Congratulations to all those who attended the rally in Canberra, and other capital cities, against the carbon tax. And especially to the organisers … you got enough people there to be noticed and vilified. Well done.
I understand the Prime Minister was invited but declined. And thanks to 2UE for the cartoon…
And what a hideous spectacle it was too!
Ah, a new troll; what’s this one’s pedigree-less background.
I’m not sure that being on the demonstrably wrong side of history should be reason for pride.
“demonstrably wrong side of history”?
There is nothing wrong with carbon dioxide, but it can’t provide a unifying theory of climate. And until there is a general theory of climate we can’t forecast or explain the big cycles that repeat themselves. For example, until the Bureau of Meteorology can explain the recent flooding rains in Australia, it should stop pretending it knows anything much about weather or climate.
But even the Bureau should acknowledge that recent increases in concentrations of carbon dioxide have had no demonstratable effect on weather or climate.
Speaking of the “wrong side”, has everyone voted:
http://ninemsn.com.au/?rf=true
“demonstrably wrong side of history”?
That is yet to be demonstrated.
RD… do you really believe CO2 causes global warming?
“There is nothing wrong with carbon dioxide” – indeed it’s a well formed molecule with interesting properties.
“For example, until the Bureau of Meteorology can explain the recent flooding rains in Australia, it should stop pretending it knows anything much about weather or climate.” golly I thought it did ! Weren’t they telling us it was because of fairies at the bottom of the garden or was it something else called La Nina.
” do you really believe CO2 causes global warming” – of course it does. Evidence is abundantly clear.
Carbon taxes however are another matter. But hey reality is Julia’s vote has just bounced back. And the Libs desperate (if anyone with half a brain is listening – if not you can chuck the switch to sceptic mode and slum it) to prove they are not in denial.
Other committments. Lots of “middle Australia” couldn’t make it either, but were there in spirit.
RWFOH, on the subject of hideous spectacles, would this be OK by you?
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_demonisation_of_the_anti_gillard_protesters/#commentsmore
Luke says ‘the evidence is abundantly clear’ that CO2 causes global warming.
It’s all nonsense, we are looking at a benign trace gas of which humans produce 4 parts per million per year. Any rational person understands this cannot warm the atmosphere.
What bunk el Gordo – “benign trace gas” is simply a rhetorical appeal to teensy weensy non-toxic. IRRELEVANT. It’s a straight physics calculation and observation. The numbers are in.
“Any rational person” is code for someone on the street who hasn’t got a clue except for not wanting to pay more tax.
Anything else is pure denial given the now massive weight of evidence. A carbon tax is another matter. Julia’s on a winning formula – climate change action + no gay marriage + no legal suicide = carbon tax bill.
Luke,
So happy that you are eager to pay your carbon tax bill. Tell us, how much carbon sequestration and carbon offsets have you personally financed as you KNOW that you are the source of earth destroying CO2???
Sadly, I imagine you as being the typical leftard who will do NOTHING to abate their own pollution until forced!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
It was great to see people at a rally telling the truth and using facts for a change, instead of the lies and exaggerations coming from the lunatic left and labor.
Here’s more proof that their solutions can’t work or how to waste 12 billion dollars over 15 years for neglible result.
Flushed straight down the loo, what crazy times we live in.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate-programs-fail-at-first-step/story-fn59niix-1226027088557
KookyKat – did I say I was happy with a carbon tax? Droopy draws.
Neville – The rally – What a bunch of rednecks and old codgers + Hansonites and League of Rights – you’re with your mates mate. Wake up. The pro carbon tax vote just increased after yesterday.
It’s really up the sceptics party (lower case and unelected) to now say whether they are allied with the Australian League of Rights and One Nation. Perhaps Cohenite might inform us?
So Luke your incredibly powerful gas has given us 0.7C warming over 100+ years, but what about an increase of 10C over ten years after the younger Dryas?
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/abrupt/data4.html
Of course you are talking total nonsense as the NOAA site above proves, I mean that’s real and NATURAL CC.
Makes your 0.007C imcrease per year look wimpy indeed.
Of course your warming came at the end of one of the coldest periods on earth for thousands of years, so much of it is probably natural as well.
What a total wimp trying to con people with a wimpy increase in temp.
Luke,
What caused ‘La Nina’? I think the point Jen is making is that we don’t know what drives the big sea surface temp changes in the Pacific. Do we?
It has been warm over the past 30 years and CO2 has been increasing, but there is no indication that they are related. It’s a post hoc argument, nevertheless the extra carbon dioxide has been beneficial in greening up the world.
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2011/03/23/global-greening-continues-did-we-cause-it/
Look at ’em blow smoke – how many confusing bogus arguments can you guys run.
CO2 correlation yep and a swag of other corroborating physics.
La Nina – yep natural variation – and see my previous post on evidence it was supercharged !
Neville – tell us what all the other forcing factors were at the same time. Don’t try it on eh?
Not even Spencer or Lindzen takes your position guys.
Lubos Motl (a very clever physicist) has some strong words here http://motls.blogspot.com/2011/03/australian-carbon-tax.html . Lubos can run rings around anyone about quantum physics and mathematics.
Luke you’re hopeless, but here’s one of your heros confessing that there has been no “statistically significant warming”since 1995. 15 years and counting you silly fool.
When are you going to wake up, surely you don’t this need country outhouse of a fraud to completely smother you in smelly stuff before you understand?
BTW some incredibly poweful gas, what a joke.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html
Luke,
you can believe whatever you like, and in your abrasive and insulting manner, you might even convince people to believe what you do, but until you are ware of the consequences, it’s all pretty useless really.
If the problem was SO drastic, then governments across the World would be closing down those ‘big emitters’, the power plants, and doing it without delay, no matter how drastic that sounds, because if it was so dire, then it becomes a necessity, and you can then work on fixing the lack of power problems in the interim.
However, those emissions from those power plants are in fact rising, and rising all across the Planet, because people have a crying need for access to a reliable and constant source of electrical power.
China and India are perfect examples.
China with 1.35 billion people has only recently surpassed the US (with 300 million people) as the largest producer of electricity. Almost a billion people in China have NO electricity whatsoever. Until those people have even a fraction of the standard we have in the Western World, then emissions, especially from China and India will keep rising.
Even here in Australia, in the U.S. and all across the Planet, electrical power consumption is rising, as are those CO2 emissions just from the generation of power, because those plants that do emit CO2 provide the only effective means of actually supplying that power.
To find ‘VIABLE’ replacements, you are looking at seven to ten years from thought bubble to supplying power, and that applies for nearly every plant.
Currently, there’s nothing to replace those large scale plants that ARE desperately needed.
In the interim, the ONLY thing that has resulted from this CO2 driven Climate Change debate is that everyone, (and most especially Governments) is trying to make money from it.
None of the things they are even thinking about doing are having any effect.
Until you realise the consequences, you can believe whatever you like, but don’t put us down for pointing them out.
It’s after all only my humble opinion.
Tony.
Luke your previous post on a supercharged system was flawed, the lesson I learnt from that exercise is that natural variability rules.
I do miss your posts, where we had your undivided attention in all matters climatic.
Guys – these are now the big guns
http://climatescientistsaustralia.org.au/about/members.html and were in parliament today available to both sides
Neville – hopeless – “statistically significant warming” tell us what that means Neville….
Note how many times the PM refers to carbon dioxide as a pollutant? A complete lie of course.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/reject-the-climate-extremists-20110323-1c6pa.html
And she says don’t be swayed by extremists, the irony is delicious.
Luke if you don’t know then ask your hero Phil.
Here he is again on the BBC confessing the same thing. Just because you can’t answer Luke don’t try avoiding the question — is this the biggest scam and fraud of the last 100 years?
Even to a rusted on religious fool like yourself no warming for 15 years must make you pause and start to doubt your silly belief.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
Yesterday’s rally was an embarrassment to Australia. It makes me further ashamed to be Australian. I take heart that it was only representative of a small vocal, whinging far right minority.
Neville you are way out of your depth and it’s frankly embarrassing. Phil says “Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level.”
95% is completely arbitrary – at 90% it is ….
Tony has said it all really,
It is quite ludicrous to make claims and demonise those ‘polluters’ and ‘make those polluters pay’ (Julia Gillard page 11 SMH March 24th), when we all rely so very heavily on them.
This is particularly true of the power providers.
Nearly everything we do relies on power production.
Even the existence and use of this blog does.
Not many people would be happy about their access to affordable power being tampered with, yet there are so many of them gleefully contributing to the ‘demonising’ of the companies who provide that extremely necessary resource.
To further quote her article in today’s SMH “If you make polluters pay when they pollute, then they’ll reduce their emissions.”
Does that mean that even our own Prime Minister does not understand that power stations cannot just switch off and reduce?
Does she truly believe that they work the same as our switches in our homes?
Does she really believe that replacement sources of power are suddenly going to spring up?
Every known alternative so far is either politically unpopular or prohibitively expensive.
How on earth are we helping CO2 reduction if we’re merrily exporting coal to countries like China and India?
SERIOUSLY???? That’s a very fair question.
Does she really believe this could possibly work, or, is it far more likely as Tony points out:
“In the interim, the ONLY thing that has resulted from this CO2 driven Climate Change debate is that everyone, (and most especially Governments) is trying to make money from it.”
It’s the only outcome I can see. Our Bureaucrats, Brokers and Bankers will make an absolute killing on this.
I can’t for the life of me see how it will reduce CO2 emissions at all.
It looks far more like some sort of elaborate scam to me.
And Luke, I have no affiliation with any particular political party.
I would rather see this one removed from politics and put back into the hands of genuine scientists.
I would rather see that group of 3 Bs forced to back off and keep their greedy mitts to themselves.
The real shame is that it has become political and opportunists have seen a way to make money from it.
I would further add that no one will be happier than us ‘redneck’ farmers if the climate puzzle was solved.
Us ‘rednecks’ would support this tax if we believed that it would contribute to some genuine breakthroughs in climate science and alternative energy sources.
That’s not what we’re seeing.
Not even close by a country mile.
Face it – a swag of top flight highly published numerate scientists (above) versus you rabble? What advice would you expect the PM to take? Perhaps you should advise her on brain surgery techniques too? Everyone can play! No expertise needed.
BTW I’m not in favour of a unilateral carbon tax, especially not on agriculture.
I am in favour of considered global action by a significant majority of emitters.
However, I am going to defend the core science against nefarious attacks.