Will Steffen: Labor's Alarmist-in-Chief

Knows everything there is to know about the climate

It really is no wonder that the Climate Commission, headed by warmist Tim Flannery (salary $180k), and advised by Will Steffen, the Labor government’s chief scaremonger, has produced the skewed and catastrophist projections that it has. Let’s look at Steffen’s previous form:

In January 2011, Steffen linked the Queensland floods to climate change (whilst at the same time saying he wasn’t):

Climate change committee member Professor Will Steffen, the executive director of the ANU Climate Change Institute, said there was no direct link between global warming and the tragic flash flooding in Toowoomba which has killed at least nine people in southeast Queensland.

But he told The Australian Online that climate change would lead to heavier, more frequent rain.

“As the climate warms, there is more water vapour in the atmosphere,” he told The Australian Online.

“This means that there is a probability that there will more intense rainfall events around the world.

There is some evidence that we can see them now. I think the place where the best data is the US.” (source)

Then back in May 2010, he compared those sceptical of catastrophic man-made warming to “flat-earthers”:

While there were uncertainties about the pace and impact of change, he said, the core of climate science – that the world was warming and the primary cause since the middle of the last century had been industrial greenhouse gas emissions – should be accepted with the same confidence as the laws of gravity and relativity.

“Right now, this almost infantile debate about whether ‘is it real or isn’t it real?’, it’s like saying, ‘Is the Earth round or is it flat?’ [Climate change] is a hugely important question and yet we are not having a rational discourse in the media in Australia on this question. That is my biggest frustration.” He called on the media to focus on areas where there was not a consensus, including the link between climate change and the south-east Australian drought and how rapidly sea levels would rise. (source)

Steffen has never, ever, conceded that there is any doubt in the debate. EVER. He clearly believes that he knows all there is to know about the climate, and anyone who dares suggest there are unknowns is simply branded a filthy denier.

So is it any wonder that a climate report prepared by him spouts the usual alarmist hysteria? Nope. Not in the slightest.


  1. Interesting that these weather events are continued to be linked to GW, they must not be keeping up with the news from the IPCC head office, given the entry of the 17th of May.
    Maybe the deniers hope that no one looks for any updated information from the IPCC, or they are unaware of the IPCC heads comments on the issue…. *rolls eyes*

  2. Minchin strikes back:


    Key point: “..government-appointed committee of known climate alarmists, selectively appointed..”

    That’s something else the government needs to answer to, although I guess it falls under the category of “audits”. There are none. This really needs to be pushed home.

  3. All the newspaper articles I read refer to “Climate Change”. Now, as a geologist with a bit of an understanding of earth history, I can pretty safely say the the climate has been changing since the earth first had any sort of atmosphere. It will continue to change too.

    Why, oh why can’t they refer to it as “human induced climate change” or some other phrase – or is that phrase too long for the average attention span of most people? Sorry, thats my gripe for the day.

    • The Loaded Dog says:

      Why, oh why can’t they refer to it as “human induced climate change”

      Good question Nick, but that’s part of the genius of this whole insidious and deceptive movement; the ambiguous and fraudulent use of words.

      When they refer to “Climate Change” they are actually referring to their belief in Catastrophic Anthropogenic (human induced) Global Warming.

      When they refer to “carbon pollution” they are actually referring to carbon dioxide, which as we all know is the stuff we breath out and that creates the bubbles in beer.

      Their continual use of the word “Carbon” to describe carbon dioxide is the biggest travesty of all in my books.

      And incredibly there are so many MANY people I have spoken to, one of them unbelievably is an engineer, who think the government is trying to reduce “carbon emissions” (black sooty stuff) and find it hard to accept it is actually the odorless colorless trace gas carbon dioxide that is being demonised.

      You will also note when referring to their catastophic predictions they tend to use word strings such as, it is possible, it may lead to, is likely to lead to, in all probability there will be, etc etc etc…

      Truly, an evil movement….

  4. froggy uk says:

    But he told The Australian Online that climate change would lead to heavier, more frequent rain.

    “As the climate warms, there is more water vapour in the atmosphere,” he told The Australian Online.

    “This means that there is a probability that there will more intense rainfall events around the world.

    Hmmm, Perhaps Steffen gets his info a little late or he doesnt talk to his fellow global alarmists, We in the UK got all this scaremongering last year from the Met Office about how we should expect huge floods very soon, Well now we are told of low resevoir levels & impending hosepipe bans, water shortages etc,
    So now the Met Office have anounced “the dryest Spring ever” (`u` turn anyone?), & lets not forget their classic prediction “by 2010 snow will be a thing of the past & children will only see it in pictures”,
    You would think being funded to the tune of £70 million per year the government would demand accuracy, But now its been suggested the Mets propaganda machine should get a rise of another £10 million this year despite of their predictions being next to useless, Perhaps it should be called a “hush money” incentive or perhaps “P,P,P” (propaganda puppet payment),
    It sounds like youve got a mirror image of what we have here.

  5. Richard N says:

    Nick. I agree. I think as the tide of public opinion turns on this scam we might start to get a few more skeptical climate scientists get some media time.But dont hold your breath waiting for the warmist ridden ABC to change its tune.

  6. Aert Driessen says:

    No wonder Steffen can say what he likes and the government can do what it likes. Everyone’s arse is covered by the Disclaimer (see contents page of ‘The Critical Decade’)

    This document is produced for general information only
    and does not represent a statement of the policy of the
    Commonwealth of Australia. While reasonable efforts
    have been made to ensure the accuracy, completeness
    and reliability of the material contained in this document,
    the Commonwealth of Australia and all persons acting
    for the Commonwealth preparing this report accept no
    liability for the accuracy of or inferences from the material
    contained in this publication, or for any action as a result
    of any person’s or group’s interpretations, deductions,
    conclusions or actions in relying on this material.

%d bloggers like this: