Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Open Thread

By

“The mass crushes out the insight and reflection that are still possible with the individual, and this necessarily leads to doctrinaire and authoritarian tyranny if ever the constitutional State should succumb to a fit of weakness.

In a state of collective possession they are the adapted ones and consequently they feel quite at home in it. C.G. Jung 1957, page 5
In a state of collective possession they are the adapted ones and consequently they feel quite at home in it. C.G. Jung 1957, page 5

“Rational argument can be conducted with some prospect of success only so long as the emotionality of a given situation does not exceed a certain critical degree. If the effective temperature rises above this level, the possibility of reason’s having any effect ceases and its place is take by slogans and chimerical wish-fantasies. That is to say, a sort of collective possession results which rapidly develops into a psychic epidemic.”

The Undiscovered Self by C.G. Jung. 1957. Pages 4-5.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Neville says

    There’s no doubt that Jung was correct. Amazing when anyone asks these group thinkers what they mean by ” taking action on CC” they either look dumb or hurl abuse.

    After years of abuse trying to get an answer here from Luke his belated response was to use new nukes. But Christy showed that 1000 new nukes still wouldn’t make zip difference to the climate by 2100.
    Of course the latest RS and NAS report just backs up Christy’s point that we couldn’t make a difference for thousands of years. The mitigation of AGW is a 100% fraud and con and would only waste 100s of billions $ for a zero return for the taxpayer.

  5. Debbie says

    Yes Neville.
    There is much screeching about action but no one seems to actually have a workable action plan.
    We hear & see lots of hand waving but it only seems to be about making ‘them’ pay. . . plus a lot of quasi academic double speak about such concepts as ‘taxing externalities’ or ‘counter intuitive rationale’ .
    Most of it is underpinned by a bitter aftertaste of misanthropy.
    I often wonder who these demonstrators think ‘them’ is?

  8. spangled drongo says

    Neville, I’ve been goofing off, sailing and camping in my little wooden dinghy but I love that Fort Denison tide gauge you posted.

    It’s about as I remember it: through the 1940s there was some SLR but since around 1950 virtually nothing has happened.

    As the FD gauge shows.

    Thanks for your links.

  9. Neville says

    Spangled I just wonder if you noticed another link I posted on that last open thread. Here it is—–

    BTW another new SL study finds that there has been about 1.7mm/ year rise (about 7 inches/century) in SLR since 1900. The Wenzel et al study also finds that SLs have fallen along most of the OZ east coast since the 1950s. So much for the extremist BS promoted by the former Labor and Green coalition govt.

    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/new-paper-finds-global-sea-levels-rose.html

    See the map showing the post 1950s SLR reduction. Interesting stuff because it seems to display a fall in SLR or negative values. And the same for parts of USA.

  12. handjive of climatefraud.inc says

    Further historic evidence Australians have had to deal with extreme weather/climate, despite low carbon(sic) levels, and not an SUV in sight:

    “A HISTORIC 19th century tunnel and cobblestone bridge have been dug up under The Parade.

    Norwood historian Denise Schumann said the tunnel was part of “Norwood’s colonial past”.

    “They date from a time when the natural environment played havoc with early European settlers as they tried to tame the natural landscape,” Mrs Schumann said.

    She said the bridge — made of cobblestones and parapets — was built over Second Creek in 1857.

    The bridge was widened and extended when the Adelaide & Suburban Tramway Company started running horse-drawn trams along The Parade in 1879.”

    http://www.news.com.au/national/south-australia/cafe-owner-uncovers-historic-tunnel-and-bridge-underneath-the-parade-at-norwood/story-fnii5yv4-1227065883596?sv=4b0d1e101518c64823762a8532c3d09a

  13. Debbie says

    Johnathon Wilkes.
    That’s easy 🙂
    They think it makes them look & sound superior, intelligent, caring, progressive etc. . .
    They think by using such terminology they can lay claim to holding some important position in the urban environmental elite.
    They think they are operating at a ‘higher level’ or practicing what they believe is ‘ higher level thinking’.
    Jen & others call it groupthink. . .I used to know it
    as basic mammalian herd instinct.

    🙂

  14. egg says

    ‘THE idea that “climate science is settled” runs through today’s popular and policy discussions. Unfortunately, that claim is misguided. It has not only distorted our public and policy debates on ­issues related to energy, greenhouse gas emissions and the environment, it also has inhibited the scientific and policy discussions that we need to have about our climate future.’

    This Oz story pulled from WSJ

  15. spangled drongo says

    Thanks Neville. I missed that link.

    Very Interesting and agrees with my observations.

    As you know I reported to Jen that a house I lived in next to the Cleveland Point Lighthouse during the ’40s and ’50s where the highest astronomical tides came over the lawn in those days, these days those same tides on that same spot are 10 to 20 cms [4 to 8 inches] lower.

  16. Neville says

    Yes Spangled I followed your debate with Luke and others over the years. Now we know you were correct, big surprise NOT.
    BTW there is now an admission that the temp along the west coast US since 1900 is actually NATURAL and does not involve human co2 emissions .
    You see it’s the PDO and more el ninos again, another big surprise NOT. And why not OZ east coast and other areas etc?

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/22/surprising-pnas-paper-co2-emissions-not-the-cause-of-u-s-west-coast-warming/

  18. spangled drongo says

    “And why not OZ east coast and other areas etc?”

    Neville, why not indeed. I think climate science is, albeit reluctantly in many cases particularly amongst reviewers, on its way to discovering that AGW is responsible for 3/5 of 5/8 of sweet fanny adams of any “warming”.

