Eating less meat won't help climate

Back on the menu

With apologies to all you gullible greenies who gave up eating meat because you thought it would “save the planet”, it appears that it won’t make any difference after all:

Eating less meat will not reduce global warming and reports that claim it will are distracting society from finding real ways to beat climate change, says a leading air quality expert.

“We certainly can reduce our greenhouse gas production, but not by consuming less meat and milk,” Frank Mitloehner said on Monday as he presented a report on meat-eating and climate change at a conference of the American Chemical Society in California.

Mitloehner, an air quality expert at the University of California-Davis, said blaming cows and pigs for climate change was scientifically inaccurate.

And to top it all, yet more rubbish from the UN:

He also dismissed several reports, including one issued in 2006 by the United Nations, which he said overstate the role that livestock play in global warming.

Read it here.

Electric motor manufacturer says we all need electric cars

No conflict of interest there, clearly

Feathering Your Own Nest Alert: A new report claims that only electric cars, using power generated from renewable sources or fossil fuels with carbon capture, can achieve a 60% emissions cut in Australia by 2050.

So who produced the report? Only one of the largest manufacturers of electric motors on the planet, Siemens.

Read it here.

Stealth indoctrination in the classroom

Stealth indoctrination

The first of a possible series of posts. My son brings home readers from Junior School. This isn’t science or geography or any other specific subject area, just readers. But many of them have little drips (and not so little drips) of stealth indoctrination on climate change. This particular title reads like a propaganda pamphlet for the WWF. Unsubstantiated claims and alarmism are fed to nine-year-olds as fact, which, as all good nine-year-olds do, they soak up and believe unquestioningly. Here’s a few choice quotes from the best page:

Page 21

And my favourite is this:

There is a growing worldwide awareness that animals, plants and the planet are important. (page 23)

Note that neither “humanity” nor “people” feature in that list, which is the mentality of the extreme green – save the whale, f*ck the people. Now for the name and shame, so you can add the appropriate caveats to your son or daughter:

  • Published by Blake Education ( in 2003
  • “On the Edge of Extinction”
  • Series entitled “Brainwaves” [Should be "Brainwashing" - Ed]
  • Authors Claire Craig, Sharon Dalgleish, Ian Rohr

More to come, without doubt.

New blog: RCS Audit

Regular ACM commenter Eloi has started a superb site, which has already been blogged by Anthony Watts and Andrew Bolt, looking at the quality of the Australian Bureau of Meteorology Reference Climate Station network – and not a moment too soon. These sites are supposed to be the gold standard by which we measure our nation’s climate, but looking at this photo, it is a crock:

Spot the weather station in the junk…

As Eloi puts it:

This has to be one of the favourites so far – the station is just dumped in a lot along with corrugated iron fences and builders’ rubble. CRN1 status: Fail.

Visit the site at

Pointless climate gestures of the week

Switch 'em back on

Yes, it’s that time again, where everyone in the entire universe [surely some mistake?] switches off their lights for sixty minutes in the utterly pointless gesture that we all know as Earth Hour. The Sydney Morning Herald is a sponsor of this nonsense, so they’re plugging it for all its worth:

Earth Hour will again encourage people to turn off lights this Saturday at 8.30pm to raise awareness of climate change.

From humble beginnings in Sydney in 2007, Earth Hour has grown to become an international event, with famous locations like Times Square and the Eiffel Tower joining in last year. Millions of people in more than 80 nations are expected to participate this year. (source)

Just to demonstrate the global commitment to this, here’s a photo from Times Square (one of the locations mentioned above), showing the huge difference Earth Hour 2009 made there:

Spot the one missing bulb

So as usual, ACM is asking all its readers to use as much electricity as possible during Earth Hour to cancel out the efforts of thousands of hippies sitting in the dark. Maybe we could even get an upwards blip in the power usage – now that would be funny!

"Bonkers" doesn't come close

Whilst we’re on the subject of pointless gestures, the announcer on ABC Classic FM annoyingly drew my attention to some “artist” who has put a metal sculpture on an iceberg (no, really):

By creating a gigantic and unprecedented art project, cool(E)motion™ wants to re-engage the public on the topic of climate change. It wants to do so in a positive manner, contrary to the fault-finding impulses or the accusing finger.

We will demonstrate the inextricable link between climate and culture and visualize what the consequences of that link are. To illustrate this we will travel into the areas around the North Pole. The impressive dynamic natural elements that are typical of this area speak to everyone’s imagination: a virginal white stage with unimaginable forces, such as rapidly receding glaciers, floating icebergs, drifting ice. On these dynamic stages we will place huge sculptures, which derive their inspiration from the local culture. These almost majestic sculptures will be propelled by their stages at high speeds toward their final destruction. In order to reach our audience with this magnificent theatrical drama, we will broadcast it live into people’s living rooms.

Because cool(E)motion™ is very concerned about the effects of climate change moving south, we will give the very first victims of climate change a voice: the Inuit, a group of people who currently have no voice. Their story can become ours. But Inuit culture has always dealt with adaptation to harsh circumstances. Because our culture is based on more stable circumstances, we are not used to short-term change. We, with our more structured culture, will have a tougher time. But nonetheless, climate change means culture change.

You can sample the full barminess of this here.

OT: Krudd & Co – schools stimulus spending rorted

A COLA at Broke Public School

Last month it was the home insulation scandal – four young men dead, thousands of homes possibly electrified, millions of dollars to be spent fixing it up, already accusations of further rip-offs by fixers, Peter Garrett demoted in name only but still draws healthy cabinet salary, no-one with enough decency in Krudd & Co to do the honourable thing and resign, whilst Greg Combet is given the hospital pass of cleaning up the mess – and now evidence of astonishing waste in the “Building the Education Revolution” spending.

Today’s Australian carries the latest in a long line of stories about covered outdoor learning areas, or “COLAs” [how PC and post-modern is that? - Ed] which cost about tuppence ha’penny to build, but on which sums of $1m or more are being spent through the Rudd stimulus package. Basically, a COLA is a roof on stilts, a glorified shade cloth in other words (see pic). How one of these could possibly cost anywhere near a million is beyond belief. But no-one in the government gives a toss. As long as the money’s spent and they can brag about what a great job they’ve done for schools, that’s all that matters. Maybe we should call them Rainproof Outdoor Resources for Teaching and Study, which has the more appropriate acronym RORTS.

These are your tax dollars being frittered away by a government in disarray that thinks it can solve any problem if you throw enough money at it.

So as one scandal exits public consciousness via the side door, the next one is already waiting to burst into the limelight.

Read it here.

Richard Glover spouts climate nonsense

Tedious sceptic bashing (and not funny either)

I’ve waited a long time for this – an opportunity to sink my teeth into Richard Glover, another ABC lefty who presents the Drive programme on ABC local radio in Sydney. Unfortunately, living in Sydney I often have the misfortune to listen to Glover, and whilst most of his stuff is harmless enough, his comedy-based Thank god it’s Friday section from 5 – 6 every Friday is toe-curling in the extreme. The trouble with Glover is that he thinks he’s a natural comedian, but in reality, he’s about as funny as haemorrhoids, as will be evidenced shortly.

So it gives me enormous pleasure to relate that he’s also a climate alarmist, or at least someone completely unsympathetic to any sceptical viewpoint [What a surprise. Yet another ABC lefty who's a climate alarmist to boot. Knock me down with a feather. Add them to the list - Ed], writing a tedious piece in the Sydney Moonbat Herald dissing sceptics, entitled The Lara Bingle of Climate Change. If you don’t immediately get the reference (I certainly didn’t), he’s referring to the IPCC’s Himalayan glaciers error, which, as he puts it, “gets more attention than it deserves”. Right.

Do climate-change sceptics have the same attitude to other pieces of expert advice? When their car develops a fault and the local mechanic says the brake pads are shot, do they seek a second opinion? And having been told by the second mechanic that, yes, the brake pads are shot, do they then trawl around town until on the 99th visit, they strike a mechanic who says “no, the brake pads are fine”? And then driving at high speed up the F3, do they entrust their lives to this last opinion?

No. Because it would be mental.

What happens when Maurice Newman, climate agnostic and ABC chairman, goes to the doctor? Does he storm from the office when they diagnose chickenpox and seek second, third and 99th opinions until he finds a doctor who will give him the all clear? And does he then decry the first 98 doctors as victims of “group-think”?

No. Because it would be mental.

This kind of reasoning is so childish as to be laughable. Because the science of climate is obviously completely equivalent to checking whether your brake pads are worn down, or whether you have spots and a temperature, isn’t it? And then having bowled us over with the power of his logic, the ad homs begin:

As a non-scientist, I cannot directly evaluate the evidence for anthropomorphic [can't even get the word right - Ed] global warming; I cannot clamber up a glacier and take readings, just as, when I visit the doctor, I can’t check my own prostate (even though, according to some readers, I’ve spent a lifetime with my head stuck up there [and those, dear reader, are the only true words spoken in this entire article - Ed]).

I can, however, evaluate the debating techniques used by both sides. And here, the global-warming sceptics are very, very annoying.

I’m sorry, I can’t go on. As I’m writing this, I can feel the very will to live draining away, so if you really want to read it, go here. I’d rather spend my time doing something more pleasant, like have my wisdom teeth extracted without anaesthetic.

Daily Bayonet GW Hoax Weekly Roundup

Skewering the clueless

With apologies for the late arrival, here is the weekly skewering.

Obama cites healthcare to avoid the toxic bore

Look, Obama needs to have a credible sounding reason for cancelling his trip to Australia. And “pushing the healthcare bill through” sounds pretty good, but we all know the real reason, don’t we?

Rudd’s like the nerdy kid in the playground who hangs around the cool kids, but the cool kids wish he would just go away…

NSW electricity bills to rise 60% in 3 years

Shocking price rises

And well over a third of that increase will be thanks to the government’s pointless ETS (if it ever gets through):

NSW residents will be slapped with a 60 per cent electricity price hike over three years, to be announced today, more than a third of which will be to pay for Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s emissions trading scheme.

The power price rise will add at least $100 to the average annual bill for households in Sydney. [If you live in a box with a single 60w lightbulb perhaps, but for average homes, a 60% increase is going to be way more than this - it's so wrong I wonder if this is a typo? - Ed]

Country residents will be hit even harder, with the annual power bill for homes expected to increase by $170-$200 a year. [Again, this seems ridiculously small - Ed]

The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal will release its final determination into NSW power pricing this morning.

It has told the State Government that to pay for the anticipated climate change policy of the Federal Government, charges need to be increased in NSW by significantly more than they otherwise would have been.

And in a surprise move by the independent regulator, the price rises are due to come into effect as early as July 1 this year.

The report, details of which have been provided to The Daily Telegraph, states that a third of the increase was directly attributable to CPRS.

“It is to pay for the fact that the country is so heavily reliant on coal,” a source in the energy industry said.

Yet again, we find the effect of the Rudd ETS is completely at variance with the spin and misrepresentations coming from the government.

Read it here.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,706 other followers

%d bloggers like this: