- The Politics and Environment Blog

Main menu:


August 2012
« Jul   Dec »




Site search

Please visit


Nature Photographs


Disclaimer: The inclusion of a blog or website in this list should not be taken as an endorsement of its contents by me.

Gone Fishing

I am going to take some time out from this blog to try and complete a couple of projects that I’ve started, but am having trouble finishing. So there may be no new posts here for a while.

In the meantime you can subscribe for my irregular email updates here:

And check the ‘Community Home’ page for updates from other readers with their nature photographs and more here:

And here’s a picture I took of a fisher, a darter cormorant, in Kakadu National Park a few years ago.

Interestingly according to one account of life in the Lower Murray in South Australia one hundred years ago there was a bounty on cormorants (that are closely related to darters), with 34,000 taken in one year ostensibly because they ate too many fish [1].

[1] Travels in Australasia, by Wandandian see page 301

26th July 1909 at Caurnamont, near Mannum

‘Birds were very scarce, though we saw one fine old spoonbill wading round the swamp and swinging his head from side to side in the peculiar fashion these birds have while feeding.

On the latter day, while out shooting, I picked up a freshly decapitated turtle of the kind called by the natives “emys,” and on meeting a fisherman enquired of him whether he had caught many, and why it was without a head.

He replied that the turtles were so destructive of fish spawn, that a scalp fee of one penny was paid on the head of each by the Government, and that he caught a good many from time to time.

On further enquiry, I found that in the past year the South Australian Government had paid over £600 in scalping fees to various people for 116,000 turtles and 34,000 cormorants, thus satisfactorily explaining why the cormorants are so shy, and look upon every man with suspicion; for when one contemplates what a hunting they must have in the course of the year to furnish such an enormous “bag,” it would be decidedly strange if they were at all otherwise. In spite of all this I saw hundreds of them on the Murray and lake waters, so that I am sure many must pour in from outside to take the place of those that are shot, and should this be the case it will be many years before their numbers are at all reduced, or the Government get anything like the full value for their money, or even justify its expenditure.’

[Back then Murray cod were plentiful despite the turtles and the cormorant though now there are no Murray cod in that stretch of river below Lock 1.]


3,962 Responses to “Gone Fishing”

Pages: « 163 64 65 66 67 [68] 69 70 71 72 7380 » Show All

  1. Comment from: Neville

    SD I agree and the one bloke I’d never ever trust is Gore’s dingbat prophet Hansen.

    BTW here is UNI Colorado SL page showing the effect of the recent pothole in satellite SL fall caused by ENSO.

    Gav should run a straight edge over this graph, because the trend is definitely down. But there is a fair bit of doubt about satellite measurements of SL.
    This still shows 3.2 mm year but the physical gauges show much less.

    But they still say the trend may rise again but it seems to be locked in firmly with ENSO. See correlation in second graph. Amazing that the big La nina year helped drop SL by a 1/4 of an inch in just 12 months.

    So if we have more la ninas because of our now cool PDO SLs may be arrested perhaps for a while? Who knows?

  2. Comment from: spangled drongo

    A bit like that CANUTE site hey gav?

    “By combining two uncertainties (the frequency of present storm surges and the uncertainty of future sea-level rise) into a single likelihood, a statistically robust prediction is generated.”

    IOW they “generate” one load of robustness from two loads of crap.

    Is that what you call sustainability? Recycling and condensing?

    Or is that just a garbage compressor?

  3. Comment from: Debbie

    that is an example of the ‘piggy backing’ I mentioned earlier.
    That is purely ‘number crunching’.

  4. Comment from: Neville

    So the UNI of Colorado states that the Strongest La nina ( 2011) since 1917 caused so much rain that it caused the oceans to fall. Huge floods in the MDB in 1917 as well.

    Much of that rain over eastern OZ of course. We can of course expect more la ninas during the cool phase of the PDO.

