The devastating impacts of climate change are becoming impossible to deny. Scientists have for 30 years been pointing out the dangerous consequences for the planet and its inhabitants. There is no reasonable doubt that global warming is real, it is manmade, and it is serious.
Responsible citizens have been pushing for effective action to reduce fossil fuel use. But a core group of denialist journalists and organisations have been brutally sabotaging their efforts. Now that the devastating effects are becoming impossible to ignore, concerned citizens and journalists the world over are compiling lists of these cowards.
School children can see their planet and their future are being wrecked. They will be voters and adults in a few years, and in increasing desperation will demand drastic action. There is a growing effort to track down those most responsible.
Deniers, you have been warned!

Some examples. Sources in my dropbox at https://tinyurl.com/v9stq5m .
1. Malcolm Turnbull’s ‘do-nothings’ who argue fact or fiction on climate science.
2. Unearthing America's Deep Network of Climate Change Deniers: A new study attempts the first tally of those driving the peculiarly American strain of climate change denial.
3. Network structure and influence of the climate change counter-movement.
4. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming.
5. Australia, your country is burning: dangerous climate change is here with you now - Michael Mann, currently on sabbatical in Australia.
6. A Burning Nation, led by cowards – Angus Hervey.
7. You will die of old age; I will die of climate change – student protest placard.
8. Your 50% risk [of collapse and extinctions] is simply not acceptable to us… the young people are starting to understand your betrayal… we'll be watching you… we will never forgive you – Greta.

'compiling lists of these cowards.'

Don't you believe in democracy?
Don't I have a right to my own opinion and dissent?

Or is it all Sieg Heil! Sieg Heil! Yes mein Fuhrer now?
You don't happen to sport a Hitler moustache do you?
if not you should, maybe it'll suit you.

So what are you trying to do, scare me?
Do you want me to curl up into the fetal position and piss all over myself in a state of pure fear?

Don't you know it's 2020 and the Women who advocate against Domestic Violence say ITS WRONG to use fear or violence, (or fear of violence) to try to control other peoples behaviour?

Even those nutcrackers know IT'S WRONG.

You know what's really sad?
You wouldn't be saying that so proudly and confidently if people were coming door to door to round you up.
You look forward to punishing them don't you?

- But remember it goes both ways.
Maybe others are also writing lists with people like you on it.
You wouldn't be so confident if you were also in the firing line.

You're the one driven so mad by your beliefs that you're thinking about rounding 'deniers' up.
And that makes you an angry little coward, does it not?

- And BTW if you look forward to punishing others, that makes you an extremist.
You're a bona-fide danger to society.

" You will die of old age; I will die of climate change – student protest placard."

Oh a student made a placard? Well that changes everything!!

And Mr Bryce falls for Oreskes load of tripe. Nuf said.

"School children can see their planet and their future are being wrecked. They will be voters and adults in a few years, and in increasing desperation will demand drastic action."

Well school children can see what they've been indoctrinated to see. But when they become voters and workers and taxpayers and parents, they'll see what the rest of us can see. That the futile effort to control the climate isn't worth the cost. and they'll vote accordingly.

Wow. An excitable newcomer really putting the boot in. Lists of "cowards", eh. Shades of 1984 and popping off the Romanovs in the cellar. What hysterical nonsense. Shot his bolt straight way.

*...We will never forgive you – Greta...*

Until it's time for the eulogy, and distribution of Daddy's will.
He was such a good old fart ...really...

Dan

I did not bother reading the first post, only the title - and yes, the author is right: there is indeed no place for "deniers" because even denying this nonsense is a form of participating in that stupid game. Just ignore all this nonsense, let the dogs bark and let the caravan move on!

Yep, time's up for us old farts having to share this beautiful planet with the indoctrinated.
The dawn of the the Planet of the morons !

See Greta and her spotty faced supporters have been taken to task for churning up the ground while she was squealing about the world being on fire - all in torrential rain.

Oh dear another religion zealot on olo. Yawn. The only thing UNPRECENTED is the corruption of true science by the gw zealots. With life expectancy right up their, the quality of life as good as any time in history we have produced so many spoilt brats who truly believe this unscientific gw religion. An entitled generation preaching to those who have given them the easy life they have. Failed miserably in spanking the entitled brats bums. That is where the elderly have failed.

What does the Jewish Socialist Bernie Sanders say of climate change?

Bet he gets off on it. Should be a few votes in it.

Uncle Donnie is pretty circumspect about it.

Scott Morrison wavers.

And the Russians? Drinking themselves under the table trying to forget about it.

Russians drink 83% of their own manufactured industrial alcohol. Mmmm.

No wonder then, all those busty blond Russian singles advertise all over my iPad.

Maybe somebody loves me after all!

Dan

Bryce, how can I put this as simply and delicately as I possibly can.
YOU are a FOOL!
Everything you've written has no backing or facts to back them up with.
You are the gutless one like that ignorant arrogant bimbo of a mentally and emotionally deranged little piece of irrelevance.
You too dare to play the child card in an egregious attempt at trying to convince us that you're as sick as she is, only worse because I expect ignorance and mis-information from a kid, but you buddy.
No you are just plain sick.
While you have been locked away in front of your keyboard, you have completely missed the revolution that is exposing this whole GW thing as a con.
If you had bothered to do some neutral and objective research, you would have found that, the truth about all this is that; the planet is going through it's warming phase of it's climate cycles.
The cycles last a few hundred years or so.
When it has reached it's max, as it has done since it was born, it will begin it's return to the cold, (possibly ice age).
Now what is really important for you to grasp is that because it is warming, CO2 in the oceans are released, relative to the small temperature increases.
Now because of the temp increase, it allows the oceans to give off CO2.
I'll say it again so you can take it in.
First the planet warms, THEN the CO2 is released.
Got that?
So to correct the lies which have been orchestrated by a vial and evil group to feather their own nests and personal and financial gain.
The scientists were right, they said the planet was warming, but the scumbag thieves got a hold of it and added the words, "because of man made CO2,and the burning of fossil fuels".
The CO2 we emit is, well, nothing over the bigger picture.
I have video's of people of note, and other info, but I'm not going to waste my time, because I've been debating with people like you, time wasters.

Ian Bryce,

You said: "Australia, your country ........"

WRONG! Ask the Chinese in Australia whose country it is and they will tell you that Australia is NOT your country and that the Chinese own it lock, stock and barrel.

It's too late to turn back the clock on global warming. We have passed the tipping point and I expect to see a rapid increase in mean temperature and the disappearance of glaciers, more desertification, fiercer cyclones, more heat waves, etc., within the next 10 years.

Cranks like to his bloke just learn the words, but they don't know what is actually being 'denied', nor do they know the difference between carbon and carbon dioxide. They are not sure whether their masters want them them to talk about 'climate change' or 'global warming'. They know nothing.

I remind my critics that we have a duty to future generations. The most basic requirement is to stop trashing their (and our) habitat. If a vocal few are the main problem, our duty is to stop them!
Regarding free speech, my maxim is that the entitlement ends when (a) wrong, and (b) harmful. It is hard to find a more deserving case that AGW deniers!

Instructions on our 'duties' as well; and his Lordship also advises that the right to freedom of speech ends when he and his sort deem what we say to be wrong or harmful. The arrogance and ignorance could not get worse. He is probably just a lonely weirdo, lacking in social skills. It's not likely that the professional climate hysterics and frauds would be interested in using him as a front man, even a useful idiot.

Bryce, very interesting stance you hold.
Your attempt at trying to appear a virtuous man is commendable, BUT you must be told that your attempt at virtue shaming/signalling or whatever the hell it is that you're trying on us, is futile.
Your accusation that it is incumbent upon us to leave the planet in a state that our children will appreciate, is a somewhat sad attempt at finger pointing and blind accusations.
Firstly you are a charlatan for presuming to have the knowledge and even the authority or right to speak to us with an accusatorial bent.
You have presumed too much of the wrong thing.
You have simply listened to the hype, instead of doing your own research.
It's not that hard, Google has more than enough info to persuade you that you are wrong.
I am in possession of videos and info that clarifies this whole GW mess and rebukes any claims that we (man) has done any wrong, and definitely not that we are doing any harm to anything by using fossil fuels.
I suggest before you dig yourself further into irrelevance that you take some time and see the huge number of people, and scientists who have come out to clarify and debunk the accusations that we have created all this CO2.
Have you not wondered why there are so many people and scientists speaking out AGAINST this GW con, yet no-one, nada, zip scientists coming out defending it.
Only the scientists can defend it as they know the technicalities involved with all this.
You absolutely cannot dismiss the fact that the scientists are not saying a thing, so it means this was a political ploy and nothing more.
Stop trying to sell you brand, it's all over, the truth is well and truly out there now, so by persisting you are only making yourself look even more foolish.

Dear Ian Bryce,

Mate the time has been up for a long while. The fact that you have found one of those corners of the internet where denial is still in vogue does not make this a problem. What is a problem is the use of denialism as an excuse for inaction.

Really only the most ideologically twisted deny the facts of global warming and believe it when they do so.

This is far more about a deeply selfish segment of our population desperately trying to bat away anything which might even slightly impact on their accumulated wealth.

Hey Ian Bryce,
"If a vocal few are the main problem, our duty is to stop them!"

Hang on, I thought the problem you identified was to 'stop trashing their (and our) habitat'.

How does what we say on the forum here have anything to do with Asians chopping down forests and chucking garbage in the sea you idiot?

Which one is it?
The people actually wrecking the planet or the people who exercise their right to dissent your climate crap?

How are we alone to blame for everyone else putting fuel in the cars to power the economy and for daring to turn the lights on, or for flushing our toilets too often?

Do you think we alone created the world problems because of our use of plastic plastic straws?

Maybe you think things like continental shifts, you know Madagascar, Sri Lanka, Australia and Indonesia breaking off and floating away;
Ice ages 'freezing Antarctica over', Doggerland sinking and North Africa being entirely engulfed by sea water to become a desert were all caused by humans too?

Hey Mr Opinion,
"It's too late to turn back the clock on global warming. We have passed the tipping point... blah blah blah"

Good now you can finally go back to putting your mind to use thinking about more constructive and practical things like we can actually do adapt to the environment instead of thinking you can control it.

As usual, we need to clean up after another mis-information know nothing has finished emptying his bowels all over the forum.
Let me clean up this HUGE mis-information campaign.
There is only ONE thing to remember, which fortunately means there is a chance some people will eventually see the light and not the bull, or propaganda.
So, for the umpteenth time;
We (the so called deniers) are more than aware that the planet is warming.
We are also aware that it is normal and has been happening for as long as the planet has been alive.
We also know that the planet, like many things in life, lives on cycles, which means that every few hundred years or so, the planet cycles between hot to cold and back again as a matter of course.
We also know that CO2 is released by the ocean when it warms up, it takes back CO2 when it cools down.
We also know tha the warming comes first, THEN CO2 is released, NOT the other way round!
We also know that the amount of CO2 created by mankind, is negligible, barely worth noting.
So any thinking, open minded, mature adult, with even a modicum of common sense, upon reading these facts, will immediately conclude that Man did nothing to the Planet, and therefore needs to do nothing in return.
What has become increasingly apparent about this GW is that it is a lie, that was created by a group of very wealthy, yet sick and evil individuals, for personal and financial gain, with a very sinister overarching agenda.
Now I suggest you set aside your anti denialist rants and beliefs, and do what you should have done in the beginning, go and do some research!

I finally worked it out. Men have periods because of climate change. Thanks Ian and Steelie. I am now starting to think straight.

Dear runner,

You wrote;

"I am now starting to think straight."

Mate don't do that, please stay true to your inner self. I have always enjoyed your latent thoughts such when you talk about gay marriage being 'shoved down our throats'. It is a source of joy to see the closet door ajar even slightly.

I look forward to more such pearls and I'm sure you will not disappoint.

Sea-level rise of two inches in 200 years. Temperature rise of two degrees or so in 200 years. Yikes !

On TV, one little girl in Bristol, England, all rugged up, tugged at my heart strings: imagine the British Isles having to endure another two-degree temperature rise by 2100 ! Growing grapes in the north of England and southern Scotland, like back in the Venereal Bede's days. Tobacco growing in England, presumably the south, like 400 years ago. Oh, the horror !

And summers now lasting twice as long as winters ! In Adelaide this morning, a minimum of 12 degrees: I dug out my smelly old winter singlets. By midday, it had rocketed up to 13 degrees. How can we endure such conditions ? What is Morrison doing about THAT ?

Bushfires ? Fuel load: most Australians are sensible enough to know that. Sure CO2 levels have risen, and maybe temperatures have gone up two degrees, aggravating the droughts that have plagued Australia every five or ten years since 1788. Sure, do something about CO2. Sure, reduce the use of fossil fuels, maybe bring in nuclear. But don't assume that every problem is caused by the one-and-only Wicked Witch of the Greenhouse Effect. That's religious thinking.

Joe

'American writer H L Menken provided a perspective on scares in 1918. “Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; THE WHOLE AIM OF PRACTICAL POLITICS IS TO KEEP THE POPULACE ALARMED (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) BY MENACING IT WITH AN ENDLESS SERIES OF HOBGOBLINS, MOST OF THEM IMAGINARY .”'. (Peter Smith, Quadrant Online, 3/3/20)

I am left wondering how many of the deniers are cockies?

As that doesn't make sense to me.

Cockies in my experience tend to be very practical and matter of fact people.

And to simulate the effects that CO2 has is a relatively simple matter as all you have to do is seal your green house, release CO2 progressively within a recycling

(not venting so as to waste and dissipate it)

ventilation system and watch the temperature sky rocket.

Of course, as previously said, if you can control the temperature and humidity via something like an air conditioning system, the potential for significant yield increases is huge.

Thus, to my way of thinking, it is a simple matter to bring the cockies around. Just prove it to them by way of simulation.

And I am not referring to the political variety who have their eyes fixed on the bucket of money which comes with fossil fuels.

It is also true to say that the weather systems have always had cyclic peaks and troughs, with the bell curve being broader at some times than other. But to that we have added additional levels of CO2 which adds additional variance to the system.

And how do we know about the history of CO2 levels over millennia? Well, they just deep drill the ice wherein it is trapped, date it and make observations and findings.

It's pretty straight forward actually. But in an environment of economic uncertainty where those who act would be immediately disadvantaged by those who don't, it perhaps ought not be so surprising that some advocate for "keeping the pedal to the metal" for as long as we can.

So many who appear to be deniers aren't deniers at all, but rather are just whipping up a frenzy of denial to maintain their economic position for as long as they can.

A foolish game of brinkmanship it is but one thing is for certain, if warming is real, more and more it will begin to bite down hard until eventually it will become so uncomfortable that the majority will act.

rEPRUSu, so am I too understand that you do not agree with the clarifications of late, and the proof and confirmation that, we are slowly coming around to the fact the earth MAY be warming.
But it seems that there is still reluctance to reject, (even after it has been demonstrated), that the CO2 is causing the warming, and not as is now more and more being confirmed that because of the warming, CO2 is being released from the oceans.
And that this warming is causing the subsequent release of CO2 from the ocean, and nothing to do with fossil fuels or the burning there-of.
Again, there is no dispute that burning fossil fuels emits, many things, CO and CO2 being just two of them, and by any standard of measurement or comparison, quite negligible.
So it would seem that the shoe is now clearly on the other foot.
Scientists are on the record, debunking the original lie, even proof of it by being on You Tube, so we can verify and scrutinise the person in question, unlike the fictitious 97% arseholes who are nameless and faceless with nothing to identify who they are.
Because of the lack of disclosure and the fact that no scientist has come forward to speak up in favour of this version of GW, BS because it's not true, compared to the tsunami of experts who are aggressively debunking it, because they know they are on a winner and backing the right horse.
If you seek verification of what I say, I have many articles and videos to confirm, if you feel the need and still do not believe me, even after you do your own research.
That is, IF you truly are interested in the uncomfortable truth and not the convenient lie!

So far we have only heard the hysterical mantra, We are Doomed! No science is given to debate. Fact is they do not know the facts of Earth history, and assume man can stop changes in natural historical climate changes. The Northern Hemisphere is suffering extreme cold currently, and we are told we are all going to be burned. This next winter we will experience extreme cold in Australia. Any burns will be Ice Burns. Australia is to experience a rain storm 500 K wide, similar to rainstorms last century. All the fires are out, we are in for floods. The ignorant follow Tim Flannery and Al Gore who stated no rain till May in Australia. With the increase in hot house gasses the planet will green with new life not die.

Quote: 5. Australia, your country is burning: dangerous climate change is here with you now - Michael Mann, currently on sabbatical in Australia.
6. A Burning Nation, led by cowards – Angus Hervey.

http://www.theguardian.com/global/video/2019/feb/26/strong-winds-cause-ice-tsunami-on-lake-erie-video?fbclid=IwAR2X3PJjcoMp0biPXoTQ4ja8QFJaAOMxq8dZCO-Nou6czsiEvOzop__dqA8

http://www.cleveland.com/news/2020/03/see-jaw-dropping-photos-of-ice-covered-houses-on-lake-erie-shore.html

RePRESSu,

So those archaeologists working in Greenland, trying to excavate MWP* graves may not have that long before they can be dug out of the permafrost ?

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/11/why-did-greenland-s-vikings-disappear

* MWP - Medieval Warming Period.

These warming periods seem to occur about every 1000-1200 years - about 2000-2200 BC (Mesopotamia/Sumeria), 1100-1400 BC (Minoan Crete, Troy), 100 BC - 200 AD (Rome, China, the Mayan Empire), 900 - 1400 (Europe, Australia).

Michael Mann, the Hockey Stick fraud. Yes, Josephus. And in Adelaide, where February is usually stinking hot, most days have been mid twenties. Even the media is starting to talk about the mild summer. We've even had rain. Even the MOB's shonky downgrading of past temperatures to make things seem hotter now can't hide what is actually happening.

Dear ALTRAV,

«We (the so called deniers)»

Perhaps you enjoy this role, but it only encourages that insane nonsense. Please do not feed this insane movement by talking about it: whether you speak for it or speak against it, they just bask at the attention!

---

Dear Joe,

«That's religious thinking.»

Really? Does it lead anyone towards God?

Please do not taint religion with the madness of the author and his like.

Also, please read my above response to ALTRAV: no good can come of you denying them and trying to talk with them rationally - just ignore them, that's all.

Yuyutsu,

'Religious thinking' in the sense of perceiving any opposition to one's beliefs as the work of some sort of devil, by whatever name, 100 % evil, to be extirpated and their proponents to be exterminated if possible.

i.e. a belief, not necessary in some god but in its Satanic Opposite. Yes, implicitly, to totally oppose and expose such evil is to be, in a roundabout way, doing god's work.

'Religious thinking'.

Joe

Dear Joe,

OK, I will just take this as one of the illogical peculiarities of the English language. Like why the same word is used for the skillful production of music out of a musical instrument, for kicking a ball back and forth by a group of hooligans and for toddlers throwing about plastic boxes in a sand-pit.

Yuyutsu, you are right of course.
I find it hard not to respond.
I reason that if I don't respond, it is taken as though I agree with them and their comments.
It's just the way I'm wired.
I must admit though, I have held back in some cases, but mostly because the topic was crap, or the commentor was crap.
But if anyone tells an untruth, I feel compelled to out them and see that the truth is told.
Most of the time these untruths are merely opinions, which is like someone asking to be abused.
I may say some unbelievable things, but the likes of the you know who's say some unbelievably stupid things.
I can't believe that they actually believe what they say.
But there you have it.
I must try to refrain more often, but it would be like trying to stop a cat from chasing a mouse?

I have yet to see any form of credible evidence which debunks the majority view of some of the finest scientific minds on the planet though I am happy to look at anything.

I have some understanding of meteorology having studied it throughout the course of my pilots training.

However, if you are actually capable of reading science then you would have to understand that you are attempting to refute the best that international science has to offer, so you do really need to put your rebuttal into an acceptable format.

The climate systems of the world are complex. And indeed, there is more than one factor that contributes to both cooling and warming ie our position in orbit and our relative distance from the sun.

So, the normal fluctuations still occur however there is now a "Joker" in the mix. So, it is a nonsense to attribute weather conditions only to one factor or another.

Indeed, another ice age will eventually come, CO2 or not, but not at this stage of the game.

And of course, the more the ice melts, the more blasts of cold air we will get, providing relief at least in the short term.

But quite plainly mean global temperatures are going up.

And as said, if you want to see CO2 in action you can do it in your own backyard.

So, the problem is multi-variant but unlike in primordial times, we no longer have sufficient natural means to soak it up.

If you look to my earlier writings, I quite plainly expressed the view that we were going to get scorched well in advance of the fires. Because that is what the science was telling us was the most likely outcome.

So when the politicians are running around expressing shock, surprise and dismay I can tell you for a fact that it is but a charade of crocodile tears on their part because they were ..ing told in no uncertain terms that that is what was most likely to happen.

rEPRUSu, if I were to challenge someone to a fight, I would bring along a FIGHTER, I know nothing about fighting.
If I am being challenged to explain GW so I bring along those who know about GW.
As I said previously, with the amount of push-back about the science and the lies about GW, I have seen no discernible challenges to the deniers submissions challenging their reasoning.
No scientist, or expert has come forth to deny that the globe IS warming, and because of this, the oceans are releasing CO2.
They have gone quiet on the line that humans are the cause of the CO2 and that is the cause of GW.
When the only experts coming out to debunk this fallacy are in fact saying that it's the other way round.
Because the Earth is warming, the oceans are letting off CO2.
They state categorically, that humans have nothing to do with GW.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVc-Y-mJ_uY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZdm-w6FmHo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewJ6TI8ccAw

Just a taste, to give you an idea that what I say is true.

amazing how the religious zealots ignore the myriad of false prophicies dating back about 60 years and more recently BOM fiddling temperatures. Oh well it must fit the narrative.

I don't think it logical to persecute someone on the basis of what you think might happen fifty or one hundred years hence. We live in the present, and the reality is that even five year predictions have great uncertainty. For example, the current uncertainty relating to coronavirus has caused considerable panic. A pandemic could cause far more harm than the prophecies of climate catastrophists. What is pertinent is that an understanding of the disease itself is of far greater importance than complex predictive models with unknown variables.

ALTRAV,

You say,

" ..... if I don't respond, it is taken as though I agree with them and their comments."

I don't think the looney left would ever make the mistake of thinking you would ever agree with them. The best way to deal with these loud mouthed minorities is often to ignore them.

Remember the recent election on climate change, when Shorten threatened the electorate with the same rubbish being spewed out here by the usual suspects, plus a few new ones. Remember how the electorate rejected his nonsense. Now, Albanese, too thick or too mad to get the message, is threatening Australians with the same thing or worse.

Have faith in Morrison's "sensible Australians" in the real world.

Science is best approached dispassionately and from a neutral perspective.

I have no vested interest either way. And neither do I seek to attach belief in the absence of fact. I neither believe nor disbelieve but rather on appraisal of the available evidence have formed the view that the cream of the world's scientists make a compelling case.

To "speak" science ALTRAV, you need to cite studies. All of the evidence from the scientists is publicly available in the form of citable scientific studies on line. This is not the same as someone expressing an "opinion" on YouTube.

If one's mind has not been trained in this manner in some way or another, it is easy to become bamboozled and misled by pseudo-science and as Runner knows, it becomes a case of:

"The blind leading the blind."

And that's part of the problem. It usually comes down to people who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo who want to hang onto any little thing to support their view.

It is conspiratorial nonsense to think that the worlds scientists have a hidden agenda. With the tools available, they have studied the problem and formulated a view.

That is not to say that they always get it right ie in the aftermath of WWII with a sudden crisis in heart attacks and strokes, medical scientists were put on the job. And, what they came up with was "Cholesterol" - the big vein and artery blocking goo.

But at that time, the measuring equipment at their disposal was not sufficient to deduce that there is healthy cholesterol which we need, and unhealthy cholesterol which we do not, as we have come to understand with the advent of better tools, understanding and equipment.

As for the Greens, with all their failings and inability to martial themselves to the extent of being able to offer viable alternative economic policies ie if we shut down coal, we'll push up this industry and that and migrate all those redundant workers and unemployed.

If they had of had greater input at the time of the boom you would all have energy positive houses now and no longer need to pay for electricity or gas.

Is that so bad?

(you're being screwed ding-a-lings)

Ever been to a country that truly suffers from fossil fuel pollution? Is that what you want?

Instead, you would be contributing to producing an energy surplus for the benefit of grand projects ie if the sea is risin, why not desalinate it and pump it to the cockies in the dry zone?

But the issue is that far too many people get paid way too much for doing way too little. And how sick are we of hearing the ongoing incessant whining of those who deserve more. It's not that we do not have a heart for them, but they come as beggars and at best only ever get scraps from the table.

As as you understand, if some people are to get more, then other people must get less. But when if ever do we hear any public debate about who should get less. It is as if the pathetic saps in the media are muzzled.

But doesn't such a one sided false debate tell you something?

It was a Greens report that verified that more than 800 billion dollars a year goes offshore to the international beneficiaries of this nations resource sector? And a not insignificant chunk of it to some filthy pom in london and other dead beat, do nothing share holders.

Is that you what you want?

Or would you do as I and relegate international interests to a niche and favor local start ups?

As Runner understands visa vi the Church, and the same applies to the Greens, don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

NASA - GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE - VITAL SIGNS OF THE PLANET:

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

" ... Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources. ... "

..

" ... SCIENCE ACADEMIES

International Academies: Joint Statement

"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10 ... "

..

Now, c'mon now ALTRAV et al.

Do you want to discuss serious science or would you prefer to express the half-witted ramblings of some peanut on YouTube?

rEPRUSu, I'm sorry to have to tell you, BUT, within the text of your submission lies the very point which has led this debate.
Just these few seemingly innocuous words carry the substance of the whole weight of the implication of it's message; "It is LIKELY that MOST of the warming..........
If they had said; "It is without question or doubt, that THE warming is..........
Then I would have to reconsider.
But even then, the mountain of comments even in videos, (it's merely the modern medium of getting to more people on the ground) that are coming forward, unsolicited, has to be noted and allowed to weigh in to the debate or argument on GW.
BTW, those same people you malign ARE in fact experts and scientists.
They declare their status and position usually at the beginning of, (or near), the transmission of the video.
There are now more than enough antagonists and detractors to begin doubting or at least, questioning this GW claim and it's veracity.
Don't forget, we have said, we would not disagree with the fact that the planet is warming, but only with the fact that someone decided to attach or create a false cause, in the statement that we humans are to blame for this current level and subsequent increase in CO2.
This is a falsehood, a lie, a egregiously and game changing lie.
Had they just said, "the planet is warming, but it's OK, it's only the warming phase, and it will revert to cooling in time", no one would have given it a second thought, BUT, add in something which suddenly gives this statement a threatening connotation, and BINGO we have a world panic on our hands.
And it is this panic that they are relying on to muster the people under their wings so as to foster an air of trust so the public will submit to whatever they say to stop this evil thing from killing them.
I'm actually not beyond thinking this current pandemic smacks awfully like something these bastards would orchestrate.
It sounds far fetched, but try disproving it!

Over all the Earth is naturally warming as it has done throughout history. The fact of the zealots have got on to this natural fact and blame Capitalist greed as the cause is deceptive religious politics. The only answer they see is Communism, this as the platform of Bernie Sanders, where the State manages all property; and everyone benefits, and the young are falling for this lie. The religion of Global warming is promoted by Marxist ideologues to scare the young into Get Up action groups to destroy Western Society. We just need to sit cool it for the next 30 years till this madness passes. Remove social media from the young and they are removed from the brain washing pseudo science and Marxist propaganda.

The Earth is warming naturally, adapt to manage our environment.

Capitalist greed
Josephus,
What so many don't realise & accept is that the average Joe Blow is as, if not more greedy than the average Capitalist. They're simply less successful due to their own limitations !
But, greedy they are just as much ! i've had the opportunity to watch ordinary wage blokes on the next computer doing their Tax returns & let me tell you, the greed on display put many capitalists to shame !

Hey SteeleRedux,

"Men don't do that"

Actually they do.

According to political correctness, boys can have periods too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/16/boys-can-have-periods-schoolchildren-taught-latest-victory-transgender/

Actually they do.
Armchair Critic,

More proof that stupidity has no bounds !

