http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/untold-suffering-global-scientists-warn-of-climate-emergency-20191105-p537mt.html
I believe the science
Too the eleven thousand scentists who put this report together
In it they share views I have posted here
World population, our general standard of living, the fact far to many live lesser lives
That in parts the world is overpopulated
Even [my view now] we pollute this world and must change our ways
Disagree? tell me why, tell me is the climate changing? related to man made or not?
Will it return to the one it was say 50 years ago?
Tell me who conned me, how, why, to think the science is right

MHaze went under the knife about a week ago, hope he is well
He would take to me on this subject
While at it rechtub would too, we can only hope he is ok
Wanted, a case to prove I and those like me have been conned and why, will watch with interest

Hi Belly,

It could be 11 million scientists, the radical right forumites, brain washed on the subject of climate change by Big Oil and Big Coal, will never accept that climate change is real. These guys have been fooled into believing climate change is the brain child of the left, and no matter how great the evidence, they are simply going to plod along and allow the disaster to take its toll on humanity.

One crazy poster believes climate change science is an attack on his fundo christian beliefs, the work of Marxist/Atheists. Abortion Boy might pop in soon with one of his way out comments.

Dear Paul,

«These guys have been fooled into believing climate change is the brain child of the left»

Margaret Thatcher is "left"?

It was her invention, in order to crush the coal-miners' union, by using nuclear energy to make the coal-miners redundant and stop their disruptive strikes.

There are far better reasons to abandon oil and coal, but this dishonest hoax of right-wing Margaret is not one of them!

It'll be alright, stop worrying. Just keep burning fossil fuels - it's only coal, it won't hurt you.

another load of c ap written by people who want to preach to others while still producing well above carbon footprints. These scaremongers are a disgrace to true science. Very comical.

Oh 11000 scientist. Oh dear oh dear. What bollocks. You guys are either extremely gullible or totally dishonest. No wonder the likes of Jussie Smollett can put it over you so easily. Try finding some true facts before announcing Greta's narrative. You might scare a few kids.

Gee belly that must be a worry for you. A couple of years ago it was 15,000 scientists making the same fool statement. Have another 4000 woken up to the scam?

Of course Ten years ago 31,487 American Scientists, including 9,029 with PhD’s signed the Global Warming Petition Project warning that there is no convincing scientific evidence that man-made CO2 will cause catastrophic heating. So their 31,487 trumps your 11,000 & diminishing pro warming lot pretty easily.

In the last few years even more proof that global warming is a scam has been even more rapidly.

Hassy, do you still have that rain gauge in the chook pen, along with the 97 year old neighbour that proves all that climate change stuff is malarkey?

p/s Are you still smoking the dried geraniums?

As I said Belly, 11 million scientists could agree there is a climate change emergency and the forums 'Usual Suspects' would still be in denial.

Thanks to all contributors
Paul as you know I agree totally
And as you know in depth discussion is not possible on this subject with some
Well aware GY thinks our side is crap
But the link, the announcement itself, is much more than just climate
But very much related to it
I think, coal [use and sell it while we can] is on the way out, say 50 years no more and its use will end
Pollution? it gets worse every day, and will in itself FORCE us to change
Population [respect to Loudmouth] is at a turning point and in part bringing about mass migration/refugee flows
Runner, read your posts, every one baffles me, the Christ I LOVED is never seen in your posts
regards all

Hey Belly,
Come on really?
Do I really have to click and read the next installment of 'fear and guilt'?

It's as bad as the constant coverage of the Royals, to keep them relevant and their profile propped up when they're not good for squat.

- Except flying around in private jets and telling everyone else there's too many people and we need to worry about the climate of course...

Hasbeen's right. global warming and climate change are fake. So let's all get over it and get on with our lives burning all the coal, oil and gas we can get our hands on.

The Climate has been changing since the Earth was formed, but the alarmists want you to believe the change is caused by coal the energy that has created a prosperous and healthy world; or overpopulation which is also the effect coal has caused. Before coal 1 in 5 children dies before 5 years, similar to developing third world. The answer to third world poverty is the creative use of fossil fuel, in raising their standard of living. It is done by capitalism and a valued care for people.
The Marxist do not want more children, their view of the individual is disposable, that is why one child policy, abortion and euthanise is paramount in their agenda. Catastrophic climate is making young women fearful of having children, that is Greta's anger, "How dare you destroy my future!".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=MaN2_XT1BVo&fbclid=IwAR1icXOwMwVyIPQ_plTKwCerN9A8DJ-xMuF630UZt7uh8mSF3PyuQHzQh8k&app=desktop

There is no climate emergency. Superstitious people are being panicked by fear-mongering and lies. Only ignorant, uneducated people fall for such codswallop, and this site has more than its fair share of that sort - the sort that believes in black magic in the guise of science.

So lets get real! First no more air travel, gas heating or cars. This should start the ball rolling. Cancel all public service pensions and seize private superannuation and use that money for remediation!
Of course this applies only to members of political parties supporting the emergency. Scientists supporting the emergency and fellow travelers. Myself I welcome more space on airline travel and roads.The strife in financial markets wont affect me either.
Lets see how serious you guys really are with this existential threat to life on earth? Any takers or any increases on my sensible measures?

Dear Belly,

Scientists have a moral obligation to issue warnings
of catastrophic threats. They are obligated to speak
out based on their evidence. Now it seems they are
going beyond just research and publishing and are
going directly to citizens and policy makers.

However, making changes is politically difficult
as the economic interests behind the various industries
are a powerful political lobby that is reluctant to commit
the necessary resources to the task. The reluctance to
make changes derives from political decisions not to
slow down economic growth.

We have to wait and see if appealing to citizens and
policy makers directly will produce better results.

This paper pretty comprehensively details temperature changes around the world, mainly in the Northern Hemisphere:

https://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/its-here-a-1900-2010-instrumental-global-temperature-record-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/

Very illuminating.

I'm puzzled why there is alarm at birth-rates, which, on a world scale, are approaching zero population growth:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/population-by-age-group-to-2100

Note that it's not the births, but the older age-groups which are rapidly growing in numbers, as people live longer and don't conveniently die off. That 'demographic transition' will last only until life-spans reach a natural limit, of 100-120; and then those numbers will stabilise.

The number of births round the world will stabilise in the next couple of decades, then slowly decline. So, a few years later, the number of 5-14-year-olds will decline; and then, of course, the 15-24 year-olds after them. And then, us.

But the number of working-age people, 25-64, will increase substantially, by about 40 % by 2100; and the number of people aged 65+ will increase by three and a half times. It's going to be a much older world by 2100.

So let's see: with a fascist one-world government, who should we kill off ? And how ? Should it be us old farts first ? Some un-named ethnic groups ?

Joe

To Belly.

The scare tatics of global warming, and the consistent use of "emergency" should be all the proof you need that there is a con job being made. Is there any truth to the matter? I use to believe that there was, but watching one "climite emergancy" follow another climate emergancy, and I think it's all rubbish at this point. A hurricane is an emergancy. People die from those,my hey thappen suddenly and cause a lot of havoc. A famine on the other hand is a disaster, but it is not an emergancy like a hurricane, a tornado, an earthquake, or a flood is.

The repeated use of the term climate emergency with no actual destruction, deaths, or otherwise shown threat, show that this is a con.

You asked for proof. I'm telling you the proof is in the words being used, and in the lack of actual harm that's occured. The damage of Global warming is that everyone who sees it further their pursuits uses it as a truth to score points for their cause (if they are environmentalist), for their career (if they are a scientist looking for grants), or for their popularity (if they are a politician looking for votes). Each group exaggerates the claims and make it yet another emergency that follows yet another false alarm. This harms those who actually do care for the environment. There are big issues to tackle. Smog being one huge issue for countries that issue warnings for their population to wear masks and stay indoors.

What happens to environment concerns when global warming is found out for what it is? A giant scare machine that isn't actually helping anything. People will lose heart on environmentalists and clean air advocates, because they associated with global warming frauds over and over again. No reliability means no trust. No trust means LOCAL POLUTION will get worse and no one will look for better solutions because they don't trust the industry providing solutions and lies.

quick ring 000

runner,

It wasn't raining
when Noah built the ark.

WELL, we agreed, check your comments, in a thread called climate change is taking place
Do we now[regardless of its course ]say it is not?
Loudmouth you left the s on, your links will not work
Hasbeen and a host of others, SO THE WHOLE THING is a fraud, why?
Who convinced you my view is the wrong one, me a victim of fraud?
Can it be fossil fuel owners/investors unlike the tobacco industry are not trying to defend their own interests?
Then tell me again about me being a victim of a huge fraud, tell me why, who gains
Then, catch your breath, read not my link but the story it is about
Tell me those scientists are wrong, to remind us we are polluting the planet
To loudly remind us some [far too many] are living in substandard conditions
Tell me the last 36 months here in this country being records for heat, is a fraud
Then remind me about ice melting not being a signal the world is heating up
38 Degrees outside, month of NOVEMBER ok with that?

Sorry, Belly, thanks :)

Temperature increase in the Northern Hemisphere (i.e. much more than in the Southern Hemisphere - more land area and far more population):

http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/its-here-a-1900-2010-instrumental-global-temperature-record-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/

Slowing population growth:

http://ourworldindata.org/grapher/population-by-age-group-to-2100

I hope these help.

I won't be around but I'll bet that by 2100, the retirement (pension) age will be more like 75, or even 80. And since work is far less likely to be heavy, manual labour, 75 and 80 will be like the new 55.

Joe

'runner,

It wasn't raining
when Noah built the ark.

seemed like the climatologist got it totally wrong back then to Foxy! They to were to silly to heed God's warning so made up their own religion. Hmmm!

Dear NNS,

You write;

“You asked for proof. I'm telling you the proof is in the words being used”

Yup, well that's the level of scientific rigour some people bring to the table.

Dear runner,

You write;

“quick ring 000”

Why? Is there yet another child being abused by your faith's leadership?

Dear Josephus,

You write;

“It is done by capitalism and a valued care for people.”

Sorry but these two are diametrically opposed. Further more inventions like the solar cell give us completely viable and often cheaper alternatives to coal.

The rest of your post is dribble.

Dear Jbowyer,

Or we could just facilitate a move to renewable energy and electric transportation.

runner,

The climatologists got it wrong?

No.

The flood did come.

I shouldn't be surprised at your reaction.
It is very tempting to live for
the moment. Why think about years from now?

But that's not how good Christians live. Good Christians are
very aware of one day being judged by their Creator.
So they try to behave accordingly.

The people who got it wrong were the people who
took no notice of the warnings. That's been happening since
the days of Noah. But Noah listened to the
warnings. He planned ahead. And so should you as a
good Christian.

Well as some comments prove we are not talking about the report
Some are thanks Loudmouth, but some have no clue as to its basic warning
If we look, at the report not our own view of what it says, we will be forced to see it part at least it is right
Waiting for some to put in print, their view of how and why I have been conned
And by who for what reason
Climate change is here, it may never change back
Indeed it may/will make parts of the world worse or better who truly knows

Belly it is only a Media report. We want the same scientist as I posted including Professor Plimer saying yes this is fact, and not scare mongering. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=MaN2_XT1BVo&fbclid=IwAR1icXOwMwVyIPQ_plTKwCerN9A8DJ-xMuF630UZt7uh8mSF3PyuQHzQh8k&app=desktop

When these scientists say this is real and solar panels farms which incinerate birds and wind farms which kill large birds will save the Planet. All the product mined and processed with fossil fuel to save the Planet. The alarmists are not selling their diesel and petrol four wheel drives, we do not see the evidence from the alarmists, just the radical Marxists who have never worked in their life.

Dear Josephus,

Who are the radical Marxists that you're speaking about
who have never worked in their lives?
Could you name names and give us some evidence please?

Foxy, Have you not heard of "Get Up"? I'm going out to dinner now will give you an interview with one later.

Thanks Josephus.

I'm looking forward to it.

Enjoy your dinner.

My husband's cooking tonight (smile).

Has anyone checked to see how many of these 11,O00 scientists are actually involved in climate science? Or, like the media, do you think that people with science degrees know everything about ALL science, irrespective of their personal disciplines.

Superstitious, cultish Leftist fools will fall for anything. It used to religious cults making monkeys out of ignorant rubes; now it's climate cults.

Steeleredux, Solar cells you say? If they are the cheapest why is my bill twice what it was and still going up? Questions, questions.
Lets get serious the greens, getup, Extinction rebellion unable to fly, register cars or even travel in them. No electricity, super or public service pensions? This will sort out how dire this emergency really is.
Thank you Joe as usual a breath of fresh air and sound common sense. Steel baby on with the usual abuse?

Dear Josephus,

I looked up GetUp. It appears that they're an
independent political activist group.
The Australian Electoral Commission acknowledged
that Getup's activities are issue-based rather
than supporting or advocating support for a
particular registered political party.

In 2019 the AEC's determination was also supported by
the Australian Government's Solicitor and the
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions.

Perhaps you're getting the group mixed up with someone
else? Did you know that former Liberal politician
John Hewson used to be on the Board of Directors
of GetUp?

Well at least the Kiwis are taking this thing seriously, even the Nationals.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania/this-is-our-nuclear-moment-nz-passes-climate-change-law-20191107-p538fd.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2PGd2YRUC-pzTsK7Onx4f0vGbwGbLhGdd2xBe7-MGwRRvnBZwdqNIRWt4#Echobox=1573105591

Leigh Sales described the 11,000 activists as 'experts'. Experts in what? Certainly not the climate, which was what they were lecturing us on. There were all sorts, from engineers to theologians. Over 2,000 were students! What of, who knows! Chiropractors and herbalists were involved in the scam. And the usual mugs were sucked in again.

One idiot gabbled on about climate change and bushfires, not knowing that even the arch climate villain, the IPCC, had said some time ago that bushfires were not more prevalent, and they had nothing to do with climate change anyway.

As usual, this latest scare-mongering is bullshite.

Dear JBowyer,

Usual abuse? Not sure what I wrote that would be considered abusive.

Perhaps if I were to raise it to this level it might be a contender; "I love how this idiot has been totally discredited in just a few posts."

As to you gibbering on about everyone concerned about the impact of GHGs giving up electricity when there are many avenues for supplying renewable energy to power our homes, cars, and industries you really need to stop. It makes you look foolish.

Dear Josephus,

Plimer is not a climate scientist but rather a geologist by training and one that sits on the boards of fossil fuel companies. Stop quoting him. It does you no credit.

I thought everyone knew that all the stories of the Great Flood were just the memory of the Ice Age thaw? The ice age put a cap of ice around the North of the earth five kilometres thick it stretched down to just North of the site of London.
No North Sea, no English Channel, Bass Strait or sea between us and New Guinea, the water bound up as ice. Then in the space of fifty years precious little ice and the missing seas appeared in less than fifty years.
Happened fifteen thousand years ago so well within human memory!
Steel again I have to ask if solar cells are the cheapest generator of electricity why are all our bills not only double what they were but are still increasing?

For gods sake SR, how can you suggest the kiwis are rational beings we should copy, when you see what they have as a PM.

'runner,

The climatologists got it wrong?

No.

The flood did come.'

just another convenient lie you choose to believe Foxy. No wonder you live in fantasy land fed by regressives.

runner,

Ah runner, your rejection of The Story
of Noah, The Ark, and The Flood in
Genesis 6-9 indicates that you do accept
scientific evidence instead.

Gotcha!

Dear Joe,

«I won't be around but I'll bet that by 2100, the retirement (pension) age will be more like 75, or even 80. And since work is far less likely to be heavy, manual labour, 75 and 80 will be like the new 55.»

How depressing.

If you are correct, then people will be forced into slavery for even longer years than they do now. All this technology that was *supposed* to give us more free time and allow us to retire earlier, has backfired, so instead of machines serving people to allow them to do what is really important and fulfil life's true purpose, people will have to serve those machines until the age of 75-80...

Fortunately, nobody can tell the future.

Josephus you tell me it is only the media? then expect me to put a high value on your opinion?
Fact is it is scientists, not media, who wrote the report
Not activists not anything other than scientists
Yes read, understand, what New Zealand has done, then see why it has acted
Then leave the baby pen Fox/Sky news is, be brave, research other opinion, other world news about clean energy, it's increasingly lower costs
But SOME must first find the report, take the time to read it, then tell me why it [the report] is a hoax
regards

Steel, the site you posted is a journalist report on NZ, not a science journal by a reputable science on what is happening to the Earth. Take the time to listen to this site and give the scientific evidence to refute their position.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=MaN2_XT1BVo&fbclid=IwAR

The list of 11,000 includes Mickey Mouse. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/science/scientists-petition-on-climate-crisis-blocked-over-fake-signatories/news-story/eb7b2647890516320363863b8dd1caee?fbclid=IwAR3dEBDGR_Y9M4ar-UlmYazXbbgpFwA7JegN78YE93_3UcK8Q3AkeFAF0lY

Evidence would be nice. In Adelaide, we had the hottest day ever back in january, half a degree hotter than back in 1939, in a much bigger city pumping out vastly more heat. Heat has (I don't know for sure, Steele knows far more than me) something to do with temperature ?

Our beaches here suffer from natural erosion, sand taken by the current from south to north. The sea-level doesn't seem to have risen, but that might be because of constant uplift along the entire southern edge of the Australian tectonic plate (note the cliffs along the Bight), and dipping along the north coast.

So it would be nice if there were real discussions about temperature and sea-level rise, instead of hysteria, although I'll be the first to that admit hysteria has its place.