  5. Comment from: Neville

    Jo Nova pulls apart last weeks Catalyst from THEIR ABC. That ABC reporter should read about the strong la nina that dropped the oceans SL in 2011.
    Much of it dumped on OZ. What a mob of drongoes.

  6. Comment from: gavin

    OK, now guys, on what basis do you decide who’s study is worthwhile?

    Btw; I don’t need any blog bait, yes or no as we go.

    Last week on high tides all shores disappeared, nothing unusual and mostly flat seas but our fisher wife reminded me there are “swells” involved when their jetty boards go under. That’s normal too, no dispute but what odds, a big one?

    After our 2003 bushfires, I made submissions re observations on fire behavior based on wind and fine fuel in rampant natural furnaces with combustion rates similar to a gas storage explosion. As the heavens were on fire (combustion in the sky) after our late lunch I had to move partner and her mum very quickly.

    Local researchers have concluded it was a tornado and that satisfies me because I missed the transition from a chain of big fires around the horizon am to the inferno pm. Another family member minding children at home but right in it’s path was one of the first to describe the fire storm as a tornado by it’s terrifying noise. There was a considerable element of shock around that community, I guess many will never forget it.

    Some of our young will be dealing with the latest climate predictions from the world bank. These personal experiences will help. Putting satisfying science around it could take ages.

  7. Comment from: Robert

    “Some of our young will be dealing with the latest climate predictions from the world bank.”

    Gav, predictions based on solid science are PROBABLY wrong. Predictions based on climate models HAVE to be wrong. And the “World Bank” is like every other institution with a name that’s straight out of a Superman comic: full of crypto-Marxists, trough-swillers and devoted spenders of other people’s money.

    So “our young” may as well relax, have fun, go surfing – and fund it all by working at a real job.

  8. Comment from: spangled drongo

    Neville, it is so obvious that these govt run “scientists” and the MSM just love CAGW for the riches it bestows on them. It’s the new green economy where the liars, thieves and betrayers thrive and we send our countries broke with massive govt employment and fiscal cliffs, print more worthless money, greentape free enterprise production out of existence etc.

    Any right wing govt that attempts to be elected just cannot introduce policies to rectify these increasing deficits so the problems increase and become ever more unfixable.

    I think that’s all part of the agenda too.

    And the young are so engrossed in virtual reality they won’t notice until it’s way too late.

    If we can’t keep extracting more treasure from below we are stuffed.



  9. Comment from: Neville

    SD you are spot on. But using even GAIA Tim’s prediction we won’t change the climate or temp for thousands of years. Even if you believe in CAGW like Tim, Gore, Hansen etc “the entire world” will not stop emitting co2 today.
    Just ask China, India and the non OECD. Therefore his prediction is blown away. And the OECD is just about flatlining, zero chance of mitigation from that sector.

    I repeat again the mitigation of AGW is the greatest con, fraud and ponzi scheme for at least 100 years.
    Simple maths proves the case. Trillions of dollars to be wasted and flushed down the toilet until 2100 for a guaranteed zero return.

  10. Comment from: Debbie

    You don’t appear to have a great understanding of the variables that created those fires in your area in 2003.
    Have you not ever noticed that even in controlled burns, whirly winds are created by fires?
    The fire most likely did that….not the weather or the climate.
    The extremely hot, dry, windy, droughty prevailing weather conditions and the failure of several different authorities to keep tinder away from private property were the 2 main reasons that areas of the ACT were so seriously damaged.
    Successful management of fire risk is not ‘rocket science’ or ‘climate science’ for that matter!

  11. Comment from: cohenite

    gav says:

    “OK, now guys, on what basis do you decide who’s study is worthwhile?”

    I’ve told you gav, the definitive study on SLR is this:

    They did a follow up reply to the usual crap from Rahmstorf and associated ratbags and that follow-up is here:

    You will note the Professors refer to an Australian study by Watson which is here:

    AGW predictions about SLR are, like all AGW predictions, junk.

  12. Comment from: Debbie

    :-) :-)
    Since when did the world bank become an ‘expert’ on climate predictions?
    I thought they were financial ‘number crunchers’ not climate ‘number crunchers’?
    Some of their financial predictions have been way off target.
    Just asking.

  13. Comment from: spangled drongo

    Debbie, gav is a bit slow on the uptake. He probably hasn’t been around too long.

    Gav, mini tornadoes occur in Australia in hot weather all the time but you need to live in a dust bowl or burnt out country to be aware of how many there actually are.

    If you are at sea you come across them too but not anywhere near as often.

    It is one of nature’s ways of cooling and probably form the basis of thermals used by raptors, pelicans, hang gliders etc to gain altitude quickly.

    They are everywhere and critical to the negative feedback of cooling by convection.

    They are so incredibly efficient that they cause hail to form and suspend it at great heights until gravity overwhelms the updraught.

    Sorry to disappoint you if you think they are a recent product of CAGW.

    They have been around for ever.

  14. Comment from: Neville

    That first paper Cohenite linked to had this conclusion.


    Our analyses do not indicate acceleration in sea level in U.S. tide gauge records during the 20th century. Instead, for each time period we consider, the records show small decelerations that are consistent with a number of earlier studies of worldwide-gauge records. The decelerations that we obtain are opposite in sign and one to two orders of magnitude less than the +0.07 to +0.28 mm/y2 accelerations that are required to reach sea levels predicted for 2100 by Vermeer and Rahmsdorf (2009), Jevrejeva, Moore, and Grinsted (2010), and Grinsted, Moore, and Jevrejeva (2010). Bindoff et al. (2007) note an increase in worldwide temperature from 1906 to 2005 of 0.74°C. It is essential that investigations continue to address why this worldwide-temperature increase has not produced acceleration of global sea level over the past 100 years, and indeed why global sea level has possibly decelerated for at least the last 80 years.

    If we have seen a deceleration of global sea level for at least 80 years then the whole theory of AGW should be reviewed pronto. It just wouldn’t add up.
    Of course any govt introducing co2 taxes should be booted out on their rear ends.

  15. Comment from: Graeme M

    Interesting about the fire tornado. I’ll have to read the article at some stage but the fire itself was in some ways not natural due to the land management practices – in particular open grassland and relatively heavy fuel loads plus of course the pine forests. I understood that those pine forests act like incendiary devices in fires and that collectively that created the explosive power as the fire encroached on the Canberra suburbs.

    I haven’t followed all the ins and outs of the fires but I also understood that there was a lot of poor management by authorities in response to the fire which after all began some time before the events of that Saturday.

    In many ways, Canberras firestorm was like Sandy – a confluence of events that made a relatively normal situation become seriously bad. And while it was definitely hot and dry at the time, I don’t think you could argue that it was unusually so. Dry conditions and fires are a standard part of the Australian context.

    On a different matter, I have been following the Arctic Ice convo on Climate Dialogue. I think it’s safe to say that the experts offering their views there are indeed experts. What stands out for me is the number of variables they’ll admit to and indeed the uncertainty. What certainty there is seems driven more by a personal sense of what is happening than concrete evidence. Lots of subjective pharsing in particular.

    While I think that something is going on as I noted before, it does seem that attribution for the cause of the something is pretty unclear. The post by Frank in recent public comments is an especially insightful one.

    So. Worldwide temps are increasing generally, but far more slowly than was anticipated. Conclusion? Natural variability swamps the AGW signal on decadal time scales, but the signal is unmistakeably there. Oh yeah?

    SLR rate is not increasing and physical evidence indicates that it may even be decreasing in places. Conclusion? Natural variability swamps the AGW signal on decadal time scales, but the signal is unmistakeably there. Oh yeah?

    Arctic ice is indeed dwindling. However Antarctic ice is not. And it seems the various reasons for the Arctic ice melt are still not clear as the decline lately seems in excess of the rate one would expect from a pure CO2 signal. Conclusion? Natural variability swamps the AGW signal on decadal time scales, but the signal is unmistakeably there. Oh yeah?

    And it goes on. What is one to think?

  16. Comment from: Graeme M

    Ahhhh… of course!!!

    Global warming is creating a wall of wind that is keeping Antarctica cold, hence the surprising finding that in fact Antarctic sea ice is INCREASING. We should have known. And of course, temps are being kept unnaturally low by the hole in the Ozone – man-made of course.

    Of course.

  17. Comment from: Debbie

    Exactly SD….EXACTLY!
    You really need to get out more Gavin.
    We get those things out here all the time and have done so for as long as I can remember.
    Sometimes they can be quite destructive if they for instance king hit an old shed or an empty tank or an open horse float etc.
    I particularly hate them when they decide to go through my yard when I have a line full of wet washing….because they always have dust and dirt in them….and they’re often strong enough to rip the washing striaght of the line.
    They are particularly noticeable when we do controlled burning or when we are burning off paddocks…but that is likely also because they can be easily seen due to the soot….but it seems that the fires themselves create them as well.
    SD is also correct that the birds use them….the hawks out here are particularly good at using them.
    While completing a University degree in Canberra I lived on a property at Gundaroo and we got them very frequently there as well.

  18. Comment from: Graeme M

    In Gav’s defence I think the suggestion is that this fire gave rise to a real tornado as opposed to the typical fire ‘whirl’. Now I have no idea what the difference may be but these researchers are suggesting there is one.

    Debbie, you live out the Hay Plains way somewhere don’t you? I recall travelling across there some years ago at the height of the drought and seeing what looked exactly like tornadoes, quite a few of them. They had all the aspect of tornadoes – thunderstorm formations with the funnel cloud and a debris cloud where they touched the ground. I was rather surprised to see those. No idea of the size though as it was hard to tell the scale due to distance.

    Of course I’ve experienced plenty of dust devils/willy willies over the years too, some of those can get quite large. That most recent I saw out around Lameroo a few weeks ago. We used to get plenty during the hot years in my childhood in Queensland – often across the local schoolyard on a baking hot summer’s day during the drought in the late 60s/early 70s.

    I also experienced a strange funnel shaped formation nearby travelling the Pacific Highway in the late evening about 2-3 years ago. We were in the middle of a substantial weather event that caused considerable local flooding – plenty of lightning and wind and this bizarre enormous formation dimly seen through the dark and rain. Scary.

    However the researchers seem to be suggesting this was something other than those more typical formations.

  19. Comment from: gavin

    Deb; very few people have seen a fire storm like the 2003 event, and certainly not our previous fire researchers. When I saw flame in cloud during daylight it took me a long time to adjust to the fact, so I contacted researchers directly to find how we fitted in with world wide wild fire studies.

    Oh, I forgot to mention the associated dust storm that fueled that thing. Even bare paddocks burnt as the dry soil was whipped up. Mixed up with pine plantations, was vast amounts of rough pasture, and some of it was inaccessible in practical terms through the previous season. I suggested heavy grazing in following up remedies.

    GM; the SH wall of wind has been a common topic for some time, almost all others associated with climate change

  20. Comment from: spangled drongo

    Debbie, you’re bringing back memories. Sheets of iron spiralling skywards as the shed loses its roof [again]. At least no cows, vehicles or houses like the US.

    That fire tornado in the photo is only a baby. I have seen one at Longreach in Sept ’55 that began with the lightning from a “dry” thunder storm and locked into a rain cloud where we were getting rained on heavily yet the bushfire was going ballistic. I remember the boss saying as we watched the fire and the rain, “why isn’t the rain putting out the fire”?

    That was because in the centre the rain wasn’t coming down because of the willy-willy suspending the rain and there was air-borne fire as well.

    Anyway gav, you asked for SLR links and cohers gave you the best there is.

    Wanna say something? If only “thanks”.

  21. Comment from: el gordo

    ‘Since when did the world bank become an ‘expert’ on climate predictions?’

    The group which put the report together (connect4climate) is a creation of the bank, which has vested interest in the outcome of the debate.

  22. Comment from: Minister for Truth

    That academic knucklehead Flannery was being interviewed on their ABC and he made the claim that Kakadu is now almost devoid of the smaller animals and ipso facto it was because of carbon induced global warming


    If there is is a decline in the populations of the smaller animals and marsupials in the Kakadu it is mainly because the cane toads have got them.

  23. Comment from: Johnathan Wilkes


    Since when did the world bank become an ‘expert’ on climate predictions?

    Funny you should mention it, as I was driving this morning and listening to Jon Faine on the ABC, *

    I was yelling out loud the very same question, when he, in a gushing voice announced the World Bank’s current news release.

    I keep saying “the mind boggles!”
    It surely does.

    There are only two talk-back stations in Melbourne in the morning, Neil Mitchell on 3AW and the ABC.
    While my standards may be lower than a snakes belly, I still can’t bring myself to listen to that sanctimonious twit on 3AW

  24. Comment from: Robert

    1851: 6 February ‘Black Thursday’. One quarter of the colony of Victoria incinerated. One million sheep dead. One of history’s worst fires, some say the worst.

    And all before climate change!

  25. Comment from: Neville

    Good video response by Bob Tisdale to Obama’s first press conference after re election.

  26. Comment from: Debbie

    Gavin (and Graeme),
    I disagree re those 2003 fires and how those ‘experts’ have been reported.
    There has certainly been firestorms and those fire tornadoes before.
    There have also been what we dub ‘whirly winds’ that have wreaked damage similar to tornadoes completely seperate from fires.
    The difference is that this time they have had an opportunity to study them rather than just historical anecdotal evidence.
    The other difference is that it happened in the ACT and damaged parts of our national capital.
    That damage was more a feature of the ‘management’ of the surrounding areas.
    It wasn’t just the pine plantations. Gums are even more likely to cause that type of fire storm than pines.
    Ask the aboriginal elders and also ask the generational farmers.
    Under the right conditions (and 2003 was certainly that) those things just love to burn.
    I don’t live on the Hay plains Graeme. I am a MIA resident. I live near Leeton/Griffith.
    However, the Hay plains are not far from here. The landscape there is quite different to here.

  27. Comment from: cohenite

    Wello, folks, it looks as thought the lukes, bazzas and polys of the world have skulked back to their lairs and all we have left is gav.

    I declare AGW the loser!

  28. Comment from: Graeme M

    I shan’t argue re firestorms cos I don’t know nuthin about them. But I would be surprised if there hasn’t been such effects in major fires in the past. Certainly some of the big firestorms in Australia have been pretty ferocious.

    I agree re the management thing. Plus there just wasn’t the information broadcast to the general community leading up to the event. As I recall even on Saturday morning I had not really heard anything to suggest how dangerous things were becoming. I think most were really taken by surprise.

  29. Comment from: el gordo

    ‘I declare AGW the loser!’

    Not so fast, elsewhere there is still mopping up to do ….die hard watermelon blogs are delightful places to hang out. There is robustness and humour in good measure.

  30. Comment from: Minister for Truth

    “Wello, folks, it looks as thought the lukes, bazzas and polys of the world have skulked back to their lairs and all we have left is gav.”

    Only because their minders in Shonkademia Central have called them off to stop the credibility of the alarmist academics falling any further.

    Just read Maurice Newmans piece in todays paper to get an appreciation of tthe harm these cretins have done. Along with the antics of this incompetent Gillard Govt our standards of living are bound to fall over the coming years…is his prediction

  31. Comment from: Johnathan Wilkes


    “our standards of living are bound to fall over the coming years”

    Isn’t that the truth!?

    This falling of standard of living has intrigued me for some time, because our standard of living is relative, if you think about it.
    One might think that we live a lot better than our parents did, and maybe it’s true in an abstract sense but only if we make no comparisons.

    In absolute terms? I don’t think so.

