Gillard: addicted to tax and spend

21 January, 2011 by

Old fashioned socialist

We all appreciate that those who have suffered from the floods in Queensland and Victoria deserve financial help from the federal government to help them rebuild their lives and their homes. However, why is it that Julia Gillard’s immediate reaction is to consider a one-off “levy” (translation: tax) rather than the many alternatives? Tax ‘n’ spend is good old fashioned socialism, of course, which Julia with her crypto-communist past would be well aware of.

How about one of these instead:

  • postpone or abandon the pointless National Broadband Network, which will be out of date before it’s even completed. By the time our “state of the art” network is operational, having dug up every street in Australia to lay fibre cables, the rest of the world will have moved on to n-th generation wireless at a fraction of the cost;
  • postpone or abandon the pointless price on carbon, which will do nothing for the climate, nothing to “encouragize” China or India to cut their emissions, and will add massive costs to businesses trying to rebuild and huge increases for those struggling to pay their energy bills;
  • abandon the political posturing about returning the budget to surplus by the artificial deadline Labor itself has set. Vanity is the only thing preventing flexibility here;
  • stop wasting money on rubbish policies like cash-for-clunkers or the Pink Batts fiasco;
  • cut rafts of other wasteful government spending;
  • [readers are invited to fill in the blanks – Ed]

Of course, the federal government should contribute to this tragedy, but not via yet another slug on the poor Australian public.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,

World's media: 2010 "hottest year evah"!

21 January, 2011 by

Cooler than 2010, according to world's media

“Ever”? Really? What hotter than when the planets coalesced from a swirling disk of white hot stellar matter 4.5 billion years ago? Well no, of course not. But the media regularly make nonsensical statements like this because they haven’t a clue about history, or any concept of time.

What they mean is “since about 150 years ago.” The fact that 2010, like 1998, was a major El Niño year, and therefore tells us very little about what global temperatures are really doing, is of no consequence. It is likely that 2011, influenced as it will be by a strong La Niña, will be significantly cooler. But there will be wall-to-wall excuses for that – “just a blip”, “warming will resume faster than evah next year” – because a cooling blip is just a blip, whereas a warming blip is evidence of man-made global warming. Add that to a slow recovery from the depths of the Little Ice Age over the past 200 years means that it is almost inevitable that each decade will be warmer than that preceding it.

However, the media’s love of scare stories and the gullibility of the general public ensures that idiotic headlines like this go largely unchallenged.

Both the ABC and Fairfax (natch) fall into the trap of demonstrating their ignorance of any concept of history by copying the same headline from AFP:

Fairfax: 2010 warmest ever year, says UN weather agency

ABC: 2010 officially the hottest year ever

The articles go on to cover much the same ground (but always remember, the WMO is a body operating under the auspices of the UN, just like the IPCC, which, as any fule kno, is little more than a corrupt mouthpiece for a bunch of politically-motivated environmental activists):

The UN’s World Meteorological Organisation said Thursday that 2010 was the warmest year on record [at least they say “on record” here, but they don’t go on to explain that means 150 years, or 50 atoms across on the Age of Earth Ruler – Ed], confirming a “significant” long-term trend of global warming and producing exceptional weather variations.

The trend also helped to melt Arctic sea ice cover to a record low for December last month, the WMO said in a statement. [Nobody ever mentions the Antarctic of course, because that end of the planet isn’t playing ball – Ed]

Last year “ranked as the warmest year on record, together with 2005 and 1998,” the WMO added, confirming preliminary findings released at the global climate conference early December that were based on a 10-month period.

“The 2010 data confirm the Earth’s significant long-term warming trend,” WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud said. “The 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998.”

Which is like saying the 10 warmest days this year happened since the end of winter. Shock. It says nothing about the cause – we all know the cause (it’s the Green Climate Monster). But that doesn’t stop typical “cracked record” remarks from the Grantham Institute’s Bob Ward, wading in for no other purpose other than to bash sceptics (and alarmists are much better at bashing sceptics than they are at playing by the rules of science, like actually sharing their data and models for example):

“Self-proclaimed climate change ‘sceptics’ may still try to claim that global warming stopped in 1998, but they cannot explain away the fact that nine of the 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2000,” said Bob Ward, of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics (LSE).

“Self-proclaimed”? And what’s with the quotes around ‘sceptics’? Following that lead you’re a self-proclaimed ‘alarmist’ whose livelihood is funded by the climate scare, then? Actually most sceptics don’t claim warming stopped in 1998, I certainly don’t. 1998 is a poor year to choose because of the large El Niño spike, but I would suggest that temperatures (as measured by satellite, rather than the fudged and homogenised surface records) have been largely static since about 2002. But of course Phil Jones of CRU previously went as far as to say that there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995…

But it’s all meaningless. None of this says anything about the cause, and that’s really all we’re interested in.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With:

Daily Bayonet GW Hoax Weekly Roundup

21 January, 2011 by

Skewering the clueless

As always, a great read!

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With:

MTR 1377 interview on YouTube

20 January, 2011 by

Last night’s interview with Luke Grant is now on ACM’s YouTube channel (link), and is also on the new ACM Media page (link).

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With:

Introducing the Green Climate Monster

20 January, 2011 by

Just call me GCM!

Just happens to have the same initials as general circulation models – that’s pure coincidence of course. Anyway, I’d like to introduce this little fella to you (see photo). After many minutes of painstaking research, Australian Climate Madness has decreed that all unusual or severe weather events of whatever nature, anywhere in the world, are solely the mischievous work of the Green Climate Monster (he gets bored easily). The GCM is responsible for the shrinking Arctic ice sheet, the growing Antarctic Ice sheet, advancing glaciers, retreating glaciers, heatwaves, cold spells, mountains of snow, absence of snow, droughts, floods, hurricanes, absence of hurricanes, very windy days, calm days, sunny days, cloudy days, foggy days, El Niño and his twin sister, the seasons, thunderstorms, absence of thunderstorms, excess rainfall, less rainfall, extinction of frogs, discovery of new frogs, fewer polar bears, more polar bears, everything else listed at the Warmlist, and plenty more besides.

Now I know what you’re thinking. That’s totally ridiculous. Everyone knows that the GCM doesn’t exist, to which I would respond: disprove the existence of my little green friend. The GCM causes everything. Nothing you mention can possibly NOT be as a result of the GCM’s little games – he has a very commendable work ethic – I don’t know how he does it, to be honest. So any weather or climate phenomenon you care to mention results, either wholly or in part, from the wayward actions of the GCM.

To which you will inevitably respond: you’re crazy, Joe – check yourself into the local loony bin – you need serious medication, pal.

But simply replace my imaginary friend with “climate change” and that’s the situation we find ourselves in today. Climate change causes everything. Nothing can disprove climate change. Whatever happens, whether it be a long drought in Australia that “experts” thought would never end, to tragic floods in Queensland and Victoria, climate change is to blame – we know that because politicians, climate scientists and the mainstream media tell us.

The problem with this is that it becomes an unfalsifiable hypothesis, and therefore inherently unscientific. Ask a climate scientist what weather pattern or climate signal would show anthropogenic climate change were not happening, and they wouldn’t be able to give you an answer.

So you will see a lot of the Green Climate Monster in the future. Whenever, something is blamed on climate change, the GCM will pop up on this blog – because we know who’s really behind it, don’t we?

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: ,

UK madness: "greenest government ever"

20 January, 2011 by

William Hague the Younger

And they say it as if it’s something to be proud of! Personally, I wouldn’t be proud of associating myself with an anti-human Marxist ideology, which would demolish our hard-won Western standards of living, with everyone sitting in the dark because the reliable coal- and gas-fired power stations have been abandoned, and the windmills are standing becalmed – a monument to environmental stupidity, with people shivering in their homes, unable to afford to pay their energy bills.

And that isn’t just hyperbole, the UK has committed itself to cutting its emissions by some astronomical figure like 80% by 2050, so the lights going off is a real possibility.

But UK Foreign Minister William Hague, who I remember making a cringe-making speech at a Tory conference in the 1980s as a precocious teenager (see photo), and who is visiting Australia at the moment, thinks that being the greenest government ever is something to aspire to:

The most senior minister from the Conservative-led British coalition Government to visit Australia will today lay out his nation’s ambitious plan to combat climate change, as debate continues over whether global warming has contributed to devastating floods in several states. [Have to drop that in of course, this is the Canberra Times, after all – Ed]

Foreign Affairs Minister William Hague will deliver two speeches in Sydney where he will promote British Prime Minister David Cameron’s vision for his coalition administration to be the “greenest government ever”.

In contrast, the Federal Government’s policy is unclear and Prime Minister Julia Gillard is waiting for a committee to recommend whether to proceed with an emissions trading scheme or adopt a carbon tax.

That’s nonsense. The Federal government’s policy IS clear – a price on carbon during this parliament – and equally idiotic as the UK’s policy.

The communique issued after the talks said that both governments were committed to ”promoting swift action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” at home and overseas.

”Action on climate change is urgent and cannot wait for the signature of an international treaty,” it said. (source)

And it will do nothing for the climate. Pointless environmental tokenism at its worst.

UPDATE: Irony of ironies, the European carbon market (of which the UK is a part) has had to be suspended because of fears of yet another massive fraud (read here). Why can’t Julia and her hopeless Labor government see what’s coming? They don’t need a crystal ball, just look at the UK.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With:

ACM on Melbourne's MTR 1377 with Luke Grant – tonight

19 January, 2011 by

MTR 1377

Tune in to Luke Grant’s show on Melbourne Talk Radio (MTR 1377) to hear a chat with Simon about the floods and Victorian Governor David de Kretser’s comments on climate change. If you’re in Melbourne, do tune in from 8pm (not sure when it’s going out yet), or you can listen online at:

www.mtr1377.com.au

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With:

Victorian governor blames climate change for floods

19 January, 2011 by

Clueless

I mean what else can it be? Does the governor understand the concept of geological time? Does he understand that records only go back 150 years? Does he appreciate that events like this have gone on, unobserved, for thousands of years? Does he understand that the role of governor is above political point scoring? Clearly the answer is no to all of these questions, especially the last, where following Quentin Bryce’s lead, he thinks he can say what he likes. But David de Kretser has form for this. A climate activist, he advocated a carbon tax back in 2009 to “fight global warming” (see here). So it’s little surprise that he, like the odious Bob Brown, rushes to blame climate change for the Victorian floods:

“I’m sorry, I’m one of these believers in climate change I’m afraid and if its [sic] doesn’t get that message out I don’t think its going to go away,’‘ Prof de Kretser told 3AW yesterday. [In other words, “I’m using these events to cynically push my own political agenda” – Ed]

“There’s too many of these events [Too many for you? Going to start controlling nature now, are you? – Ed], not only in Australia but throughout the whole world that are happening now, which everyone says this week (is a) one in 100, one in 200 years (event) but they are happening pretty much more frequently now.”

The Governor, seeming to sense his statement would be controversial, made the comments in relation to both the recent floods and the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires.

Government House staff said he was not be available yesterday for any further comment on his position. (source)

That’s the spirit, make controversial statements with no basis whatsover and then hole up in the residence and refuse to face the criticism. But at least Ted Baillieu has called him out:

Premier Ted Baillieu later disagreed with the Governor’s linking of the floods to climate change. ”I don’t think we are in any position to make a comment on that, frankly,” he told The Age.

He said he had been told yesterday that Melbourne Water was now saying Victorians should expect 30 per cent more rainfall in the next 10 years.

”You’ve only got to go back 12 months ago and they were saying Victorians should expect 30 per cent less,” Mr Baillieu said. (source)

More rain, less rain, more drought, less drought, more hurricanes, fewer hurricanes, stronger hurricanes, weaker hurricanes, more heat, more cold – whatever – it’s all climate change.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With:

Wivenhoe role in Brisbane floods

18 January, 2011 by

Spillway at Wivenhoe

An article in The Australian today highlights the role of the Wivenhoe Dam in the flooding that affected Brisbane:

The official records from SEQWater show that, at 6am on Friday, January 7, Wivenhoe Dam, Brisbane’s insurance policy to protect the city and surrounding suburbs from a massive rainfall and flood event, was at about 106 per cent capacity. This means that Wivenhoe had filled to 100 per cent of its capacity for water supply with a total 1.15 million megalitres, and it was 6 per cent into its additional 1.45ML of storage for flood mitigation.

On Saturday, January 8, it is understood to have let about 100,000ML go; on Sunday, when Mr Goodwin’s family was there, a further 116,000ML were released.

By 9am on Monday, the levels in the dam had soared to just over 148 per cent, and it was reported that managers at the dam had “scrambled”.

That afternoon, the extreme rainfall over Toowoomba and the Lockyer Valley unleashed a maelstrom that the Bureau of Meteorology had not predicted. While the run-off from this event did not fall into Wivenhoe’s catchment of about 7000 sq km, the dam’s operators were caught by surprise and released 172,000ML as the capacity went past 150 per cent.

Through Tuesday, as Wivenhoe continued to rise past 175 per cent and then 190 per cent, the situation was becoming critical as the available buffer for more rain had been almost fully taken up. Nobody wanted the dam to go to 200 per cent, and the theoretical maximum of 225 per cent needed to be avoided at all costs.

One of the crucial questions that will be asked in a commission of inquiry, called late yesterday by Premier Anna Bligh, is whether the releases from the flood storage compartment of a little over 200,000ML on the weekend were too little, too late, necessitating a huge outpouring to get levels down quickly.

The operators of the dam gave the order on Tuesday, cranking up the release to a staggering peak rate of 645,000ML a day. At that point the Brisbane River flood was not a case of if but when: the computer modelling showed major flooding from this Wivenhoe discharge was inevitable and would peak in the 36 hours the water would take to reach the city gauge.

The release from Wivenhoe at a peak rate of 645,000ML a day represented up to 30 per cent of the dam’s total capacity. Nobody was under any misapprehension about the consequences. It was this release from Wivenhoe that represented about 80 per cent and perhaps more of the volume in the Brisbane River.

A rainfall event that could have been comfortably managed by the dam if its flood compartment had been lower had turned into a major flood that would devastate thousands of homes. (source)

So the question to be asked is, was it an oversight not to release water earlier, and at a more controlled rate, in anticipation of the floods, or was it to preserve water in the dam due to some diktat from the climate change department? Hopefully the inquiry will answer that question.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With:

Will Steffen to report on Queensland floods

18 January, 2011 by

Impartiality personified

Yes, you read that right – the same Will Steffen who is the Labor government’s Chief Alarmist, and who has already made up his mind and linked the Queensland floods to climate change (see here). Kind of like the University of East Anglia investigating Climategate – no, wait, they did. What hope is there for an impartial, balanced report? None. The people of Queensland deserve better.

A report on the flood disaster and climate change will be undertaken by an expert on the federal government’s multi-party committee which is investigating ways to price carbon.

Professor Will Steffen, a member of the climate change committee set up by the Gillard government in September last year, told AAP he was working on a report covering the floods.

And just in case you missed the bias, here it is again:

Prof Steffen said there was evidence that extreme weather events appear to be increasing.

“We are getting more intense rainfall events as the earth warms, but it’s difficult to pin down any individual event,” he told AAP. [Oh, but how I wish I could, he thought – Ed]

“Rainfall events like the type we’ve seen in Queensland are becoming more likely as the earth warms.

“There is a long-term warming trend with or without La Nina.”

And lastly, so that you’re all thoroughly reassured about this process.

Prof Steffen said he would produce an update on the science for the committee, as part of the Garnaut climate change review update, as well as write his own independent report. (source)

Phew that’s OK then. Seriously, this guy is so compromised he shouldn’t be let anywhere near an “independent” enquiry.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,
«Previous Page
Next Page»