little response in the atmosphere, lost $350 billion,.Lyme disease, marine dead zone,..Maple production advanced, mental illness(Alberta)..migration difficult(birds), mountains melting,...mudslides,..oceans noisier, oyster diseases, ozone loss,..Pacific dead zone,..plankton destabilised, plankton loss, plant viruses,.polar bears starve,..psychosocial disturbances, popcorn rise, rainfall reduction,..riches,..rivers dry up, rockfalls, ruins ruined, skin cancer,..smelt down,.snowfall reduction, stick insects,stormwater drains stressed,..teenage drinking, terrorism, tree beetle attacks, trees could return to Antarctic, tree growth increased, tsunamis,..tundra plant life boost,..uprooted - 6 million, Vampire moths, violin decline,walrus displaced, war, w.ar between US and Canada,..water scarcity(20% of increase), water stress, water supply unreliability,..weeds,..white Christmas dream ends, wine - harm to Australian industry,..*World bankruptcy,.World-famous places threatened,..*World in crisis,..*World in flames,

Suggestions.for replacement links are welcome.

Total (dead and alive) 883
Last updated 05/03/12
..its funny/this relateS..MORE THAN/YOU THINK
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6282&page=0

but..closed minds..cant hear..the simple-truth/their broke.
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=CARBON+CREDIT+NEW+AGE+MONEY+NWO&

OUG,

"my lord hasbeen..HOW TYPICAL/THE MANY RESPONSES
YOU PRESENT INFO..but the info is ignored as they play the man"

If Hasbeen puts up junk-science, and it's promptly shot down in flames...well...what?

Then you point us in the direction of cohenite and Jennifer Marohasy and various other junk-science purveying, denier sites...as if that's a game changer.

Nothing much changes around here.

mY DEAR POIROT..nothing you can say wilL sTop me loving you
so there..take it like a man man

i dont know who the big a was .but i love hIM TOO
My admiration for paul runs DEEP AND PERCULES AS WELL

IT KILLS ME..WE CANT AGREE TO DISAGREE
MY ONLY CONSOLATION IS ONE..fine day..when the truth becomes clear
that those who colluded to deceive..colluded to bribe buy off the lobby..

who colluded to change the numbers..get theirs..
spin the sin.[ie the deceivers/...not the believers only decieved into belief..thaT THE SKY COULD REALLY FALL]..BUt as someone said once..if need to tell someone off..thaTS WHAT IM HERE FOR/CAUSE I LOVE YOU.

I DONT BLAME YOU/in fact icking myself..i too could be selling free power into the grid/but then i only used les power cost than the service fee[now the ids have moved back in the bill now is 1300 bucks[for half of that i too would still be with you.

if i had bigger bills i too would have taken the blue pill.
but sadly..i use too little[then]..but now am gETTING SHAFTED
SO I CAN PAY MANY OF YOU UPSET..THEY GOT TO YOU.

ANYHOW..I REALLY DO LOVE YOU
so i cant lie..to you.

you did your research
i did mine..for me the numbers are the crime

http://investmentwatchblog.com/snowden-weve-actually-had-tremendous-intelligence-failures-because-were-monitoring-the-internet-were-monitoring-you-know-everybodys-communications-inst/

one under god, I know it is a waste of effort. Most of this lot are a mix of gravy train riders, greenie religion bigots, or lefties who refuse to look ay anything without approval of such masterminds as KRudd, Gillard or Obama.

I won't waste my time again.

I can only wonder if they do ever read anything other than their own propaganda. If they do, even with the evidence staring them in the face, they refuse to recognise it

hasBEEN..MATE..WE CANT GIVE UP ON OUR MATES
i love all our posters more than me own misses

anyhow..let me quote..your last post at the business thread

<<..It was not just imposed import duty..that..*protected our manufacturing.>>..SUBSIDIZED..MANUFACTURING..[IE INDUSTRY?]

PETRO/CHEMICAl..[fuel]..>>..Freight*ing costs that protected much of our small industry are no longer of much effect.//..*If fuel becomes expensive enough,*.. we might have a chance.>>

see how energy price is set to double
but note too..one big point..[the more transport 'fuel'..the more c02

SHIPS USE HEAPS OF PETERO CHEMICAL..CARBON BASED fuel*
[i think its called bunker fuel..its just gone up..in price
because they had to stop making bunker fuel[poluting grade]..to meet the diesaL POLLUTERS NEED

so tHE DIESEL..ISNT AS POLUTING AS BUNKER FUEL
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=bunker+fuel+production
BUT NONE OF THESE SMART/MATES..of ours dare think how much pollution THEIR IMPORTS OF ALL THIS ALTERNATE ENERGY IS COSTING US[NOT THEM]

<<..>>

<<..Yep the sight of clipper ships carrying international trade once again will signal our return to manufacturing our own requirements.>>

with bunker fuel*ED POLUTANTS

THAT mEASURE ALONG WOULD CUT THE WHOLE CARBON POLUTION GOING ON
IN THE MIDDLE OF THE OCEONS UNSEEN..THE REAL problem..is transporting solar solutions everywhere..they canb ship it

Dear Hasbeen,

“I can only wonder if they do ever read anything other than their own propaganda. If they do, even with the evidence staring them in the face, they refuse to recognise it”

My thoughts exactly.

Come on mate if this was any other topic you would have had the likes of Forbes and Nova for breakfast. We all have our weaknesses, god knows I do, so perhaps for your peace of mind you just accept this is one of yours and keep it to yourself.

Hasbeen,
I disagree. You should continue to post when you come across evidence or sound opinion that is contrary to that of the warmist religion.

The fact is that while the world climate may change according to natures timetable, it has yet to be proven that mankind has any influence on any such change. I know there are many things, like the tides, that are beyond human influence.

I am a lazy bloke and I do not keep up to date as much as I should, but I believe that Tim and Big Al will let us all know the minute anything is proven regarding human influence in climate. I trust them to do that. So I carry on as usual

In the meanwhile, let us know if you come across information that contradicts the warmist religion. Simply because there are many that read OLO but do not comment.

As described previously (see Australia’s warmest 12-month period on record) the warmth was most significant in September, which saw a mean temperature anomaly of +2.75°C, setting a new monthly record by more than a degree. At 1.43°C above average, October was also a very warm month. Temperatures during November were 0.52°C above average – the smallest temperature anomaly since August 2012 – but warm enough to complete a record spring.
Where is hasbeen, it's his thread.

579 and Paul,
Don't you realize that few these days even bother to read any warmist crap.

The public is tired of the exaggeration, the fiddling of data and the outrageous predictions, all wrong. The models that you pushed so hard have failed. Honest persons would be eating crow.

To be blunt, the wheels have fallen off the scare mongering wagon of AGW.

All you blokes have left is a religion of a few zealots who believe without any evidence. Those that continue to theorize about human induced climate change are seen as snake oil salesmen.

Come back and talk to us when you have tangible evidence.

Well that got a laugh.

579 gives a bunch of temperature data and Banjo waltzes in with “Come back and talk to us when you have tangible evidence.” How much more tangible than mercury rising in a thermometer can one get?

Perhaps 579 you might want to post in Braille next time.

I am more intrigued by the way Hasbeen ignored all the evidence presented showing the original statement quoted was distinctly inaccurate and just declared victory and pushed off.

Steele,
I did say few bother to read warmist crap. Including me.

Who now would believe warmist temperature data after EAU and the 'hockey stick'. Am sure Phil Jones (world leading climate scientist?) is not Allan's brother, but a good laugh.

And that there is no evidence as yet to support the theory of human induced climate change.

Yep, come back when you have evidence

Dear Banjo,

When actual temperature data becomes 'warmist crap' you do know you are officially in la la land.

But I am a patient guy.

Let us try something local and simple to start off with. Did Adelaide experience a record number of days over 40 degrees this summer in over 130 years of data?

Not saying it is proof of anything, I just want to see if you accept those figures.

Steele,
Temp data, right or wrong, is not proof of human induced climate change.

You are aware that 1000 years ago cereal crops were grown in Greenland, until it got too cold. So yeah the climate has changed, at least in Greenland. But we are talking about human induced climate change.

Adelaide temps? Your mate K Rudd said a few hot days in Adelaide was proof of climate change just before his entourage left for Copenhagen. That is just crap and typical of the arguments warmists use for proof. Same as the furphy that the oceans will rise to cover 8 storey buildings. Kids in UK will not know what snow is. We will not get enough rain to fill dams, etc. You believe that crap?

Easy to see why the wheels have fallen off climate change debate.

I do trust Tim and Big Al to inform us if and when there is some proof of humans effecting climate change. We can't even make it rain locally, when required, despite our best efforts, yet some think we can alter the wold climate.

Yep, I'll talk when you have some tangible evidence.

Haz, I wrote, regarding AGW:

>> …ultimately, we just don’t know! And therefore we should all be sceptics and be erring on the side of caution. [We] all… should be advocating the same thing – that we should be doing what we can to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels and onto renewables.

And we need to realise that quite aside from any climate change consequences that our addiction to fossil fuels might have, that this would be a damn good idea anyway!

In short, the whole AGW debate should be redundant, as we should simply be doing the same things anyway regardless of whether it is real and critically serious or completely bogus. <<

You offered no response.

Well…. surely this is the all-important point. Your vehement AGW denialism should really be totally irrelevant!

You should be just as fully supporting the steady conversion from fossil fuel power to renewable sources just as vehemently as the most rampant ‘warmists’.

Yes?

LUDWIG..<<..You should be just as fully supporting the steady conversion from fossil fuel power to renewable sources just as vehemently as the most rampant ‘warmists’.>>

I WOULD go one further
i would say once you advocate against greenhouse petrO/AND\COAL
you sign up to the tax..or you stop gaining the advantages OF WHAT THEY BRING,..

[LIVE BY THE S/Word
your sword is thy last word..]

IF YOU SAY...ITS A HUGE DANGER
dont be two faced..get off the grid..buy a prios
till then dont be using 10 timES THE COAL I DO..AND LECTRURE ME TO SUBSIDIZE YOUR TWO FACED BLIND BIAS

ITS BAD..iF YOU GET the advantage
but none of the guilt/blame/shame..gee how clever be you?

*Sigh*

Dear Banjo,

Yes, thank you for all that, but in your evident excitement I'm afraid you have failed to address the simple question I put to you; Did Adelaide experience a record number of days over 40 degrees this summer in over 130 years of data?

All I want to do is put a series of very basic questions to you directly around climate data to discover where the disconnect lies. This will require very little effort form your good self.

If this is something you see yourself struggling with then perhaps we can tackle it from a different angle. In that case I would ask you what data set would you need to see before you would be induced to change your mind on human induced global warming?

I am quite happy to venture down either path. Your call.

Luddy old mate, you are at least a warmist worth talking to. Sorry I missed that point.

However I must throw it back to you to explain why we should "wean ourselves off of fossil fuels and onto renewables".

To start with there are no renewables that work, except hydro, & perhaps woodchips replacing coal. The latter is pretty limited if we don't want the whole planet resembling Easter Island.

Wind never works when you need it most, when it is really hot or cold. These conditions are always calm. It also requires huge subsidies, & the life of the things is proving much less than claimed. The economics just don't work.

Solar is just too polluting in it's manufacture, even for me. It doesn't make economic sense, requiring huge subsidies. Longer term users are finding their output rapidly diminishing, much earlier than claimed.

Just like solar, alternative liquid fuels produce more CO2 than petroleum in their manufacture, so why bother?

One of the reasons for the bankruptcy of Spain, was the love affair they had with tidal. They have billions of dollars worth of that experiment sitting in the sand dunes, awaiting the scrap merchants oxy torches.

So now please explain why we should forsake fossil fuels when there is more than enough for 50 years minimum, before it gets expensive. You often suggest this is required, but not why. We have plenty of coal, & as we now know, there is no reason for not burning it. In fact common sense suggests it is imperative we burn it, to increase plant growth.

While we have nothing but models to suggest CO2 can cause us problems, we all know it's boon to plant growth. We also know that it has been at much higher levels in the past, without incinerating all life on the planet.

If we are really serious about life, it becomes almost a requirement to warm up the planet. The greatest land mass is close to the north poll. Every degree warmer opens up more living space for most life. What is wrong with that?

Hey Steele have the US broken 3000 all time cold records this winter?

Yep, I can talk superfluous crap, just like you.

IT JUST GETS BEtter and betTER..AS THE BIG MONEY
GETS YOUR CARBON CREDIT PIE

abc's fact checK..site..has a funny c02 tax linkage
alcOa..is closing down a plant/..tony rightfully SAYS
THATS WHAT THE TaX IS DESIGNED TO DO..[but was he correct in this ]..or wrong?

fact check reveals..that alcoa..*sold off 53 million/juliargreen credits [in free*..govt carbon credits..subsidy]..to keep polluting with*..the free govt 53 million handout..bailout/subsidy..compo

nice money if only butt one..of the 100?..big polluters who got it
who must already be lobbying tony[watch out mate/ambush coming]..NOT JUST www..[world-wide-war]..israel expects to set in train next week

its typical..ITS Farcical..[BOTH PLANS]
the lie..juwlie..of a cosha tax..gave away our cash to huge polluters/..because THEY WERE DYING ANYHOW..our money prolonged the pollution..[well done..you greenies..you bailed out AcoalcO2..53 MILLION]

ditto aLL THIS..NEW energy wasted..[BY Revitalized/cashed up/big pouters..in building solar wind etc..with the INDUSTRY BRIBE/HANDOUT/BAILOUT.

the worlds RICH..got greedy..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Pl2zeCKVSlQ

thats all it is really/about/loot and plunder and break/THE USELESS Esters[have the living subverted into feeding the dying capitalist corp$e
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/13/satellite-animation-shows-massive-eastern-u-s-cool-down/

they bought off the lobby with free industry/light bulbs..subsidies for rebuilding your business on govt tick..by bribe fear and spin doctoring/siN

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/13/more-good-news-for-polar-bears-ice-habitat-higher-now-than-in-70s80s/

like the latest is govt giving moneY PER KILLOWATT YOU SAVE BY DOWN-SIZING..YOUR MACHINES WITH BRAND NEW MACHINES.SUBSIDY..100 DOLLARS PER Kilowatt 'saved'..SALES/INDUSTRY/Commerce/looting pilaging

SO MANY OF YOU SOLD OUT TOO CHEAPLY
The smartest Enron energy greenies
are behind thIS NEO BUSINESS AS USUAL MODEL/BY CAREBON BAILOUT..OF THE RICH/OWNINg the dead corperate corpse..sykking AWAY OUR LIFE BLOOD/UP TO OUR GILLS IN DEBT.. AS THE EASY MONEY [RETIRED/PENSION funds finD GREATEST RETURN..IN EN DEBITING THE GANDKIDS TO SERVE THE SPOILED GEN X DYING AND SENDING THe rest broke/into serfDOM/JUST LIKE GOVT SERVANTS PLANNED..since the bankers sent us broke ww1/PHASE..OF STEALING OUR ASSETS [GOLD first then silver then copper then sewers/power water auto associations sport media science religion green groups political parties

TILL NOW 85 OWN MOST OF IT..AND YOUR STILL LEECHING YOUR LIFE BLOOD INTRO USURY..THEN THEY BEGIN SPENDING THEIR BOOTY/THEN we get hyper inflated into eternal servitude..its all..just a huge ponzi pyramid scheme

that they now plan to destroy in flamES
SEE PREVIOUS POSTS

Dear Hasbeen,

It is obvious you are talking about daily temperatures.

This last winter in the USA was not the coldest in the last 100 years, nor the last 50 years, not even the last 40 years, in fact for that period it came in only fifth coolest.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/DecJanFeb-USA48-temps-1973-2014.png

Dear Banjo,

Come on mate, you wrote this very interesting line;

“Temp data, right or wrong, is not proof of human induced climate change.”

What a pearler!

Okay I want to know if there is not a set of temperature data that could ever prove to you that there is human induced climate change then what would? Rising sea levels?

Or are you so totally incapable of entertaining any evidence contrary to your belief that any further discussion is futile?

Having basically lost the argument on global warming, the skeptics have shifted the goal posts, with their new line being; "Oh yes, there is evidence of global warming but it not caused by human action." Who do they think is responsible, coal burning monkeys!

Steele,
No evidence of human induced climate change has been forthcoming to date. Only theories and conjecture, enough to start a religion.

It is up to those who make the claims to produce the evidence.

Evidence will be headlines IF and WHEN it happens.

End of discussion.

Paul,
What religious nuts, like you, do not accept is that there are many things in our world that humans have no influence over. Take the tides, volcanoes and earthquakes as obvious examples. I suggest that the worlds climate is another. Can we influence continental drift or the shifting of the poles?

Straight away you refer to burning coal but there is no evidence that humans burning coal, or other fuels, causes global warming. Your religion tells you that, you believe without evidence. Your mob shifted the goal posts when you changed from global warming to climate change, because you could not produce any evidence.

Remember, Kids in UK will not know what snow is. Rain will never fill our dams again!

About time you produced the evidence or started eating crow.

Dear Banjo,

Thankfully we humans are a diverse lot, that is one of our blessings. I have a great book on last century's flat-earthers. I think those who were so derisive of the them in a way are disrespectful of our species.

While scientific evidence can be subject to mathematical rigour and proofing, the ultimate acceptance of that evidence by humans is of course entirely subjective.

When you claim there is no evidence for human induced climate change then you are exercising that subjectiveness. Extensive research shows the same degree of subjectiveness is shared by around 15% of Australians, and the fact that political persuasion is such a large indicator of dis-belief in AGW reinforces the fact that straight science remains a poor cousin to belief systems in the true anti-AGW cohort of which you are a part.
http://www.nccarf.edu.au/sites/default/files/attached_files_publications/Reser_2012_Public_risk_perceptions_Second_survey_report.pdf

You are one of the very few people with whom I engage at any level who say that there is no temperature data that would change their mind on AGW. It puts you in a very small subset of the 15%. That you and others like you gravitate to a political site like this is understandable and I think the rest of us should be grateful for the chance to be exposed to what is a rather rare ideological trait.

While I do despise bullies on OLO I do not despise you for your ideology because in a way it is a celebration of the human race.

More strength to your arm.

<< Luddy old mate, you are at least a warmist worth talking to… >>

Thanks Hazza. But I think of myself as a sceptic, not a ‘warmist’.

<< However I must throw it back to you to explain why we should "wean ourselves off of fossil fuels and onto renewables". >>

Really? Do I have to?

Hwaaaw ( :>(

Surely it is just so obvious! This wonderfully cheap oil, coal and gas is having one enormous and absolutely terrible effect, far worse than global warming; it is powering the massive expansion of humanity. It is leading to an ever-greater rate of usage… of finite resources. It can’t go on indefinitely. It is leading us straight into an almighty crisis situation.

<< … there are no renewables that work… >>

There are none that provide the quantity of energy or that are anywhere near as cheap, or don’t have enormous downsides.

So what does this mean when the crunch comes??

Wouldn’t be an enormously better idea to start introducing the various renewable but more expensive energy sources now, so that we can transition away from our utter dependence on oil and other fossil fuels?

continued

Haz, the very fact that renewable energy sources can’t go anywhere near competing with fossil fuels constitutes a damn good motive for progressively introducing then NOW. Because if they get introduced only after oil has become very expensive and/or in limited supply, then the energy shock (the sudden big change in the price of energy and all the economic and social consequences of it) will be enormous.

So we need to act now just as the warmists want us to, regardless of whether AGW is real and serious or entirely bogus.

We don’t need to forsake fossil fuels. But it would be a damn good idea to slow down our consumption of them while greatly increasing renewable energy sources. And if we did this, fossil fuels could continue to be a significant part of our energy paradigm for many decades longer than they will be at the current rate of exploitation.

As for your suggestion that global warming is actually a good thing; it could have some advantages, but I wonder how these would compare to the incredible devastation that would be caused by a metre or two of sea level rise, and by more intense weather events and some areas getting much less rainfall. Very much more damage than benefit I would think.

Banjo,

We may be at cross purposes here on global warming, considering you seem to be off the planet on this. We are talking about the effect us human are having in relation to climate change on our planet Earth. When you say there is "no evidence of human involvement" are you referring to the plant Earth, or you own planet, Venus? Because you do seem to be off the planet on the issue.
Completely separate from the climate change issue, is the renewable energy issue and the need for sustainability on that score. The majority of skeptics not only deny climate change science, they also despise anyone who would suggest that there is a need now to develop alternative energy sources. These skeptics are content to carry on as per usual in Cloud Cuckoo Land, completely oblivious to the looming crises. What is their future hope "God will provide"?

Luddy old mate, you are too pessimistic.

The old cleshay applies here. The stone age didn't end because they ran out of stones, just as we stopped using gas lights, because electricity was better.

Sometime soon some smart little chap will find a way to power your transport with a tiny chip of nuclear material, installed for life on the production line.

There will still be plenty of coal to extract the chemicals required for pharmaceuticals.

There is no shortage of carbon as a construction material, & we can use cellulose instead of petroleum as a base for plastics. We only used petroleum as it was available cheaply, & now because all the development it has had.

In fact, most of those resources you worry about will not be required in the near future, & will be as much a curiosity as flint arrow heads are today.

Fifty years ago we still used kerosene to light some homes, not fly thousands around the globe. Seventy years ago we still had some Oz wheat going to the UK in sailing ships. It won't take long.

So do stop worrying old mate, you can go for a drive without all that guilt. You are not using anything future generations will value, or need.

SR, please write my CV.

Hasbeen, you certainly have a plan for the future, but I think you'll find it's "cleeshay", with a double "e" ? A tiny chip of nuclear material, eh? Geez, what little you don't know wouldn't fill the space on the back of a Julia Gillard skirt.

Knew I should not have trusted WikiAnswers for spelling, but you know, I believe it is only peanuts who are more interested in spelling than what is being said, so I don't really give a stuff.

Luci thank god I'm no where near a Gillard skirt, I hate throwing up.

On this occassion your spelling is better than your idea.

<< Sometime soon some smart little chap will find a way to power your transport with a tiny chip of nuclear material, installed for life on the production line. >>

Hazza, I think you are WAY too optimistic. You can’t assert that we will make amazing technological advances that will save the day. All you can say is that we will probably make some tech advances that will improve things to some extent and that we might possibly make a really big one or two that will have a big positive impact, but that the chances of that really are pretty small.

You demonstrate just the same sort of thinking re: technofixes as you do re: your assertion that AGW is bunkum. You just completely cannot assert either with any credibility!

So I say just the same sort of thing as with ‘technofixology’ as I do with AGW: we need to err on the side of caution!

We need to plan for the future in such a way so as to NOT depend on significant technological advances.

DEAR LUDWIG..why the gloom and doom//lets say your right/the sky is falling AND TIDES GOING TO TAKE AWAY ALL THE SEA SIDES

HOW DO US PAYING BIG BUSINESS Polluters our carbon tax..TO KEEP Polluting..[you may have noted comalco or some other aluminum smelter received 53 MILLION in carbon credit..for compensation

RECALL ONLY THE WORST 500 WILL PAY
[OR DID THE 500 WOrsT GET A PAY DAY
i recall brown coal burners got a big chunk

so how did all that extra pollution
our carbon credits paid for..help ..the presumed problems

did comalco use solar POWER TO POWER THEIR SMELTERS
or use the half off peak price the states gave them tp attract them into that state..in the first place

in short lUDDY..OL BUDDY..EVEN IF CARBON IS THE ONLY PROBLEM
Doubling our power prices only hurt us all more[BAR THE FEW WHO GOT FRee credits to trade with

if you owe a carbon CREDIT..DEMAND payment..in as real carbon credit
ie a tree that turns it into plant food and FRESH AIR/BUT DO WE sabe grown trees[or plant 1000 sticks in plastic BAGS THEN NOT WATRER THEM TILL Their dead

all green schemes are built on greed and guilt and who got the free lunch/if a householder GETS 50 CENTS A KILOWATT..YOU CAN BET YA BOOTS SOME MATE Is getting that too/on top of free solar cells

well solar cells arnt working out[all that co2 their production caused needlessly..soon we need rebuild them alL OVER AGAIN

HOW CAN YOU NOT SEE THE INSANITY
R

Luddy I've been hearing all this gloom & doom about peak oil since the 70s.

Now as a bloke who wanted to breed horses, but not race horses, I dreamt of it being true. Alas it never was.

As a bloke who loved sailing, I also dreamt of building a small sailing ship, capable of entering the shallow NSW coastal ports, & the Queensland ports, but large enough to earn a living caring cargo, rather than the tourists we carried in the Whitsundays. Never happened.

Well sorry mate. like the boy who cried wolf, I got sick of these people getting my hopes up. I'm turning off until it happens.
As far as I'm concerned I see no difference in us denying ourselves the use of petroleum, to denying the 2100 generation the use of it, if that happens.

Don't forget all that coal we have to produce liquid fuel from, if the amazing technologies don't eventuate.

Whatever happens solar & wind will never be more than Mickey Mouse power for the cottage, it certainly won't ever power a civilisation.

I lived for many years using about 7 LBS of gas for my stove a month, & little more than a gallon of outboard fuel, so I am probably more capable of handling it than most. If set up I suppose I could be again, however I couldn't believe how much my life was dislocated when we had no power, no gas, & only some petrol & firewood in the last flood.

Flooded in for 5.5 days was bloody awful. I now have an 8KVA diesel gen set, plenty of diesel, a spare 80Lb bottle of gas, 12 volt lighting through my granny flat & a 12 volt pressure pump. I won't be caught again. Note no windmills or solar panels, tried them & found them a pain.

I doubt many city folk would last more than a couple of days without help, if it happened to them.

Haz, what you call doom and gloom is what I call realism.

Just think about this….

Fossil fuel is finite, yes? There is still a damn lot of it out there, but….

The rate of consumption is astronomical, and still rapidly increasing.

So really, if you look at the increasing demand and the ever-more-difficult-to-extract-and-thus-more-expensive supply, then you gotta admit that things is looking downright precarious in the not-too-distant future.

Add to this what you readily acknowledge - that no renewable energy sources come anywhere near matching fossil fuels in either cost or scale of supply…

…and deep poo approacheth!

Your optimistic outlook is totally dependent on us coming up with super-duper new technofixes.

But surely you gotta admit that the prospects of this is looking dismal.

We’ve been trying like crazy to do this for yonks…. with every possible alternate form of energy!

And where is we at with it? We is where you readily acknowledge – with NO other energy source coming anywhere near the low cost or scale of supply that fossil fuels is providing.

Please Haz, think long and hard about your optimism, and realise that it IS totally unrealistic!

Luddy we have plenty of coal, & no rational reason not to use it.

The yanks have been building small self contained nuclear power plants for everything from subs to aircraft carriers. A couple of them in each suburb, & district

As long as we have electricity, most will be OK.

I've always hankered after a Stanley steamer, & with modern pulverized coal boilers, a modern version would handle freight & farming use, & probably a good fun car.

Then there is the old WW11 gas producer. That will drive cars, & clean up all the good country that has gone back to scrub with Beattie's damn fool clearing regulations, treating regrowth as virgin clearing, to buy a few greenie votes.

Haz, perhaps the main difference between us is that you are willing to just let it all happen, believing that we’ll adapt to a new energy regime when we are forced to, while I would love for us to carefully plan for the new energy regime, starting NOW.

As I’ve said previously, within this plan fossil fuels can continue to be a part of our energy requirements for a very long time to come. The less we use them, the longer they’ll last of course.

I think that your desire will end up being extremely painful for a very large portion of the world’s population.

Trouble is, any significant moves to diversify energy regimes and thus reduce fossil fuel usage become extremely difficult to achieve in democracies that are 1. full of people worried first and foremost about their electricity and petrol becoming a little more expensive and 2. full of all-powerful short-term vested-interest big businesses which hold enormous sway over government decionmakers.

So I dare say that you will get your way.

But I do find it strange indeed that someone like you, who presumably has no vested interests… and desires the best possible future at least for Australia and her citizens, holds the views that you do on this subject.

continued

<< Beattie's damn fool clearing regulations, treating regrowth as virgin clearing, to buy a few greenie votes. >>

Oow, them’s fightin words. I was closely involved with the whole tree-clearing business in Qld for a decade. Regrowth was treated in the same manner as old growth vegetation only if it had reached at least 70% original height and at least 50% original cover. By that time, the vegetation was much more akin to a natural ecosystem than to a cleared paddock with low regrowth. If landholders hadn’t been using their country for so long that they allowed it to return to this state, then they could hardly complain about not being able to clear it without it being assessed by vegetation management officers. Then, if it wasn’t an endangered or of concern regional ecosystem, they generally got to clear it anyway. Beattie’s vegetation management legislation was a very good attempt to balance productivity and ecological values throughout Queensland. It stood up for a very long time. It could only have done that with the support of rural community. It would have died if they’d come out unitedly and vehemently against it. And then it all went by the wayside when Newman got into power, with much of the ecologically valuable land again being opened up for clearing. That was a bloody disaster.. and one which we’ve have heard scant little about in the media.

But that’s a discussion far removed from the subject of this thread.

OK lets fight. You say " at 70% the vegetation is more akin to a natural ecosystem than to a cleared paddock. You'd best show me some. All the regrowth I've seen is always overcrowded garbage, mostly wattle, & useless to man or beast.

What right do you have to dictate what someone can do with their own property. What right do you have to interfere with my sons, or other sons birthright.

My son wants to come back here some time in the future. He will not want a pile of useless garbage scrub. I have only a couple of old horses now wandering the place, so only need about 10 acres mostly cleared.

While I would be happy to let the rest go through a cycle of trees/scrub, & be recleared, we can't afford to do that, because of those fool laws. A cycle of timber would be good for the place, bringing back up all the nutrients now too deep for my pasture to reach.

As I can no longer do the work, my son has to use much of his leave, coming back to control the regrowth.

I would like small clumps of shelter trees, but we can't have that incase he wants to grow turf, or small crops. We have to cut everything down before it even becomes useful for fence posts.

The land would be better served if allowed to go out of production, back to trees for moderate periods, then be brought back to production by reclearing.

Academics & city people, mostly with no idea, but a grasping desire to control others have destroyed our ability to do what we know is good for the land.

Thanks mate.

ludwig/PUBLIC SERVANT..<<.2./full of all-powerful short-term vested-interest..big businesses which hold enormous sway..over government decionmakers.>>

Yep from free landgrants..TO GOVT SUBSIDies..bailouts
mates rates..and so much other adgenda..then politICAL ALLIENCES

<<>>perhaps the main difference between us..is that you are willing to just let it all happen,..believing that we’ll adapt to a new energy regime*>>

KEEN WORD USAGE

THEN..<<..when we are forced* to,..while..*I??
THE ROYAL WE OF THE PUBLIC BUSSY BODIE PRIVATISING PUBLIC ASSET..into provate proffit...the big 'i'..<<..would love for us to carefully plan for the new energy regime, starting NOW.>>..aGain/still?

<<>.As I’ve said previously, within this plan fossil fuels can continue to be a part of our energy requirements for a very long time to come. The less we use them, the longer they’ll last of course.>>

HERES AN IDEA..STOP GIFTING
FUEL SUBSIDY FOR petri-dIESEL TO MIners /farmeRS

<<>>I think that your desire will end up being extremely painful for a very large portion of the world’s population.>>>

funny..this comes directly/from the presenty cause of our pAIN
AS The public srvant..of all THAT PRIVATE/PYBLIC THAT GIVES COSts onto us..for their mates privaTE GAIN

YOU ALREADY DOUBLED THE PRICE OF POWER
thus doubled the gst we must pay on top/that goes back tO YOU FEW
WHO SO LOVE TELLING OTHERS WHAT TO DO..i know you just have to have the free solar cells on ya roof/yep without any proof..just as i know you will have a huDE CREDIT..BUILt up/one day you will trurn into owning seqeb..[CAUSE I KNOW PUBLIC CSRERVICE DOES THings like thATR FOR ITS MASTES

JUST LIKE YA FIVE AWAY STADIUMS..AND TENNIS CENTERS and race course training parks to mate..and sell off bulions of dollars in forrestry land reserves for 800 MILLION

JUST LIKE YA PRIVATISED THE PORT/closed down schools..for cash to build oother GOLD PLATED INFASTRUCTURE TO YOUR OWN FRONT DOOR

<<<..Trouble is,,extremely difficult to achieve in democracies that are 1...full of people worried first..and foremost about their electricity..and petrol becoming a..*little more expensive and>>

..YOU ARE LOVING It.
NEST FEATHEring

Hasbeen,
Following your debate with Ludwig with interest and laughter.

How come a practical old coot like you found a few days without power so awfull? For a bloke that has done most things you should have adapted easily, and probably enjoyed the 'camp' set up.

You would be the first bloke I would ask to solve a problem

why install the 12 volt system? Put a caravan plug on your switchboard or outside wall and with a lead and kick the gene over and light everything up.

I suggest you keep the regrowth down, the bureaucrats may change the rules. If the horses get too fat, electric fence a bit off to keep them in.

Don't know about in QLD, but in NSW they will only let you have dams enough to store 10% of the rain that falls on your property. They claim to own the rain. I told them my philosophy was that I owned the rain and I was generous letting them have what I did not require. I did not win though.

Be very careful of the bloke that says: "I'm from the government and here to help

<< OK lets fight. >>

Alright then! BIFF SOCK WHAM…. ):>)

<< at 70% the vegetation is more akin to a natural ecosystem than to a cleared paddock >>

Yes it is indeed Hazza. A lot of the time it may not look much like old growth at all. It is often much thicker. But hey, we had to have a cut-off point somewhere at which point the size of regrowth needs to be closely assessed. And when you think about it, the 70/50 rule was a pretty good one. It could easily have been 50/50, or perhaps 30/50.

<< What right do you have to dictate what someone can do with their own property. >>

Oh come on! We have all sorts of restrictions placed upon us, whether we live on a rural property, in suburbia or an inner-city unit. The various laws are there for the greater good.

Tree-clearing restrictions were introduced directly because of irresponsible clearing practices, which led to loss of topsoil and productivity, erosion and silted-up water courses, as well as the loss of biodiversity.

I spoke to many landholders who expressed agreement with the legislation and condemned those who have cleared and overstocked irresponsibly in the past, and would continue to do so in the absence of these laws.

In all my years of doing property inspections, assessing regrowth and regional ecosystems and discussing the whole business with hundreds of landholders as I was shown around their properties, I never encountered anyone who opposed the laws as strongly as you do…. and most of them had no trouble in speaking their mind very forthrightly.

And let’s not forget that most of the time landholders got to clear pretty much what they wanted anyway.

Yes Luddy, I have a very strong aversion to other people trying to dictate what one may do with their own property.

If someone wants to control property I have bought & paid for, they should come & make me an offer I can't refuse. Then as owners they can do what they want, otherwise get the hell out of my life.

Perhaps a friends experience affected my thinking here. He was fined numerous times for rabbit infestations on his property. The fact that the national park adjacent was nothing but a giant rabbit warren was not allowed as an excuse for his inability to keep them down.

Just because a property owner becomes unable to maintain his property is no reason to give control of it to some grasping green gestapo for ever. A new owner will come along soon enough to bring it back to useful. Until national parks are a pristine example of how to look after nature, government & grasping greens have no place on private property.

I watched Paterson's curse take over much of the Riverina with continual re-infestation coming from stock routs, national parks, & other government owned land. To me government control is a recipe for disaster, only exceeded by greenie control.

<< To me government control is a recipe for disaster, only exceeded by greenie control. >>

Haz, I reckon that is a very polarised way of looking at it. It just isn’t anywhere near that simple. Government and greenies aren’t total demons and rural landholders total saints. They’ve all got their merits and shortcomings.

As I said; the reason that tree-clearing legislation was introduced was because there were huge problems with over-clearing, which in conjunction with other bad practices such as overstocking, has led to the enormous loss of topsoil, fertility and productivity and to erosion and massive ecological damage.

In my discussions with landholders, their main criticism was not of government but of landholders who had done the wrong thing and cleared too much country or the wrong sort of country, hence making the legislation necessary.

This happened on a massive scale. It was the culture of the day to clear too much country. So much for your view that landholders were best off left alone to do what they wanted with their land.

As with a million other facets of our lives, we need regulations to keep things under reasonable control, or else they’ll run off the rails.

People are generally NOT good at doing what is best for the greater common good, in the absence of laws to make them do it!

The Vegetation Management Act was simply fundamentally good law-making!

The great problem with it was that it was mooted for a long time before it actually came in, thus allowing for a massive phase of panic clearing across huge areas of Queensland. It should have been introduced quickly, with only a very short period of notification for the public.

<< …government & grasping greens have no place on private property. >>

Actually, a very large part of rural Queensland is leasehold, not freehold, which means it technically isn’t private property, and is government-owned.

But regardless of whether a property was leasehold or freehold, the vegetation management laws applied, just as many laws govern what you can do on urban properties, regardless of whether you own the property outright, have a mortgage or are renting or living in government-owned public housing.

so all these volcanoes going off soonish
whats the pole shift going to do..but create a nuke winter
18 months of no sunlight..put that into your planning[no solar power for two years...And the ony thing that can save us..is coal]

12 Signs That Something Big Is Happening
To The Earth’s Crust Under North And South America
http://investmentwatchblog.com/12-signs-that-something-big-is-happening-to-the-earths-crust-under-north-and-south-america/

Why are fault lines and volcanoes all over North and South America suddenly waking up? Are we moving into a time when major earthquakes and volcanic eruptions will become much more common? For the past several decades, we have been extremely fortunate to have experienced a period of extremely low seismic activity along the west coast of the United States.

You see, the west coast lies right along the infamous Ring of Fire. Approximately 75 percent of all the volcanoes in the world are on the Ring of Fire, and approximately 90 percent of all global earthquakes occur along the Ring of Fire. Scientists tell us that it is inevitable that "the Big One" will hit California someday, but people have gotten very apathetic about this because things have been so quiet out there for so many years.

Well, now it appears that things are changing in a big way - and not just along the California coast.

BUT HEY IT WAS 'GREAT'..WHILE IT LASTED..
BUT SOON YOU TOO MUST PAY THE RENT.

ONE WAY..OR THE OTHER..YA GOING TO GET THE LONG LONG NUKE WINTER
ALL ALL YOU MUGGINS WHO WANTED THE NICE CASH COW..DONT GET INCOME..BUT HUGE DEBT..TOO..[HOW GOES THAT CHINAMAN FU YU TOO.]
YA GOT TOO CLEVER ENRON.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/28/white-house-looks-to-regulate-cow-flatulence-as-part-of-climate-agenda/#ixzz2xHqYITaT

WARNING WARNING IS GOING TO BE LIKE A COW PAt
[once..UPON/OUR TIMES..A Bird Story



A little bird was flying south for the winter. It was so cold; the bird froze up and fell to the ground in a large field. While it was lying there, a cow came by and dropped some dung on it. As the frozen bird lay there in the pile of cow dung, it began to realize how warm it was. The dung was actually thawing him out! He lay there all warm and happy, and soon began to sing for joy.



A passing cat heard the bird singing and came to investigate. Following the sound, the cat discovered the bird under the pile of cow dung, and promptly dug him out and ate him!