    Could it be that apart from homogenising and UHIE there is no human fingerprint?

    Quite likely, I feel.

  23. egg says

    ‘Warming, if it resumes again after the 18-26 year “pause” in global surface temperatures, tending to decrease the temperature differences or gradients between the equator and the poles…’

    So with global cooling we can expect more cyclones?

  32. egg says

    ‘The freeze on NSW petroleum exploration licence ­applications and petroleum special prospecting authority applications was expected to end tomorrow.

    ‘The decision comes despite fears of price rises and gas shortages in the next few years.

    ‘Mr Roberts, who has close links with anti-CSG activist and radio host Alan Jones, will extend the freeze until September 26 next year.’

    Daily Telegraph

  35. egg says

    ‘What worries me is that many people, including scientists and politicians, believe a whole lot of dogmatic nonsense about climate change. The nonsense says that climate change is a terrible danger and that it is something we could do something about if we wanted to. The whole point is to scare people, and this has been done very successfully.

    ‘Climate has always been changing, and climate has always been lousy. It has always been a background to existence that on the whole we’ve learned to cope with pretty well. What I feel happy about is that there are a lot of ordinary people with common sense who don’t believe the nonsense.’

    Freeman J. Dyson

    Theoretical physicist, Institute for Advanced Study

    September 2014

  36. Graeme M says

    Here’s a question I’ve often wondered about but never been game to ask as it might be one of those dumb questions that I really should have known.

    But when the talk is about surface temps, the ocean surface temps are lumped in with atmospheric temps. However these are two quite different things.

    The atmosphere is, I assume, warmed by both direct sunlight and heat radiated from the surface. The surface is both ocean and land. So why is land surface temps never discussed and yet sea surface temp is? I am not sure which is the greater contributor overall to atmospheric warming, I think the ocean would due to larger area, but equally it can only get so hot before evaporation comes into play. Land surface however cannot evaporate and so the surface itself can become very hot (say sand, buildings, rocks etc).

    When we say that the temp of a region is on average 30C, that’s an air temp. When we say a sea surface is 20C, that’s a surface temp. Why are the two lumped together in graphs and so on? Why no mention of the land surface temp?

    The air temp is the air temp. The ocean surface temp presumably contributes to heating the air. but so too does the land and structures on it. So where is the land surface temp considered?

    What am I missing?

  40. egg says

    Over the past few years I have been hanging out at green/left blogs where I’ve received much abuse with my global cooling meme, but that has all stopped since informing them that they have in fact saved the planet from overheating.

    That’s correct folks, temperatures haven’t risen in 17 years and it obviously has nothing to do with the sun. Of course we have a slight problem in that CO2 continues to rise at an alarming pace, but I’m suggesting the data mostly comes from the top of a volcano and not to be taken seriously.

    There is now a deathly silence amongst my watermelon comrades and soon we’ll be breaking out the champaign.

  41. egg says

    ‘A new paper has found the earth’s climate was less sensitive to increasing levels of carbon dioxide than previously claimed.’

    Graham Lloyd / Oz

  43. egg says

    Revkin critiques Koonin

    ‘Climate skeptics often argue that, during the last fifteen years, global temperatures have been nearly flat and that climate models are unable to predict or explain this pattern.

    ‘This so-called “climate hiatus” rears its head again in Dr. Koonin’s editorial. In fact, these last fifteen years are in no way surprising: 1998 was an extremely hot El Niño year and the early 2000s were at the peak of a strong solar cycle.

    ‘The remarkable thing is that global temperatures have remained close to the peak values of the late 1990s despite the fact that natural sources of variability would indicate that they should have cooled.

    ‘A statistical model (based on the work of Judith Lean at the Naval Research Laboratory) that accounts for solar variability, El Niño, volcanic activity, and greenhouse warming indicates that the underlying trend of global warming has accelerated over the past 15 years.

    ‘We are further baffled by Dr. Koonin’s implication that climate feedbacks are so complicated that there might be some negative feedback that makes the whole thing go away. Yes, the detailed physics of feedbacks are uncertain, but understanding isn’t just based on theory or recent history.

    ‘The geological record is filled with evidence that feedbacks (mostly water vapor, some others) will amplify the intrinsic greenhouse signal, and we are not aware of any evidence to support the notion that a “white knight” negative feedback will make this all go away.

    ‘Dr. Koonin is correct that there is still uncertainty about the magnitude of the impacts of climate change and society will have to make decisions under such uncertainty.
    He seems to suggest, however, that there is enough scientific uncertainty that we can’t even claim that the impacts of climate change will cause harm.’

  44. egg says

    Here is some more from that Graham Lloyd article: Climate not as sensitive to carbon dioxide

    ‘The findings have generated vigorous international debate about an issue that remains a key area of uncertainty in climate ­science.

    ‘Dr Curry said the paper was not the last word of climate sensitivity because it related only to the uncertainty in external forcing, surface temperature and ocean heat uptake.
    It did not take account of solar influence or ­internal variability.

    ‘In an essay published this week, President Barack Obama’s former climate advisor Steven Koonin said today’s best estimate of the sensitivity was no different, and no more certain, than it was 30 years ago despite billions of dollars having been spent.’

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/climate-not-as-sensitive-to-carbon-dioxide/story-e6frg6xf-1227072070917

  46. egg says

    “We are overdue for the biggest ideology collapse in history, begging for an investigation into why the mainstream media and influential politicians apparently never checked the veracity of claims about “settled science” and “corrupt skeptics.”

    Russell Cook