Moon(-bat)
A few articles caught my eye this morning – more madness than sanity, as usual. Firstly a truly extraordinary rant by Paddy Manning in Fairfax, which I show just for amusement, really:
HOW pathetic watching sceptics squirm over the link between the recent floods and climate change. How much more risk do they want us to tolerate while we wait for the proof that might satisfy them?
Way too much. For decades we’ve been told that global warming will lead to more extreme weather events. Now it’s happening before our eyes. (source)
The rest’s the same. What’s even more pathetic, however, is watching pig-ignorant journalists and politicians with the memory span of a goldfish use the floods to make cheap political points, when there have been worse floods before, even in the microscopic 150 year flood record, with no evidence of increasing frequency or severity. But don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?
Now, on to the UN. Whenever a sceptic dares mention that there may be an ulterior motive behind climate change action, like anti-globalisation, or anti-capitalism, or scaling back western economies, the Fairfax-reading, ABC-watching lefty heads can’t wait to pop. So isn’t it odd that Ban Ki-Moon(bat) is advocating precisely that:
The world’s current economic model is an environmental “global suicide pact” that will result in disaster if it isn’t reformed, Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, warned today.
Ban said that political and business leaders need to embrace economic innovation in order to save the planet.
“We need a revolution,” he told a panel at the World Economic Forum inDavos, Switzerland, on how best to make the global economy sustainable. “Climate change is also showing us that the old model is more than obsolete.”
He called the current economic model a recipe for “national disaster” and said: “We are running out of time. Time to tackle climate change, time to ensure sustainable … growth.” The Guardian revealed yesterday that Ban is ending his hands-on efforts to reach a global climate deal through UN negotiations, and move to focus on a broader sustainability agenda. (source)
“Sustainability” being a codeword for massive wealth redistribution, abandoning capitalism and its replacement with socialism and Marxism, of course.
But amongst all the madness, a glimmer of hope. Remember that the basis of science is scepticism and that “Question everything” should be the mantra… except in climate science, however, where the mantra is “climate models trump empirical evidence”. The opposite of sceptical is “gullible”, and more and more people are abandoning gullibility for scepticism:
The number of climate change sceptics has almost doubled in four years, official research showed yesterday.
A quarter of Britons are unconvinced that the world is warming following successive freezing winters and a series of scandals over the credibility of climate science.
The figures suggest that a growing proportion of the public do not share the belief of all three major political parties and Whitehall – that climate change is a major and urgent challenge requiring radical and expensive policies.
The survey, carried out by the Office for National Statistics, has plotted levels of acceptance of the theory of man-made global warming since 2006.
In that year it found that 87 per cent of people were at least ‘fairly convinced’ that climate change was happening.
Last year that share had dropped to 75 per cent. Numbers who say they are unconvinced went up from 12 to 23 per cent. (source)
Australian Climate Madness 
The Greens, environmentalists, global warmers, Fabian socialists & Moonbat are experts at false logic. It goes something like this:
A and B are factual & reliable data. Add C to A + B and shake it all about.
Now we have A+ B + C which also becomes factual and reliable. Therefore C = factual and reliable, where C may equal rising temperatures, more droughts, carbon pollution, end-of-the world etc.
The solution to the problem is to get rid of the whole stupid lot of them.
Looks like the last piece was written by an alarmist; the climate is always changing. Hopefully one day they’ll get it right and say they mean “human caused climate change”, which is what the people they refer to are rightly skeptical of.
Dave N
While I am prepared to accept that climate changes over long time scales I would like to know were in the last 110 years the official climate for an area has changed.Where I live the climate has not changed in the 40 odd years I have been here.The weather comes pretty much from the same direction at about the same strength year in year out we get most of our rain in the winter months and we have four seasons.if it has got a bit hotter then it is barely noticeable.
So my genuine question is were in the world for that area has the official climate definition changed.
I am prepared to admit that my definition of climate,that being the weather an area receives over an extended time,may not be the definition the alarmists use.
“memory like a goldfish” … I protest! This is an insult to goldfish.
Yes I see quite a few items lately with people saying we should change the model mostly to put them in charge.
This is a great site, here is a comment I made to the Guardian, re – one of the comments and the UN:
ted208
29 January 2011 2:33AM
WoodwardRobert Says:
“The only way to save this planet is to reduce the population of humans living on it”
I agree but the plan the UN has is worst than the so-called problem!
There is a 30 yr + cooling problem coming and we are worried about CO2. Call me a skeptic, but it was never about the science and always about power, corruption and all that lovely easy money.
Look at the white-collar crime and theft around the carbon trading markets, and the lies that spew forth from our governments, and then tell me it isn’t a gigantic hoax.
After all there only a $ trillion dollars, the UN want to collect in global taxes. That’s a lot of millionaires. And the poor will not see a penny of it, guaranteed!
Dire Straights said it right about Politicians and UN bureaucrats.
” Money for nothing and your Chicks for free”
Neil young had the answer to the over population problem UN Style.
“We need a Kinder, Gentler Machine Gun Man”
Will any Eco Nazi global warming fanatics step forward to save mother earth?
I’ll just fix up Paddy Manning’s rant for him. He’s so confused.
“HOW pathetic watching warmists desperately trying to find a link between the recent floods and climate change. How much more of their ambiguous bullshit do they expect us to tolerate while we wait for some reasonable proof that would satisfy us?”
There. That’s much better isn’t it…..