    One must remember that before the early to mid sixties, (possibly earlier?) the norm was a one income family and two or more children and still most could afford to buy a house and also a car when they became more widely available.

    Compare that with today. Very few families can exist and afford those “luxuries”, on one income.

    How come?
    Weren’t we promised that the working day will be 4 hours and that we’d only be working three days?

    Many of us work six days 12 hours now, just to make ends meet.

    And please don’t tell me we now want more than we did back then, we wanted what was available then and could afford it on one income. We still want what is available now but it takes more than one income to do so and to the detriment of having children to boot.

    What happened?

  32. Comment from: el gordo

  33. Comment from: Graeme M

    This is more of Postma’s stuff hosted on a site set up primarily by members of the ‘Slayers’ group, so that rather undermines any claim for legitimacy. Sure, I have some sympathy for their argument but it sure hasn’t gotten any traction in the mainstream. Still, I will have a good read of that article and see if I can get my head around their case.

  34. Comment from: el gordo

    Graeme there maybe flaws (no doubt Gavin will point them out) and I was surprised by the statement: ‘carbon dioxide clearly has a cooling function, not a warming one.’

    Here’s me saying CO2 has nil effect on climate, now this holds me up to ridicule.

  35. Comment from: Debbie

    :-) :-) :-)
    :-) :-) -:)
    Good one ei gordo!

  36. Comment from: gavin

    elg; I’m too sleepy to get into arguments about CO2/ AGW. but your link has no calculus (no math > no physics) for anyone to follow where as Smith et al does it beautifully. My observation re internet climate change discussion, most is unauthorized twaddle.

    Alternatively, blogs are peddling books that won’t see light of day at any respectable uni, imo coh’s SL definitive is another.

    While I”m here, Deb dear has no idea re 2003 fire storm weather change or impact on cross boarder bushfires, some deliberately lit along Two Sticks Road just hours before as control lines. Btw Deb all forests on our western slopes were pines and they burnt like crops, unstoppable on a windy day. Another point in my subs, crop fires can travel at the speed of the wind on a bad day.

    Researchers had only just described ember attacks as the main threat. I reckoned our fire was much more than that and the usual hot day atmospheric plume from any fire was essentially blown over by the prevailing wind about midday. The culmination at 2 pm was a dust storm on fire that filled the sky as it hit the western suburbs. Out there was now a hurricane, not some willie nilly.

  37. Comment from: Robert

    For connoisseurs of extreme fire events:

    “Soon a two-thousand degree Fahrenheit surge of flames overtook the small community. The extreme heat agitated the atmosphere into a flurry of superheated tornadoes and hurricane-force winds. A scorching hail of embers, white hot sand, and debris peppered the town. Rooftops were blown off of houses, and chimneys crumbled….Superheated winds and tornadoes pulled the heated air upward into the sky, allowing cooler air from Canada and the Western United States to rush in to fill the vacuum.”

    Amazingly, the Peshtigo fire is often forgotten, because the Great Chicago Fire, 250 miles away, was happening right at the same time – and other major fires as well. The extraordinary things about Peshtigo – by far North Americas’ worst – are the time of year (mid autumn) and its sheer speed. The town itself took just ninety minutes to turn to ash and rubble, though a huge area of Wisconsin was burnt. People boiled in the river and died instantly from inhaling super-heated air. Fortunately, the blaze was so intense it forced its own wind change, which helped end it.

    Did I mention it happened in 1871?

  38. Comment from: Robert

    Checking the claim that people boiled in the river at Peshtigo: While some may have boiled in wells and other water storages, the river deaths occurred from bombardment, and not just by the collapsing bridge. It seems the firestorm lifted the debris from the town and just hurled it back down! These poor people were effectively clubbed to death by their own buildings.

    But Peshtigo happened 140 years ago. This is the age of science. We now know if we give enough temple offerings to Goldman Sachs and GIM, they will intercede on our behalf and Goddess Gaia will spare us.