The morals of this story are:



* Not everyone who drops shHHHH it on you..is your enemy.
* Not everyone who gets you out of sh/..it is your friend.
* And when you're in deep sSS hit,..keep your mouth shut!

http://peoplestrusttoronto.wordpress.com/2014/03/30/office-of-outgoing-jpmorgan-asia-ceo-raided-by-hong-kongs-commission-against-corruption/

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/uu60061837#summary
http://www.activistpost.com/2014/03/shocker-comparing-deaths-from-medical.html

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2014/03/actual-photo-of-flight-370-clone-at-tel-aviv-airport-2928028.html
http://xrepublic.tv/node/8195
http://xrepublic.tv/node/8178

The IPCC's Latest Report Deliberately Excludes And Misrepresents Important Climate Science
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/

This week, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is releasing its latest report, the “Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report.” Like its past reports, this one predicts apocalyptic consequences if mankind fails to give the UN the power to tax and regulate fossil fuels and subsidize and mandate the use of alternative fuels. But happily, an international group of scientists I have been privileged to work with has conducted an independent review of IPCC’s past and new reports, along with the climate science they deliberately exclude or misrepresent.
»
THING IS THESE ARE THE GUYS THAT WANNA SELL YOU THEIR CARBON'CREDIT'
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-31/dear-unnamed-significant-financial-institution-ny-attorney-general-has-some-bad-news

http://www.activistpost.com/2014/03/capital-controls-and-200-price-hikes-in.html

http://intellihub.com/socialism-communism-hoaxes-false-collective-rights-replacing-legitimate-individual-rights/

big tie in to the british..nce/money..oligarchsfina..[not briks]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2592992/Britains-secret-bid-fix-UN-climate-report-Impact-economy-ramped-up.html?offset=100&max=100#comment-51304809

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-31/david-stockman-why-we-are-plagued-drivel-masquerading-financial-reporting

same insane mindset
http://unreportedtoday.com/planned-turkish-false-flag-exposed.html

IPCC's doom-and-gloom global warming apocalypse
is political theater, not real science
http://www.naturalnews.com/044525_IPCC_report_global_warming_apocalypse.html


The IPCC has just released its latest "Apocalypse Now" report(1), threatening all humankind with imminent self-destruction if industrial output of CO2 is not immediately and drastically curbed. The UN global government report concludes that global warming is "severe, pervasive and irreversible," a position which seems to be little more than a foregone death sentence for the human race, even if drastic changes are made right now.

please not the new word...beyond or on top of holowcaus deniers]
direct from the spin 'doctors'..ya ready for it?

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/?p=81710

"Unless we act dramatically and quickly,
science tells us *our climate and *our way of life
are literally in jeopardy. Denial of the science is malpractice."

it might have come from lawyer advisement?

why does govt lie..to put us into fight/flight mode
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-911-attacks-keeping-the-lid-on-the-lie-media-response-to-the-growing-influence-of-the-911-truth-movement/5373217
http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/scheme-us-domination/
http://investmentwatchblog.com/alert-false-flag-in-the-making-fbi-and-military-are-hunting-for-ex-recruit-thats-planning-a-jihad-style-attack/
http://www.examiner.com/article/2014-worldwide-wave-of-action-learn-to-prove-corporate-media-as-liars-7-of

Breaking: Sen. Harry Reid Behind BLM Land Grab of Bundy Ranch
http://www.infowars.com/breaking-sen-harry-reid-behind-blm-land-grab-of-bundy-ranch/

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/09/04/Harry-Reid-s-Son-Representing-Chinese-Solar-Panel-Plant-In-5-Billion-Nevada-Deal

Kit Daniels | BLM attempted cover-up of Sen. Reid/Chinese gov’t takeover of ranch for solar farm.
http://www.infowars.com/video-infowars-reporter-goes-off-on-propaganda-information-officer/
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/23065-why-us-fracking-companies-are-licking-their-lips-over-ukraine
THE KARMA
Scientists discover how to make ethanol using just water and CO2
http://rt.com/usa/stanford-study-copper-ethanol-728/

Scientists at Stanford University in the state of California say they’ve developed a procedure for making potent liquid ethanol that doesn’t rely on corn or any other crops traditionally involved in the process.

The researchers disclosed their discovery in the latest online edition of the journal Nature, and in it they say that in less than three years’ time they expect to have a prototype device ready that will make biofuel from using not much more than carbon monoxide, easily derived from carbon dioxide.

"We have discovered the first metal catalyst that can produce appreciable amounts of ethanol from carbon monoxide at room temperature and pressure –
`http://rss.infowars.com/20140411_Fri_Alex.mp3
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Pentagon_Secret_Plane_Has_Been_In_Space_For_Almost_500_Days_-_And_They_Still_Won%E2%80%99t_Say_What_It%E2%80%99s_Doing_There.../34424/0/38/38/Y/M.html

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/blm-fracking-racket-exposed-armed-siege-and-cattle-theft-from-bundy-ranch-really-about-fracking-leases_042014

http://www.activistpost.com/2014/04/safe-and-accurate-food-labeling-act-is.html
http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/unlabeled-gmo-salmon-groups-call-fda-rein-industry-claims/

http://investmentwatchblog.com/monsanto-pouring-money-into-defeating-measure-to-ban-gmos/

http://12160.info/video/will-feds-stage-violence-to-frame-cliven-bundy

the cocco..'the tipping points']
they talk of brown smoke..[that is heating the atmosphere
but cooling the oceans..[as usually the greenies trick the data]

but lets move on/this brown smog/cloud whatever
is caused by cooking fires..so they have invented a super efficient 'stove'..that looks like its made from a 4 gallen coffie can..they could make cheaper than a bucket[say 4 buCKS..TOPS]..TO MAKE IN INDIA

..BUT WAIT.. its raising money for this poor lady unable to buy a 5 dollar stove..[how you may ask]..well the tin..can is hooked/up to a phone

YEAH..THATS RIGHT..THESE POOR/FOLKS Cant BUT..A
4.or..5 DOLLAR STOVE..SO..WE SELL THEM..A 50 DOLLAR?..PHONE..

BUT WAIT..IT GETS BETTER
THE PHONE GOES..INTO THE TIN CAN..sorry cook/stove..via a sensor
that hooks-up..to the phone/that hooks uP TO?,,SAY..A SOLAR CELL

THAT HOOKS INTO..THE PHONE SYSTEM/VIA..THE CELL-TOWER..TO GO
TO USA..SO THEY..CAN SELL THE HEAT[CARBON-CREDIT].CREATED BY BURNING DUNG..IN THE POT..INSTEAD OF..THE OLD OVEN

NOW..BY TONIES DIRECT*ACTION..we could..give them.a billion stoves
at ..5 BUCKS A STOve..and buy..more carbon abatement/wholesale/than 500 moblie phones..ringing home

but/it..was so STUPID..i just/had to..note it
5 billion tony..we build the stoves..gift em to india
run the numbers..buying mobile phones/with carbon credits/mate thats insane

ps..the solar charger..could be..making methane/FOR..stoves
but..see how these..elites waste the crapp..out of..our hard earned carbon debt..BY..FURTHER..INDUSTRY/READ COMMISION.

direct action..or nuthin

hang*em high../6 \..billion..can return normality to india
almost overnight..BUT REALLY..THINK..what-if..THAT WOODSMOKE.WAS MAKING*..THE MONSOON..and its less/now..because less carbon is precipitating..moisture into rain

anyhow..forget carbon/credits
if anything..maybe..direct action..
and...alternate less hurtful ways..to precipitate the rain..into forming the monsoon/..but we are..right in/the chief/liars/LAI.. back yard

the dudes..already a billionaire
now..selling mobile phone..cook tins..[how mucha pop?]