Joe

Foxy,
Listen to the full interview to gain Jacob Andrewartha credentials.
Their purpose is to destroy Democratic capitalism. The majority of the Climate activist are Marxists at the Melbourne Climate protests.

Climate activist Jacob Andrewartha says “we have every right to organise a protest because protests are inherently disruptive”.
More: http://bit.ly/2Npjmgy #TheBoltReport

Dear Josephus,

Thank you for the links and information.

There's so much information to sift through isn't
there? I'll add the following as well:

http://www.seti.org/more-than-11000-scientists-confirm-earth-climate-emergency

This link is useful because it also gives other sites you
can look up such as NASA's climate change site and a site
giving images of the effects of climate change. Also it's
worth while checking out the American Institute of Bio Science's
journal - BioScience.

There's also commentary on the study available on the BBC
and the Washington Post that are worth a read.

I missed this post before, but it is a perfect example of scientific argument on climate change by a lefty useful idiot.

Paul, "Hassy, do you still have that rain gauge in the chook pen, along with the 97 year old neighbour that proves all that climate change stuff is malarkey?

p/s Are you still smoking the dried geraniums?

As I said Belly, 11 million scientists could agree there is a climate change emergency and the forums 'Usual Suspects' would still be in denial".
Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 7 November 2019 5:06:58 AM.

An example of a mental giant among the warmist community.

The level of abuse is near to the level of refusing to see any view other than your own for some
We still have not addressed the report, some just never will
And we too refuse to see NZ is far far from going it alone in that manner
The list would be many posts long
See Foxy, a Librarian, has her sources challenged in a rude fashion
Paul let his emotions do something very very risky here, he told the truth
Steelredux has been targeted, even his intelligence, by someone clearly not qualified to judge others
Read the report understand it

Belly,

Where is the development of zero carbon nuclear being prioritised? Why is the UN persisting with a total ban on ocean fertilisation? Even OF scientific experiments are banned for the totally comical reason that the outcome of such experiments is unknown. If fifty year predictions by far from perfect software models stoked with very incomplete data should be given any credence, then why should governments be so choosy about what solutions are acceptable?

What has occurred over the past 150 years is between 0.5 and 1.0 degrees Celsius atmospheric warming and about 0.3 degrees Celsius warming of the top 700 metres of the oceans, hardly a plot line for a Hollywood apocalypse. A warming ocean may bring more rain: This could be enhanced with ocean fertilisation, but with the ban in place we wont find out if this is possible. At least the LNP wants to try a modified Bradfield scheme: All that northern rain earlier in the year might have made a difference.

Cheers

Belly do not give us news paper reports by Journalists, Give us Scientists defending their position. The report you gave us has been debunked as it also includes Mickey Mouse: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/science/scientists-petition-on-climate-crisis-blocked-over-fake-signatories/news-story/eb7b2647890516320363863b8dd1caee?fbclid=IwAR3dEBDGR_Y9M4ar-UlmYazXbbgpFwA7JegN78YE93_3UcK8Q3AkeFAF0lY

At first I thought the 11000 survey was the usual rubbish. But then I found out that one of the signatories was the famed Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore.

As we know, Dumbledore has good form in regards to championing causes where the world is threatened but the authorities are blind to the problem. Having created the cult of 'Dumbledore's Army' to fight 'he who shall not be named', he is now involved in the new cult of climate alarmism to fight an invisible gas. Very compelling data indeed.

On the other hand, another signatory was Mickey Mouse (who struggles to spell his own name). But those of us with long memories know that Mr Mouse got his start as a steamboat driver, belching smoke like there's no tomorrow (http://youtu.be/hxf-UHuGobI?t=19) - just another alarmist who refuses to practice what they preach.

Hey Josephus,

I'm not interested in journalists;
I'm not interested in scientists.

I don't want narrative and conjecture.
I don't want any part of going around in circles achieving nothing.

I'm a realist.
Give me intelligent and logical ideas with a sound economic basis;
Then give me a plan to make it happen.

- Otherwise I'll abuse everyone for their incompetence -

Those here claiming to be 'following the science' deceive - mainly themselves.

There is no "The science". There are several strands of science in regards to the current climate. There are perfectly argued papers saying that there has been warming over the past 200 years and its caused by various gasses. Equally there are perfectly argued papers saying that there has been warming but the cause is other than gasses. And papers saying that there is no warming. Or that the warming is natural and expected and maybe even welcome. Or that the warming is over.

The notion that there is a settled "The Science" is unscientific.

Previously on these pages I've shown some of these 'I'm-following-the-science people some of the contrary science. They simply refuse to accept it. Some even refuse to acknowledge it. Even when given the URL they just pretend to not notice it. Its as though its surrounded by a S.E.P (http://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Somebody_Else%27s_Problem_field)

We (humankind) have been presented with predictions of gloom as far back as we know. The Bible would be half its size if all the 'prophets' were excised. Ever since Malthus we've been told that population is a problem. We are always running out of food to feed the growing masses. We are using up resources. And yet for 200 years these population fetishists have been utterly, utterly wrong. Not just a little wrong - utterly wrong. And yet, here we are presented with the latest population alarm, and the usual crowd fall into line, forgetting the previous false predictions and treating this one as infallible.

Remember when we were told that cities like New York would be partially or fully inundated by now?

Remember when we were told Pacific Islands would go under by now?

Remember when we were told the Arctic would be ice free in summer by now?

There'd be 50 million climate refugees by now?
We'd run out of oil by now?
There'd by famine throughout the world by now?
That snow would be so rare, kids wouldn't recognise it.
That our ski industry would cease to exist because of lack of snow.
That the dams wouldn't fill.
That Perth would be a ghost-town.

And so much more.

All fervently believed at the time by the same types of people (and often the same people) who now believe this latest 'we're-all-gunna-die' malarkey.

All fervently believed with the attendant screams to 'do sumfing'.

AND ALL WRONG.

But that's the beauty of these things. These people can make all the outlandish predictions they like in the sure and certain knowledge that not only will they not be called out on it when it fails to happen, but that their followers will actively not remember the false claims.

Me? well I can't wait to see what we're all gunna die of next year. Because the one prediction that's assured to be true, is that, when these ones don't pan-out, others will take their place.

The report had much more in it, tell me are some living a substandard life
Is the climate changing? reason [left out]
Are the never seen before fires raging on the NSW coast drought or climate related
Josephus sorry old mate putting you in the never going to hear basket
Are humans polluting this world, do we need to change that
Yes the climate is changing yes the ice is melting at record levels
And yes SOME will refuse to see it
See Murdocks propaganda factory lost over 300 million dollars, needed that! good news on a bleak day
Visit NSW RBF fires near me, pull up NSW north coast
Our main highway is closed in both directions, fire rages homes burn but the climate is ok?

Belly,

The climate changes. Australia unfortunately has cooler than average sea surface temperatures in the areas from which evaporation forms much of our rainfall. Meanwhile rainfall is heavier in other areas of the globe. Why are the sea surface temperatures cooler? How anomalous are the current conditions compared with past decades and centuries?

'runner,

Ah runner, your rejection of The Story
of Noah, The Ark, and The Flood in
Genesis 6-9 indicates that you do accept
scientific evidence instead.

Gotcha!'

you certainly did Foxy! I fell in my own trap.

btw My wife had an uncle (mother's brother who recently passed on) who grew up very poor by aussie standards. He ended up head of the Agriculture Dept. in Victoria for a number of years. The rest of the family thought he was all a bit woke but were quite proud of his achievements. Probably about 7 years ago I was speaking to him (only met him about 3 times). Usually we disagreed on most things. I nearly fell off my chair when he stated what rubbish the climate change narrative was. I never did find out what changed his mind.

Hi runner,

Thanks for getting back to me.

I'm not surprised though about people changing
their minds regarding climate change. It works
both ways. Many of our friends who were rather
dubious before are slowly starting to look at things
from a different perspective.

I read the report that appeared in the American
Institute of BioScience's journal, BioScience
and the recommendations made a lot of sense,
especially that so many climate scientists endorsed
it.

Anyway, I'm still reading as much as I can on the subject.
I, like I suspect so many other people, don't quite
understand things fully - so reading up helps.
(Anything to do with science - makes my eyes glaze over).

Here's a link that I found useful from the Smithsonian.
The world's largest museum and research center in
Washington DC. I had dealings with them when I was in
charge of Inter-Library Loans at the University Library
at USC (University of Southern California) in Los Angeles.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-around-world-declare-climate-emergency-180973462/

http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/OandA/Areas/Assessing-our-climate/State-of-the-Climate-2018/Australias-changing-climate
CSIRO no less wounder who conned them?
Well worth the read, and adds to our debate, only for those with open minds however

The climate in Australia is emerging out of a mini ice age and Australia’s climate has warmed by just over 1 °C since 1910. However there is no evidence to link this to burning coal or human increase in population. As the ice melts into the oceans it will reduce the ocean temperature. This will have a wider effect on climate as cool ocean currents will reduce the amount of CO2 being released from the ocean.

CSIRO questioned in the Senate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ya1oznG-uo&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR15aEF2XxgkT00rnuh9wzd8OaPBdNlrLfQlMC9xvZp000y5VMm-FBmzfjM

Belly,

I remember a CSIRO report saying how solar was much cheaper than coal, and that nuclear was impossibly expensive, so "CSIRO" does not mean "beyond question".

Within your link:

"The year-to-year changes in Australia’s climate are mostly associated with natural climate variability such as El Niño and La Niña in the tropical Pacific Ocean and phases of the Indian Ocean Dipole in the Indian Ocean. This natural variability now occurs on top of the warming trend, which can modify the impact of these natural drivers on the Australian climate."

That is what we have currently. Also, the report only looks at the past 120 years or so and gives no consideration of the effect of a warming ocean, which lags surface warming by several decades. And what of the effect of the ozone hole? I see the report more extrapolation than insight.

Cheers

Fester get a rear vision mirror, right behind you is the mounting evidence solar and other clean energy is cheaper than you think
And getting cheaper and used more for economic reasons not climate
Some insist, on wrongly saying it is the reason we pay too much for power
Fact is privatisation, the desperate need of its new owners for profit, leads that race
To the overspending on wire delivery before those sales
Tell me PLEASE , someone explain to me why and who, conned me, who built the case the climate is changing, who said it was man made
Then as you try to force feed me the news it was or is a fraud explain to me why and who
Pacific Highway cut here over night in this areas worse EVER spring bushfire crisis, but wait! it will get far far worse

This solar farm has to switch off every second day due to negative prices
http://reneweconomy.com.au/this-solar-farm-has-to-switch-off-every-second-day-due-to-negative-prices-63529/

Hi AC,

It goes to show the success of renewables, capacity is more than meeting demand. Having the ability to "switch off" and still be meeting demand is a positive not a negative. Switching off is nothing new, your article said; "In the days when coal reigned supreme, many plants had to switch off or ramp down at times of low demand, which used to happen exclusively at night (as opposed to during the day now, mostly due to the impact of rooftop solar)". Is there a new problem?

Are we not fortunate to be in this situation;

"Some peaking gas plants operate just two per cent of the time. Some diesel plants, built under capacity payments, don’t switch on at all, because they are not needed" are we not fortunate to be in that situation."

With the high cost of gas and diesel, you would only want to operate those facilities as a last resort, in an emergency no less. Thankfully not too many emergencies.

Belly,

If we had stuck with coal fired power and built a couple of nuclear power stations, electricity would probably be cheaper and emissions lower. I have rooftop solar, but cheap and reliable batteries have yet to be developed, so going off-grid would be far more costly than paying the inflated electricity costs we have currently.

Another thing in that CSIRO report: It said that the oceans were heating as fast as the land, which is untrue. The problem we have at present is the cool water around Australia reducing evaporation. Ocean fertilisation may be able to increase ocean evaporation, but this cannot be determined while the UN ban remains.

You might want to look at the solar minimum as well. It has an association with weak el nino conditions.

Cheers

The renewables, wind and solar , cost two to three times more than coal, gas or nuclear in electricity generation and will never be cheaper than them nor as reliable. Australia is not even particularly well-endowed in wind and solar, except in the more inhospitable and remote parts of the continent.

ttbn is right in inferring that the sun rarely shines in Australia.

ttbn, instead of making broad unsubstantiated claims like; "The renewables, wind and solar , cost two to three times more than coal, gas or nuclear in electricity generation and will never be cheaper than them nor as reliable"

Why not read the facts as presented by the CSIRO;

http://publications.csiro.au/rpr/download?pid=csiro:EP178771&dsid=DS2

Sorry if the don't fit your narrative.

Fester are you aware the sunspot cycle is well understood and has existed even before men?
It is at a low point, it has low points, its full cycle, while it changes, is about 11 years
Take me on, tell me renewables cost too much
But please, do not ignore the fast growing use of it in many parts of the world
Tell me again, fossil fuel owners are saints, want to use coal to gift us cheaper power
Self delusion is never fact
Look up the link in the thread firebugs, see it right now, see the national route one as it enters its 22 hour of total shut down
Read of the fire storms here and in Queensland, tell me it is normal
Mr Opinion, you are brighter than that, lift your game
My forcast for a dreadful summer remains true, and it is not yet summer, do many understand? one of the fires, mid total fire ban, was a deliberately lite [controlled burn?]
Tinder dry here, truly horrific, and it will burn, this summer it will burn we can only hope it does not kill

So ..... it's not disputed that world temperatures have risen by about a degree over the last century ? And that sea-levels have gone up by maybe two inches ?

Is that the general consensus ? If not, then what is the 'true' story ?

Another puzzle, at least for me - well, two really:

* . a number of gases are accused of contributing to global warming (am I allowed to use that term, or 'greenhouse effect'?) - carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane, water vapour. Does anybody know how much each contributes ? And how many parts per million etc. of each of these is perfectly safe, even necessary for life ? i.e. what's the comfortable limit of - especially - CO2 ? Greenhouse operators pump CO2 into their green-houses at 1050-1200 parts per million to stimulate plant growth and proportionally increase water efficiency, after all.

* . CO2 etc. are produced, not just by human activity (as they have done since we learnt to use fire 750,000 years ago), but also by volcanoes, innumerable sub-oceanic micro-tectonic vents, all animal life, and perhaps other sources that I don't understand. Does anyone know, or have a rough idea, how much is produced by different sources ?

Another thing: what programs can be introduced to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, to partly counter the impact of the greenhouse effect ? Massive and permanent tree-planting schemes of course - useful timber trees, fruit & nut & medicinal trees and other vegetation - but what else ? Oceanic algal blooms of the right sort of algae ? Etc. Etc. - to bring CO2 in the atmosphere down to acceptable levels ?

Or should we go nuclear ? [Yes, yes, let's talk about 60-year-old technology like Chernobyl or Three-Mile Island, or keep building nuclear power stations on the beach in tsunami-prone areas, etc. ?] . France and Finland seem to be doing okay on it.

Or does everybody else but me already know 100 % the answers to these tiresome questions ?

Joe

The 11,000 persons clicked on an editorial that were supposedly called scientists. Check the persons out here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs3ZPGLPiss&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR0Gvm7ZvSxHksawPFAO3hFXaqywZfzSkByROjGUa-fpooh58o-UUAnjNsI

http://theconversation.com/stabilising-the-global-population-is-not-a-solution-to-the-climate-emergency-but-we-should-do-it-anyway-126446
That is interesting, did not need to remove the s from my link, this site or its birth place
Loudmouth this is for you, yes know is is against your thoughts but it is a part of the report we are talking about
You quoted temperature rise but some will not believe it has risen, or the sea
And my reason for posting this? clear reminder the report is about many things many that we must consider rather than just rejecting it

Belly, get a good belly laugh as you listen to the truth on these scientists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs3ZPGLPiss&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR0Gvm7ZvSxHksawPFAO3hFXaqywZfzSkByROjGUa-fpooh58o-UUAnjNsI

Dear Loudmouth,

Mate, do yourself a favour and go look these things up. It is very easy to do. You have put numerous questions to me in the past and I have endevoured to give you answers but none have changed your mind in the slightest.

Now you are here doing a rinse and repeat. Yes people know how much each of the GHGs contribute. CO2 is around 20% of the greenhouse effect which has the average global temperature at 15 degrees Celsius rather that the -18 degrees it would be without it.

And no, there is absolutely no doubt that the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 by a third is due to the burning of fossil fuels by humans.

There are all things you can find out for your self with very little effort. My question to you is why don't you do it?

If instead you were determined to stick with your position you will need to be able to demonstrate what physical property of CO2 no long applies. I have had a look and there is nothing I can see. How about you enlighten the rest of us how it could be so.

Hi Steele,

The problem is that there are so many conflicting answers to my dopey questions - who to believe ?

And neither do you put your money where your fingers are and assert something - an inch in sea-level rise ? Two metres ? A metre a year ? - and, of course, back it up. Meanwhile tides go up and down twice a day, a metre or more each time. Horrors !

Sorry, I can't take any of this seriously. I have this naive idea that the production of heat, in manufacturing, air-conditioning, cooking, etc., pushes up the temperature, especially in built-up areas like cities. Not being at all woke, but suspecting that many factors, including CO2, contribute to increases in temperature and sea-level, such as they are, I simply don't know.

But it's 12 degrees here at the moment, my phone says, three weeks away from Summer. Yep, last week and next week, it was/will be 30 degrees, so I know Summer is coming. Just not this weekend.

Pacific atolls are growing, I'm told, since that's what they do, said Darwin. Fiji has mountains above a kilometre high, much of it is safe for now. Our coast-line goes slowly up along the south coast and down on the north coast, due to tectonic activity, as the Australian Plate slips below the Pacific Plate. There is probably still some post-Ice-Age continental uplift going on in S-E Australia. Nothing stays the same for long.

I fervently wish that I could get hysterical about runaway global warming, like St Greta of the Holy Tundra. Please provide me with some definitive evidence why I should.

Here's another dopey idea, given that sea-levels have risen an inch or two in a century, how much of it might be (seriously) dumped waste - plastics, thongs, packaging, building material, car-bodies, etc., raising the world sea-level by, say, a millimetre ? And soil degradation flowing into the sea around the world - up another millimetre ? And a million ships sitting on all that water - up another millimetre ?

Meanwhile the tides .........

Joe

Loudmouth is absolutely correct! Humans do not produce greenhouse gases by burning fossil fuels.

Loudmouth has heaps of degrees in this area and has been studying it forever and knows more than anyone else. He's so good that he should be a climate change adviser to ScuMo and the LNP who also know that climate change is all just hocus pocus invented by scheming lying scientists who aren't as learned as Loudmouth.

So let's all get over it and get stuck into burning all of the coal, oil and gas we can get our hands on.

With the greatest respect appropriate to your status, Misopinionated, I disagree with your last post. Good luck with your TAFE certificate this year.

Joe

OMG Loudmouth! Are you saying you don't have degrees in this area and don't know anything about AGW and climate change. What a shock! Well that shouldn't stop you from being an adviser to ScuMo because he knows as little as you do about climate change.

Dear Loudmouth,

You write;

“And neither do you put your money where your fingers are and assert something - an inch in sea-level rise ? Two metres ? A metre a year ? - and, of course, back it up. Meanwhile tides go up and down twice a day, a metre or more each time. Horrors !”

Absolute tosh mate.

You have asked this before just two months ago and I have answered providing both quotes and sources;

Quote

“Thus, these results indicate about 11–14 cm (4–5 inches) of GMSL rise from 1901 to 1990. Tide gauge analyses indicate that GMSL rose at a considerably faster rate of about 3 mm/year ... since 1993, a result supported by satellite data indicating a trend of 3.4 ± 0.4 mm/year ... over 1993–2015 … . These results indicate an additional GMSL rise of about 7 cm ... since 1990 ... and about 16–21 cm ... since 1900.

http://science2017.globalchange.gov/chapter/12/

Let me know if you need any clarification on these figures.

End quote

Your response then?

Quote

Thanks SR,

So a rise of two degrees Celsius in the last century ? And six to eight inches of sea-level rise since 1900 ?

Right, now we have something to go on.

Cheers,

Joe

End quote

Now you are back running the same passive aggressive prevaricating crap up the flag pole again.

And you wonder why I don't take you seriously?

Read my link Joe? Loudmouth?
Any thoughts? how about the theory sea temperatures are rising down deep if not on the surface
Can we re look at the report we are talking about? see its other concerns?
My recent link needs at least a look Loudmouth
Mr O you can do better, the position of snide rude dude is already filled, you are no chance of getting it
Just opened my highway, but not to trucks, the long way around has been cut in one of the only two ways, by fire
Right now this is this state's worst fires event, long long ago as a kid fought southern highlands fire [a school] with a milk tankers load, tank water only there
57 homes went in the Blue Mountains then and about thirty others around the state
We lost 150 yesterday and over night, now? grim worse to come next week but far too many erupting right now

LM,

Re your questions...

There is a rough consensus that temperatures have risen somewhere between 0.8 and 1.2c since 1850. It depends on which temperature database you prefer. Although most people in the field would accept that number there are many who dispute it, saying there's either no or much less warming or that there is insufficient evidence to actually know the answer.

Equally in sea-level rises there's a rough consensus of around 15 - 22cm since 1900. Again many would dissent from those numbers but most would agree or at least not strongly disagree.NB: seas have been rising since the start of the Holocene, on average.

Despite what some might say here, no one knows the effectiveness or extent of warming caused by the various greenhouse gases (GHG). For example there is a concept called Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECR) which is the estimate temperature increase caused by a doubling in the level of CO2. The IPCC and most others say that number is between 1.5c and 4.5c. A range that big means they're really saying its between not much a a helluva lot. They don't know. The more we learn about the climate the lower that number gets.

I'd be really interested in understanding the mindset that just accepts these scary scenarios as gospel.

Earlier I listed a small sample of the myriad climate predictions that have proven to be just plain wrong. Yet they were all believed at the time and just as fervently as the current scares. And there was equal certainty that we needed to do something at the time. Yet nothing was done and nothing happened. The Arctic didn't melt, cities didn't flood, snow still falls, Pacific islands are still there, the 50 million climate refugees didn't eventuate.

So I'd like to know how it is that so many here and elsewhere, just disregard these previously failed claims when evaluating the validity of the new scary claims. Indeed not just disregard, but ignore them or just pretend they never happened.

What mindset allows people to be utterly hoodwinked 5, 10, 20 years ago and yet be utterly certain that this time they aren't being led down the garden path. Its no different, indeed precisely the same thinking that occurs in religious cults where the faithful are told the world will end on so-and-so a time and, when it doesn't occur, just accept the new end-date as though the previous prediction never happened.

But I wish I understood how people 'think' like that. Or what it would take to snap them out of their delusions.

Paul,

The CSIRO is merely another tax-wasting department where you get your second hand lies from.

Speak to the Chinese and Indians if you think that there is a 'climate emergency'.

China has 1,032 coal-fired power stations currently in operation, and a further 126 under construction. India 291 coal plants and 33 more on the way.

Australia has 20, and none on the drawing board

CSIRO is our pre-eminent public research organisation.
And its science is world class. It is sad that to
some people none of that matters.

In general, the most industrialised nations are now
actively trying to limit the effects of pollution,
but the populous less developed societies are more
concerned with economic growth, and tend to see pollution
as part of the price they have to pay for it.

About 360 billion tonnes of shipping to raise sea level by 1mm, Joe. It's a big bath tub.

Belly,

A coal fired power station can pump out electricity at capacity for 85% of the time it operates. On average, solar panels will put out 25% of capacity per day, with substantial variation within and between days, as well as seasonal and geographic variation. Like Alan's thorium reactor, a one gigawatt 24/7 renewable power system is yet to be built. I think the thorium reactor would be far cheaper and easier.

Here is a link discussing the relation of enso to solar cycles:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/05/solar-minimum-and-enso-prediction/

Cheers

The highlight of this thread is "EMERGENCY!" So it is supposed to scare us into action, to pack our essentials and be ready to board the nearest craft. But look at the people calling the emergency! Every news Channel around the world reported it even our SBS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs3ZPGLPiss&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR0Gvm7ZvSxHksawPFAO3hFXaqywZfzSkByROjGUa-fpooh58o-UUAnjNsI

Sounds like the Marxist political scam that it is, promoted as an emergency by those susceptible to scams.
Sea levels in Sydney: http://saltbushclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/sea-levels-sydney.pdf

I think I will move back to Sydney, as tide levels there are lower than they have been in past measurements

Thanks, Fester.

Someone asserted that renewable energy was already cheaper than coal- or gas-fired energy. So it would be cheaper to produce wind towers and solar panels, etc., by using renewable energy generation instead of fossil-fuel-generated energy ?

Really ?

Joe

This is where the Emergency began for Greta:

Quote"This should do our POSTER CHILD for MENDACITY. The former Maldives President Mohammed Nasheed, who famously held an underwater cabinet meeting in the Maldives in November 2009. The meeting, chaired by President Mohamed Nasheed, took place around a table 5 metres underwater. Bubbles ascended from the face masks the president and the Cabinet wore, and fish swam around them. At the meeting, the Cabinet signed a declaration calling for global cuts in carbon emissions that will be presented before a U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen, Denmark, in December 2009. Asked what would happen if Copenhagen fails, the president said, "we are all going to die."

We are ALL going to die! Well yes, but many not be by drowning, I'm now 80.


Nasheed has since been ousted from office, and the new Maldives government is front and centre in promoting high-class tourism on islands only centimetres above the high tide mark. The lying and hypocrisy is rank."

Dear mhaze,

Make sure you copy and paste your answers to Loudmouth's questions. He will be back within a few months to ask the same ones again.

As to predictions that the Arctic will be ice free at some stage in summer they are perfectly on track. The fact that there have been some overly enthusiastic calls on when that will be does not negate one iota the fact that the trajectory is very much headed in that direction.

https//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Disappearing_Ice.webm

I am curious why you latch on to these top end predictions by a very small number of the scientific community and use them to toss out the notion that the ice retreat is happening at all.

It surely must take a deep level of delusion to allow such a personal deception. How do you manage it?

As to what a warmer climate look like this is an example;

http://twitter.com/weatherdak/status/1192718035603189760

Dear Josephus,

Mate, sketchy youtube clips and amateurish 'papers' are hardly of sufficient weight to make your case. Care to find something a little more substantial for us.

The only ones with that worry about climate change are people with something to loose, and them wats inclined to panic.

I'm neither of those, so good night!

Dan

There's a climate emergency around the Glen Innes district, the Mayor of Glen Innes has declared that the bushfire that went through the village of Wytallibah was due to climate change.

Is Mise, If only they could catch that bastard Climate Emergency and imprison him for arson!

I see Steel glosses over and not reads or opens links, so imagines what is written. Probably low energy by seven at night.

Again, did any single poster read the report
Or the second link that, looked at population?
Yes the anti climate changers are at full voice, even reminding my side we are victims of a con
Yet to see why and by who
Yet to see science from the it is not true side, from experts in climate
Josephus mate, you are becoming lost in a world of your own, one that in truth never existed
In this thread at least the anti climate change case is shallow and bitter
Tell me why a con is in play

Dear Is Mise,

You are one of the few people who are now seeing the current spate of bushfires in Australia as a consequence of climate change.

As an environmental sociologist I saw this coming a long time ago and I have formed the opinion that the climate in these areas is now fixed. What I mean by that is that a tipping point may have occurred and the climate has no chance of returning to what we knew as normal with periods of drought followed by rain followed by good weather. I think we now will just have drought followed by drought followed by more drought.

Humankind only has itself to blame for causing climate change with its uncontrolled burning of fossil fuels that is heating the planet. Actually I stand corrected: it is not all of humankind that is responsible, it is just people like ScuMo, Tony Abbott, John Howard, etc.

I said a long time ago that northern NSW and southern Qld were destined to become dust bowls and it's looking like I am going to be proven correct.

Belly,

I felt the CSIRO report pumping renewables and trashing coal and nuclear was ideologically motivated and deliberately misleading. Many people believe that renewables can completely replace coal and supply cheaper electricity. The anti-nukes remain as militant as ever, blind to the fact that French nuclear power will make up the shortfall for Germany's renewable odyssey, let alone the French example of nuclear power providing low carbon electricity safely, reliably and cheaply.

Why is nuclear power a heresy in the Church of Climate Change?

I wasn't quoting me, but the Mayor of Glen Innes who is a well known Greenie and lives (lived, as her houses were burned) at Wytallabah, something of a Green community nestled among the gumtrees.

TV is shewing the result of having your houses surrounded by fire accelerant trees.

More devastating, but not unusual, bushfires in NSW and Queensland; and, also not unusual, the mad dogs are barking about 'man made climate change'. The only man made thing about bushfires is the failure to clean up undergrowth and take sensible precautions if you want to live in the scrub. The Sydney Morning Herald's rubbish-talking ratbag heroine this time is the mayor of Innes. This woman,apparently, is an expert in climate change and bushfires. Perhaps we should get rid of the professional politicians and replace them with bored, batty housewives wasting their brilliance on local councils.

Dear Is Mise,

Sorry about that. So you are saying you are a climate change denialist?

Misoppinionated you said, "As an environmental sociologist I saw this coming a long time ago and I have formed the opinion that the climate in these areas is now fixed. What I mean by that is that a tipping point may have occurred and the climate has no chance of returning to what we knew as normal with periods of drought followed by rain followed by good weather. I think we now will just have drought followed by drought followed by more drought."

What absolute nonsense, Queensland during that same time had the biggest flood they had ever recorded; costing the country $1.243 billion. So Queensland are the good guys who burn less coal and NSW the coal environazis. You cannot have it both ways. The Alpine winter has been some of the best snow falls in years. Snow is water, not drought. It is just that drought happens to fit your political agenda.
Be aware of the world around you, not opinion based in your computer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Townsville_flood

Dear Josephus,

I didn't know Townsville was in southern Qld. Thanks for correcting me. You are a wise man; it is no wonder as to why they call you Josephus.

Once people had a degree of faith in institutions like the CSIRO. Since the total corruption has been revealed in the deep south in the US more and more have lost any confidence in bureaucracy. Bom seem to think its fine to fiddle with data and ensure it fits their narrative. The anti coal bigots have shown themselves to be desperate and dishonest while raking in billions of tax payer money in questionable renewable scams.

OK let us continue to ignore the report that started this thread
Too everyone including the UN who warns us the climate is changing
Even us, yes almost every poster in the recent thread Climate, agreed it is changing
Doubt anyone elected Mayor in Glen Innes is green, BUT yes some things are weird
ABC radio interviewed the Taree Mayor [good bloke but] see he lives northwest of our two fires, and is in no danger, but they thought he was
Now read the thread, do please, take not of the charges laid against believers, then look for the basic evidence to support those claims, try to find some
Tell me again man has no impact on the environment zero on climate, and very little needs changing
I need the grin

SR,

Thanks for helping make my point. The true believers just ignore and/or minimise the past predictions and go week-kneed at the new predictions.

Now according to SR, the predictions are on track because the Arctic will be ice free at some time. But the predictions were more specific than that. They were predicting 2013-14 or before 2020. And not a few but the ubiquitous "scientists". eg from the BBC in 2007 "Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.
Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years."

And that nice Mr Gore won a Nobel (and made a sh!tload o money) by predicting 2013.

But, as I stated, when the prediction fails, the clueless just move onto the next prediction.

And the Arctic isn't even moving in the right direction for your claims to be true. While the trend-line (you remember trend-lines, I taught you about them a few years back) for 1979-2006 was for progressively less ice, the trend-line for 2007 to 2018 has been progressively more ice. So your assertion (ie a claim without basis) that "the fact that the trajectory is very much headed in that direction." is utterly wrong.

Still as George Costanza explained... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ

Oh, by the way, your link was rubbish.

So still we see the true-believers trying hard to forget all the past false-predictions and fervently believing the current false predictions. And so it goes.

So Belly, would you like to explain to me why you now so strongly believe the current set of predictions when so many of the previous similar predictions were shown to be wrong. I can't help but notice that you are assiduously avoiding that problem.

Yes the climate is changing. Always has been...always will. Yes its a little hotter now than 100 years ago.

But we had bushfires 100 years ago. We had drought 100 yrs ago. And floods. and cyclones/hurricanes. and rising seas. and new record high temperatures and new record low temperatures.

But even after all that, even if these predictions of impending doom are even plausible, there remains no evidence that anything we (Australia) do will make the slightest difference to the outcome.

Belly it never occurred to me to believe you were silly enough to actually take seriously anything coming out of the UN, but in your last post you appear to be trying to force me to such a belief.

I don't see how anyone could believe anything that Mr O stated his belief in. Such a ratbag should convince anyone to doubt anything he believes.

A quick thought about our fire history would be enough to convince any rational human being with half a brain that nothing has changed.

Remember ash Wednesday, & it's occurrence long before any increase in CO2 occurred.

Dear mhaze,

Back gilding the lily as always.

These 'ubiquitous scientists' were clearly defined in the article as Professor Wieslaw Maslowski and his group.

The same bloody article quoted a Dr Mark Serreze from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) which collects the observational data on the extent of Arctic sea ice, delivering regular status bulletins.

"A few years ago, even I was thinking 2050, 2070, out beyond the year 2100, because that's what our models were telling us. But as we've seen, the models aren't fast enough right now; we are losing ice at a much more rapid rate. "My thinking on this is that 2030 is not an unreasonable date to be thinking of."

He even said of Maslowski "I think Wieslaw is probably a little aggressive in his projections, simply because the luck of the draw means natural variability can kick in to give you a few years in which the ice loss is a little less than you've had in previous years.”

As to trend lines (sigh) all you did was reveal how much your cherry picking was breath-taking back then and I have little doubt that is what you are trying to push here.

However I would be kind of interested to see how you have managed to come up with this claim;

“And the Arctic isn't even moving in the right direction for your claims to be true. While the trend-line (you remember trend-lines, I taught you about them a few years back) for 1979-2006 was for progressively less ice, the trend-line for 2007 to 2018 has been progressively more ice. So your assertion (ie a claim without basis) that "the fact that the trajectory is very much headed in that direction." is utterly wrong.”

Especially given we currently sit at the second lowest extent and area for this time of year.

http://neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov/csb/index.php?section=234

Oh and why was my link 'rubbish'? All it did was show satellite imagery turned into a gif. Are you that brain addled you won't accept such a format?

Dear Hasbeen,

Measurements started in Hawaii in 1959 have been recording exponential increases in CO2 to today, which is definitely before the Ash Wed fires of 1983.

This is the problem when untrained people are constantly sticking their beak into subjects they have no qualifications in. I can understand why climatologists feel like they're fighting a lost cause trying to make the general public aware of the problems of AGW and climate change. A case of knowledge versus ignorance.

Mr o. Please tell us why we have record floods in middle OLD and record droughts in South western QLD during the same period, According to your knowledge which you learned at Uni, you can now predict [foresaw you said] these happening.

"As an environmental sociologist I saw this coming a long time ago and I have formed the opinion that the climate in these areas is now fixed." No the problem you see is an opportunity to pipe water from the north to the south, but a sociologist you only see the problems not the answers. This is the challenge!

So can I ask you when it is going to rain in the drought areas? The farmers are relying on your knowledge so as to plant crops. In 1951 Indigo Jones predicted the big drought in the new century and his calculations had it breaking in 14/11/2019, but others using his same calculations put it in 4/05/2020. I see you now learned weather predictions at University based on Climate science. We just want to know when will it rain to make the rivers flow? I suppose your university lecturer was a Marxist socialist, they seem to have all the clues on Climate, especially the coming doom of mankind.

When most of us on this site have been around for 80+ years we have seen a few things, droughts, floods, fires etc. We have not seen the people along the beach fronts moving to higher ground, or the cities on Australian ports abandoning their ports and building new ports on higher ground. Perhaps that is a career path you could pursue. Big money in Ports building especially now the sea levels are changing!

No it is all a lot of hot air incinerating birds and wind clobbering rare night birds, we are seeing; even that air will be cooled as the ice melts and water covers more land and we will have to return to coal fires to keep us warm.

MrOpinion,

Not at all, I simply quoted the Green Mayor of Glen Innes, she is getting a lot of sympathy; at the town markets this morn a local was heard to say that he had intended to take up a collection for her but his wife objected and wouldn't lend him one of her thimbles.

Oh dear SR,

The article I linked was a mere example or the myriad of similar stories. You manage to find one guy in there that has a slightly longer time frame and then, you assert that he's the really-trooly scientist.

Google "Arctic ice free 2013" and you'll get over 32 million finds. I think people were talking about despite your fading or convenient memory.

This article might help ... http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/09/12/remember-all-those-breathy-predictions-about-an-ice-free-arctic-by-2015-nevermind/#726d1533aa19

Re trend-lines. Still re-writing history I see. Way back, when I pointed out there were 100s of trend-lines concerning the so-called climate pause, you were aghast that there was more than one. I had to explain why. But its a just another inconvenient truth that is now residing in the memory-hole.

So out of all the failed predictions over the decades you pick one where some scientists didn't make the same erroneous prediction and think that vindicates all the other failed predictions. Oh dear.

As to your rubbish link I was refer to the first one in your post.... https//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Disappearing_Ice.webm

As to the facts...minimum sea ice extent has INcreased by 10% since 2007. The lowest ever (well since 1981) was 2012. If its moving in the direction you say, why is it higher now than then?

Belly,

You wanted to know how you'd been duped?

Try watching this.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs3ZPGLPiss

I suspect you won't bother or won't get too far in but at least watch the first 10 minutes and then explain to us (and yourself) how you were taken in.

Mr O,

"Measurements started in Hawaii in 1959 have been recording exponential increases in CO2 to today"

False. False. and False.

Do you know what exponential means? Obviously not.

Mhaze first glad to see you back many wished you well in that link before your op
Well let me be honest Hasbeen take note, please
See I believe some conspiracies are very very real
And that the anti climate change story is one
As well think, totally, *fake news * is too
That those who charge others with it, *invented it*
And use it to protect wealth privilege and defy the truth, DAILY
Science I trust science, know mother nature is a myth, no such thing exists, *only natural selection*
Can any one show me some thing humanity has not damaged in the post birth of the industrial revolution, just one thing
So yes I believe in mans damage to the climate, I understand [ham radio operators do] the earths different layers, they affect radio communications
See sporadic ionisation of the E layer, love some now
Do we admit to adding anything to any of those layers?
I do, man has not stopped putting profit before planet

Climate scientist says she resigned because it has become too political to disagree with the politics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg_I8QypcvM&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR2nPIHTdWj6srZ7IoJv0YrohMqRS8M4i36DV8rHHR4QgXX26IM932w2FFw

It is unfortunate that so many things are being politicised
these days.

Dear Foxy,

The only thing that can save the environment and humankind from destruction is socialism. We cannot escape from political action. Socialism or capitalism? The choice is ours.

Dear Mr Opinion,

Socialism is not as innovative or productive as capitalism.
It also gives the government a great deal of
power. Government leaders can abuse their
position and claim power for themselves.

Not an ideal situation.

Perhaps a combination of socialism and capitalism
would be a better result?

Dear mhaze,

Utter rot. Now you are just making things up.

Firstly you say; “You manage to find one guy in there that has a slightly longer time frame”

Not at all, there was one other scientist mentioned in the article a Professor Peter Wadhams from Cambridge University, UK, who is an expert on Arctic ice, and he too said it may not be as early as 2013 as well.

Then I asked you to substantiate this;

“And the Arctic isn't even moving in the right direction for your claims to be true. While the trend-line (you remember trend-lines, I taught you about them a few years back) for 1979-2006 was for progressively less ice, the trend-line for 2007 to 2018 has been progressively more ice. So your assertion (ie a claim without basis) that "the fact that the trajectory is very much headed in that direction." is utterly wrong.”

You replied with;

“As to the facts...minimum sea ice extent has INcreased by 10% since 2007. The lowest ever (well since 1981) was 2012. If its moving in the direction you say, why is it higher now than then?”

I had said; “As to trend lines (sigh) all you did was reveal how much your cherry picking was breath-taking back then and I have little doubt that is what you are trying to push here.”

And boy was I right. You picked what you thought was the second lowest year on record (2007) and then tried to say there isn't a problem because the subsequent years did not reach that far.

Well it so happens the minimum extent reached on Sept 18 2007 was 4.16 million km2. The provisional results for this year was 4.15.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2019/09/arctic-sea-ice-reaches-second-lowest-minimum-in-satellite-record/

Hardly an increase of 10%. was it, rather a decrease. Grow up.

As to the animation it came from NASA. Why do you struggle with it?

Dear Foxy,

I wonder if Misopinionated is actually a Chinese or Russian troll ? He/she has that naivety of a young, true believer, if you know what I mean nudge nudge wink wink.

Socialism now has a very long and detailed (I won't say 'rich') history - a history of the inevitable degeneration of 'fine principle' into a sort of left-wing fascism, time and again, a history of the dangers of total power, of brutality, of callous disregard for humanity. It's an evil system, and I have to confess to having supported it for nearly fifty years, until the Tien An Men massacres.

Democracy, on the other hand, is an imperfect, forever-unfinished, messy system which, as Churchill noted, is superior to any other system. The ultimate alternative to democracy is only fascism.

Joe

Joe

Ahh! Mr O is a Marxist. Of course he has a degree in social engineering. Capitalism is evil and communism has the answers. Unfortunately he has not lived long enough to know the real difference of both systems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpVv49v8BLQ
It is a wonder that the brilliant Mr O did not share his marks equally with the dumbest kid in his class, he wanted to excel over all. He is a rotten capitalist for not making himself share with the Fail lot so that it brought their score up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEa8DpheXkM

Dear Loudmouth and Josephus,

Give it a rest. Unless you are prepared to decry socialised medicine ie Medicare and spruik for a system like the US then you two are socialists. Are you?

How is adopting Medicare going to lead to "the inevitable degeneration of 'fine principle' into a sort of left-wing fascism"?

Dear Foxy,

You did not properly comprehend what I said.

Dear Mr Opinion,

If I misunderstood you then kindly explain
what you did mean.

<Unless you are prepared to decry socialised medicine ie Medicare and spruik for a system like the US then you two are socialists. Are you?>

I think mercy and kindness to others precedes socialism by quite a bit. If you want to see socialised medicine in action, then look at Venezuela's health care system. At least the doomsayers there are being placated with a humanitarian catastrophe. Those waiting for the world destroying evil capitalism to be wiped out by the avenging climate change will need a little more patience.

Cheers

Steel, That is why we have non taxpayers from the third world flocking here for social welfare, and the socialists complain when non citizens do not receive equally the labour of our hands for which we have paid. Ultimately the whole system fails as it is easier to be on welfare than spend half our income on taxes. Wait till everyone goes of private insurance and see how the system works.

Climate scaremongering is a Marxist agenda supported by the Muslim UN.

Dear Foxy,

Unfortunately I cannot because to do that I would need to draw on the knowledge gained under my qualifications and that would be totally anathema to others. No, I must plead ignorance in order to placate others who would shame me for my asocial desire to be seen as myself. I am but a poor philosophical harlot. O shame on me.

Dear Mr Opinion,

" Every harlot was a virgin once."

(William Blake).

Churchill got it right but it may well be time to give capitalism a heart
This whole debate is weighted down by those who profit by not addressing climate change and the whole list of this the report is telling us
Evivence? science? put your head out the window, see the bush fires , look at the very true record breaking drought, see how long ago the last one was
Then tell me the climate is not changing
Our national highway was closed for three days
Opened only to be closed again as fire travels from the sea to forests right up to that highway
We humans will address these issues or we will see hundreds die as fires such as last year in Greece, this years in California, and our horrific ones in WA QLD and NSW are not yet near over

Belly, Earth climate is bigger than local weather conditions.

This is the weather - Tell us how Townsville can have the biggest flood ever recorded while in the same State same time, can have the biggest drought ever recorded. Tell us how human emissions of CO2 has caused the difference in air streams, and include Kilauea in Hawaii spewing toxic fumes for years. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WolhhbcOtYw and Indonesian volcanoes: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=indonesian+volcanoes&ie=&oe=

These are not predictable and affect air quality that stream through wind paths. Take these into account in forecasting weather patterns across Australia. Now tell us this is the set pattern we can expect now in those areas, as Mr Opinion states

I wonder how ScuMo is going to explain his lack of interest in climate change in the wake of the firestorms this week. I know! he can blame Labor. What a brilliant idea.

Mr O, Lets find the culprit that is lighting the fires, and we will know who to blame. Looking at your contribution to Climate it is obvious you like the blame game. That is why you want to destroy Capitalism.

SR,

1. The link I was referring to wasn't the NASA video but this one (https//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Disappearing_Ice.webm). I don't really care. I just pointed it out because I thought you might like to fix it if you thought it was material. I'm sure you understand what I was talking about but as per usual try to obfuscate to avoid admitting an error, no matter how minor. I used to find your practice of playing to fool to avoid admitting error to be disturbing but now its just funny and sad.

2. Re the sea ice extent. I was using 2018 data not preliminary 2019 data. Prelim data is subject to change and often significant change.

3. My original point was that the predictions made by 'scientists' that the Arctic would be ice free by 2013 was wrong. Try as you might, that remains a fact. Now it may be that, in SR-land, when someone says it'll happen in 2013 they mean 2023, 2033 or the 12th of never ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNNRGa3pKyw) but in adult-world it means 2013. The prediction was ubiquitous and wrong which was my point. The current crop of predictions will suffer the same fate and the same bunch of true-believers will do their best to forget the error.

4. Whatever the momentary sea ice extent, the fact is, if its going to become ice free it needs to be declining in extent year on year on average.Its not. Its no closer to being ice free now than it was a decade ago. Its simply a failed prediction. But then again it wasn't a prediction - it was just more propaganda in the great scare campaign.

So Belly, I'm guessing you didn't watch the link I posted. Good idea.

Just for clarification the video shows:

1. The new report isn't new. It contains zero new data.

2. It wasn't put together by 11000 scientists but by one guy who then invited others to 'like' it. 11000 did so.

3. The vast majority of the 11000 aren't scientists at all but just climate alarmists. Belly, you could have signed it.

The International Disaster Database reports that the risk of danger from weather has fallen by 99% over the past century. We are getting fewer cyclones, and the planet is getting greener.

Everything about this "11,000 scientists" story was absolute rubbish. The alarmist fiction was put on the internet for any idiot to sign, which is what idiots did.

But, certain posters will continue making fools of yourselves, with their pathetic references to every nutbag site they can find. It's unlikely that they will ever emerge from their caves into the light

NASA, CSIRO, Smithsonian, and 11,000 scientists,
climate scientists, from over 153 different countries
all live in caves?

Wow! Who says we can't learn anything on this forum.
The previous thing we learned from this poster was that
"Leftists" lived under rocks.

Seems to be a bit of a pattern in thinking - here.
Perhaps there should be a need for this person to get
out from under and into the sun light - for some
enlightenment?

Just a thought.

'I wonder how ScuMo is going to explain his lack of interest in climate change in the wake of the firestorms this week. I know! he can blame Labor. What a brilliant idea.'

hopefully by calling out idiotic Greens who oppose back burning and then have the audacity to use people's misfortune to push their gw religion.

Dear mhaze,

Come on young fella, you can do better than that. All you had to do was look at the Wikipedia source and you would have found this link;

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4616

Most definitely from NASA.

Now please don't engage in your normal "practice of playing to fool to avoid admitting error" because it use "to be disturbing but now its just funny and sad".

Now the fact that a small group of scientists predicted 2013 as the date the Arctic would be ice-free and were wrong is not in dispute. But what you are extremely disingenuously attempting to do is claim this was the opinion of the wider scientific community which it most definitely was not. Please stop.

As to the sea ice extent the only thing that held up confirming the figure was the fact that "Changing winds or late-season melt could still reduce the Arctic ice extent, as happened in 2005 and 2010." That figure is now accepted as confirmed. Not only that the October data is even bleaker.

"Arctic sea ice extent averaged for October 2019 was 5.66 million square kilometers (2.19 million square miles), the lowest in the 41-year continuous satellite record. This was 230,000 square kilometers (88,800 square miles) below that observed in 2012—the previous record low for the month—and 2.69 million square kilometers (1.04 million square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average."

Therefore when you write;

"Its no closer to being ice free now than it was a decade ago."

It's rubbish! The outliers are becoming the norm indicating a trajectory to everyone but the most indoctrinated.

Wonder how my detractors would judge man made climate change if it was not linked in any way to fossil fuels?
See protecting just that, is the basic reason a campaign to deny it exists
Mhaze have read yours and everyone's posts, always do, but just drove 45 klm north
Right into the heart of a still burning bush fire, it will take two decades[ with normal rainfall] to get near what it was
Now yes *as another said* climate change did not light the fires firebugs did
Around here schools are closed, so another fire is likely, but not every firebug is a child
The biggest dry in living memory contributed, ,climate change?
Who knows but again put your head out the window, read other than SkyFox Fake News

"NASA, CSIRO, Smithsonian, and 11,000 scientists,
climate scientists, from over 153 different countries
all live in caves?"

What did I say about "certain posters" making fools of themselves!

I said these posters were the ones living in caves, not people I don't know, and who don't make fools of themselves daily on OLO. The sort of fool who has chosen to ignore the latest information that "11,000 scientists" don't exist. The sort of fool who just keeps on posting rubbish hoping to get a rise out of other posters because she has nothing better to do, and "needs" to keep doing it because she has "serious health problems" (she has actually posted this stuff) that she likes to keep us up to date with them at every opportunity. The sort of fool who buddies up with another fool to rabbit on about about people who "put off" new posters when she and her buddy top the list of suspects in that regard

ttbn,

Don't take yourself so seriously.

No one else does.

We know that you never really want to hurt anyone.

You just feel it an obligation.

We get it.

You're the same old sausage, fizzing and sputtering
in your own grease.

It would help your mental well-being if you were to
come out from down under -
into the sunlight every now and then.

Keep on trolling Foxy; it seems to be all you have in life.

Runner Scomo,s most telling comment was made a few years ago at Maccas in his local suburb
My thoughts are with Queenslanders today along with WA and SA my state too
After the fires if we see and after this summer, it will remain tragic as we take stock, insects and such most animals did not escape this holocaust
Hurts to know some maybe most are deliberate acts, we know kids started at least two massive blazes not yet under control
Foxy is targeted so am I because we believe in the science, we are joined by massive numbers of humans all over the world
Those who may read our words in fifty year may well know my thought the anti change team is part of the Fake News conspiracy, I do already, and you can indeed sell some people anything

'In August, environmentalists celebrated the protests staged 40 years ago against logging of the Terania Creek rainforest in NSW.
https://www.abc.net.au/…/terania-creek-anti-loggin…/11406660
Today, the same forest is being destroyed by bushfire.
The same people that jumped in front of bull dozers back then are the same ones blaming these bush fires on climate change.
“The forest wars” in the late 70s and early 80s saw 900,000 hectares of native forests in NSW and Qld converted to national park.
NSW now has more than 870 national parks and reserves totalling over 7 million hectares. Queensland 8.2 million hectares.
Today, large areas of national park estate in NSW and Queensland are being incinerated by fires that could have been avoided.' Malcom Roberts

Meanwhile the Marxist will cash in on the gullible while people die and lose their properties. And if anyone was to link the deaths to abortion laws!

We should focus our effort on Human Change & the emergency it causes !

ttbn,

You have no idea what I or anyone else has in life.

However, your deep need to complain is
obvious for all to see.

11000 scientists??

A check was done on all the Canadian signatures. Almost no climate scientists found and indeed few actual scientists.

A check was done on all the German signatures. Almost no climate scientists found and indeed few actual scientists.

And now?....the page where the signatures are listed is now unavailable.

They say its because of technical problems. I'm sure all those who fell for the 11000 story will fall for that as well.

SR writes: "the fact that a small group of scientists predicted 2013 as the date the Arctic would be ice-free and were wrong is not in dispute. "

Well it took an effort to get to even that admission, but small mercies.

IF you google arctic ice free 2013 you get over 32,000,000 hits. So maybe not a small group. Remember people pushing this prediction got a Nobel. And money, money money.

But its always the way these things go. The same thing happened with the old ice age scare. At the time it was everywhere and widely accepted. Then it didn't happen. Now the true-believers will tell you no-one really bought it.

Same with the Arctic 2013 story. Its everywhere, widely pushed, no real dissenters among the alarmist community. Then come 2014 and suddenly we're told no one really bought it.

The predictions in this silly report will suffer the same fate. OMG we have to act now or its all over. And then in a year or two, we'll be told the same thing all over again. And the same people will buy it all over again.

The circle of life.

Dear mhaze,

Well let's look at your record in the last few posts.

You said there was only one person in the article indicating a longer time frame – there were more.

You said the trend of Arctic ice extent was increasing – it is decreasing.

You said "Its no closer to being ice free now than it was a decade ago." - there was less ice in October just gone than there has ever been from when records started.

You claimed the animation wasn't from NASA – it was.

And now you are claiming that the number of Google hits as evidence of something.

Done and dusted once again. Time to give it a rest mate.

May I politely suggest the following link as being
worth a read from the Smithsonian - the world's
largest museum and research center (19 museums and 9
research centers and affiliates around the world).
It may help clarify a few things:

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-around-world-declare-climate-emergency-180973462/

Good news everyone. There's no climite emergency. Find something else and stop wasting your time on this. But do try to take care of the enviornment. Just because there's no climite change doesn't mean a damn thing if your weeds cause a wild fire, your cities choke out the breathable air, your water is used up or un-drinkable.

Either way. Move on. Your burning daylight wasting breath on fake emergencies.

another quote from fire fighter you won't hear on abc

'Smith said the environmental authorities who have a put a stop to reduction burns — which include controlled burning, mechanical clearing like slashing undergrowth, or even reducing the ground fuel by hand — “need to be held personally accountable for the losses people have endured. People have lost their lives as a direct result of the decisions made by the environmental authorities!”

The firey ended the post, asking, “Tell me why these enviros shouldn’t be stood up in front of a judge and charged with manslaughter? Enough is enough!”

https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/rural-firefighters-heartbreaking-plea/news-story/602b8b84c7092a232fd6fdceecb37f86

Belly, if we are both around in f years, tell me again that what you currently believe was the "SCIENCE".

Dear NNS,

Sorry old chap but I don't think it is all that seemly for someone who is obsessed with believing something they have zero evidence for is trying to tell people that regardless of the science there is 'nothing to see here'.

Of course global warming is real unless the physical properties of CO2 have miraculously been altered by divine intervention.

Unfortunately SR you need a bit of Math to understand how the properties really work.

If you had enough you would know it can't possibly do what the UN IPCC & people like you claim.

http://nswnationalparksandwildlifeservice.cmail19.com/t/r-l-jdhrhtid-uumcuudd-y/

All National Parks and picnic grounds closed.

To SR.

Look at the track record of climite change, and of it's alarmed emergencies. If climite change exists, it isn't the way it's described by climite change narratives. And it definately isn't an emergancy. How many times does a cause have to cry wolf before you realize it's not credible? Move on dude. Take care of the enviornment but don't follow a known lie.

Will those who think man made climate change is a fraud take a breath?
Think just for a minute who gains by such a fraud, tell us who
Then consider my view, Fake News is the product of the right
They use it constantly, to smother the truth
Is it not just as likely you are a victim of fraud as you say I am
Yes, the quote [please take the s from your link so it works] those PC tree huggers do bring us firestorms
Not letting winter burns take place
Some of you, in NSW at least, know local government asks for far too much paperwork to let burns take place, so they do not
BUT surely we have ex firefighters here? it is just *too dry* to risk winter burns in some areas
NNS you confidence is misplaced read other than Sky/Fox generated FAKE NEWS
Hope we all get this day/week over safely

Emergency:

A sudden unforeseen crisis (usually involving danger) that requires immediate action.

By no definition of the word is climate change an emergency, and Climate emergency is an oxymoron declared by virtue signalling greenymorons.

Dear Shadow Minister

A lot of people probably see you as an oxymoron: A know-all-know-nothing who knows everything.

Hi Belly,

Are all things okay down your way? Niece in Penrith has been told to watch out for burning embers in neighbourhood around house, expected to travel up to 30km.

Mr Opinion,

If the gibberish in your last post was the best you could come up as an ad hominem I can't feel threatened by you, only pity.

PS I've tried to us small words.

Belly, it's not the news agency that causes me to disbelieve. It's being observant. Over the years I've heard the cause for climite change corrections. And I believed it. Then time passes and you see what's happened and what hasn't happened. The whole issue is like a child crying wolf when there is no wolf. Over and over again until there is no credibility.

And that's my issue with all if this. The lack of credibility combined with the closeness climite change causes are with the general causes to protect the enviornment, and clean up polution. It's not a matter of IF climate change is publically denounced as a mistake or worse a fraud; it's a matter of WHEN climite change is counted as a mistake or a fraud. Personally I don't want all the other efforts of preserving natural resources, cleaning up polutions and better waste management systems to be set aside because they are all tied too closely to a lie repeated over and over again.

My position is that the truth should be the standard, not scare tactics. So far that is a standard that climate change narratives fail to hold up to. Move along, and waste your breath on this sham no more.

On that note though Belly, you've asked a question. Who started this lie, and what do they have to gain. I assume that if I don't have an answer then you think that that proves I'm wrong?

I'm not a cop and it's not my intent to put those responsible to justice. There are theories and accusations that I've heard, some of them make sense too. Others just might be a possibility in order to throw one's adversaries under the bus. I'm sure you've seen the same people and the same groups blamed for promoting climite change for their gain.

Doesn't matter. Those who are ether foolish enough or powerful enough to continube such a sham, are unlikely to recieve any punishment, or repercussions. They are either too powerful (as some conspiracy theories perpose such as saying these lies are communist propaganda to weaken western societies) and they are not going to be put to justice anyways. Or they are the foolish ill informed public and scientists that don't know how the world climate works well enough to see they are doped or mistaken. No justice or negitive repercussions for them either, it's too large a group.

What does matter is the loss of concern and confidance over enviornmental issues. That's the real concern. Imagine all of the progress for preserving the enviornment lost because it is tied to an ongoing uncreditible lie. Personally I like natural reservations too much to throw them away for WHEN climate change is scattered as the lie that it is.

Dear NNS,

Firstly mate you really need to put a sock in it. My understanding is you aren't an Australian and right now probably isn't the time to be calling the whole thing a lie.

We have our biggest capital city under threat of catastrophic fire conditions today, something that has not been flagged before.

We have the extraordinary circumstance of both California burning while we have catastrophic fires occurring here.

Significant firefighting aircraft like Elvis use to be able to be shared between the hemispheres but that looks increasingly problematic given the extended fire seasons in both countries due to climate change.

To have a group of 23 former fire chiefs with over 600 years of experience seeking for months but not getting a meeting with our prime minister to warn about the exact same scenario NSW is facing now is very unsettling.

This is an emergency, we very much need action now and to be planning for a new fire risk regime, yet the very mention of the word climate change has this bloke putting the shutters up.

This is not a lie at all, and there is far more evidence for global warming than for the God you hold so much stead in.

Dear Hasbeen,

The earth is 33 degrees warmer that in it would be without the greenhouse effect. CO2 makes up about 20% of that effect. We have raised the level of CO2 in the atmosphere by a third thus far. How could anyone with even just a modicum of intelligence say there has been no impact?

The answer? They can't. Where does that leave you?

SR

"You said there was only one person in the article indicating a longer time frame – there were more."

WRONG - I never commented on how many people were in the article

"You said the trend of Arctic ice extent was increasing – it is decreasing."

WRONG - you don't understand trends. It doesn't mean to take two carefully selected points and take them as a trend. It involves a highly complex (for you) averaging of StdDev and least squares to get a sense of the gradient of the trendline. When you do that using recent confirmed data you find the arctic minimum has been increasing.

"You said "Its no closer to being ice free now than it was a decade ago." - there was less ice in October just gone than there has ever been from when records started."

Wrong - first the October data isn't confirmed. Its a guess. Second, if we ever get to an ice free arctic it'll occur first in September which is when the arctic reaches its lowest levels. So what happens in October is neither here nor there in terms of ice free predictions. But I get that you'd want to use guesses from irrelevant periods that support your pre-judged views than actual relevant data that doesn't.

"You claimed the animation wasn't from NASA – it was."

WRONG - never made such a claim. Your link was to some sort of search page. Somehow you assumed that everyone would work out which of those search finds you meant.

"And now you are claiming that the number of Google hits as evidence of something."

CORRECT - its evidence that the 2013 claims were widespread. You assert without any evidence that it was a prediction made by a small number. I can see how someone having a view based on evidence, rather than a view based on mere hope, might be confusing to you.

Belly wrote: "Then consider my view, Fake News is the product of the right
They use it constantly, to smother the truth".

So the chap who has conniptions at the mere mention of "the left" has no problem smearing the right.

Who in his fevered mind are the constant purveyors of "Fake News".

Hilariously the very 'report' he relied on to start this thread was fake news.

11000 scientists? Not even close. We'll probably never know how many actual scientists signed the 'report' because the people who put it together have now hidden all access to the signature list to stop others checking the names.

But based on the findings by the Canadian checkers, there's probably less than 500 scientists of whom maybe 10% had anything to do with climate studies.

But that sort of fake news is the sort Belly et al like and they'll never recognise they've been had.

Years from now the belly's of the world will still be talking of the 11000 as though its a fact.

Dear mhaze,

These were your exact words; “The article I linked was a mere example or the myriad of similar stories. You manage to find one guy in there that has a slightly longer time frame and then, you assert that he's the really-trooly scientist.”

So yes you did assert there was only one.

You say; “When you do that using recent confirmed data you find the arctic minimum has been increasing.”

I would love to see what torturing you have had to do with the data to get that result. So how about you tell us what have you used.

You say you never made the claim the animation wasn't from NASA but here are your exact words; “The link I was referring to wasn't the NASA video but this one (https//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Disappearing_Ice.webm).”

Finally you say about your Google hits “its evidence that the 2013 claims were widespread”. Show me any other scientific study which independently said the region would be ice free in 2013.

Mate, this propensity of not ever saying you are wrong is getting a bit thin. It's okay to fess up. Might be good for the soul. Give it a try for once.

Saw all posts, Paul rough diamond here old mate but I truly am afraid,
100 Meters visibility here and for the surrounding hundred k,s this morning
Tanks near empty, have at most 400 gallons, lawn dead forrest tinder dry
Near here [totally true] floating down ash on fire about three inches square and ten k from the fire
Wind picked up and by nightfall? my home may not be here
Shadow Minister truly pleased you are safe, mate if you sat with me on watch on my veranda you would not question the word emergency
So many years ago, this then not quite a teen ager fought the fire that took Almertons only school with? milk from a tanker,
We can only hope if nothing else,the inquiry to come ensures when safe controlled winter burns are ALWAYS done,
Will post local fire map next post
Regards all

Come off the raw prawn SR, you can't just make things up when you are talking to most on here. "CO2 makes up about 20% of that effect", what drivel. Careful there mate, your lack of math is showing. We may have raised the CO2 by 0.004%, which can cause a similar percentage of stuff all.

No amount of CO2 can increase the temperature by more than 0.78 degrees C, & that is recognised by even that august body, the IPCC.

Yes climate changes, but it in not puny man doing it. In fact if the current trend in sunspots continues, we are in for a very cold couple of decades getting towards a Maunder minimum.

The fact is eastern Asia & the US have been cooling [using raw figures,even NASA figures, not concocted tortured figures] for a couple of years, with resultant crop failures. The growing belt for corn & Sorghum have moved some couple of hundred miles south of their usually areas.

Do try to keep up with what is happening in the world, rather than in the computers of the scam brigade old mate, if you want to be taken seriously.

Dear Hasbeen,

This has never worked in the past so I am not holding my breath but how would you like to show us where you pulled this from;

"No amount of CO2 can increase the temperature by more than 0.78 degrees C, & that is recognised by even that august body, the IPCC."

What a load of crock.

http://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/fire-information/fires-near-me
Here is the fire closest to me, at day break not one of the 70 still burning was at warning
Now seven are,never seen it so hot and dry, never
Too Australian National Highway cut again, 3 klm south of me and north about 40 klm, no traffic moves
Hasbeen steelredux has a point, you will need something far better to convince me
Explore that page if you go to the link, then see QLDS too

Climate emergency is challenged in another thread and here
Try this, my small village has become a refuge for hundreds of trucks unable to drive on either national routes Pacific and new England closed
A town not far north, one of three, is under warning to leave, two hundred homes!
The same fire that closed this road from Friday till yesterday, now has a circumference of at least one hundred klm, it is heading my way, north east winds due to switch around midnight here, southerly buster coming
IT will change the direction of the fire
50 burning in NSW 11 at danger level half [25] out of control
That number was 7 just hours ago
dry winter stopped burn off yes tree huggers too but every attempt to burn got out of control
Me? 5.000 liters of tank water left,if power goes off? no water, if planes drop water? fire retardant may poison me
We have a climate emergency right now
[lost three more homes this day] in this fire stay safe Queenslanders

SR,

"So yes you did assert there was only one."

NUP - I pointed out that you mentioned one.

"I would love to see what torturing you have had to do with the data to get that result. So how about you tell us what have you used."

I already told you. I used the Sept 2018 figures. They are the most recent confirmed minimum figures. Its not as simple as this but let's keep it easy for the innumerate. September 2007 minimum 4,160,000 sq km; September 2018 minimum 4,660,000 sq km.

(4660000 - 4160000)/ 4160000 *100 = 12% which I rounded down because I'm so fair-minded.

"You say you never made the claim the animation wasn't from NASA but here are your exact words; “The link I was referring to wasn't the NASA video but this one (https//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Disappearing_Ice.webm).”"

At the time you made two links. One was from NASA the other was unintelligible. It now turns out the unintelligible one was also NASA. Who knew?

" Show me any other scientific study which independently said the region would be ice free in 2013."

That's the entire point. There are no studies. The claims were widely disseminated but had no basis in fact. Just like the claims in the opinion piece masquerading as science that started this thread. That was my original point.

Dear Belly,

Just an update on my niece.

I rang my brother - and the fires are really
bad where they are. My niece and her three kids
are safe they're now in Kempsey (in the town)
with my brother and his wife. But her husband has
stayed on their property and is watching things there.
He'd installed a sprinkler system some time ago
on the roof. However there's no water - so much for
that.

My other niece's husband is right in the front lines.
He's a park ranger - and he's out there fighting
the fires.

Our prayers and thoughts are with all these brave men.

Belly, take care tonight with the southerly coming your way. Hope its a positive and works in your favour.

Foxy, wish your folks all the best as well, dangerous time with night coming, no property is worth a life, lets hope all is well.

Watched the ABC most of the day, fantastic effort by all those fighting these fires, those on the front line, those supporting, and those doing the coordinating.

Can't let this pass, one of the sewer rats of Australian politics, the disguising National MP Barnaby Joyce had the audacity to claim people who died in the recent bush firers must be Green voters. Five people have be charged with deliberately lighting fires, would the sewer rat Joyce like to suggest these pyromaniacs are National Party voters, and any who might live in his electorate voted for the grub himself.

Belly I know nothing will ever convince you on climate change, unless Labor tell you it was all wrong.

I wonder if your pipes freezing on winter mornings would do it, or would you parrot the tripe that global warming makes it cold too.

Paul,

Here's what Joyce said,
"Mr Joyce made the comments about the fire victims in response to a question about whether the NSW Government had provided enough resources for hazard reduction.
"They may need more resources, but they also need legislation regulations that allow them to get in there and do it in a more substantial way," he told Sky News' Kieran Gilbert.

"The crazy thing there Kieran, I acknowledge the two people who died were most likely people who voted for the Green party.

"So I'm not going to start attacking them, that's the last thing I want to do.

"What I wanted to concentrate was on the policies, we can mitigate these tragedies happening again in the future."

And they probably were Greens voters as they came from a heavily infested Green area.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-12/barnaby-joyce-greens-council-bushfire-victims/11696654

Dear Paul,

Thank You for your well wishes regarding my family.

Our thoughts and prayers are with all the people
doing it tough out there.

Alternate energy emergency.

FOCUS reports: “The crisis in the German wind energy industry is worsening. According to the ‘Süddeutsche Zeitung’, hard cuts at the largest German manufacturer Enercon will cost 3000 jobs.”

It appears the Germans are over paying through the nose for alternate power, & are forcing their governments hand in reducing subsidies, the only thing that keeps wind power alive.

Issy, I expect that kind of garbage from a jerk like Joyce. That's the same bloke who was bonking his office girl at taxpayers expense. The fool wouldn't have a clue who they voted for, will he agree pyromaniacs most likely vote for the National Party.

Dear mhaze,

Lol. Really?

You had earlier said “WRONG - you don't understand trends. It doesn't mean to take two carefully selected points and take them as a trend”.

Now you go and do just that.

Here is the trend line since measurements were taken;

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/monthly/images/09_Sep/N_09_extent_anomaly_plot_hires_v3.0.png

It delivers a slope of -12.9.

You had to work your cherry-picking arse off to get a +12% slope didn't you. Don't you ever sit there and say to yourself I have become a shameless manipulator of data, perhaps the position I am attempting to defend is untenable?

Dear Hasbeen,

Dodged the question twice now. Third time lucky?

"This has never worked in the past so I am not holding my breath but how would you like to show us where you pulled this from;

"No amount of CO2 can increase the temperature by more than 0.78 degrees C, & that is recognised by even that august body, the IPCC.""

Is that how it's going to be from now on? Wild fires are going to be blamed on global warming instead of mismanagement?