  39. Comment from: Neville

    Incredible that they’ll even use an art gallery to promote their stupid alarmism.

  40. Comment from: Neville

    Good post at Jo Nova’a site and very good comments from the bloggers. Tony from OZ and Cohenite etc are very good, as expected.

  41. Comment from: Neville

    Very good post from Matt Ridley exposing some of the frauds of CAGW.

    He has an excellent bar graph showing the decline in SLR and a link to the WUWT post covering it.
    A very good read and many links to follow up on. BTW I think this decline in SLR should be a method of exposing one of the more iconic claims of CAGW.

    BTW we are now in a cool phase of the PDO and probably more la ninas, very interesting times indeed.

  42. Comment from: spangled drongo

    “but your link has no calculus (no math > no physics) for anyone to follow”

    What does that remind you of gav?


    Matt [rational optimist] Ridley is always a refreshing breath of sanity in the CAGW debate.

    He nails it.

  43. Comment from: Debbie

    Just so you know….I was actually in the ACT during those fires.
    No one is saying those 2003 fires were not destructive.
    And yes, there were pine plantations involved….and they went up too….big time.
    You are however missing the point.
    Every fire has unique aspects….and the 2003 fires in the ACT had some of those.
    But it was essentially a bush fire that got completely out of control and created havoc.
    Housing and private property was too close to bushland….especially the eucalypts and the huge fuel load that was underneath them….it had also built up momentum from the National Parks areas.
    The whirly wind/ hurricane effect was not unique to those fires and/or the concept of CAGW.
    It was horrible and destructive….but (IMHO) the lesson should be about managing risk from fires….not an attempt to blame it on CAGW.
    Victoria needs to learn the same lesson from the 2009 fires that were actually far more destructive than the 2003 ACT fires…but damage to private property was caused by a very similar combinations of factors.

  44. Comment from: gavin

    Nev; you can’t get away from your Cato booksellers inc mob blogs, can you?

  45. Comment from: spangled drongo

    Gav, don’t machine-gun the messengers. That’s not how the debate is carried out.

    If you’ve got a problem with any little thing Ridley [or anyony else quoted here] says, let’s hear it.

  46. Comment from: Debbie

    same applies to the docos and books that are peddled via blogs for environmental movements.
    Also applies to adverts by same.
    They’re very short on evidence and very high on emotion.
    All ‘sides’ can lay claim to statistical evidence to support them.
    It’s way more to do with politics than the practical application of science.
    The environment and/or SL or even the climate/weather are spectacularly uninterested in following ANYONE’S or ANY ORGANISATION’S projective models and trends…which is actually the point.
    No one can be absolutely right or wrong because we really don’t know how the relationships between all the variables work.
    Stat modelling is a useful tool. It is not a crystal ball. It is also not unique to climate science. In other areas such as economic/financial projections it has also proved NOT to be a good exclusive basis to inform social policy.

  47. Comment from: Debbie

  48. Comment from: Neville

    Poor old fact free Gav, so tell us where I’m wrong. Your SL romancing is all about having fact free personal romps all over the place.
    At least I’ve referenced Humlum, Uni Colorado, Watson, Ridley and IPCC etc and their ever changing lower estimates over decades for SLR.

    Where is the IPCC wrong with the four reports from 1990 to 2007? They started high and lowered it with every report.
    The 2007 AR4 report had a mid point range of 30 cm by 2100 and that has now reduced over the last 5 years.
    Are all these people above just mindless whackos or are you just trying to defend the indefensible?

  49. Comment from: gavin

    Nev; is your decelerating SL, a scalar or vector quantity?

    Deb, where were you mid afternoon Jan 18th 2003, and what areas of eucalyptus did you see on fire?

  50. Comment from: Johnathan Wilkes


    ” is your decelerating SL, a scalar or vector quantity”

    You gav, haven’t got a clue!
    You trying so hard to sound clever and learned, and all you are is a try-hard smart…

Pages: « 163 64 65 66 67 [68] 69 70 71 72 7380 » Show All