[ps also.im noting the highest..ATTRIBUTED/cause of death.is lung cancer/[from woodsmoke]]..stop the woodsnoke..and..the cancer rate drops/

then/WATCH..the mongrels will say...the drop
in lung cacer..was cause/of the stop..smoking sin taX

AND THE..PHOTOES OF DEAD PEOPLE..WE MUST SUFFER THROUGH
BECAUSE OF THE SAME CARBON NATZIES..THAT SOMEHOW MADE COOKING AN ONLINE CASH COW..FOR DOING MORE BIGger BUSINESS..carbon-polution

do we really..need watch these poor people...killing themselves>..do we realy need..give away mobile phones..to cook dinner/c02 guilt free?

there is much..prattling on/at the other greenie warmist thread
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16208&page=0

referring/in extacy..on their 'latest'..IN-GLORIOUS LINK
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_ice.html

,,..<<..Passive microwave satellite data reveal that, since 1979, winter Arctic ice extent has decreased about 3 to 4 percent per decade (Meier et al. 2006). Antarctic ice extent is increasing (Cavalieri et al. 2003),..but the trend is small.>>

AND NOW ITS NON EXISTENT
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15257&page=38

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6292&page=0
YOU GUYS LIVE IN THE PAST/
the green carbon credit..scam..is winding down.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16076&page=0

its lobby will no doudt move onto some other moralizing regulation...sin-tax..cash cow..as scientists will always sell their souls for funding[and lets face it there is riches in taxing a weightless gas/by the ton..just like having a money tree.only you sell licensed to pollute...thats really catholic of you.

what motivates my anger is the one tax fixes it all
plus those 'in the know'..selling their free-solar cell power for three times the rest of us must buy it for..how low can you go..how much cash have you sold your soul..for>

YOU DONT TAX AIRPLANE FUEL..NOR SHIPPING DUEL
BETWEEN THOSE TWO..plus transport they use 2/3 rds the petro pollution

yet bug abusers still get the fuel tax excise exemption of 12 billion
yet these huge polluters still get govt cash..[so much for ya stinking lobby..you avoid taking on the biggest poLLuters

then all ya freaking lies..and the nutters keep coming and comming like greedy cash monkeys..seeking the next carbon credit fication[on stale data

your stinking models made absurd predictions
they were wrong/but because we dont resist you mongrels professionally the useful idiots keep parroting on the babble.

ITS YOU MUGS/HOLlOW/CAUSE AFFIRMATIONS..THINKING WE BELIEVE YOU
when mostly their just ignoring your latest blaH BLAH BLAH

AND THEIR RIGHT.so what motivates you some greenie bonus points
or the cold hard cash they give you for fooling and foiling the opposition.

regardless you professing fools win/not by the science/but by persistence akin to rape..and the thief caught lying yet again
http://rss.infowars.com/20140421_Mon_Alex.mp3

and still you lot bounce back..pretending its true
then one day you going to look and see the fruit..of all you screwed

http://board.freedomainradio.com/page/books/the_handbook_of_human_ownership_a_manual_for_new_tax_farmers.html

GERMANY: Renewable Energy Policy “Complete Failure”… Bring On The Dirty Coal Monsters
http://www.silverdoctors.com/germany-renewable-energy-policy-complete-failure-bring-on-the-dirty-coal-monsters/

In a stunning admission, the German Government recently announced that its transition to Renewable Energy was, “On the Verge of Failure.” This blunt statement was released by Germany’s Economic Minister and Vice Chancellor to Angela Merkel, Sigmar Gabriel at an event at SMA Solar… Germany’s leading manufacturer of Solar technology.

Germany decided to shut down eight of its Nuclear Power Plants after the disaster at Fukushima. Unfortunately, renewable energy isn’t filling the void. To make up the difference… in come the COAL MONSTERS.

This announcement is a DEATH-BLOW to the advocates of renewable energy such as Wind & Solar.
http://www.mintpressnews.com/report-crackdown-national-security-reporting-tanked-us-press-freedom/190012/

but not the plan to tripple your energy costs
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/enron-2-0-wall-street-wants-manipulate-state-energy-markets-just-like-manipulates-every-market.html

how do these scams happen?
[well we seen the corruption going down globally
but the watch dog sleeps/the sleep of treason/malfeasence

http://rinf.com/alt-news/latest-news/corporate-media-journalists-perpetuate-lies-misinformation-drugs/

http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/25409893/bunkerville-residents-sound-off-about-blm-police-media#.U2ND--3FXTk.facebook
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/02/nakba-israel-palestine-zochrot-history

its al realy patheTIC..were yypersensitiVE.to putting on one extra blanket..or getting our next refund for the free power we draw ofF THE GOLDP[LATED LINES.. as others doube up using 'carboN CREDITS' to shut down LOW COST base powER STATIONS ..IN THE sure knowing the artificial shortage need expeNSIVE [EXORBITANTLY EXPensive power the bleedind solar abusers usE AT NIGHT

ie last night it got cold..in a sOLAR POWER FREE ELECTRICity power home/hooked into 'ouR' GRID'..anyhow LAST BI THEY GOT 75 DOLLARS CASH BACK/SO THE BACK DECK WAS LIT UP WITH [OF THE GRID]..FREE POWER
PLus two bar electric heaters/that gIFT WE TOOK OFF YOU SILY Udgers killing us with your cheap coal powER/YOU GOT NO IDEA HOW GOOD IT feels to send you fools NOT GETTING IN ON 70 CENMTS A KILOWAT POWER GENERATION..broke

ITS TIME TO THROW A FEW POLITITIONS ON THE FIRE
NOW WE EVEN Selling off the gold[forget gold plate/mate
the bAIOUT DOLARS LOOKING TO BUY SOMETHJING ARE NOW BUYING THE FREAKING 'ROYAL'..MINTS...[its not the freaking wqueens gold?]..who is selling it/thIS TREASON IS GOING ON GLOBALLY/right in ya FACE

IM SO OVER BLOGGING JUst to give them ideas
IF YOUR NOT Exposing lies
YOUR LIVING THEM

May 11 11:40
It’s not “climate change” anymore. It was "global cooling" - until they realized they couldn't squeeze money out of that. Then "global warming", until they realized the globe wasn’t warming. Then it was "climate change" And now it’s “climate disruption.”
By: portos

http://xrepublic.tv/node/8836

Weird Looking Death Spiral
By: malterwitty
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/05/09/weird-looking-death-spiral/
Climate experts say the Arctic is in a “death spiral.” More rational people might say that Arctic ice area is right about where it was 10 years ago.