The cause for global warming will be to reduce pollution, but the premise of global warming is that polution needs to be reduced world wide. A condition that isn't going to be met by China or by several other large polluters of the world. Thus it can always be the great excape goat to blame on. Seek to reduce polution instead of facing the issue of fire management and wild lands groomed for safety of potential fires?

NO! What needs to happen for fire management is to put in place strict restrictions and consquences for breaking restrictions in dry seasons so that a brush fire doesn't start by those going out into the brush. Then on top of that, standards for electric companies to remove any trees or branches that a power line can set on fire. (As was the case of one of the fires in California).

Next thing we'll see is that flooding, and erosion will be blamed on global warming instead of those who are managing the area that had the floods and erosion. Or there will be an oil explosion and the cry will be "climate change sparked the oil." Instead of the real issues of what actually caused it.

My hopes are for any of you facing the fires going on, and that you and your loved ones will be safe.

Paul,

What Joyce was remarking on was the irony, that he said it was slightly in bad taste, but it doesn't come anywhere near the slandering of dead and living Australian soldiers by alleging that they threw bombs at children.

I knew both George Nole and Judy Fletcher and I'm 99% sure that they voted Green and I also know that their local village was a fire trap, George was killed in his car, I don't know exactly where but in all probability on a road that was bordered by very flammable trees and plenty of dead wood on the ground.

One thing that is for sure, the Greens will do everything that they can to divert the emphasis away from tree removal and clearing safe areas around buildings etc.

Oh come on SR,

Now you're just being silly and/or grasping at straws.

I didn't say I was showing you a trend line. I was merely showing a very simplified way of demonstrating that my original point that ice is increasing in the Arctic was true. I even said it was a simplified method and not the way I'd normally do it. But I don't have the heart to teach you least squares theory.

Come what may, even if you want to use the unverified 2019 figures which are probably an underestimate (2018 figures were recently increased due to under-estimation), the fact remains that we're are no closer to an ice free arctic now than we were a decade or more ago.

Now you may not want that to be true and we've seen over the years that you prefer the fantasy to the fact, but it remains a fact that the predictions of an ice free arctic in 2013, 2020, 2030 or our life time is looking pretty sick.

Just like all the other BS predictions the alarmist community conjures up

Issy, did Bonking Barney allege dead and living Australian soldiers threw bombs at children. He must have read 'Scorched Earth, Black Snow' by Andrew Salmon, plenty of first hand accounts on that very subject given in the book. You should have a read, it might open your eyes to the truth

Dear mhaze,

Stop being so bloody slippery mate. You had been talking about trend lines right through our conversation and asserting they were going up.

“the trend-line for 2007 to 2018 has been progressively more ice”

Then you give a 'simplified version' of what? A trend line of course. One which took against you very own advice “two carefully selected points and take them as a trend”.

The Sept 2019 figure is very much confirmed so stop trying to slither away from it.

You have attempted statistical bastardry and been found out. You really should be ashamed but as is usual for people like yourself you have instead tried to double down.

You really are very ordinary aren't you.

Once again this is the link to the actual trend line for any who are bothering to follow this;

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/monthly/images/09_Sep/N_09_extent_anomaly_plot_hires_v3.0.png

Paul,

You and the truth are as far from each other as DiNatoli and reality.

His latest gurge doesn't say anything about clearing gumtrees away from buildings.

Sr,

For Christ-sake, this is just getting silly. Are you really that desperate to prove black is white?

Here's what I've said earlier....

"for 1979-2006 was for progressively less ice, the trend-line for 2007 to 2018 has been progressively more ice."

Both those statements are true.

"minimum sea ice extent has INcreased by 10% since 2007."

Again true. Unless you want to use the unverified 2019 numbers in which case go for it. I prefer to use real data.

As to my last post showing calculations as to the ice, I specifically said I was keeping it simple ie no trend lines just proof that the ice minimum has increased.

As to using 2007, call it a cherry pick if you want but I wasn't hiding it. I mentioned it from the outset. The trouble is that you forensically parse each post to search for any ambiguity to hang your daft notions on. I feel like I need to run each post past a lawyer.

Here are the facts: (not that you'll care)

1. The claim was it would be ice free by 2013....it wasn't.
2. Not only isn't it ice free, but from 2007 to 2018 the minimum ice levels rose.
3. Even if the 2019 levels are confirmed, the trend will still be up.
4. If the theory that these things are cyclical is correct, then there will be an inflection point at some time. At the moment that looks like 2007. So not a cherry-pick but an identifiable change in the data.

IF you are so concerned about getting the full picture, why go back to just 1981? http://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/86917-1.jpg

Oh and just to make it clear, this whole thing grew out of me saying 2013 wasn't ice free. In SR-land, that isn't true for totally unrelated excuses....or something.

So again SR. Where the predictions about 2013 shown to be true or false?

Issy, you have read the Andrew Salmon book, have you? Are you claiming the first hand accounts of war crimes committed during the Korean War by Australian and British soldiers are fabrications or distortions of the truth?

You can only hope that Morrison has learn't that you can't appease the gw Marxist alarmist. He wasted another billion dollars by giving it to the renewables fraud recently. In response he has been called an arsonist. I would say he would be totally foolish to continue wasting money on this religion. The fraudsters will still be wanting more and using autistic children and corrupt 'science' to continue their cause.

btw is Foxy, Steele, Paul, Mr Opinion or any others protesting outside the Chinese or Indian embassy yet? Thought not. Obviously unable to think past this very flawed narrative.

Paul,

"Issy, you have read the Andrew Salmon book, have you? Are you claiming the first hand accounts of war crimes committed during the Korean War by Australian and British soldiers are fabrications or distortions of the truth?
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 13 November 2019 1:47:02 PM"

All that I'm claiming is that your statement that Australian soldiers threw bombs at children is another lie by an habitual liar.

You cannot substantiate your ridiculous claim

Dear mhaze,

“So not a cherry-pick but an identifiable change in the data.”

Well that got a laugh. So an outlier becomes an inflection point in your eyes. You really are a shocker aren't you.

Let me have a go. From 2008 to 2019 there was a nearly 19% reduction in ice extent in the Arctic.

There is not another 10 years period within the entire record that you could have picked to get the figure you did is there.

I am enjoying you showing everyone a common denier tactic. Sorry mate, you got caught with your pants down and no amount of scurrying about is going to get you out of this one. Good job.

My last word on the subject. Issy, you were given the evidence, go read it again, you refused to accept it, I can't help that. If you are really interested there are many more first hand accounts in Andrew Salmon's book.

BTW, how convenient to claim "friendship" of two people killed by bushfires, and then claim you know how they voted, to give credence to your own warped political leaning. You would have no idea how these people voted, you most likely don't even know them. You are one sick dude to link supposed friends deaths to how they voted in the past. Can't speak for themselves now can they, how convenient!

Next election, if you feel so strongly about it, stand outside a country polling booth and scream at prospective voters; "If you vote Green then there's a good chance you'll burn to death in a bush fire, like my dear friends!". Sicko's should get carted off to jail.

'BTW, how convenient to claim "friendship" of two people killed by bushfires, and then claim you know how they voted, to give credence to your own warped political leaning'

yeah must admit Paul a low blow and probably as bad as that Green calling pollies arsonist. In line with much of Green ignorance. Both despicable statements. Makes Pauline look better and better. I suppose that's what the Nats are afraid of.

Paul,

"BTW, how convenient to claim "friendship" of two people killed by bushfires, and then claim you know how they voted"

I said that I knew them and was 99% sure how they would vote.

Can't help making up lies, can you?

IM,

I think the greens are struggling with the concept that their policy of stopping the reduction of fuel load has far more impact on the forest fires than any emissions by Australia.

Paul,

Once again your questionable ethics are on display.

Is climate change responsible for the volatile oils in gumtrees?

'I think the greens are struggling with the concept that their policy of stopping the reduction of fuel load has far more impact on the forest fires than any emissions by Australia.'

actually the Greens largely struggle with truth.

For SR, 2019 is a critical year vis a vis the Arctic sea ice extent. His entire argument against the fact that Arctic Sea ice has been increasing since 2007 is based on the as yet unverified guesstimate as to the September 2019 numbers.

2007 on the other hand is a mere outlier, to be ignored. Only used by deniers or something.

So 2019 - super important and totally relevant.
2007 - nothing to see here...move along.

Sea Ice extent in 2019 4,150,000 sq km
Sea Ice extent in 2007 4,160,000 sq km

A statistical tie according to NSIDC.

Same number, totally different value. One supports his hopes and is therefore oh so important. One debunks his beliefs and must be disregarded.

This is the level of logic that leads SR down the garden path so often.

BTW SR were the predictions about 2013 shown to be true or false?

runner, I can understand why you are a fundo christian, believing in fairy tales like you do. No the Greens do not have a policy of no hazard reduction, that is simply a lie, 3 Hail Mary's and an Act of Contrition my son and all will be forgiven by the Great Sky Being.

Issy, sitting out in the bush waiting for a burnt up wombat to shoot, and sniffing petrol at the same time is extra dangerous at the moment.

Paul,

You're right about the Greens having a policy on hazard reduction, they wrote it in after they were so heavily criticized over their role in the disastrous Victorian bushfires a few years ago.

Can you tell us if it's true that they are going to advise people to clear the gumtrees away from their homes?

42 Hours without the internet, my servers mountain top site hit by fires
If some could see my area? I did first on Tuesday a brief trip in to ash then, after another highway closure yesterday
The term Emergency sure is best to describe this and many other areas
Tell me when, in spring, this country faced so many fires
So many stated at once fighting them
I saw homes of people I knew reduced to ash and twisted tin
I hope we do not see the inspected summer and even autumn and send my regards to victims and fire fighters country wide

Fake News has impacted on the ability of some to think clearly
Right now that product of the very right [implemented to confuse and constantly abuse any truth] is running wild with this subject
It may be hard for some of the wheelchair warriors here, but getting out in the unburnt forest, then the burnt one would bring wet eyes to anyone
NO animals could have gotten away from some firestorms near here
A million plus hectares burnt out, not yet summer
I WISH it will not be true, but I fear for the unburnt forest right behind me
At Christmas, and I will never know why, Victorians camp in there
By a creek before it becomes a river under trees, we call it the mud flats
They if it goes up? have zero chance of the single one road 14 klm drive out emergency? hope I am wrong fear I am right

Dear mhaze,

Trying to deflect I see after getting caught with your pants down.

Twice now you have asked;

“BTW SR were the predictions about 2013 shown to be true or false?”

Of course we both know that earlier I had written;

“Now the fact that a small group of scientists predicted 2013 as the date the Arctic would be ice-free and were wrong is not in dispute.”

So the only reason you have raised it again is through desperation.

And it makes you look like an insufferable idiot who can't admit when they are wrong.

Grow up.

Belly,

I'm in the bush and the nearest gumtree is 500 metres away, there are trees near the house and sheds but no closer than 100 metres except for the shade trees but all the close trees are proven fire retardants.
Not my doing but done donkey's years ago when property owners could manage their properties without Green instigated interference, all that we do is maintain the early setup and relentlessly dig out any gum seedlings that shew themselves.

We also have reserves of water that is for firefighting only and is never used, it's in underground cisterns that were built over 150 years ago and still don't leak although the water is a bit manky!

This is worth reading,
"TAKE THE EUCALYPT OUT OF INCENDIARY DEBATE
'The Australian' 1/1/2010 - By Robert Darby and Nick Brown"
http://www.smalltreefarm.com.au/Aust-Article-Take-The-Eucalypt-Out-of-Incendiary-Debate.pdf

Ise mise my place is my fault, I am the first to live here, relocated Sydney 1970,s home on what was a cattle paddock
My trees are mostly bottle brush, first lot selected for their height 6 to eight meters tall
Only natives here all for birds and me to enjoy, plus a few fruit trees
Sadly had to remove mulberrys great plums, [3 fruit bearing] pair, loved that
But tank water and flying foxes do not mix
Four other houses, same history, flanked by highway grown over two feet deep fire feed
And a 20 square meter heap of drain blocked timber half a meter height, constant requests see zero action
So it will burn, believe me it concerns me
Last night I lost server, just got it back, and the highways was blocked yet again
A two week old fire went tropo again, it started in forest 20 klm maybe more, from the sea, and went there and 25 klm south, last night it took off in a westerly run not yet over
Climate emergency [lack of rain] brought these fires to us

SR.

"So the only reason you have raised it again is through desperation."

No I keep pointing it out since, in the end, after all the wriggling nd squirming, the fact remains that my original point remains unassailed and unassailable.

So now that we've established that your whole argument falls apart because of the illogicality of thinking that two years with the same levels of ice are simultaneously critically important and mere outliers (doublethink lives in SR_land), we find SR reverting, as per usual, to ad homs.

Ad hominem, the refuge of those who can't cut the mustard.

Now we all know that you're going to dispute that analysis, so, while doing so, perhaps you could enlighten us as to how 2007 is a mere outlier, while 2019, with the same levels of ice, is the year you choose to hang your hat upon.

To Belly.

Glad to hear you're still alright. Hope you stay well.

The dryness, both from a lack of rain, as well as from heat drying the land after a rain are aspects to watch out for. But I don't think those are contributed by a world wide climate change due to excess pollution. However, even if that is a factor, the issues of climate change won't fix fire hazards and fire seasons. Instead climate change will become a scape goat without any practical solution.

For the time being, there are nations that have such a problem with pollutionin their cities, that citizens have to wear face masks when going outside. Some even recommending their people to not go outside as much. Those nations with these problems aren't going to stop their pollution. Maybe someday that will change, but for now, you can't count on that and will have to manage how to handle brush fires on your own. World wide pollution isn't changing. Making climate change when an emergency a scape goat with no actual solution.

NNS thanks, still trying to get my car back
Well this much is true it is hot and dry, and winter burns got away so did not take place
Cost cutting had a role, parks truly professional fire fighters no longer exist
One HORRIBLE truth exists, firebugs, some from the very group we owe so much to, volunteer firefighters have been started on purpose
SOME landowners have started fires mid this crisis, to? they say protect their property!
One truth
By summer's end right or wrong those who demand climate change action will see huge increases in their numbers bank on it
Firefighting fire bugs? yes it is an illness and much like phedophils joining Scout groups they join firefighters

Dear Belly,

The basic fact is that the world is just getting gradually hotter.

Scientists who have been measuring and modelling the Earth especially since the 1960s are telling us that the cause is the burning of fossil fuels.

Research by scholars especially environmental historians, environmental archaeologists and environmental sociologists supports what the science is saying.

The problem is too big to stop the planet from continuing to heat up.

People must learn how to deal with the problems and prepare for future worst case scenarios.

Expect the worst that Mother Nature will throw at us.

Much this climate 'emergency' hysteria is probably due to increasing depression and mental illness in society. Many people have become so run down with lies and Left propaganda that they can no longer sort fact from fiction, or think clearly for themselves.

Mr O, Is burning trees equivalent to fossil fuels? How much carbon and air pollution is released from 1,000,000 hectares of burnt forest?

The Black Saturday bushfires in 2009 killed 173 people, 120 in the Kinglake area alone. Another 414 people were injured. More than 450,000 hectares had burned and 3,500 buildings including more than 2000 houses destroyed. The RSPCA estimated that up to one million wild and domesticated animals died in the disaster.
http://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/black-saturday-bushfires

1851: 6 February, Black Thursday
Fires covered a quarter of what is now Victoria (about five million hectares). Areas affected included Portland, Plenty Ranges, Westernport, the Wimmera and Dandenong districts.
Around 12 lives, one million sheep and thousands of cattle were lost.

Fire has been present on the Australian continent for millions of years and has been significant in shaping much of the landscape. Many fires were started by lightning.
Aboriginal people used fire for many thousands of years to 'care for country'. The fires were a tool that encouraged the growth and extent of grasslands to enhance hunting, reduced levels of fuel, and kept vegetation from becoming dense and hard to walk through.

Dear ttbn and Josephus (plus others),

Actually I'm beginning to enjoy your one dollar brain comments. It's good to see how the ignorant and uneducated think.

I can see Mr O working hard on his post graduate studies. He will go far in this world, especially with China.

Josephus Mr Opinion, let me be clear I think I know climate change is man made
Too I think/know big money is behind the anti climate change side
As it was with tobacco
Now mid true real climate emergency, some, continue to say nothing is taking place
A country known to be built on land that is sinking is in [well one of its cities] trouble after a 50 year record flood
My morning drive just to shop, went past truly horrific burnt out bush, and the fires burn still
Tell the victims it is not climate change, if we three could get together and do that drive, then stop and see unburnt grass, even my backyard, we could start this debate with open eyes
Yes and YES some scientists who put out those emails, who continue to do so, are idiots
But not most of them not most of the world's scientists

One of the things that needs to be done is clearing gum trees well away from buildings, if you don't want a fire then don't provide fuel.

Second thing is clear all trees from the road right of ways, then there will be less chance of cars burning (plus their occupants) and no chance of a burning tree falling and blocking a road.

Climate change may or mayn't be real but gumtrees are real and they are very flammable plus they are wont to drop limbs on the unexpecting.

Yep very very true ise mise, you will have heard of widow makers, gum trees snapping limbs of and killing those under them, even in camping grounds
Once while road worker would arm myself and clear huge areas of them by the road
Practice stopped! see we workers had to work to fill a contracts needs
No mention there so we had to stop doing it
EVEN no longer able to drag dead animals of the road, no contract to do that
Lady lived on roadside Kangaroo killed and in middle of driveway
Believe it! boss said we must not move it! not our job
Council said not theirs either
Bloke about my size traveled past on way to and from work base, he had a cup of coffee with her lovely lady,she got an idea, ring the local paper!
That story became front page news
Both us and council sent teams to remove it!
Continued

Further long before effort was made to get true reform in to the roads a team did great stuff
I was honored to see it in action, workers and bosses got together and made huge savings with great innovations
Golden Circle was its name
It aware people die needlessly after hitting roadside trees, was this
Plant from edge of motorway to fence native bottle brush and such
Remove all tall growing trees, make the garden barrier both a thing of beauty wattles too, and a car catcher slowing out of control cars not ripping them apart
Your thoughts see are shared, just think spring driving with flowers in bloom city to city tourists would love it

Hi Belly,

There are plenty of native trees and bushes under three metre maximum, why can't bigger trees than that be cleared, say ten or fifteen metres from roadways, and smaller ones planted in their place ? Even graded from 3-metre trees closer to the tall trees and 1-metre bushes closer to the road ?

I'm on a corner block and have planted half-metre-high (and 2-metres-wide) acacias up to the pathway along the road and 1- and 2-metre bushes and trees further away from it. It's hardly rocket science.

I'm sure that many, many city Greens would jump at the chance to spend a week or two clearing country roads and re-planting smaller bushes and trees. It would be good for them, both to put their money and effort where their mouths are, and to be the first time they've ever been out of a city.

And some nearby towns may even have coffee shops which sell smashed avocado and soy-latte kale smoothies. Win-win !

Joe

I've got a question. I agree with the removal of
gum trees in critical areas. They do have very
oily residue. However I've been watching on the
news that bush fires are spread out at random and
unconnected areas - my question is - what starts
those bush-fires? Lightning strikes might
explain some of them - but what about the rest. Are they
all started by people? Surely not.

Foxy,

Another fire starter is spontaneous combustion, any buildup of leaves, grass and other rubbish against a rock or a log can heat up from decomposition, probably with help from the sun until it reaches a critical point then ignite.

I have heard of Malley Fowl nests going up when something has happened to the attendant birds and the temperature is not regulated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_combustion

Loudmouth in the end brand new four lane motorways took over from my death highway [it name given after far too many deaths]
That plan had been for from one meter to three meter roadside native flowering trees
We saw in the end a Native wattle mad engineer see cicle pod wattles planted, they fall over, gas up, and make wonderful firestorms blocking highway traffic sometimes for days
Ise mise right again, here fires have been started by our much loved bush turkey nests
BUT in such dry and hot, even windy weather?
Our winter too has those westerly winds
We here and south of us think they come rushing in to remind us every August it is still winter,
Dry here fires under control but still burning
Idiot started one to the north to protect his drug crop'
Some farmers we are told evidence exists, started fires to put a barrier around their crop to
Firebugs arrested now number 7 in this state

http://www.facebook.com/CraigKellyMP/photos/a.117937578400885/1334833920044572/?type=3&eid=ARC1x8LwtdlruVqtRhjrRNk-nIGzpUa1KX-w7Dv1RZbf5URHVFJYXlirLUX905yl5W_jwIOXA-SpeH1L&__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARAMCiXeuMYa7-u2biIe-3ZHt6v7-m6ZzF88l0a-hMWDhEInbBd_s4rvY_EwdtBTxOJyeaYkCBbUbh2Qh-486rChJRT2B9D3p-WUz-7JCTgNCuMXLbyWHdeZxRLWJDkzY-Whv-MjANVteuuPw_Un31-F-T2GPgk36SwczFiA20SAfeUza1gjlB55RtDPHe0wxVg-ju1JYTFXZnI4atSTd81DEremZgi-zEs_sVgat1JTQ6T6e9HKGm36R9PU_c2VGmaxAUd83Chdv9sJK6gM2qd8sOMLWyundcCIZjxBiyCalNTL5u5hMEvAhBZq49b0dYn_LeDZA4TrH8a9pWDGafpTjs-u3dnGDXmLDfW1QyEtNlUwLKdF62Q&__tn__=EEHH-R

Venice in 1830 was in water the same as in 2019.

Dear Is Mise,

Thanks for that - something I did not know.

On the news yesterday - they were interviewing
a psychologist who explained why some people
go off and start fires.

It's all a bit much to take in.

Belly,

You'll appreciate this, on a well known part of the New England Highway, Black Mountain, a new section was built (and it's a vast improvement) but, to stabilize the fresh earthworks, millet or a similar grain was planted; the result was that the kangaroos soon got the word and came from miles around for the good feed.

The law of unintended consequences at work.

Belly, "much loved bush turkey nests". I loved them too, great eating, until they protected them.

They were a problem at the Happy Bay resort on Long Island in the Whitsundays. Hundreds of the things, & the young ones, looking for a place to build their nest mounds would move in to the resort, & start building against one of the guest cabins. Determined things, nothing would stop them, move every thing away with the loader, & they would drag it all back.

The only cure was to catch them & deport them to Lindeman island, who had none, & wanted them. Lindeman ended up with a moderate bachelor population of turkeys.

Sorry mate, you've got the reason for the westerly winds wrong. The authorities who run the Brisbane Ekka, [our Royal Easter show equivalent], offended the climate gods way back last century, so the gods send the westerlies to coincide with the start of the Ekka each year. Why is it that authorities are always so clumsy?

Sorry you have to suffer them too.

Ise mise yes true in fact along the sides of highways grass is greener always, cut but not removed it grows in fertile land it created itself
But right now that grass even the meter high stuff outside mowed area is dry and dead
Fires here are in containment lines for about the fourth time
But they are not so north west of Sydney
SMH tells us the homes lost are now more than all lost in last three years summer fires
Sorry tell everyone but by summer's end this will see no one doubt we have a crisis of dreadful and record proportions

Climate emergency has received a lift because of these far from out fires
And right now here the wind has changed two, from strong north west to near gale southerly
A truth is here to see Morrison is wedged by his party just as Turnbull was
Morrison may, seems to, not think climate change is real, Turnbull knew it is
Far too many conservatives use the Barnany tactic, [also used by Brant] feed the chooks [supporters] and fullsteam ahead
It will fail, only a failed economy could be worse for this government

Belly,

Over our way, the grass is becoming less of a threat, in places where it has been exposed to strong wind it has broken off low down and has been blown away leaving only a stubble; it'll still burn but with less intensity and consequently be easier to extinguish.

Dear Is Mise,

May I suggest you and your mates start now by pulling out the stubble with your hands. If you leave it late it might us get away from you like wildfire!

Opinionated,

It ain't our stubble, on the our place all the dry grass around the house was rollered and then raked and stored as light-up material for the steam tractor.

Issy, if a bushfire comes your way, just put up a sign "I didn't vote Green!". You'll be perfectly safe. After all according to Barnyard Joy the people who burn up in bushfires are Green voters.

A farmer has been arrested for lighting a fire, said he was protecting his crop by back burning. FARMER! he must be a National Party voter!

"Issy, if a bushfire comes your way, just put up a sign "I didn't vote Green!". You'll be perfectly safe. After all according to Barnyard Joy the people who burn up in bushfires are Green voters."

Ya! Herr Arzt

Issy, Me thinks we should do some scientific experimentation into Barnyards theory to save us all from bushfires. How about the next time there is a big bushfire, we sit Barnyard on top of a 44 gallon drum of petrol in the path of the fire. I'm 99% sure Barnyard don't vote Green, I'm also 99% sure no harm will come to Barnyard. Should however Barnyard go up like the 4th July then the 1% comes into play, and we know that Barnyard has been a dirty rotten deceitful liar all these years, and has been secretly voting Green!

Well barnaby gets a run, but in truth he may have hurt his relationship with farmers
More and more are demanding action on climate change
Graas here, well looked after garden and lawn, is dead to the very roots in some places
Three meters outside my fence that drain ,20 m2 of dead tree and leaves, one match and my home and three others? gone ise mise
The saddest thing? plenty would set that fire without blinking
True but not popular view some few but some, firefighters are fire bugs, start fires to look like heros, we will by summer's end hear more about that
My first fire, first I fought? eleven years old, near the only male there, small country town women fought until men could get home from work
We got jam sandwiches and hot tea as a reward and weeks after saw our self in action on 8mm film shot by scoutmaster

Paul,

Methinks we should start cutting down gum trees as a means of reducing hazards; does that fit in with the Greens' Hazard Reduction policy?

Issy, my wife was reading our posts last night, she wants to know what asylum we all come from? She specifically asked "who is this Dizzy person you talk to?"

I said; "No he's not Dizzy, he's Issy, although by some of his posts you might think he is dizzy. Issy is a 97 year old ex-hippy from Nimbin, who left the commune in 1968, because the other hippies wouldn't let him shoot fury little woodland creatures."

The wife's reply; "As I said, what asylum do you and your forum mates come from!"

Paul,

Is cutting down and removing hazardous and flammable trees from around dwellings not a good idea?

If not, why not?

Needling isey? or just displaying a lack of understanding?
This country, for the next one hundred years, should plant two hardwood [gum trees] for everyone we remove
We have the world best hardwood lets farm it
So much marjinal land needs to provide a reliable income such trees do
Stop fires? 5 years minimum time kids too, for every firebug soon fires will fade away

Issy you ask; Is cutting down and removing hazardous and flammable trees from around dwellings not a good idea?

My answer is; Yes its a good idea.

Many folk have moved to bush land settings, and not because they are prevented from doing so, or they are lazy (could be a bit of that), but rather because they choose not to remove fire hazards from around their property. Nothing to do with government, or environmentalists, or greenies. They simply like the "natural" aspect of the whole environment they have moved to. Also some people are complacent; "There's no chance of a bushfire coming through here." attitude, "There hasn't been a bushfire through here in 50 years!" Then next season their house burns down in a 1 in 50 year bushfire.

Paul.

"INVERELL Shire Council received a warning in August from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) following a tree-clearing activity sanctioned by council...
The warning came after the investigation found council had breached the long-standing National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1974 for damage to an ecological community, identified under the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995.

OEH spokesperson, Lawrence Orel, said failure to heed the warning could result in fine of up to $110,000.

Inverell Shire Council general manager, Paul Henry, said in a written response to the Times that the action was initiated by a number of calls from the community in relation to trees, limbs and fallen timber in close proximity with the Ashford/Inverell Road.

Mr Henry also said a motorist and his family were potentially endangered when the truck they were following knocked loose an overhanging branch, which struck their vehicle."
http://www.inverelltimes.com.au/story/2554995/inverell-shire-council-warned-after-bulldozing-trees/

Permission is needed to remove native trees.

Further to the above,

"State-by-state rules around tree removal
Despite the fact that a tree may be located solely on your property does not mean you have free rein to remove it. In fact, removing a tree from your property without proper approvals from your local council can incur hefty fines.

Nationally, native species are all protected and require approval before any removal. You will also need to supply specific reasons for the removal. In most states, this rule against removing native tree species only applies to rural areas. ACT and South Australia are the only states to have blanket rules against removing native tree species. Trees that have heritage and Aboriginal heritage significance also have protection on a national level.

The tree species that are exempt from this protection are pest species. You are also exempt when it comes to pruning protected trees for maintenance or when intervention is in the best interest of the tree..."
http://www.finder.com.au/cutting-down-trees-on-your-property

Here is a paper from one who changed his mind for Climate Emergency to no Emergency at all!
http://www.quora.com/Why-did-you-change-your-views-on-climate-change/answer/Chris-Boyd-50?ch=10&share=a2211cae&srid=ZKwA&fbclid=IwAR2QvPEsOqSUnCbynn8IJPFo2IlejaKUGM0aq_hvFzBjGISjUueGZXTMgmQ

We see some clutching at straws here, even inventing the straws to start with
Greens do not hold any power over the NSW Government, can not be behind silly council tree preservation laws
Right here, in a place in real danger if one local fire gets going in today's heat, folk live under trees
Talk to snakes they let sleep under beds
They may not even vote
Climate emergency is not caused by at most, ten percent of the population

Belly, the climate is changing but there is NO emergency! Emergency is a political ploy to scare the population to make them believe the United Nations is to be believed [as they initiated the scare mongering], that we need a whole world unified Marxist Government telling us what to believe and how to act.

They tell us it is Democratic Capitalism that is destroying the Earth. That the Earth is overpopulated and people are disposable. Young brainwashed Marxist Australians promote the drought on human produced CO2, but they ignore the floods in QLD and record snow in the ski fields.

The ABC and SBS both are captured by the lie, promoting Venice flooding as Climate emergency when it has happened before in history, high tides flood the canals.
"Large parts of central Venice are under water again, as another exceptionally high tide inundated the Italian city.
Three of the worst 10 floods since records began in Venice, nearly a hundred years ago, have now happened in a week." http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-50452688/venice-floods-further-warnings-of-high-tides

Josephus, let's be honest, it is my view you are so entrenched in your own view you will not let the truth breath
Climate emergency exists, we see it every day, ice melting cities fooding fire storms here Greece California in record numbers
You see a huge conspiracy at work, so do I but we differ on by who and why
As more, world wide, come to demand action, and as renewable energy maintains its growth, just on economic grounds, it will see more agree we must consider the science not fight it

In the 1820's Joseph Fourier discovered something in the atmosphere traps the sun's heat. (This was a quarter century before the Communist Manifesto was published.) In 1856 Eunice Foote discovered it was CO2. John Tyndall confirmed it in 1859. The power of CO2 as a heat trapper can be tested in any decent physics lab on the planet. Trap some CO2, shine various wavelengths of energy through it, and see what "shadows" form on the other side. The shadows indicate what wavelengths didn't make it and were redirected by the gases.
Even simple thermal cameras can confirm it. Watch the candle at 90 seconds in! (1 minute) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6Un69RMNSw It's SUCH basic physics that even Mythbusters could set up a backyard test that demonstrated how CO2 traps heat. (3 minutes) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I
CO2 traps heat. This is known. It's in physics textbooks over a century old. Warnings to the public started over 60 years ago, as this 1958 Bell Telephone Company "Science Hour" shows. (2 minutes). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-AXBbuDxRY&t=4s
Anyone stating this is all a conspiracy theory is proposing a conspiracy that goes back over 163 years to Eunice Foote!

Max Green welcome you will shortly find insults heaped on you by the flat earther here
Please stay around, my hobby more than anything [ham radio] showed me much about the earth's layers that make our planet habitable.
Sun spot cycles gives us radio nuts great fun or disappointment
We have a climate emergency, but some, unknowingly in defense of fossil fuels will not see it

Max Green,
Have a look at the facts:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjlmFr4FMv

Hi Josephus,
not until you give me a 2 paragraph summary of what it says. Do you have evidence that CO2 does NOT trap heat as I showed above? Or are you going off on one of the more infamous tinfoil hat traps, like "The Sun did it!" or "Temps haven't warmed since 1998!" or "They said there would be an ice age!" or any one of a dozen other denialist myths I've come to know and love like that cantankerous old uncle that always gets drunk at Christmas.

Belly,

"Greens do not hold any power over the NSW Government, can not be behind silly council tree preservation laws"

Then who is?

Issy, its the Shooters and Hooters! Shooters with their fire sticks, and Hooters with their exhaust sparks!

BTW Another Egg-On-Face Award is coming your way.

Max I just let the scientist talk! Listen to the UTube clip and debate his science.
1. Former Greenpeace leader Roger Moore "The shortage of Carbon"
2. CO2 is unseen the basis of all life on Earth and currently 30/1,000,000 above death of all plants. For Green House plant health CO2 should be 1,000/1,000,000.
3. Natural gas is cleaner than coal burning, and coal can be changed to liquid fuel, and is currently done.
4. Carbon the basis of all energy. It cannot be increased or decreased.
5. Oil has given us a healthier and longer life span.
6. The agenda is a religious cult has formed to return us to hunter gatherers. That humans are the enemy of the Earth. Leonardo DiCaprio is a hypocrite with his lavish lifestyle with large yacht and private Jet consuming huge amount of fossil fuel.

Dear Josephus,

Are you confined to the mental health unit or are you free to step out for a few hours during the day to visit others with your worldview, like mhaze, Bazz, Loudmouth, Hasbeen, individual, etc?

Hi Josephus,
You've got to get out of the denier echo chamber and read some real science! How plants respond to CO2 completely bypasses the KNOWN RADIATIVE FORCING of CO2. You've ignored my previous post, so why should I respond to yours? But I'll try anyway, just to show you how engaging in a conversation with others is done!

Some plants may respond well to higher CO2. Some don't! But first remember the RADIATIVE FORCING = extra heat will hit food production with various rainfall shifts. Every extra degree of temperature allows the atmosphere to carry 5% more moisture. That means increased evaporation and drought in drying areas, and increased precipitation in dumping areas. It means increased famines and floods. The net effect? About a quarter less grain grown right as the population hits 9 or 10 billion!

Also, just saying “CO2 = plant food, therefore more plant food will be good for them and force them to grow bigger” is about as sensible as saying “Pizza is human food, therefore more Pizza will be good for them and FORCE them to grow bigger!” We might in truth get bigger. But the trite summary above ignores diabetes, heart disease, circulatory problems and ... death. Some important crops and grazing pastures get their self-defence toxins unbalanced. Some produce too little and become vulnerable to bug attacks.
http://climatecrocks.com/2010/12/08/the-co2-is-good-for-plants-crock-turns-out-not-so-much/
Some produce too much making them inedible to us or livestock.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2010/2943500.htm

Did you know this? Did your denier hero talk about any of this? The "Carbon shortage" claim is just ridiculous. Look up how long the planet has got by on 250ppm! Tell us all the last time it was 400ppm!

"It cannot be increased or decreased" is also ridiculous. Is your denier hero really delusional enough to say fossil fuels will NEVER run out? Google peak fossil fuels. Get to understand Hubbert's peak. We will run out one day, after we've cooked ourselves to do it.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/huge-tesla-battery-in-south-australia-primed-for-big-upgrade-20191119-p53byo.html
State and Federal Liberal governments support battery storage upgrade
More evedence renewables have a force of their own and continue to grow
If not the greens who, a question put to me,tree huggers are not all greens, some truly think they can change the *environmental history * of our country
They in doing that bring about fire storms climate change brings them about in extremely dry summers or winters

Dear Max Green,

You need to keep in mind that Josephus and the other deniers of AGW and it's consequential climate change have $1 minds so of course they are going to come up with the weirdest illogical explanations for how the world works. It's simply because they are ignorant and uneducated.

Mr O,

The single biggest problem is that Australia contributes 1.3% to GHGs. Even if Aus became carbon neutral tomorrow the difference would probably not be measurable.

Thus any town council or even state that declares a "climate emergency" is purely delusional.

Dear Shadow Minister,

The crime being committed by humanity is the endless burning of fossil fuels.

We are not all responsible, it is only those like Tony Abbott, John Howard, ScuMo, etc. who are responsible.

They're the ones causing the climate change that is heating the planet to the point where it is now starting to catch on fire.

Opionated,

Are not bushfires the similar to the burning of fossil fuels, if not then the solution to our problem would seem to be the burning of wood that is not fossilised.

Mr O a delusional hypocrite, John Howard is long retired, and Tony Abbott is trying to stop the burning of carbon fuels and reducing particulate carbon in the atmosphere by fighting the current bush fires. I do not see you fighting the fires, burning carbon fuels releasing CO2.

The problem is yours Mr O as you use fossil fuelled transport and breathe CO2 into the atmosphere and release methane from consumed carbon fuels. You are part of your own problem, consuming carbon and fossil fuels. To be true to your agenda, you would return to the bush as a hunter gatherer, use no computer, phone, plastics, medicine, harvested broad acre food, wood, or coal fired metals.

So Mr O, the Earth is burning try telling it to my Northern Hemisphere friends. Fake Alarmist News!
http://electroverse.net/northern-hemisphere-snow-season-off-to-a-monster-start/

Max, I am a gardener and compost carbon fuels to add to my plants, they thrive better on introduced carbon matter to their soil. I do not need to force feed them they root it out themselves. When I was growing mushrooms producing 60 tons of carbon substrate the Mushrooms loved it. Carbon is what creates the basic building blocks of life, carbon and oxygen. I consume both and love it!

Josephus, you never replied to my "CO2 is plant food" post?

Also, you know that breeder reactors eat nuclear waste, have passive safety, only leave fission products waste which is only 1 golf ball per human lifetime (or 1.4 Olympic pools of waste for Australia for 70 years!) and only has to be buried for 300 years? That normal reactors return about 60 times the energy it took to build the reactor, but breeders eliminate all that uranium mining and refining because they eat nuclear waste and get 90 times the energy out of it, so their energy profit is in the high HUNDREDS of times the energy profit? That means they have ample energy left over to manufacture all the diesel we need for harvesters and jet fuel for airlines, all from seawater. You knew all this, right?

And did you know uranium from seawater can run this for billions of years?

So what's this crap about us requiring fossil fuels? France cleaned up their energy grid in about 15 years by going nuclear. Why can't we?

Max, talk to the Greens about Nuclear fuels. I'm all for nuclear fuels!

Mr O

It is wackadoodle statements like

"We are not all responsible, it is only those like Tony Abbott, John Howard, ScuMo, etc. who are responsible."

That make the rest of us believe that you are a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

Hi Josephus,

Misopinionated probably thinks that carbon, and carbon dioxide, are poisons. Perhaps, when he finishes Primary School, if he enrols in General Science in Year 8 and waits until Year 10 to enrol in Chemistry, he may learn something. Ag Science would be a big help for him too.

And yes, nuclear power will probably be the way to go: after all, France and Finland don't seem to be having any problems with it. France sells the cheap energy generated there to Germany to help bring down the price of electricity generated by wind-farms.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Josephus,
so if you're all for nuclear, I gather that's based on the engineering and scientific realities?

So why on earth are you buying the anti-science claims of the alt-right? Why are you falling for anti-climate memes that are so weak 5 minutes googling pops them like a bubble?

Max Green many who post here are to the right of the ault right
Some base their views on reading the paper the fish and chips came in
Climate emergency has a momentum all of its own
We spring not yet over, have a summer from hell to overcome
By its end that momentum will have grown beyond belief

Yes, we'll see. There's only 10% chance of La Nina which could rescue us with extra rain. 60% chance neutral, which is more or less 'normal' weather, and 30% chance of hell on earth El Nino drying us out even more.

https://public.wmo.int/en/our-mandate/climate/el-ni%C3%B1ola-ni%C3%B1a-update

Belly,

"Some base their views on reading the paper the fish and chips came in"

Get up to date, wrapping fish and chips in old (or new) newspapers was made illegal decades ago, or else your local shop is out of touch with the world.

Is Mise,
I'm glad to see you post worthy and on-topic corrections there! ;-) Do you have something relevant to say about climate change?

In the meantime, our extra CO2 contribution continues to delay an extra 4 Hiroshima bombs per second of heat leaving the earth. In seconds, how long will it take you to read this post? Multiply by 4 Hiroshimas. That's how much extra energy we've trapped while you've been reading this.

Plant transpiration and its use of CO2.
The quantitative relation between stomatal aperture and gas exchange through the stomatal pore can be described by physical models derived from Fick's first law of diffusion. Such models, usually based on a simplified pore geometry, are used to calculate leaf conductance from stomatal pore dimensions or vice versa. A combination of gas&#8208;exchange measurements and simultaneous microscopical observations of stomatal apertures was used to empirically determine this relationship. The results show a substantial deviation between measured stomatal conductance and that calculated from the simplified models. The main difference is a much steeper increase of conductance with aperture at small apertures. When the calculation was based on a realistic pore geometry derived from confocal laser scanning microscopy, a good fit to the experimentally found relationship could be obtained if additionally a significant contribution of a mesophyll diffusional resistance was taken into account.

To investigate the diurnal variation of stomatal sensitivity to CO2, stomatal response to a 30&#8195;min pulse of low CO2 was measured four times during a 24&#8195;h time&#8208;course in two Crassulacean acid metabolism (CAM) species Kalanchoe daigremontiana and Kalanchoe pinnata, which vary in the degree of succulence, and hence, expression and commitment to CAM. In both species, stomata opened in response to a reduction in pCO2 in the dark and in the latter half of the light period, and thus in CAM species, chloroplast photosynthesis is not required for the stomatal response to low pCO2. Stomata did not respond to a decreased pCO2 in K. daigremontiana in the light when stomata were closed, even when the supply of internal CO2 was experimentally reduced. We conclude that stomatal closure during phase III is not solely mediated by high internal pCO2, and suggest that in CAM species the diurnal variability in the responsiveness of stomata to pCO2 could be explained by hypothesizing the existence of a single CO2 sensor which interacts with other signalling pathways. When not perturbed by low pCO2, CO2 assimilation rate and stomatal conductance were correlated both in the light and in the dark in both species.

Well I roam around the bush a bit
Once walked it now age makes it a drive, bit down this few days so? went for a drive
On to the long ago highway, back on the new few dirt roads, all well known to me
Seen them all in drought and good times, in places some of our best land
DRY no not just dry grass dying dry, heat dried and either blackened and burnt or dead, never ever seen anything like that
this gardener has twice the water storage his neighbors have 44.250 liters
Down to my last 500, watering only two tubs, see fill one tank is three four hundred dollar loads
Water? two tubs from? two liter bottle after topping up the aviary water.
Tell those living in this area, 200 klm, we do not have an emergency

The Climate emergency made over 100 youths start fires in QLD. They are hot headed bed wetters.

ttp://7news.com.au/news/qld/no-need-for-tougher-laws-for-queensland-kids-who-start-bushfires-says-government-c-564143?utm_campaign=share-icons&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&tid=1574205708407&fbclid=IwAR2Yo9avgkVO0IfR0VopuQMYxcgfNGJbZSQiPvIetQ-kgdpOv0AtZIPaAgk

Hey Max Green,

"Do you have something relevant to say about climate change?"

I do.

I don't know if there's any merit to this climate change business;

- But I think we should consider 'getting rid of' all the people whinging about climate change first.
All I ever hear about these days is this climate change this and climate change that.
On and on and on I wish everyone would just shut up.
I'm sick of it.

Armchair doesn't like science and is a bit sick of it.
Poor diddums.
When your grandchildren's crops fail and they starve to death, or get killed in some future climate war, get back to us about how sick you were about scientists warning us all this was coming, OK?

Max Green,

Yes, I have something relevant to say about climate change, I think that it is real but not necessarily man made and we should be minimising the danger of bushfires.

A place to start would be getting rid of a few million gum trees that are in a position to be a danger to human life.

We've just seen what happened in Wytaliba where love of trees outweighed common sense and years of warnings and sound advice.

If bushfires are going to get worse then we need to remove the major source of fuel.

First of all, the best science available to the human race disagrees with you and calculates that the KNOWN demonstrable radiative forcing of CO2 is trapping heaps of heat. Where that goes and the models that predict future impacts on local weather systems and micro-climates is another question, and they are perfecting those models all the time. But the overall picture is clear. It is us. It is our particular isotope of fossil CO2. Not the sun. Not Milankovitch wobbles. Not cosmic rays or volcanoes. Us. This is known. Debating this is just wrong.

Second of all, cut down millions of trees? People love trees. People NEED trees for psychological well being. Patients that can see trees from hospital windows recover faster. Did you know this? It's a fact. Cutting down millions of trees is exactly the OPPOSITE direction we want to take if we're going to help solve climate change. We don't just need clean energy systems like breeder reactors that eat nuclear waste, we need to reduce the current CO2 load on the atmosphere.

Maybe we can create fire breaks around our towns and cities, with careful attention to public parks getting enough recycled water for irrigating and reducing fire risk. But our national parks need more trees, not less, because the climate needs more trees. BILLIONS of them worldwide!

Dear Max Green,

It's obvious that you have a million dollar brain. Unfortunately you will find yourself arguing with a lot of $1 brains like mhaze, ttbn, Hasbeen, individual, Loudmouth and a lot of others who are skilled in pub philosophy. Good luck.

Yes, I note none of them have refuted a single point made in my opening statement about CO2.

So Deniers, here we go again. In the 1820'sJoseph Fourier discovered something in the atmosphere traps the suns heat. (This was a quarter century before the Communist Manifesto was published, for those who track such things.) In 1856 Eunice Foote discovered CO2 traps heat very effectively. John Tyndall confirmed it in 1859. The power of CO2 as a heat trapper can be tested in any decent physics lab on the planet. Trap some CO2, shine various wavelengths of energy through it, and see what "shadows" form on the other side. The shadows indicate what wavelengths didn't make it and were redirected by the gases.
Even simple thermal cameras can confirm it. Watch the candle at 90 seconds in! (1 minute) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6Un69RMNSw

It's SUCH basic physics that even Mythbusters could set up a backyard test that demonstrated how CO2 traps heat. (3 minutes) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

CO2 traps heat. This is known. It's in physics textbooks over a century old. Warnings to the public started over 60 years ago, as this 1958 Bell Telephone Company "Science Hour" shows. (2 minutes). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-AXBbuDxRY&t=4s

Max,

" Eucalypts are iconic Australian forest trees. Ninety-two million hectares of the Eucalypt forest type occurs in Australia, and forms three-quarters of the total native forest area."
How many to the hectare?

http://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/forestsaustralia/profiles/eucalypt-forest
https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/forestsaustralia/profiles/eucalypt-forest

Note the absence of the 's' from 'https' in the successful link.

It's an OLO thing, Max, and newcomers to the forum always get caught but few will bother to tell you.

People love trees, true, but trees, particularly eucalypts don't love people, they drop very heavy limbs on them and burn them in bushfires.
We can afford to cut down a few million to save lives.

If you want trees then plant fire retardant species and Multiculturalists could plant imported trees such as oak and elm.

Max, using the nature of CO2 forming shadows means the Earth should be cooling as More CO2 in the atmosphere traps more radiation.

http://coldclimatechange.com/carbon-dioxide-is-a-cooling-gas-according-to-nasa/

NASA
http://coldclimatechange.com/
NASA’s Langley Research Center has collated data proving that “greenhouse gases” actually block up to 95 percent of harmful solar rays from reaching our planet, thus reducing the heating impact of the sun.

Dear Max Green,

I am an environmental sociologist conducting independent research on water. My knowledge of science I got through doing my mechanical engineering degree and my readings to complement my interest in environmental issues and the manifest nature of water. I concur with what you are saying but it is my understanding that CO2 acts more as a trigger to global warming and is the direct cause of the main of producing the real culprit, being water vapour.

Max here in this place we get folk like you, informed posters often few stay
See truth has little value for many, they feed on a very real conspiracy
Put in place to confuse, to lie, to insult truth
Huge numbers world wide of true scientists tell us climate change is real
In fact countrys and groups like NASA WHO, the UN itself tell us this is true
But the combat continues,why
BECAUSE of self interests of the owners of fossil fuels
Much like the tobacco lobby murdered the truth
The first victims of climate change lineup here to give evidence they are unconcerned about the truth
Be safe today, as four states face fires that have already killed and destroyed, in the worst drought we have not yet seen the end of
Climate change? proof? wait and see

Which one of you $1 brains said that Tony Abbott is not one of those responsible for climate change because he is helping to fight the bushfires as a volunteer?

I thought he lost his seat because he was seen as being anti climate change.

Well Australia's internationally renowned village idiot should have his hands full today because he can chose to fight fires in SA, NSW and Qld.

Tony Abbott's not one of those responsible for climate change. What a joke!

Hi JOSEPHUS,
that "Cold Climate" website doesn't even have an 'about us' section and hardly represents the glorified heights of NASA. I mean, the leading NASA papers show that last century...

THE SUN COOLED WHILE THE EARTH STILL WARMED!
http://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/189/graphic-temperature-vs-solar-activity/
Explain THAT data in your "The sun did it!" conspiracy theory!
This is the official NASA website.
Hint: It has NASA in the URL! ;-)

Hi MR OPINION:
I hear you. CO2 is the trigger for the more powerful water vapour feedback. More CO2 = more water vapour feedback. That's what the standard IPCC climate change model says! Flipside = less CO2, less water vapour feedback, less global warming. We're on the same page.

Hi BELLY,
I hear you, especially on Josephus's dodgy internet links! ;-) How utterly un-adult! Tinfoil hat much?

Meanwhile, to all deniers: today's weather is served with a good dose of climate change, dry with a side serve of ash and smoke. Enjoy.

"
I am an environmental sociologist conducting independent research on water."

I thought that you were on something stronger.

Belly, False statement. We believe the climate is changing as it has done for millions of years, but do not believe man alone is responsible for the changes which you continue to put forward. That man is the criminal of Climate change, from the results of human social development.

When you can prove what we are seeing has never happened before and it is totally man made then you win! I hope I live long enough to see 2030 when the world will be destroyed by your and Greta's calculations. Humans must adapt to change not give in to it.

Josephus,
OF COURSE THE CLIMATE HAS CHANGED BEFORE AND THE CLIMATOLOGISTS ARE ALL OVER THIS!

Previous climate catastrophe's demonstrate the risks.
Paleoclimate studies demonstrate apocalyptic Extinction Level Events.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event#Global_warming
It took tens of millions of years for new species to evolve and recover after some of these super-greenhouse extinctions!

While not as hot as previous super-greenhouse events (yet), it's going to be harder for life to adapt this time because it's 10 times faster than the ice-age cycle so ecosystems don't have as much *time* to move. Ecosystems are also hemmed in and trapped by our vast grazing and farmlands, so it's not as *free* to move. We've put nature in solitary confinement, and turned up the heat.
The tiny isolated pockets of nature and wildlife that are left could just get snuffed out by climate change.

The IPCC has measured ALL the natural forcings that explain previous natural warming and cooling cycles. Understanding the climate's deep history is one of the keys in understanding how today's climate might behave. Rather than some mystery that climatologists have somehow accidentally overlooked, paleoclimate is one of the foundations to understanding today's climate.
http://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter05_FINAL.pdf

Our modern civilisation is utterly dependent on today's stable climate for our agricultural and grazing lands, which together cover almost HALF the planet. By mid century we could be losing a quarter of our crops on a regular basis. I have collected links on my blog here. http://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/global-warming-is-serious/

In summary, previous super-greenhouses were catastrophic then and will be catastrophic again unless we stop burning fossil fuels. http://skepticalscience.com/humans_survived_previous_changes.html
Only the most ignorant and obtuse climate denier would assert "The climate has changed before" as some sort of *objection*. The only appropriate reply? "Derr!"

Josephus mate we will not agree on much if anything
In my work life I would put such a person as you, to whoever I was addressing, as evidence of completely wrong view/opinion on the subject
You are a victim of a very real conspiracy
Behind that conspiracy the thousands of service station owners coal owners, fossil fuel owning LUDITTS have conned you
We are in motion on this subject, it is moving under its own momentum as evidence mounts it is very real, man has impacted on the climate and continues to
But not forever action has been started and that too is moving under its own steam, and this truth, it is financially sound to switch to renewables
See even the lie it costs more is being undone by truth

Josephus said: "When you can prove what we are seeing has never happened before and it is totally man made then you win!"

Max and Belly both say:
"Deerrrr!"