Among the greediest these days are those who are cashing in on the renewables scams at tax payer expense. I have noticed a tendency for these charlatans to be very sneaky. They often pose as 'experts' on the abc and rarely disclose their financial interests.

AC, and there are those on OLO who think 'I'M' off my tree.
What an absolutely, stupid, ridiculous, crazy, ignorant, (oh I could go on) thing to say.
Do these morons realise, when they make such stupid comments that the immediate reaction is disbelief, and immediately following that is, HOW?
How is it possible?
How does it work?
Being reasonably intelligent and open minded, I immediately suspect they are speaking metaphorically.
Having thought as much, I could not figure exactly what they were on about.
Putting bins for menstruation products in ALL toilets, is disgusting to say the least and confronting at any level for boys.
Periods are like the elephant in the room, we know about them, but if your not a female, it's not something to be highlighted.
There are some things in life that should NOT be discussed, this is most certainly one of them.
If you are female, then it most certainly MUST BE discussed, and the sooner the better, that's the right and mature thing to do.
I see NO valid reason why males should be confused even further by some fu&#ing moronic thing as a school teacher about a very personal and sometimes sensitive area of life, and to school kids, at that.
Males came to learn about things as they grew up, they don't need to be told things that do not affect them personally, and especially facilitating their growing/confused minds, with rubbish about their sexuality.
I personally don't care if you're that twisted mentally that you don't know if you're male or female.
Your problem is mental, seek help, see a medical professional. get hormone treatment, whatever, but don't expect me to be looking at a male and call you anything but an idiot, and tell you to grow up or get lost.
Don't know where this mindset of facilitating and accommodating these sicko's came from, but we must not allow it to take hold and spread.
I hope whenever people come across this type of sick BS, they show their displeasure and say so, instead of being brow beaten into submission.

It doesn't matter whether it's insane or not ALTRAV
- That aspect has no bearing on modern day decision making -

You see it's all about 'equality' agenda.
Girls can be boys and boys can be girls.

Mind you they still haven't figured out how to get men pregnant yet though
Maybe they'll make all humans sterile so that people can only be grown in a lab.

As for the kids of today, well they're ALL going to need help after being exposed to drag queen story time.

"Don't know where this mindset of facilitating and accommodating these sicko's came from"

google: 'adl';
get this response

ADL: Fighting Anti-Semitism and Hate
http://www.adl.org
The mission of ADL is to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all.

Look who they hate: Nationalists that don't support immigration;
What do they support: Immigration and equality agendas

(Look at their stories; and seemingly benign ideology)

You see they make themselves the authority, then dictate to everyone else.

Check out the hate map
http://www.splcenter.org/hate-map

Probably all leads to privatisation too, selling off the citizens assets
To the benefit of the banking elite and push a global agenda.

Their plan: Order Out Of Chaos

You wanna see something interesting?

The Murals at Denver International Airport.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/07/denver-airport-construction-conspiracy-lizard-people

Just look at the pictures, you'll see the Airport foundation stone with the Mason ingignia, and a picture of one of the murals.
Here's the murals, I think they took them down a few years back.
http://www.outtherecolorado.com/gallery/whats-creepy-apocalyptic-paintings-denver-international-airport-2/

If you look over the murals and information:

"Tanguma gave a bit more of an explanation for this one in an interview with Zing Magazine, claiming that it depicts a biblical lesson from Isaiah and Micah: that it’s possible for nations of the world to stop war by joining together."

Emphasis:

- Biblical Jewish Lesson -

A lot of weird things at that airport.

Hey just noticed something.
That mural is entitled 'In Peace and Harmony with Nature'
Then I thought, that sounds similar to that Georgia Guidestone stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

It is.

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.

AC, and they accuse ME of being off my tree and crazy.
Well, as much as I have been looking for and following anything that smacks of elite Jews, the Illuminati, the Bilderberg group, and so on and so forth, Iv'e never come across such a bizarre and inconceivable rabble of BS.
But someone knows what it really all means, but of course, they're not saying are they?
These people (animals) are a real threat to mankind.
If only I could find that speech the head Rabbi made to the gathering of all the international Rabbi's convention, some time ago.
But alas, I suspect, just like my link showing that Rothschilds own or run 97% of the world's bank's and financial institutions.
Every time I found it, some time later it was gone, now you want conspiracy theories, try that on for size?

Dear Critic,

Congratulations on completely changing the topic, it was a good response to this nonsensical thread. Now please allow me to relate to this new topic:

«I personally don't care if you're that twisted mentally that you don't know if you're male or female.»

Anyone who thinks straight can easily deduce that they are neither male nor female. Indeed, one would need a serious mental twist to consider themselves to be a gender.

You have a body.
Gender is a property of that body.
As the owner of this body, surely you cannot be that body of yours, how less so a property thereof, such as its gender!

"AC, and they accuse ME of being off my tree and crazy."

Yeah well, we're not the ones behind all this stuff.
We're just the ones who dare to point it out.

"Every time I found it, some time later it was gone, now you want conspiracy theories, try that on for size?"

Yeah I know what it's like searching for something you read or saw sometime a year or so back on the internet and not be able to find it.
You don't know whether it was removed or what, or where and how to find it again and it sort of gets under your skin and annoys you.

About a month or so back I went through a year or more of my youtube watch history and browser history just to try to find this one video I thought I saw.
I couldn't find it.

Hey Yuyutsu,

I feel like you're trying to stretch my brain, but that's ok.
- It's just that I'm not really up to complicated thinking right at this moment.
Maybe later I'll try to take it in.

I feel like simple thinking.
Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina. - Real basic stuff -
This is decided before you're born and you don't get a choice in it.

Yuyutsu,

I once thought of argument and reason adversarially. I now think of them as valuable tools for understanding ideas and values, especially my own. Without the ability to reason you are at risk of acting irrationally: Buying toilet paper to mitigate the risk of coronavirus is an example.

Dear Critic,

«I feel like you're trying to stretch my brain, but that's ok.
- It's just that I'm not really up to complicated thinking right at this moment.
Maybe later I'll try to take it in.»

As the body, so the mind: I now feel like a personal trainer, "no pain, no gain"...

«Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina. - Real basic stuff -
This is decided before you're born and you don't get a choice in it.»

Yes, the gender is decided before we are born, but there is still one thing that we can choose to do: if you dislike the gender of a given body, then simply don't get born into it. Perhaps someone else will take that body instead, but as far as you are concerned, you stay in heaven or wherever you happen to be until a more suitable body comes along with the gender of your choice.

---

Dear Fester,

Indeed, reason is invaluable.

It is unwise to go out unnecessarily to shop for toilet paper when many around are infected. This virus is uniquely nasty, not because it kills people but because it leaves many crippled and short-breathed for the rest of their lives.

The toilet paper con has to go down as the biggest laugh we've had for a long time - and I'm not talking about the videos showing people wrapped in the stuff to protect themselves from the virus.

People hoarding toilet paper are not ranked among our great thinkers. They are the idiots who we need every now a again to remind us how gullible - and therefore dangerous - the average plonker is.

What would these fools have got up to it they knew that 436 people died of common old influenza in Australia last year?

An Iranian Ayatollah has advised the putting essential oil on you arse will cure corinavirus.

Ttbn,

Well, science and common sense are alien, Western concepts, aren't they ? No room for them in the Koran, certainly not for ayatollahs.

Chili-infused olive oil should do the trick, though. Both ingested and applied externally.

Joe

'The toilet paper con has to go down as the biggest laugh we've had for a long time -'

yep harmless compared to the theft of billions by gw alarmist.

Joe,

Be sure to wash your hands after the external application.

There has been quite a critical reaction to my Deniers post. This is puzzling because 61% of Australians say ‘global warming is a serious … problem [and] we should begin taking steps now… Only 10% say ‘until we are sure that global warming is really a problem, we should not take any steps…’ (Lowy 2019). Do we have most of that 10% here?
I need to provide some backup. I believe in always being courteous and civilized up front. I would resort to stronger language only when warranted, or when things are dire – unlike some commenters!
I believe in free speech a priori (at first), but limited by truth and public interest. In my morality, people should be discouraged or prevented from repeatedly saying things that are (a) wrong and (b) harmful. (Truth as shown by science and the historical record). Examples are: crying fire in a crowded theatre, or preaching gays will go to hell.
My paper Deniers, you have been warned! is intended for habitual deniers who will not enter discussion, and yet spread false information widely. For example: Lavoisier, Galileo, IPA, Heartland Institute, Peter Smith of Quadrant online, Selby, Alan Jones, Ian Plimer… They are prepared to risk destroying our only planet, in order to line their pockets by selling books and articles. Very wrong, and very harmful.
I am qualified in physics and engineering, and taught topics in planetary science at three universities. For me, and most informed people I know, the evidence for AGW passed 50% (more likely than not) in the 1980s. Given the dire consequences, this mandates strong and immediate action.
I meet many scientists. I discussed some of these things with Michael Mann (of the hockey stick) over dinner on Saturday, and with Robin Batterham soil scientist and past Australia’s Chief Scientist on Wednesday. The science was settled 30 years ago!
If you still have doubts, I direct you to http://www.realclimate.org/ Or you might like to join your local Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL), and listen to experts providing evidence. If you have real evidence to the contrary, you can present that.

Ian Bryce, give us a single item of definite proof that CO2 has any real effect on the temperature of the planet, or take your mumbo jumbo off to the mums blog, where it may be acceptable.

runner,

Here's another one today from the media joke book on AGW: Greta Thunderpants scowling under a headline " Greta Thunberg argues net Zero emissions by 2050 'too late'.

The world is in thrall to a child with no life experience and no specialised knowledge of anything!

Thanks, Ian.

Can I suggest that, in your spare time, you get hold of a copy of Arthur Miller's "Crucible", written in the fifties as a response to McCarthy's witch-hunting efforts ? That play partly ruined his career.

I'm wondering what you might mean by "Deniers, you have been warned! " Or what ? Do you have detention and re-education camps for recalcitrants in mind ? There would be a gradation of deniers, from these who deny there is any global warming at all, up to those who won't fall in 100 % behind those termed "alarmists". Like most contributors to OLO, I would fall in between somewhere those extremes: I'm not sure that a two-inch rise in sea-level, and a two-degree temperature rise, over a couple of centuries, are anything unusual in human history - temperature rises and falls seem to have thousand-year cycles, give or take, and the current rise is on-track.

I'm not even sure that another two-degree rise would be all that disastrous across the northern hemisphere, across Canada or Siberia or dear old Scotland and Ireland. Wouldn't that open up perhaps millions of square kilometres to grain etc. production ? And help to feed tens of millions of children across the world who go to sleep each night hungry ?

"1984" would also be a valuable read as well. I'm tempted to recommend Swift's "Gulliver's Travels", especially about the bitter dispute between Big-Enders and Pointy-Enders, but I'm too tactful to do that.

Joe

'This is puzzling because 61% of Australians say ‘global warming is a serious … problem [and] we should begin taking steps now'

Yeah I suspect far more than 61% in Saudi Arabia believe death to then infidel. Indoctrination does strange thins to people Ian as shown by the tantrum throwing extinction rebellion likes.

btw have the fools blaming the bushfires on coal mining and scaring the daylights out of kids apologised yet?

Ian, I have to ask; what makes YOUR submission more valuable than another's?
It was always a stretch for me, I stayed on the fence for a long time, and read and researched, to eventually settle for the truth!
Which was; There appears to be an evil force or group who have sinister plans and intentions, and unlike ALL others, the money to succeed.
But let me not dwell on the social criminality aspect behind this, what I call 'con-job'.
You see Ian the deniers are not denying that the globe is warming, they are denying that we humans had anything to do with it.
So had the, so called experts and scientists, just said, the globe is warming but eventually it will peak and begin it's cooling cycle.
End of!
Instead of tacking on the end of that statement that we, humans are responsible for the heating, because WE have burned so much fossil fuel.
Ian, if you are half the academic you say you are, YOU know that the planet is warming naturally, not because of us, and the oceans release CO2 as it warms. (it also accumulates CO2 when it cools)
So having said this, and the fact that you praise twats like Mann and denigrate the others who disagree with you, it shows a clear display of hypocrisy.
I will not attempt to prove you wrong, because you seem very committed and headstrong about your beliefs.
I have pasted many videos and writings debunking this whole mess, so I will simply leave it for you to look a little deeper or take a long hard look at where you stand with your dogma.
BTW, Mann's "hockey stick" is wrong.

Ian Bryce,

Unless we know the actual questions asked in these polls, we don't know what respondents think about anything. Added to the iffy 61% claim, there are any number of polls with entirely different answers. In fact, there are enough dodgy polls out there to ensure that you will find something to your liking. Polls are as unreliable as climate 'science'. And, you have already said you believe in free speech only for those with your mind set. You can't tart up your intolerance.

Truth by science? Some scientists are ordinary human beings with the added need for taxpayer grants and a yearning to have their egos rubbed. Other scientists, perhaps better qualified and more honest, have not been able to replicate the findings of the shonks. The media keeps those scientists out of public debate in the MSM; you have actually to look for their comments, and most people can't be bothered doing that.

You can rave on as much as you like, Ian, but only your fellow religionists and other flat-earthers will give you the time of day if you continue your raving here. Best stick to your familiar coven.

Thankyou all you coal burners for the lovely rain (you know the sort that was never going fall again).

Dear runner,

You said; "Thankyou all you coal burners for the lovely rain (you know the sort that was never going fall again)."

Who said it was never going to rain again? Why as a professed Christian do you feel the need to tell lie after lie after lie?

Are you just emulating your president? What do you think Jesus would have thought about being usurped by a pussy grabbing liar?

Try to do better mate, as it stands you are decidedly unedifying.

'Who said it was never going to rain again? Why as a professed Christian do you feel the need to tell lie after lie after lie?'

your rush to misrepresent knows no bounds. Heard of a guy called Tim Flannery. I suspect like every gw false prophet for the last 25 years you just ignore and move on. Won't be holding my breath for an apology from you. You regressives who hold to the gw religion just dig deeper and virtue signal louder.

Let us have a look at some of these Deniers! Deniers Ian believes spread false information widely. For example: Lavoisier stated the arguments against CO2 were circumstantial and/or inaccurate, Galileo position Science is evidence-based; the most vocal skeptics are belief-based [a false conclusion]. IPA Bureau of Meteorology has adjusted its records, stripping Marble Bar of its 100 year historical record temperature because it did not suit the Climate narrative..., Heartland Institute http://www.heartland.org/topics/climate-change/index.html According to some scientists, stabilizing the climate would require reducing carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent or even more by the middle of the century. Rationing access to energy and forcing a transition to alternatives to fossil fuels would reduce the quality of life of billions of people around the world. Peter Smith of Quadrant online, Selby ?, Alan Jones Two sides to the science, Ian Plimer http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhnyVJSdohs

Obviously if you do not believe the extremists mantra you will be banished by the Marxist into extinction.

Professor Ian Plimer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bpt2QtxLjc at the Institute of Public Affairs.

"I believe in free speech a priori (at first), but limited by truth and public interest. In my morality, people should be discouraged or prevented from repeatedly saying things that are (a) wrong and (b) harmful."

You can't say you support free speech in one breath;
But then say people should be discouraged or prevented;

What you actually support is 'permitted speech' not 'free speech';

I believe that in speech, arguments should hold merit.
I also believe that if someone else writes and then posts something I think is stupid, then it's my right to say it's stupid.

- Everybody gets to have an opinion right? -

I believe humility is fair play, because it's a non-violent form of correction.

"crying fire in a crowded theatre"
That's a stupid example, you know why?
- Because you wouldn't have a problem if there actually was a fire.
The issue is not whether or not an issue may be harmful you fool;
It's about whether or not the issue being discussed HOLDS MERIT.

"preaching gays will go to hell."
That's not the issue.
You've got things inside out, which means your brain might be inside out.
The believers didn't write the religious texts.
They can't help believing and more than gays claim they can't help being gay.

The issue is whether or not you believe in 'Freedom of Religion'
Do you?
Do you believe in this basic freedom?
Obviously you think that some aspects of religions should not be tolerated.

But if you're going to pick on one religion then why not pick on all religions?
Isn't that what equality is about?
And don't just pick on one issue, pick on ALL the issues.

Why not separate all the malevolent aspects of each religion from all the benevolent aspects?
If you believe in fairness and equality then it shouldn't be a problem for you.

AC, on the money, as usual.
Josephus, your video is conclusive enough to be held up as a reasonable argument against the GW alarmists.
The only thing scientists can agree on is;
The globe is warming, and has been doing so for many years, till it reaches it's pre-determined max temp, then it begins to cool down, and eventually it begins heating up again.
The other thing they don't tell you is, that when it heats up the oceans release CO2.
It is definitely not he case that the CO2 is causing the warming!
Absolutely and unquestionably not.
First it get s hot, then the CO2 is released.
I hope we've cleared that up.
So we humans have done nothing by burning fossil fuels.
So those of you too stupid to do your own research or figure out the simplest of facts, stop saying we have done all these bad things, we have done nothing wrong, I for one am getting sick and tired of the morons promoting a lie.
Now you have been told, you can't say you didn't know, so shut up with these lies and misinformation.

Altrav et al, you have been presented with the best of what science has to offer but plainly you do not have the intellectual capacity or training as of yet to understand.

Simplistic denials and circular reasoning don't cut it.

What some of you are is a good example of when a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

And perhaps on account of the age of some of you, you're simply failing it appears to be able to continue to learn as summed up by the saying:

"You can't teach an old dog new tricks."

NASA puts people on the moon, robots on Mars and sattelite probes in deep space. Along with them, you have consensus from amongst 97+% of the finest scientific minds on the globe.

Anyone remember the Muppets? Kermit etc Miss Piggy, Pigs in Space? And not to forget, the 2 half-witted old fools who used to spend their time dribbling and throwing peanuts.

I hate to break it to you, but that is what we are dealing with here.

but, I for one couldn't give a proverbial what you silly old fruit cakes believe as the tide of public opinion is already turning. That is another way of saying that the majority of people aren't interested anymore in what you say unless you can specifically refute the evidence to date.

I remain keenly interested to see if even one of you can come up with something meritorious.

But so far, there has been nought but dribble.

Change is coming whether you like it or not. A better conversation would be once the coal mining is shut down (along with other measures) how and into what new industries are we going to migrate the disaffected. That to me is the priority at the moment.

I personally don't care if lots of people lose their jobs so long as they have a new commensurate job to walk straight into.

If you wish to apply your minds productively then that would be one good way to do it in my opinion.

The CSIRO has been embarrassed by the revelation that one of it's reports on climate change deliberately omitted the fact that no study in the climate change/bushfire question has ever been carried out in Australia.

rEPRUSu, I glossed over your last comments, with an air of indifference.
I have found and given evidence and reasons why I, and other deniers, are right.
You and your fellow alarmists say what you like, we cannot accept it because they are not backed by logic or proof.
Firstly you must debunk the greatest lie of al; that humans caused CO2, instead of it being caused by the heating of the planet.
You and your mates can quote peer reviewed all day, till your blue in the face.
There is NO evidence of all these scientists saying anything.
Why is it we have so many experts and scientists coming out to debunk these crappy lies.
You can't deny it, we have posted many examples.
You cannot comment until you have read and confirmed the info we have submitted, for so long.
So before I consider you as a worthy commentor, YOU read the info we put out, and then, only then, will we consider reading your rubbish.
Let me enlighten you, about work and jobs.
You are a fool, because you cannot get a job if;
A. You're too expensive. and,
B. There is no work because your too expensive.
Aussies have proven themselves to be a burden, in every way, and are simply not efficient or competitive compared to even other first world countries.
So keep displaying your ignorance and complete lack of understanding about work, jobs and exports.
Making things for our selves is a fools folly, only an idiot would suggest that.
The idea, Mr brainiac, is to make things to export, so we can fill our kitty.
If you want a quick education on the economy, just remember what is carrying Australia, EXPORTS of, oil, gas, iron ore, cattle, sheep, wheat, if I need to go on then you are more stupid than you yourself have demonstrated.

My post #3 - Some responses to earlier comments.

Q: ALTRAV linked a Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVc-Y-mJ_uY As proof CO2 does not cause warming.
A: He/she sadly missed the question mark in the title. It is real science. At 11:40, Mallen explains that this “Best argument that CO2 does not cause warming?” fails when measured. CO2 is after all the culprit! Please apologise ALTRAV.

Q:Joe wrote:…Would another two-degree rise would be all that disastrous across the northern hemisphere, ...grapes in Scotland...across Canada or Siberia. Wouldn't that open up perhaps millions of square kilometres to grain etc. production ?
A: Perhaps… while extincting the seabirds in Scotland who have nowhere to go! And destroying the temperate and arctic and ocean ecosystems in those areas. While turning grain fields in the Mediterranean and eastern Europe into deserts? Not to mention releasing the methane hydrate from the tundra. And killing the mountain possums in Australia….

Q: Ttbn questioned the poll results. I referenced Lowy 2019. If ttbn can raise a finger, he/she will easily find it. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/media-release-2019-lowy-institute-poll-australian-attitudes-climate-change.

Q: Josephus directed up to Plimer. Sadly, he said carbon cannot be a pollutant, because it is black and we would see it.
A: He knows very well that we mean CO2, which is transparent. Lies!

Q: Armchair Critic wrote… The issue is not whether or not an issue may be harmful you fool [gratuitous insult]; It's about whether or not the issue being discussed HOLDS MERIT.

A: Yes that’s the TRUE half of my freedom of speech ethic. Based on science and the historical record. The other half is HARM.

I see I am the only correspondent on this ONO Forum thread to use my real name and real qualifications! The deniers hide behind pseudonyms and insults. If there is anyone able to engage in civilized discussion, please step forward.

Meanwhile, I suggest to all you science deniers, that you stay away from aeroplanes! They are supported by the same laws of physics, gas laws, and aerodymanics as climate operates by. If science is wrong, planes will not be able to navigate around the globe.

Ian, instead of trying to find your reference I have many more examples to confirm my point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewJ6TI8ccAw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZdm-w6FmHo

If you are so committed and invested in this lie, I will not waste time on you.
I have more than enough examples and logical explanations, all based on objective and factual reasoning, Not subjective theoretical calculations, with so many variables you could not tell if it was day or night.
Anyway, I don't engage with fanatics and dogmatics, so carry on pushing your partisan rubbish with those who are too far gone to see the truth.

Ian, Some questions.
Do you agree that the globe is warming?
Do you agree that it will eventually peak and begin a cooling phase?
Do yo agree that because the earth is warming, the natural response is for the oceans to give off CO2, then when it cools it goes back into the ocean.
Now because of this, proven fact, do you agree therefore that first the ocean warms, THEN, CO2 is released, and not the other way round as is being attempted to wrongly promote?

Once upon a time, in the kingdom of Riccotania, the beautiful princess Uridinka reached the mature age of 18 and so her father, King Muchabobdo decided to conduct a contest for her hand among all eligible young suitors.

First thing first, the king needed to find the most auspicious date for the wedding, so he sent a respected delegation with many precious gifts, including 100 golden pigs, 300 bejeweled mares and 500 de-sexed maids to the famous astrologer, Mage Burumpumpum. Following 10 days of calculations, Burumpumpum wrote a scroll back to the king, replying that the most auspicious date will be the 3rd of the month of Abbreviations.

Now going back in time, Muchabobdo's grandfather, King Mulobubdu, conquered the city of Kumbabyo and cut down its surrounding forest to get wood for his ships. Unbeknownst to him, that forest was the habitat where the terrible witch, Tralalula, was raising her vultures. As the vultures perished, Tralalula vowed never to forgive Mulobubdu and his dynasty.

Now that the wedding was approaching, Tralalula considered this a good opportunity for revenge: under the cover of night she sent her loyal griffon, Vulgaricum, to fly over the delegation as it was returning to Riccotania with Burumpumpum's scroll, then over the right spot, Vulgaricum pooed over the scroll so his dropping fell in a '0' shape over the scroll, changing the date into the 30th of Abbreviations.

King Muchabobdo therefore set the contest for the 27th of Abbreviations, 3 days before the intended wedding, without realizing his terrible mistake, for the 27th was an extremely inauspicious day where Saturn, Jupiter and Mars were ominously aligned.

Now six light-years away from Riccotania lived the ugly dwarf Gingerpupu. Gingerpupu was 1500 years old, never washed, shaved or cut his fingernails, he fed off onions, hated broccoli and loved young prepubescent girls.

[continued...]

[...continued]

Now when Uridinka was six years old, she went out carefree to bath and frolic in the sea of enchanted sparkling bubbles. Six years later the sight of this beautiful scene reached Gingerpupu who resolved that Uridinka must become his at all costs. But how could he cross that distance? Fortunately for him, his neighbour was none other than the witch Tralalula, which lent him her personal broom, traveling at the speed of light, reaching on time for the contest.

Meanwhile, King Muchabobdo presented Uridinka to the assembly of young suitors and announced: "For this auspicious contest, I will hold a fish-hook in my open mouth. The guy who will tell the most fascinating story, so funny that I will be made to laugh and close my mouth, forgetting even the hook which will then protrude out of my cheeks: he shall win the hand of my daughter and marry her in three days time!". Uridinka nodded and blushed but could not say anything because someone contaminated the orange she was eating the day before with carbon trioxide.

First approached a handsome young prince and said:
"Once people became so gluttonous, never stopping to eat pearl biscuits until pearl worms emerged out of their stools. These worms were so luminescent that the moon itself was helplessly attracted to them, thus the enamoured moon followed them 120 degrees to the other side of the earth, changed the whole pattern of the tides and caused waves that destroyed whole cities".

The king was impressed, so much that he had to sneeze, but not enough to close his mouth.

Second approached a dreamy red-eyed youth and said:
"We were playing Pacman so much and ran so fast in those corridors that the chasing mouths lifted off the screen, then they came outside and ate the grass and everything green they could find, like locusts and many people starved".

The king did not laugh: he cried, but managed to keep his mouth open.

Third approached the dwarf Gingerpupu.

However, our time is over. This is to be continued in this very century itself!

"Meanwhile, I suggest to all you science deniers"

Uh-uh. No, and this is important:
When it comes to discussions regarding climate;
I don't consider myself a 'denier'.
I'm more of a 'don't carer'

I like to argue things that hold merit;
But sometimes I see a completely different angle that holds merit to everyone else.

My question is this:
Do you really think you can control the climate, and if so can we have it 24 degrees all year round?
Should I we all become Climate Moses, and can you rain dance effectively at will?

Humans have survived as long as they have by being resilient, and adapting to the changing climate.
We have to master our own environment.
If we don't we die.

I've said this before.
It doesn't matter if it starts raining fire 300 days a year.
We either adapt or die.

You're helping to make the human race a bunch of whining pansies, that scream hysterically over weather fluctuations.

I'm all for better more practical ways of doing things that are better for the environment.
But I refuse to believe it's a good idea to turn off powerplants and go back to the stone-age and paying a global carbon tax to others to manage things for us. NO!

Better more practical ideas
Yes! - But I won't cut my nose off to spite my face
Faceless Unelected Global Bureaucrats making backroom decisions on our behalf
- Hell No!

Altrav:

" ... I have found and given evidence and reasons why I, and other deniers, are right. You and your fellow alarmists say what you like, we cannot accept it because they are not backed by logic or proof. Firstly you must debunk the greatest lie of al; that humans caused CO2, instead of it being caused by the heating of the planet. ... "

Mate, you are completely half witted and have no clue what you are talking about.

You have not provided any evidence whatsoever to support your assertions. Moreso, it is plain that you do not even understand what evidence is. That's how stupid you are.

All you have provided is unsupported opinion, claptrap and humbug.

No one has said that the burning of fossil fuels is the only source of CO2 emmissions. Cows farting is another one. What is being stated as fact by internationally accepted scientific method is that the dangerous excess is coming from people made sources.

You are almost entirely clueless and would do well to consider carefully what intelligent, educated people like Ian are telling you. You may of course also like to fess up as to what your personal vested interest in all of this is.

Do you really think that the majority of thinking people are the least bit interested in your drivel? I can assure you they are not.

You have been provided with the NASA link wherein is contained the EVIDENCE that you claim is false. But the first thing you ought do is get a good dictionary and associated materials and learn about what actually constitutes real evidence, as plainly you do not even understand the difference between that and biased opinion.

As for the economy, shipping out primary resource is not the only way to go. Most sophisticated economies hang on to their primary resource and value add it so here again you are demonstrating how ignorant you are.

You can see what you're up against ey Ian?

It is a problem with a lot of australians is that they have a considerably overblown sense of themselves, when in reality a lot of them are just poorly educated ignoramuses.

But, in their defence, a lot of them are just defending their livelihoods and are fearful. And the lack of decent political representation isn't helping that.

Even so, having had the opportunity to consider some of the better quality posts in this thread to date some of them have already quietened down a bit.

My view is that the scientific community needs to be less concerned about political backlash and more concerned about projecting unbiased fact into the community, personal risk or not so I do applaud your efforts in that regard and would encourage you not to be disheartened by some of the commentators here, as if you can get through to some of the numbskulls here, you can pretty much get through to anyone.

When dealing with thinking and well reasoned people the job of emparting important information is a relativley simple matter. But of course, many of the people in the community have educational levels well below that of the average high school student. And in some ways, the education system has improved since some of this lot were last in school.

But again, they fear for themselves and their families as a consequence of the inevitable economic and industrial changes that must come and as you have no doubt noted, will fight irrationally on account of that.

That is why in my view new options for the economy of tomorrow must be included in the discussion.

I think of it more in terms of a good computer simulation game like civilization. You start with cave people (like some here hha3) and gradually work your way up the ladder, balancing tech, economics and the political mechanism as you go.

rEPRUSu, you can rant and rave all you like.
You are the self absorbed fool here.
I have admitted my ignorance on the topic, and therefore have resorted to seeking info and answers from those who do know.
You have provided NOTHING, just a lot more of the same tripe.
Don't you dare patronise me or anyone else for being brave or smart enough to dare to believe logic and not rhetoric.
You do not have the where-with-all to claim the high ground.
If I am so stupid, then you must call some very educated men stupid, because I am only repeating what has been written.
I, at least quote links and sources.
All your good for is telling us that the science is right and we must accept it without question or we are stupid.
Well, when you can give me some names of these smart arses that claim all this doom and gloom, I can tell you now, their submission will have holes the size of which we have never seen before.
Stop kidding yourself and stop bagging us we have backing, you have BS.
Anyway, it is YOU who is the charlatan and deviant here, I, in good faith, asked you several straight forward questions, that I thought someone as smart as you make out you could answer very easily.
BUT, it seems as though you are just another con-man alarmist.
As I and AC have said, but you and your lot are so far up yourselves, you don't feel the need to answer.
You feel you are too important to answer.
And that is, how arrogant are you and your lot to think you can change the planets climate.
To further test your superior knowledge, how about answering the few questions I laid on you in my previous post.
Now that ought to be good for a laugh.

The following comment indicates the bigoted stance of a non scientific brain, as it is emotive and not reasoned fact.

"It is a problem with a lot of australians is that they have a considerably overblown sense of themselves, when in reality a lot of them are just poorly educated ignoramuses".

The Problem School children are brain washed in Marxist Global warming politics.

ENGLISH JUDGES REFUTE AL GORE'S "AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH": The decision by the British government to distribute Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" to schools has been the subject of a legal action by New Party member Stewart Dimmock. Although a full ruling has yet to be given, the Court found that the film was misleading in 11 respects and that the Guidance Notes drafted by the Education Secretary's advisors served only to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film. In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that:
1. The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.
2. If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination.
3. Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.

Those Teachers claiming science degrees must present facts and both sides of a proposition and demonstrate the realities.

I'm just never going to bow to the idea that unelected foreign bureaucrats know whats best for us and should decide our future.

What you want is for people to be so gullible and stupid that we remove the right of our kids to also decide whats best for them in the future by putting the caretakership of the nation permanently into foreigners hands now.

You can slowly fearmonger everyone else into submission;
You can put as much funding into climate scientists hands and offer them important positions.
You can move your temperature gauges out onto the middle of airport runways and homogenise your data to tell a different climate story.
You can use kids to try to manipulate the adults with guilt;
You can shut down streets and suburbs and try to hold the populace at ransom;
You can try to frighten by telling them you're making lists to punish them later.

But I'm never going to go for it.
I'll never sell my country's sovereignty out to unelected foreigners.
- Or support the idea of %GDP being paid towards global carbon taxes.
It's just not gonna happen.

You want Aussies to pay a tax just for getting out of bed in the morning.

All you bloody globalists and your interconnected world are the reason why a map of this country is starting to look like it has chicken pox from COVID-19.

Academic know-it-alls can do more harm than good.
The planet wouldn't be on the verge of a global pandemic if you people didn't try to weaponise viruses.

There is some good that comes out of universities;
But there's a lot of seriously misguided crap from people that have been locked in their labs too long and gone all 'mad scientist' because they lost touch with the real world.

Real scientist do not intimidate others by blackmail to accept their conclusions; they demonstrate fact by showing the evidence. However under the present circumstances we cannot trust the scientists as they have altered the history to suit their conclusions.

it is pretty easy to see who will win the debate. the insurance companies are agreeing with the global warming argument and national policy will be adjusted in time once they deciade not to insure certain areas.

Talking about polls and what questions are actually asked: were the respondents - reportedly 61% of them - asked if they were happy about the ever-increasing cost of electricity resulting from climate quackery and renewable energy; the huge sums of taxpayer money flowing into then hands of charlatans? Of course they were not!

Gauwd ! You are all still arguing about global warming !
Why don't you follow the science ?
Of course the globe is warming; IT IS THE SUN STUPID !
Four cycles giving a variable period between 600 years and 1000 years.
The suns irradiation, the Milanovitch cycles, the sunspot cycles and the
variation in cloud cover caused by cosmic rays.

The Roman Warming, the Medieval Warming, and the current warming right
on schedule, interspersed with cold periods when Rome collapsed and
1000 years later when the Vikings were forced out of Greenland, and Ice
festivals were held on the Thames in late 18th century early 19th century.
Next Ice Festival approx 300 years time.

Why do people have to invent much more complicated excuses to explain nature ?

Bazz,

I don't know why people argue about anything. It's a waste of time and energy. No minds are changed, and its bloody boring.

Bazz & Ttbn,

Religious people need a Devil, to focus all their fears and hates onto. AGW will do. Therefore anybody who doesn't join the witch-hunting is a denier, a spawn of Satan, a follower of all that is evil.

Of course there is warming and cooling. Of course CO2 levels go up and down - the're much higher now than 200 years ago. But 500 million to a billion years ago, there were many thousands of parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere, and very little oxygen. Once plants got evolved, slowly, slowly, they removed CO2 from the atmosphere and produced oxygen, and they've been doing that ever since. And we live on that oxygen. So it's all a natural cycle.

Yes, the earth's temperature may increase another two degrees by 2100 - more CO2 in the atmosphere means more vigorous biotic growth, more food production - and higher temperatures means more regions closer to the poles which can be utilised to grow crops. So win-win-win.

Will there be some sort of tipping point ? Why should there be ? Will that be the next scare-story, that we're all about to reach one and die horribly ?

Joe

Nobody yet has been able to say at what temperature the Earth should stay. The Globalists have not got a clue, if the average temperature at the equator should be lower or higher, or the average temperature at the poles should be lower or higher to be normal. Though they want it colder than now. They do not want the climate to change, and they foolishly believe stop burning coal, gas and petroleum will bring us back to an unchanged climate.

Joe,

The Great Toilet Paper Frenzy might take their minds off the climate for a while. Anything that causes fear and mayhem is meat and drink for them.

'Of course there is warming and cooling. Of course CO2 levels go up and down - the're much higher now than 200 years ago. But 500 million to a billion years ago, there were many thousands of parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere, and very little oxygen.'

Oh dear Joe. You say religous people need a devil. I am sure you can't believe the rot you write pretendibng to know what it was like 500 million years ago. Strange how the warming religion is using the same dishnonest tactics on people now as evolutionist have used in order to appear intelligent.

This whole toilet paper & tissue buying frenzy has been promoted by the media, It is only a result of their pushing it, that it has occurred. Surely there are hundreds of things more important to have in the cupboard if this virus really takes off, than these items.

I wonder how much the paper industry paid them to develop the frenzy?

It should be a good opportunity for people selling bidets.

Why Is It So? - Professor Julius Sumner Miller - Classic ABC Australian Television
http://youtu.be/RUgJUcJ2Xxc

Why is it so?

Why is it that a whole planets worth of these academics can get together to extort everyone else with their planned global climate taxes?

But they can't get together to do something actually beneficial like figuring out how to make Alan B. thorium energy production a reality?

Think about that.
Why is it so?

Hat tip to NoTricksZone. Another new paper they have found.

A ‘Nearly Zero’ Climate Sensitivity Paper Finds A 16-Fold CO2 Increase Cools Earth Below Pre-Industrial Temperatures

By Kenneth Richard on 5. March 2020

In yet another new paper (Drotos et al., 2020), scientists determine the climate sensitivity to CO2 is “practically zero” the more the concentration rises. A ~4450 ppm CO2 concentration has cooler climates than observed in the pre-industrial (278 ppm) era. Why? A self-amplifying cloud feedback mechanism cools the Earth by magnitudes “as large as 10 K” upon warming saturation.

Earlier this year, scientists published a paper using mesocosms (controlled outdoor experiments) to demonstrate CO2 concentrations of 3200, 7500, and 16,900 ppm are associated with colder temperatures than in outdoor environments with 480 ppm CO2 concentrations.

Now, in another new paper (Drotos et al., 2020), several more scientists are asserting the Earth system has an internal, self-amplifying negative cloud feedback mechanism so powerful that

“at CO2 concentrations beyond four times the preindustrial value, the climate sensitivity decreases to nearly zero as a result of episodic global cooling events as large as 10 K”.

The cooling events spawned by the high CO2 concentrations lead to temperature “drops below the coldest values of the control [278 ppm pre-industrial CO2]” such that the climate sensitivity to CO2 doublings is “practically zero” over time.

“In particular, the climatological mean value of the global mean surface temperature practically stops responding to an increase in the CO2 concentration. This practically zero climate sensitivity suggests that the effect of a feedback on the global mean surface temperature may turn out to be as strong as the radiative effect of CO2.”

In other words, scientists have found yet another way the claimed “runaway greenhouse” response of the climate system to elevated CO2 turns out to be a false alarm.

amusing watching Matt Canavan exposing the complete dishonesty of the CSIRO re the recent bushfires in the Senate. Seems like the swamp (abc, csiro and bom)just can't help themselves by ignoring facts and pushing their lying narrative. Must be so disheartening for true scientist.

ALTRAV, I have always been happy to read what you have to say but in truth, you are like talking to a drunk.

On this matter, you are completely half witted and have no idea what you are talking about. You don't even know what "evidence" means, as said, that is how ignorant you are.

Runner can't conceptualise in his own puny mind how science can accurately measure the past so he does not believe.

I have not provided nothing as you assert, but rather the link to NASA which contains many of the relevant scientific organisations, their studies and their findings.

But at least you have the resident homophobic fool josephus from one of the Rock Spider churches to back you up mate hha3.

LM JOE:
" ... Of course there is warming and cooling. Of course CO2 levels go up and down - the're much higher now than 200 years ago. But 500 million to a billion years ago, there were many thousands of parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere, and very little oxygen. Once plants got evolved, slowly, slowly, they removed CO2 from the atmosphere and produced oxygen, and they've been doing that ever since. And we live on that oxygen. So it's all a natural cycle. ... "

Yes, but what is not natural anymore is that we have cut most of the ...ing trees down mate. And that is a big problem.

LM JOE:
" ... Yes, the earth's temperature may increase another two degrees by 2100 - more CO2 in the atmosphere means more vigorous biotic growth, more food production - and higher temperatures means more regions closer to the poles which can be utilised to grow crops. So win-win-win. ... "

Were it so easy mate. The problem is, is that most vegetative life stops growing at temps of 35 degrees plus. If they have plenty of access to water they can continue to survive into slightly higher temps but thereafter - dead.

Yes, so indeed there is a tipping point (which will effect some areas sooner than others) and that is one of the major concerns.

Well done mate, you're starting to understand and you're almost there. Good job. You've gone up another rung on the ladder.

Some of you ding-a-lings need to go back to Uni.

I would recommend "Open Universities" part time, but as you like.

It's fully on line, you don't need to go anyway

(with the exception of only a few course which require you to turn up for exams)

in fact, you can participate over online audio and video with grouse interactive software like "BlackBoard Collaborate" whilst enjoying a drink, smoke, feed or whatever happens to take your fancy at the same time in the comfort of your own home.

(so no you don't need to turn up anyway with the kiddies)

The issue visa vi your brains is a simple medical one. Use it or lose it.

I have been in and out of this forum for well more than a decade to enjoy a bit of intellectual relief for the best part of 15 years and some of you knuckle heads haven't grown at all.

Use it or lose it. If you're anything like me, you will find supplementing your work, hobbies or other commitments and activities with a bit of additional formal tertiary training extremely stimulating and rewarding and I would encourage you all to do so.

The mind is a bit like a blade. Every now and then, you need to hone and sharpen it back up. Providing there aren't any other fundamental opposing physiological issues working against you, a bit of extra brain honing has the distinct "evidenced" possibility of keeping you healthier and happier longer.

I'm not being entirely condescending as I am currently doing this myself, though I would add that for me, I have always found linking my study to work and hobbies

(or other personal special interests)

the ideal way to go ie if you're a cocky, do a unit in something which will add to your pre-existing and ongoing farming activities.

What I cannot understand is why the catastrophists are so straitjacketed and dogmatic. Dogmatic because of the insistence that an imagined future should have precedence over a real present. Straitjacketed by a belief that the imagined future can only be addressed by wind, solar, and tree planting. The irony of spending many years growing bushfire fuel whilst believing in an increasing bushfire risk is sadly lost on many.

What is needed is an understanding that we live in the present: Consequently we will best address present problems with economically viable current technology. What will help is technological development and a better understanding of the physical world. I note that the catastrophists are largely opposed to research and development that does not fit with their dogma: I think it the height of stupidity and ignorance to presume the future and constrain research.

It is clearly obvious we are not discussing with scientist, as he attempts to degrade and misrepresent his readers, rather than demonstrate fact. If he cannot properly represent others he cannot properly represent facts. Some lines he believes are fact.

"But at least you have the resident homophobic fool josephus from one of the Rock Spider churches to back you up mate hha3."
"Some of you ding-a-lings need to go back to Uni"

His words have nothing to represent the fact of science, when you have lost the debate degrade the opposition. Well known tactic of a looser!

It is now discovered that the extraction of rare minerals from the environment to create electric cars, cell phones and solar panels is polluting the environment.
http://www.facebook.com/ttadelaide/videos/1376455412376071/?t=32

Hey rEPRUSu,
"But at least you have the resident homophobic fool josephus from one of the Rock Spider churches to back you up mate hha3."

Hey look I don't mind making fun of others when they say stupid stuff.
Really I don't, and my record of doing so does speak for itself.

But that's being snidely, childish and petty and there's no real need for crap like that.
Grow up, you're not a 14 year old anymore.

And I don't even know what the hell Josephus said to get up your ass in the first place?
His response to:
"It is a problem with a lot of australians is that they have a considerably overblown sense of themselves, when in reality a lot of them are just poorly educated ignoramuses.

But, in their defence, a lot of them are just defending their livelihoods and are fearful."

You see, you talk shite anyway.
What livelihoods are you talking about that we're all defending?
You can't even write or spell properly.

Firstly Josephus has a capital J, don't be disrespectful.
Australia also has a capital A.
And defense is spelled with an 's' not a 'c', and if you get that one wrong you can't be all that cluey.

I make really weird spelling and grammar errors quite often I'll admit it, but not dumb ones like that.

No return from rEPRUSu on my post on CO2 cooling the planet in higher percentages.

Of course the rEPRUSu of this world refuse to even read such papers, as they know subconsciously that the global warming theory is on very shaky grounds, 200 published peer reviewed papers disproving it last year alone, & can't afford to read such stuff, in case it destroys their whole belief system.

rEPRUSu you have no right to keep pushing this scam, when you won't read anything but global warming scam propaganda.

RePRESSOR,

35 degrees ? Bullsh!t: most of the tropics -where most of the vegetation thrives and most of the world's population lives - is often around 35 degrees. But I pity Siberia or northern Canada, it may be some time before they have to suffer long periods of 35 degrees.

I suppose, if someone studied the isotherms across the northern hemisphere carefully, they could calculate how much territory could be opened up across Canada, Siberia, Scandinavia and even Scotland with each degree rise in average annual temperature - and of course, each week in extra growing time that would accompany it. A hundred kilometres further north ? Across,say thirty thousand kilometres from Alberta to Varmland to Vladivostok, that might open up three million square kilometres to grain production. For each degree rise in average annual temperature.

So what's not to like about global warming ?

I feel sorry already for the poor buggers who will have to endure the global cooling part of the cycle in 500-600 years.

Joe

No, it's not b.s. Joe. Go back to Uni and do some biology.

Or ask a farmer. As said, more than 35 and plants can survive if they have enough water, as often they do in the tropics but at that temp they do for the most part go into stasis.

..

As for josephus, and I'll dis him as much as I like, he is a homophobic fool from the rock spider church and absolute vermin.

Small "a" for ugly australia, a bastard illegitimate regime of child abusing and genocidal, parasitic filth.

Once you have committed these kinds of crimes against a people you don't get to make the rules anymore.

The unconstitutional provisions of the australia act need to be overturned, the privy council re-instated, genocide charges need to be pushed through against the crown and Sovereignty must be returned to the Original people so they can live their lives their way, unoppressed by you filthy white trash.

'No, it's not b.s. Joe. Go back to Uni and do some biology.'

Yeah Joe go and learn a baby born with a penis isn't male and a baby born with a vagina is not female. You know the sort of non testing stuff they use to confirm the alarmist narrative.

It's just amazing how ignorant and stupid some of you are.

You've been given an opportunity to engage with the real science and not a one of you has the wit to step up to the plate.

How then do you explain the logic of combustible carbon capture and storage on land you believe will become more prone to bushfires?

Hey rEPRUSu,

"The unconstitutional provisions of the Australia act need to be overturned, the privy council re-instated, genocide charges need to be pushed through against the crown and Sovereignty must be returned to the Original people so they can live their lives their way, unoppressed by you filthy white trash."

There you go, running your mouth with shite again.

I bet you didn't know that I can trace my indigenous heritage, and that some of those people took part in the Frontier War against white settlers.

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

"As for Josephus, and I'll dis him as much as I like, he is a homophobic fool from the rock spider church and absolute vermin."

- Well maybe I'll just 'dis' you as much as I like.

There’s no satisfying the climate commies, who have so far:

doubled our electricity bills
forked out $28 billion taxpayer dollars on clean energy
vandalised our grid with unreliable renewables
and closed 12 coal-fired power stations in 7 years.

"Green ideology is evil. It’s killing our jobs, it’s brainwashing our kids (and stealing their future), it’s despoiling our landscapes, it’s murdering our wildlife, it’s corrupting honest science, it’s enriching the most disgusting, cynical people in crony capitalism, it’s driving up the cost of living, it’s holding back our economies, it’s hamstringing business, it’s burning our homes…" (James Delingpole)

Ottmar Edenhofer Chairman of the UN IPCC Working Group III
"One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate
policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the
environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the
ozone hole," said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.'s Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change
from 2008 to 2015.
So what is the goal of environmental policy?"We redistribute de facto
the world's wealth by climate policy," said Edenhofer.For those who want
to believe that maybe Edenhofer just misspoke and doesn't really mean
that, consider that a little more than five years ago he also said that
"the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit
during which the distribution of the world's resources will be negotiated."

Dear runner,

You really do constantly pollute these pages with tripe don't you.

Now it's “Yeah Joe go and learn a baby born with a penis isn't male and a baby born with a vagina is not female. You know the sort of non testing stuff they use to confirm the alarmist narrative.”

Why on earth are you employing babies penises and vaginas in a discussion about climate change? Can you and your ilk stop thinking about such things even for moment? You seem to constantly reference this stuff either subliminally or overtly and the apparent fascination is unseemly and disquieting.

Is that what was happening with this one?

“amazing how the religious zealots ignore the myriad of false prophicies dating back about 60 years and more recently BOM fiddling temperatures. Oh well it must fit the narrative.”

A Royal Commission showed how much fiddling was going on by leaders in your faith but denied by religious zealots like yourself. When one of the absolute leaders was convicted you denied his guilt. What narrative do you think that is fitting?

What on earth is going on in that mind of yours? The language you so often employ asks that question all the time.

It really is best to try and stick to the topic old boy.

'Runner can't conceptualise in his own puny mind how science can accurately measure the past so he does not believe. '

Yeah considering bom change and manipulate data from 80 years ago and you believe you have accuracy 500 million years ago. What a dumbed down generation. And all Steelie can do is fall back on you are a paedophile schoolboy tactic when his own side are full of deviants.

Australia has spent 11 times the global average on renewable power and invests in renewables at a rate per capita four to five times faster than China, the European Union, Japan and the United States.

"Dear runner,
You really do constantly pollute these pages with tripe don't you" SR.

Talk about pot kettle black.

"Australia has spent 11 times the global average on renewable power and invests in renewables at a rate per capita four to five times faster than China, the European Union, Japan and the United States". ttbn.

Which proves how damn stupid we can be pandering to the left/green
blob.

http://electroverse.net/greenland-just-set-a-new-all-time-record-low-temperature/?fbclid=IwAR2RkzT8dNQPBYqH-OGQP8UHzLJMNUgLehMw0H3xzttAhvf6rErbvMNHMdA

Iceland experiencing extreme cold; when we were told Iceland would be melted into the oceans. Climate Lies propagated by the brainwashed bogans!

Also Greenland extreme cold:http://electroverse.net/greenland-just-set-a-new-all-time-record-low-temperature/?fbclid=IwAR2RkzT8dNQPBYqH-OGQP8UHzLJMNUgLehMw0H3xzttAhvf6rErbvMNHMdA

I reckon all this climate change stuff in part at least has to do with insurance companies getting out of paying for 'Acts of God'.

Read this article this morning:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-06/coronavirus-covid-19-travel-insurance-exclusion-confusion/12027638

It shows how travel insurance companies are trying to avoid any coverage for infectious diseases.

On the other side of things the World Bank has a $425 million insurance mechanism for global pandemics, but they're not paying.
They won't pay until the crisis is officially labelled a 'pandemic' by the WHO, and the WHO are holding out, because the insurance policy lapses in a month or so, and I think maybe they were hoping to not have to pay.

This is ridiculous 100,000 infected in over 90 countries, and they're holding out for the sake of the investors interests (who were earning a healthy interest rate anyway) instead of using the money to do what it's supposed to do.

What's the point of it?

Governments have signed on to billions in funding now to fight COVID-19 but still the fund set up to deal with the problem won't pay.

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

Self-serving bastards.

Hasbeen,

Yes, we are stupid for spending that much, but it's still not stupid enough for the climate commos. We need a government with the balls to resist all the climate BS, along the same lines as Trump. Morrison's mob could outspend the lunatics and still be howled down, because it's not about climate but political control.

you are spot in ttbn. Hopefully some little good will come from the Coronavirus in that opens the eyes of the dumbed down generation what life is like once a country is deindustrialized. The snowflakes are fighting over toilet paper so imagine what the self entitled regressives will be like when they can't use their Toorak cabs to drop off the kids to school.

Dear Josephus,

Where do you find these sites?

Minus 66 degrees Celsius at the Summit Observatory in Greenland? Well not according to the NOAA dataset which can be found here;

ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/data/meteorology/in-situ/sum/2020/met_sum_insitu_1_obop_minute_2020_01.txt

Why do the links you provide seem to universally exaggerate things? The temperature was impressive enough without gilding the lily.

Dear Hasbeen,

Speaking of tripe your take on Drotos et al was breathtaking in its misrepresentation of the study. Even when you do post a link to something with bit of meat your claims for it are so off the mark it makes my eyes water.

Latest news - more ice than ever before in the Northern Hemisphere, along with the best snow fall ever in Montana. Quick! Find something for the crazy mad climate hysterics to chew on.

' Find something for the crazy mad climate hysterics to chew on.'

unfortunately facts or truth has never mattered to marxist ttbn. Like the evolutionist dills they just repeat lies over and over again until the gullible think its fact.

runner,

They are totally oblivious to the truth. I don't know what causes their total unawareness. Drink? Drugs? Was there a mass dropping of babies on their heads around the time they were born?

SR,
This is the record of your post:SUM 2020 01 01 00 00 252 5.5 -9 642.30 -51.5 -999.9 -999.9 60 -99
Please explain the meaning of your figures!

Dear Josephus,

I hope this assists.

Field 1: [SITE CODE]
The three-character sampling location code (see above).

Field 2: [YEAR] The sample collection date and time in UTC.
Field 3: [MONTH]
Field 4: [DAY]
Field 5: [HOUR]
The hour is from 0 to 23, and signifies the beginning of the hour.
For example, hour 05 is from time 05:00 to 05:59.

Field 6: [WIND DIRECTION]
Average wind direction from which the wind is blowing,
measured clockwise in degrees from true north.
North is 0 degrees, east 90 degrees, south 180, west 270
Missing values are denoted by -999

Field 7: [WIND SPEED]
Units are meters/second.
Missing values are denoted by -999.9

Field 8: [WIND STEADINESS FACTOR]
The wind steadiness factor is 100 times the ratio of the vector wind
speed to the average wind speed for the hour.
Missing values are denoted by -9

Field 9: [BAROMETRIC PRESSURE]
Units are hPa
The station pressure is not corrected for elevation in any way.
Missing values are denoted by -999.90

Field 10: [TEMPERATURE at 2 Meters]
Temperature at 2 meters above ground level.
Units are degrees Celsius.
Missing values are denoted by -999.9

Field 11: [TEMPERATURE at 10 Meters]
Temperature at 10 meters above ground level.
Units are degrees Celsius.
Missing values are denoted by -999.9

Field 12: [TEMPERATURE at Tower Top]
Temperature at top of instrument tower. This elevation
will vary depending on the site.
Units are degrees Celsius.
Missing values are denoted by -999.9

Field 13: [RELATIVE HUMIDITY] Units are in percent.
Missing values are denoted by -99

Field 14: [PRECIPITATION INTENSITY] Amount of precipitation per hour.
The precipitation amount is measured with an unheated
tipping bucket rain gauge.
Units are millimeters/hour.
Missing values are denoted by -99

Dear runner,

Mate, of all the people who contribute to this forum you are the least interested in the facts by a country mile. I can't remember the last time you even attempted to spout one. All you do is come in here and spit out a little bit of venom every now and again. You are a fact free dolt.

I have far more respect for someone like Josephus, even given our differences, because he is at least willing to engage in facts, in data, in the truth.

The real truth is an absolute anathema to you.

SR, I just learned on the news tonight that Google has removed all science data that does not agree with the Climate GW agenda.

Josephus, it looks like the bastards got to Google now.
I said these pricks had money and when you have an absolute fortune, like these scum-bags, you only have to make threats, you don't have to cough up one cent.
You know, there is more behind this than meets the eye.
It is starting to give credence to my suspicions that these filthy elite Jews and their little club, not only exist but their filthy evil plans are being implemented.
It's a shame these bastards have got their filthy claws into the internet, otherwise I would dearly like to make contact with others like me who have seen through these pricks and would like to discuss some broad range of ideas and concerns.
Unfortunately, I have never been any good at cloak and dagger stuff so I will have to just sit back and possibly come across such people by chance.

For the record I put up the science facts, in the form of several videos.
It was specifically in response to SR's cop-out statement that he did not read me any more.
The problem is that he didn't answer or even acknowledge my evidence,
which debunked his promotion that was incorrectly promoted as us being the cause of GW, when in fact the planet is going through a warming phase of a temperature cycle it does every few hundred years. So this evidence basically says the earth is warming naturally, THEN CO2 is released from the oceans.
Not the other way round.
It turns out the little CO2 we have created is considered "negligible".
So I have to assume they his silence means he agrees, but then I see him still pushing the same old bull, so he did not agree, nor did he come back with a debunk or a rebuttal of any kind.
So in the absence of any comment I'll just have to assume that he is playing both sides, Hmmmm.

aLTRAV, truly you are a turkey brain.

You plainly don't know what the word evidence means in the context of science.

Put up some evidence by all means, I for one would be happy to consider it but so far there has been nought but drivel.

And here we come to it:

" ... It is starting to give credence to my suspicions that these filthy elite Jews and their little club, not only exist but their filthy evil plans are being implemented ... "

Well, you've done a good job there at identifying yourself and some of your lunacy.

ASIO itself has warned of you clowns, and they do not get involved with common crime, but rather matters of espionage, terrorism and the like.

So is it any wonder that a GW denier is also Anti-Semitic.

Did you know, that in the lead up to WWII, when it became plain enough what the nazis and their supporters were going to do, that australia had a referendum to relocate the Euro-Jews here. And that australia voted to re-settle them here.

But unfortunately, the filth of the genocidal crown ignored the results of the referendum and turned the boats back. The story and history of it can be read in a book entitled, "the UnPromised Land."

Does it please you to know this ALTRAV, that filthy white trash australia played a not insignificant role in the deaths of more than 6 million Jews, LGBTQI's and the Disabled?

P.S.

Whilst some of you may not approve of my tactics, I know these people, or rather their type. And, often times, if you sufficiently provoke them, it has the effect of liberating their tongues.

Alt Rave,

That is an utterly dreadful thing to write. You give the right-wing a bad name. There has been crack-pot rubbish written about Jewish people for hundreds of years now, and newer, more sophisticated slurs from fascists of all stripes shouldn't surprise anyone. Disgusting.

Joe

Dear Josephus,

A link would be nice.

Here's mine;

"Google has made “substantial” contributions to some of the most notorious climate deniers in Washington despite its insistence that it supports political action on the climate crisis.

Among hundreds of groups the company has listed on its website as beneficiaries of its political giving are more than a dozen organisations that have campaigned against climate legislation, questioned the need for action, or actively sought to roll back Obama-era environmental protections.

The list includes the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a conservative policy group that was instrumental in convincing the Trump administration to abandon the Paris agreement and has criticised the White House for not dismantling more environmental rules."

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/11/google-contributions-climate-change-deniers

142 posts and you are still arguing vainly. You all think the same thing you thought at the outset, but you continue wasting your lives scraping up arguments that won't change anything. Ridiculous.

thanks Steelie, as someone who lies and misrepresents regularly I am glad to have your disapproval.

Dear runner,

Lol.

I'm glad you have taken ownership of it mate. I applaud you being honest for once. Well done.

[Deleted for abuse.]

Someone phone the P.E.T team and have this looney taken away.

If Drought and fires means Global Warming, what do record floods mean?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-09/flooding-in-western-queensland-residents-stranded/12037282?fbclid=IwAR0bm6t37k00u2ZFnH_ptwnS4Lfq8HSSb9faNolBURcSQPC67JWHNvJy8PY

The fact has been established the years from 1900 to 1920 were on the average slightly drier across Australia than the years 2000 to 2020. The weather has not changed in 100 years.

Hey Loudmouth2,

Re ALTRAV:
"That is an utterly dreadful thing to write. You give the right-wing a bad name. There has been crack-pot rubbish written about Jewish people for hundreds of years now, and newer, more sophisticated slurs from fascists of all stripes shouldn't surprise anyone. Disgusting."

Well, it didn't come across as being very nice, and I didn't see the comment that was deleted.
As you all know I often criticise many of the same things ALTRAV does;
- But I try to go about it a different way.

I try to make my focus on 'ideas I oppose' and not necessarily 'people associated with said ideas', and I mostly always show links as a source to whatever I'm saying.

But I'm not scared to be called anti-semitic.
If I think an issue holds merit, I'll say it.

Dear Armchair Critic,

Of course you are anti-Semitic, it generally comes with the conspiracy theory territory.

I don't read ALTRAV's crap so it was only that loudmouth2 mentioned it did I learn what he had written. The use of the word 'filthy' echo's the anti-Semites of old, when millions fled from the pogroms in Russia, many of them destitute.

I have yet to see you take it to that deeply objectionable level. The idiot is really a disgusting human being and if I had my way he would have been shown the door. We really don't need someone with such deep seated insecurity issues that they are a constant source of toxicity around here in vain attempts at some degree of validation.

"Of course you are anti-Semitic, it generally comes with the conspiracy theory territory."

Well I think it's a stupid made up word that doesn't mean anything.

Under democracy it's not only good that I judge and criticise the leadership of the country, it's essential.

For anyone to say that I'm an anti-Semite if I criticise the actions of the government of Israel, then who cares, I'm an anti-Semite.
I'll criticise my own government as is my right and I'll criticise any other if I think the issue holds merit.
- Are you saying that's not my right?

If I say Jews used boycotts on German first, then I'm an Anti-Semite
If I oppose Zionism, and say Jews had no right to forcibly remove Palestinians from their homes, then I'm an Anti-Semite
Why should I support Jews right to exist if they wont even state their borders?
If I say they had no right of ownership to the Golan Heights, I'm an anti-smite.
Who decided on the definition of what an Anti-Semite is anyway not me, and I don't give a hoot for all the PC BS.
As for the 'Holocaust' guilt trip, I refuse to take responsibility for anything that happened before I was born.
If I criticise Jews in any way shape or form I'm an anti-semite.

I don't whinge and whine and cry and make laws that call you out as Anti-Australian.

No other nation uses the word anti-'own nation'.
Jews cannot be anti-semites, that makes them self-hating Jew, so if only non-Jews can be anti-semites, and it's a word used to denigrate (and silence criticism of Jews or Israel) is that not like saying only white people are allowed to use the word n-i-g-g-e-r?

If I say the vast majority whom are Ashkennazi Jews aren't even semites and aren't even related to the 12 tribes of Israel, then I'm an anti-semite.
The whole thing is stupid.

It's like someone had a brainfart and convinced you all to go along with it, and somehow you did.

[Cont}

By falling for this anti-semite crap, what you're all actually doing is observing and obeying Noahide Law, that is you are inadvertantly giving your consent to a Jewish religious theocracy.
I'm real sorry but this is a secular country, and 18D says my right to say what I believe is exempt from 18C if it's an extension of my true beliefs.

Cost of climate inaction
When anyone such as Labor proposes meaningful climate action, the Libs demand, have you costed your emissions targets? They chant Zero emissions, zero jobs.
We should ask the Libs: Have YOU costed your business-as-usual plan?

1. The Once-Great Barrier Reef was valued at $56B (Deloittes), and is half gone (AIMS).

2. The damage from bushfires is estimated as $100B (The Conversation). And that’s only in one season!

3. Drought, floods and lost food production are yet to be assessed.

4. Loss of habitat and wildlife are not yet included. All are attributed largely to climate change, which is caused mainly by burning of fossil fuels.

The true cost of inaction over the decades will be orders greater still.

The Great Barrier Reef is being regenerated.
http://reefrestorationfoundation.org/?gclid=CjwKCAjwmKLzBRBeEiwACCVihr5MWmnA4UTFSDjfwYK1XJ5C8BKB921ttQZxc63WL3CjUhRtLanhABoC2i4QAvD_BwE

The Bush fires were not caused by Climate Change, They were caused by an overload of dry combustible growth and lightning strikes, arson and backburns got out of control.

Food production is higher now than ever thanks to CO2 plant food.

The loss of fauna habitat has nothing to do with fossil fuels, and everything to do with bushfires. These fires have been happening for thousands of years

Could a bit of selective ocean fertilisation alter the rainfall probability? I read of ocean fertilisation as a means of carbon capture, but I don't read of it as a means of trapping heat in the ocean surface: An algal bloom can do this. The question of how this might alter rainfall can only be answered with research, yet that research will not happen, not because of Jew hating conspiracy theorists, but because of opposition by a number of catastrophists who believe that such research will cause billions to die of thirst, the death of all marine life, etc.

The science has been hijacked by ideologists. Put a Marxist tag on something and you wreck any chance of bipartisan support.

Hi Ian Bryce,

Here's what I think, though what I think isn't worth much.
I know little about all the technical modelling and stuff about 'climate change'. But I do know of a few things like Milankovich cycles and Maunder Minimums.

"1. The Once-Great Barrier Reef was valued at $56B (Deloittes), and is half gone (AIMS)."

I don't really care what it's $ value is, but I care if its inadvertently ruined needlessly for future generations.

Tell me much of whats happening on the reef is attributed to cane farmers and other agricultural activities pumping crap out onto the reef and how many big ships motor through there to Gladstone, and what crap do they dump on the reefs?
What other human activities cause more harm to the reef than is necessary?
People wearing suncream?
Surely you can't blame everything on climate change?

Would you say these things are caused by climate change or poor policies?

"2. The damage from bushfires is estimated as $100B (The Conversation). And that’s only in one season!"

Is the glass half full or is it half empty.
The bushfires brought rains the 'experts never predicted' so we should be thankful.
What does that say about the 'experts'?
Maybe if we burned the bush more often maybe we'd get more rain.

Shouldn't Labour and the Greens policies be the ones in the spotlight?
Was it not their environmental policies that hamstrung fire services ability to conduct fuel reduction?

(I will say it was this governments fault for ignoring calls for more water bombers prior to the bushfires though, and Morrison was a jerk no scratch that, an idiot for going on holiday.)

"3. Drought, floods and lost food production are yet to be assessed."
- Refer to Item 2;
Floods and rains aren't the governments fault any more than it's not your fault you can't rain dance and provide water for the farmers.
- But they are responsible for the policies and decisions they make and they can always do better.

No binding targets have been agreed since the Kyoto protocol of 1997. 2020 targets cover only thirty-six countries (including Australia) collectively responsible for less than 20 per cent of global emissions. After 2020, there are only the voluntary national pledges made under the 2015 Paris agreement. The Madrid conference in 2019 failed to agree on global rules for emissions trading, its key objective. The three largest emitters of carbon dioxide—China, America and India—have not agreed to binding targets. These three countries account for about half of global emissions. Understandably, China’s and India’s emissions continue to rise, as do emissions from scores of developing countries.

Not very hopeful at all for the climate commos.

[Cont.]

"4. Loss of habitat and wildlife are not yet included. All are attributed largely to climate change, which is caused mainly by burning of fossil fuels."

Refer to item 2 and 3.
So what now your saying it's the governments fault for not banning cars and trucks?
What exactly do you people want?
Maybe if we did ban trucks and cars we'd save a billion animals a year on our roads?
We can all live in huts and wipe our butts with leaves.
What do you want?

Why is it your so intent in bringing in global climate taxes, but your not interested in addressing the issues to change things for the better now?

Give me policies to do things better and I'll support them, but I won't cut our noses off to spite our face.

I don't care if seas rise and insurance companies have to pay everyone out and we all move inland 100meters.

I don't understand why you lot don't understand that we humans need to adapt to survive anyway.
We have to master OUR environment to survive.
Why can't we focus on on creative human ingenuity to better adapt to whatever the climate does instead of acting like we can somehow control the planets climate and weather by paying someone else a weekly tax?

This whole thing is about scaring us into giving consent to others to dictate ours and our kids lives.
Why in the hell would anyone with a brain support that?

Still no answer to this question;
Why does the temperature rise and THEN the co2 rises ?

In New South Wales, the Independent Planning Commission has upheld the rejection of the Crookwell 3 wind farm, stating, “visual impacts of the project are unacceptable given the significant visual impacts on multiple residences”.

Is the tide turning against these ugly blights on the landscape?

I see some reasonable points being raised, and will try to discuss them.

Bazz asks, Why does the temperature rise and THEN the co2 rises?
I agree the current records show them both rising simultaneously. That does not clearly show which causes which.
But the theory is very clear that CO2 MUST cause warming, due to all our scientific knowledge of the atmosphere, IR radiation etc. Warming (due to a different cause) does not have a mechanism which can explain the observed CO2.
Secondly, detailed modelling of the earth system shows what causes what.
And thirdly, CO2 contains C12, C13, and C14 isotopes. The extra CO2 (from 280 ppm to 414) has isotopes which match the fossil fuel we are burning. It is different from what would come out of the oceans if warming were the cause. Details at http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/how-do-we-know-that-recent-cosub2sub-increases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/

Armchair Critic asks if I am right, what to do about it? Do I want to ban cars and trucks? No, but transitioning to electric vehicles reduces fuel emissions. And we can charge them using solar and wind.
…giving consent to others to dictate ours and our kids lives… No, the kids are wiser than our leaders, that is why they are protesting. They will remember who opposed and who supported climate action!
Give me good policies… OK here is a proposal. Combine energy sources to make one system as reliable as coal – Fair Dinkum energy as Scomo said. Solar, wind and storage together make a good combination. Remember, my qualifications are in physics and electrical engineering.
The solar and wind power are cheap, and the greatest cost will be in the storage. Known options include molten salts, pumped hydro, and batteries. We should be developing all options to get the price down.
My vision is to put solar, wind and storage into the one site, so it can be separately funded by a regional council, and within one electorate. The local community will feel ownership. One politician can support it.

Ian, Great point. "My vision is to put solar, wind and storage into the one site, so it can be separately funded by a regional council, and within one electorate. The local community will feel ownership. One politician can support it."

Yes put them in inner city electorates, and leave the countryside pristine.

However changing our power source to current solar is not going to supply heat for furnaces to produce metals, glass, cement and bitumen roads only fossil fuels; which fuel is in fact the storage of ancient solar energy.

To give every person on the planet food, housing, transport and comfort is not going to happen by wind and solar, because it will only supply the first world. It means we neglect 2/3 of the world's population for some ideologue's brain scheme.

Josephus,
>To give every person on the planet food, housing, transport and comfort is not going to happen by wind and solar,
The nuclear alternative is always available, and there's also geothermal. However considering the enormous amount of solar energy our planet receives, what basis do you have for concluding it can't do the job?

>because it will only supply the first world.
What brings you to that conclusion? Are you under the illusion that it's still too expensive?

Aidan your last post identifies you as either a fool, or so poorly educated that you have no understanding of the subject. This is not surprising as a recent examination of Gen Z in England found that of this the greenest generation ever, only 28% know that nuclear power generation is a low to zero CO2 activity, much lower than wind or solar in lifetime CO2 emissions.

These & most greens the most vocal protesters have virtually no idea of what they are protesting about.

Only someone with no understanding of the physics involved could believe that current wind & solar techniques could ever supply eve our electricity requirements.

Worse it has no capacity to supply our industrial power or transport mining & agriculture fuel. The only life style they could support would be subsistence farming, & hunter gathering.

Is this your desired future? If not, do try reading something other than green propaganda, & learn some of the facts of life.

Hasbeen & Aidan,

I suppose the question is: how much land would solar, wind or nuclear power generation take up in, say, India to provide at the level of service that we take for granted in Australia ?

Solar and wind power generation take up a lot of land - we may not worry much about it here because we frankly have a lot of land. But not so in many other countries, not to mention that solar and wind installations would take a lot of valuable land out of production.

But nuclear may be the game-changer. Since nuclear power can be scaled up and down to be used to power submarines without much worry, and at the other extreme, to power pace-makers, safety is no longer an issue. Nobody is surely going to build nuclear power plants using 70-year-old Chernobyl-type technology; or build such plants right on a beach in tsunami-prone areas like Fukushima. Technology has moved on from all that.

Whether thorium or uranium or whatever else, nuclear power plants can be built to scale, from village-level requirements to those of large cities, and emulating the safety features that may be in place in France and Finland. If we seriously want to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere, then surely a CO2-free method of energy production should be thoroughly considered ?

By the way, Lucas Heights near Sutherland has been involved with handling nuclear waste since 1950 or so. Any major life-threatening accidents in that region since then ?

Joe

Hey Ian Bryce,

"Give me good policies… OK here is a proposal. Combine energy sources to make one system as reliable as coal – Fair Dinkum energy as Scomo said. Solar, wind and storage together make a good combination. Remember, my qualifications are in physics and electrical engineering."

I'm all for whatever works best, and I already support these things.
Lets look at WA as an example.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-01/rise-of-rooftop-solar-power-jeopardising-wa-energy-grid/11731452

"This could allow AEMO to 'spill' surplus solar power, rather than have to accommodate it in a way that put the grid under stress."

Why spill the power, I don't know about infrastucture in WA, but my idea would be to create a smaller holding pond at the base of a dam that has half a days worth of pumpable water in it, so that instead of spilling the solar power, you redirect it to pumps, I don't know maybe tiers of Archimedes screws slowly lifting the water up the dam level by level, and refilling the dam.

That way 'spilled' power becomes a battery in the form of stored water.

I'm all for water wheels, turbines, solar etc. whatever works.
- Put power generators on the wheels of trains and feed it back into the grid if it works.

And on that subject it should be a national power grid.
Build high speed rail linking all capital cities and incorporate a national power grid into it.
Include water, fuel, internet and make it like one giant hub or conduit for the whole nation.

Create a socialist base level employment schemme (The job you have when you don't have a job) that pays double dole for full-time work doing things to help the government save money.

Focus on training and have a national scheme across the nation building this HSR

Instead of just giving welfare recipients a handout (to inject money at the bottom) they could've just come up with a different policy to get that money into the economy.
Isn't a handup better than a handout

[Cont.]
The loser of capitalism is the one who doesn't get the job.
End that stupid rot and all the social problems that follow by building a foolproof system.

How you going to have free education and free welfare if you cant offer a free job to offset these costs?

This puts to use 'the 5% unemployed that capitalism needs to prevent wage growth' and make them an asset instead of a liability.

Thanks for your earlier response.

[Cont.]
One more point.
Say you have one full dam, and the HSR and water pipes are all level.
Then all you have to do is let water out of one dam and send it down the pipes to another, and you can also make power from that flow.

Then once its all connected into a national grid put solar farms near the railines and a SMR nuclear plant in each state and we'll have more power than well know what to do with.

How else do our leaders plan for the country to be globally competitive?

If you can't lower wages in the private sector what else can you do to make the country more competitive?

You have to lower the cost of energy and transport, there's no other way.

- And then you see how all these things come together -

Scottish ski resorts experience 4 meters of snow.

http://electroverse.net/the-scottish-ski-resort-experiencing-its-best-season-in-six-years/?fbclid=IwAR0ZWUc0H3Pny4M0aKdOJXPV71QDdyMV_f52iCZ0P3z-LZUobpnedYY94_s

Quote, "WHAT DID THE AUSTRALIAN MINING SECTOR EVER DO FOR ME ?
Australian mining companies are delivering almost half of their taxable incomes towards corporate tax and royalty regimes, paying more than $20bn annually to prop up federal and state budget bottom lines.
Amid unprecedented pressures on the Australian economy fuelled by the coronavirus outbreak and bushfires, new analysis reveals the mining sector has been slugged a tax take ratio of between 39 and 49 per cent since 2011-12 to support government spending.
And yet the Climate extremists and ABC types continue to snap at the hands that feeds them.
If these Climate Alarmists get there way and we close down the majority of Australia‘s mining sector in a ‘’nett zero’’ world - where will wealth creation come from to pay for; our public hospitals, Medicare, listing life saving drugs on the PBS, Schools, pensions, aged care, kids with disabilities, the ABC, etc., etc.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/…/34ac245ee6a871965daef6da…
End Quote.

Quote, "WORLD CEREAL PRODUCTION HITS NEW RECORD HIGH
Confused Climate Cult members have been brainwashed into believing that ‘climate change’ is adversely effecting crop production.
But yet again, they are not only wrong - evidence from the real world shows the exact opposite.
In their latest update the Food & Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO forecast that 2019/2020 will see world cereal production up 2.3% on last year - to hit a new high record high of 2,719 Million tonnes.
Perhaps plants like slightly warmer weather with more Co2 in the atmosphere. Who’d of guessed ?
http://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/csdb/en/
End Quote

The CSIRO states there is no link between Climate Change and the Bush fires in Senate Estimates Committee.

To achieve net zero emissions by 2050 Australian farming is totally decimated according to CSIRO projections.

GLOBAL WARMING ‘ HITS MONGOLIA
If only the World had installed more wind turbines and solar panels this might not have happened.
Quote,
"ULAN BATOR, March 2 (Xinhua) -- Extreme wintry weather, known as dzud in Mongolia, has killed more than 55,700 livestock animals in the north-western province of Khuvsgul alone since late last year, the provincial agricultural department said Monday.
The deadly spell of cold and snow, otherwise known as a “Zud” or “Dzud” –a Mongolian term for a severe winter in which large number of livestock die, primarily due to starvation due to being unable to graze, in other cases directly from the cold– has been running since late-Nov, 2019, according to Khuvsgul’s provincial agricultural department.
Snowfall is currently covering 60 percent of Mongolia, and more than 80 soums in 15 provinces are experiencing dzud or near-dzud conditions, according to the country’s National Emergency Management Agency. That number of 56,000 dead livestock can easily be increased by a factor of 10.
http://electroverse.net/wintry-weather-kills-56000-livest…/
End Quote

The new Ice age is upon us! Fact!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5pIvNOlkcM&fbclid=IwAR2RXjEfDeu8trKAxkIX14tjSzWYGKVDFDb6tuYzzhnBqTDJiKjCD5QdXVM&app=desktop

Attenborough cannot be trusted in his reporting on Climate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A8QfIGwK88

Hasbeen,
The insults you unthinkingly hurled at me failed to hide the fact that you had no objective criticism at all. Your assertions that solar power is incapable of doing certain things are not backed by physics at all - indeed they're often disproven by reality, as mining companies invest in solar power to cut their energy bills.

And despite my name, I'm definitely not a part of Gen Z! Nor am I against nuclear power, though many here are keen to label me that way because of my refusal to make heroic assumptions about its costs!

And where did you get this "low to zero" phrase from? Certainly not the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (who commissioned the survey). Nuclear power is, of course, a low carbon source of energy, but it has never been zero.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Josephus,
I see you're resorting to strawmen and lies again!
Nobody (except possibly a small lunatic fringe) want to shut down the Australian mining sector. Though we'd like to see coal mines close (and new ones not open) there's near universal support for mining of metals.

And nobody is claiming there'll never be cold weather again. Haven't you learned the difference between climate and weather yet?

Aidan,
Human effect on climate is lies, you have no evidence. If you have evidence that a pattern of extreme weather is not climate, then demonstrate the difference. http://www.use-due-diligence-on-climate.org/home/climate-change/wild-weather/historical-extreme-weather/

Quote,
In 1992, former Vice President Al Gore assured his listeners, that “Only an insignificant fraction of scientists deny the global warming crisis. The debate is over. The science is settled.”

In 2009, Gore said, human-induced climate change is claimed by 97% of scientists’.

That is in fact 75 scientists of 77 whose reports were chosen on human effect on Global warming.

Doran and Zimmerman, 2009.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009EO030002/abstract
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) is a nonprofit organization of geophysicists, consisting of over 61,000 members from over 146 countries.
An online poll was performed by Doran & Zimmerman (University of Illinois) in a cherry picking exercise –
From the 61,000 AGU earth scientists, they solicited 10,257. ( The other 50,000, that were known to be critical of the AGW theory, including: solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists and astronomers, were excluded !! ) Of the 10,257 only 3,146 replied.
3,069 of those respondents (97.5%) were then also excluded after the responses were received (deemed unsuitable, because they were neutral !!)…
… leaving just 77 per reviewed scientists who were then asked 2 questions. [Accepting ONLY those who were in government-paid positions. NO private employed or retired scientists were allowed.] The first question asked respondents to compare current temperatures to the pre-1800s, (the depths of the Little Ice Age), and asked whether it’s warmer now.!!
The second question asked “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?”
_______________________________________________________________

In contrast 31,487 scientists signed ‘The Global Warming Petition Project’ http://www.petitionproject.org/ , stating –

“There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.
Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”

I have recently read an article but have not had time to
look further into the story, but it was suggested that the American
Physics Society which is said to have 50,000 scientist members, has
reversed its opinion on CO2 caused global warming.
The article listed statements by many members that AGW is false and that
the IPCC is corrupted.

Those that know their way around scientific circles may enlighten the
rest of us.

Josephus directs us to the Petition Project.
Petition Project http://www.petitionproject.org/
Looks impressive. 31,000 scientists signed a Petition saying manmade climate change is a hoax! Quote from Petition:...No evidence… greenhouse gases… cause… heating…
Need some due diligence! Sadly it cannot be verified.
Try to see the signatories - by name: lists only letter A, surname and one initial, and no further information provided, no links.
Try by US State: lists only California, and again, no further information and no links. Most likely a simple fake.
The time for this type of farce is over.

Ian, here is one of the scientists who organised the petition.
Dr. Patrick Moore former Greenpeace president. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjlmFr4FMvI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWahKIG4BE4

Ian Bryce,
Once you have listened to the lecture of Dr Patrick Moore and listened to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYQ6eZDXXRE then please demonstrate the opposite of the lies he promotes. If you cannot then you are promoting the lies, and be honest.

Thanks Josephus for the Patrick Moore information.

I see that he has no qualifications relevant to climate. And he in in the pay of the nuclear lobby.

In fact there is a strong movement to censor him!
https://www.change.org/p/city-of-regina-remove-climate-change-denier-patrick-moore-as-a-speaker-at-sustainability-conference

In any case it is good that we are sharing evidence in an objective manner.

Ian, I see the ignorant unscientific radicals are seeking to silence Patrick. The petition is open for anyone to sign. I assume you also are against Nuclear energy, as are most radical leftist politicians. If supporting nuclear means you are a climate denier; however I note others on here prefer nuclear, so that is not a disqualification as they also state Global warming is caused by humans.

I stand against water and ocean pollution, which is caused by filthy humans. http://www.facebook.com/ttadelaide/videos/1376455412376071/?t=32

Ian check out this review including the video imbedded in the script, on algae. http://www.desmogblog.com/patrick-moore

There are very few, if any, of us on this thread who deny categorically that global warming is taking place. Although no doubt they could be rooted out and burnt at the stake, there's not that many of them.

And not many sceptics in the pay of either the fossil fuel or nuclear industries.

But from the last few posts, can we assume, from their opposition to nuclear energy generation, that the True Believers are unwittingly in the pay of the subsidised renewables lobby ?

Joe

Moore on World power:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=744&v=kHZKo13HV2A&feature=emb_title

Lord Christopher Monckton: Climate change sceptic in Australia [SD] ABC RN Breakfast

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVd8OwvNZ5Y&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR1Wk29Rg-KAfTjfQfqV7LzPdJHiStvjrpNNHDff7ChaKnZ7zULKn05EDRo

Dear Josephus,

You wrote;

"Ian check out this review including the video imbedded in the script, on algae. http://www.desmogblog.com/patrick-moore"

This was an excellent expose about Patrick Moore. I especially liked the embedded video you mentioned. He certainly is a tool isn't he. Really full of it.

Thank you for posting.

Do you have similar links you would like to share with us?

Obviously SR you have no science just emotive abuse.

Are the oceans rising in Australia because we are burning fossil fuel? A look at the facts!
http://www.facebook.com/SkyNewsAustralia/videos/211351933312539/UzpfSTU3ODg2NjM2NzI3OjEwMTU3MDkyODE5MzUxNzI4/

I know that solid evidence often takes some effort to read and appreciate.
I suggest Climate stripes https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/warming-stripes-show-how-australias-average-temperatures-have-changed/news-story/3e4d898ff05a217548db0b5ba6715961

And for scientific evidence, realcimate.org

Ian

Ian, note the records only show temperatures since 1910 for Australia as official. However temperatures recorded before that have been canned as unreliable. http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/43386/were-50c-122f-days-recorded-across-australia-during-the-1800s

joannenova.com.au/2019/01/forgotten-history-50-degrees-everywhere-right-across-australia-in-the-1800s/

Quote, "Don’t believe your lying eyes — Australian newspaper archives are full of temperatures recorded higher than 121 in the shade which is 50C. All of these temperatures in the map below are found in historic newspaper archives. Measurements done after 1910 are even done with official Stevenson screens, yet the BOM “throws them away”. It’s true that ones done in the 1800s are often recorded on non-standard equipment, or are just literally “in the shade” under cover. So some of these, perhaps many, are one or two degrees too high. But even if we take two degrees off, how scary is global warming when Australia knew many days of 48C and 49C and some at 50C 120 years ago? The BOM — supposedly so concerned about the State of Our Climate — show little interest in talking about our history or in analysing it, or even mentioning it.
And modern temperatures are recorded on electronic equipment, sometimes in areas affected by urban heat islands (concrete and cars)."

They prefer that recorded history in News Papers of local areas not be shown in their agenda to prove Man is responsible for the heat