Sick: Clive Hamilton rants on ABC Unleashed


Seriously deranged

Seriously deranged

As Andrew Bolt puts it, there is something seriously sick about this guy. I suppose we should be pleased in a way. When people run out of cogent arguments, they resort to this sort of hysterical emotional blackmail. Hamilton has obviously run out of arguments:

Hi there,

There’s something you need to know about your father.

Your dad’s job is to try to stop the government making laws to reduce Australia’s carbon pollution. He is paid a lot of money to do that by big companies who do not want to own up to the fact that their pollution is changing the world’s climate in very harmful ways.

Because of their pollution, lots of people, mostly poor people, are likely to die. They will die from floods, from diseases like dengue fever, and from starvation when their crops won’t grow anymore.

The big companies are putting their profits before the lives of people. And your dad is helping them.

Your life is going to be worse too because of what your dad is doing when he goes to work each morning. By the time you are as old as your parents, Australia will be having a lot more heat waves, … blah blah blah. There’s loads more, but really, I will not sully the pages of this blog with such unadulterated bulls#!t.

If you do decide to read it (here), just check out the comments:

“disgraceful”, “appalling” “pathetic fear mongering”, “offensive piece of sludge”, “idiocy”, “deranged”, “condescending, prejudiced pap”, “Shameful. And shameless”, “anti-intellectual”, “self-indulgent rubbish.”

Just about sums it up. Nice work, Clive. Now go away, we never want to hear this sort of rantings again, thanks.

PS. You guys in Hamilton dodged a bullet – can you imagine this twit as your MP? Doesn’t bear thinking about.

Web site: Copenhagen Climate Challenge


The antidote to COP15. Check it out at www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.org. There you will find an open letter to Ban Ki-Moon, signed by 141 scientists, challenging him, and the UN, to produce evidence of dangerous AGW:

Climate change science is in a period of ‘negative discovery’ – the more we learn about this exceptionally complex and rapidly evolving field the more we realize how little we know. Truly, the science is NOT settled.

Therefore, there is no sound reason to impose expensive and restrictive public policy decisions on the peoples of the Earth without first providing convincing evidence that human activities are causing dangerous climate change beyond that resulting from natural causes. Before any precipitate action is taken, we must have solid observational data demonstrating that recent changes in climate differ substantially from changes observed in the past and are well in excess of normal variations caused by solar cycles, ocean currents, changes in the Earth’s orbital parameters and other natural phenomena.

It is not the responsibility of ‘climate realist’ scientists to prove that dangerous human-caused climate change is not happening. Rather, it is those who propose that it is, and promote the allocation of massive investments to solve the supposed ‘problem’, who have the obligation to convincingly demonstrate that recent climate change is not of mostly natural origin and, if we do nothing, catastrophic change will ensue. To date, this they have utterly failed to do so.

Climate claims fail science test


Climate sense

Climate sense

A must-read article in The Australian from Monash University professorial fellow in geosciences, Michael Asten. Again, it deals with the key factor in climate models: feedback. We know that the effect of a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere will produce a negligible increase in temperature, but such increase may trigger “positive feedbacks” which will amplify the warming. Equally possible, however, is that the warming will trigger “negative feedbacks” which will work to counteract the warming.

Guess which one the IPCC chooses? Correct, but because the science on feedbacks is woefully incomplete, current climate model projections are next to useless. Two pieces of research seem to indicate that the feedbacks are no where near as strong as the IPCC models claim, leading to a huge overestimation of future warming:

Building on a methodology published 15 years ago in Nature, climatologist and NASA medallist John Christy and colleague David Douglass studied global temperature impacts of volcanic activity and ocean-atmospheric oscillations (the “El Nino” effect) and separated these from global temperature trends over the past 28 years.

The result of their analysis is a CO2-induced amplification factor close to one, which has implications clearly at odds with the earlier IPCC position.

The result was published this year in the peer-reviewed journal Energy and Environment and the paper has not yet been challenged in the scientific literature.

What this means is that the IPCC model for climate sensitivity is not supported by experimental observation on ancient ice ages and recent satellite data.

So are we justified in concluding that the concentration of atmospheric CO2 is not the only or major driver of current climate change? And if so, how should we re-shape our ETS legislation?

I don’t know the answer to these questions, but as Nobel prize winning physicist Richard Feynman observed: “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”

Read it here.

Wong and Brown: the Deniers


My denial is this big

My denial is this big

Tony Abbott has stated a very simple fact that many others do not have the guts to state: the world has not warmed significantly since 2001, and may have even cooled. There seems nothing particularly controversial about that statement. The temperature data shows it clearly (if you look at the satellite record and ignore the surface record with its convenient manual “adjustments” that always seem to be upwards, that is). Even the Climategate emails acknowledge it – remember the quote “we can’t account for the lack of warming”?

But Penny Wong, the person most intimately acquainted with the ETS and climate change policy in Australia, just cannot deal with facts. Neither can enviro-loony Bob Brown, and both resort to spin and obfuscation in response. First off, here’s the Wong-bot:

“He is out there publicly talking about the world cooling when we have so many world leaders … going to Copenhagen because they are concerned about climate change,” she said.

“We see Mr Abbott talking about the globe cooling as the rest of the world is trying to work its way to tackling climate change.”

A gobsmacked [“gobsmacked”? Fine journalism there from Fairfax- Ed] Greens Leader Bob Brown said Mr Abbott’s comments would alienate conservatives.

“In a world where both big and small business understand the science of climate change and the need for appropriate action,” Senator Brown said.

Wong and Brown can’t handle the truth that the planet hasn’t warmed for a decade – in other words, they’re in denial.

Read it here. (h/t Andrew Bolt)

Copenhagen – Day 2: "disarray"


Day 2

Day 2

It hasn’t taken long for the wheels to start coming loose on the Copenhagen bandwagon, if reports at News.com.au are to be believed. Under the headline “Copenhagen conference in disarray“, it reports that certain documents have been leaked showing wealthier nations would be given more power in future climate change negotiations:

The documents seem to allow a handful of rich countries to have larger emissions and more control over future talks within a “circle of commitment” and have enraged delegates from developing countries.

The US, UK, and Denmark are among the countries included in the so-called “Danish text.”

The document also sets unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

The secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as “the circle of commitment” – understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week, The Guardian reports.

The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as “a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks”, the paper reports. (source)

The ABC (incredibly) has more:

The document abandons the Kyoto Protocol, sidelines the United Nations in future climate change negotiations, and hands most of the power to rich countries.

The Kyoto Protocol relied on the principle that rich nations – responsible for the bulk of emissions – can and should be compelled to take on the biggest burden when it comes to cutting those emissions.

Under Kyoto, poorer nations were not required to act at all.

The leaked agreement not only brings the developing world into the frame, it allows rich countries to emit twice as much carbon as poor countries. (source)

Ouch. That should really stir things up! See BBC coverage here.

The other big news this morning is that this decade is shaping up to be “the hottest on record”. (They use “hotter” and “hottest” as a cheap trick to make it sound more dramatic – we’re talking tenths of one degree here.) Since the planet is emerging from the Little Ice Age, it’s a bit like saying “spring will be warmer hotter than winter”, and since “on record” means in the last 150 years, it ignores all previous warmings, such as the Medieval Warm Period, which were warmer, sorry, hotter.  In other words, Big Freaking Deal. And even then, none of this proves that the warming is anthropogenic, nor that cutting emissions will make the slightest difference.

But that doesn’t stop the moonbat media latching on to it to claim that it’s even more important that we strike a deal at Copenhagen:

“World’s hottest decade adds to pressure for climate accord”

The UN’s top weather expert warned Tuesday that the world is in its hottest decade on record as climate negotiators plunged into talks seeking a historic deal on cutting carbon emissions.

The prediction by the World Meteorological Organisation underlined the pressure for an agreement at a summit in Copenhagen, which was boosted when the United States said it would start to regulate carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant.

“The decade 2000-2009 is very likely to be the warmest on record, warmer than the 1990s, which were in turn warmer than the 1980s,” World Meteorological Organisation Secretary General Michel Jarraud told a press conference.

Jarraud also said that the year 2009 would probably rank as the fifth warmest since accurate records were started in 1850. (source)

WUWT: Smoking gun at Darwin Zero


Not had a chance to review in detail, but an interesting post at Watts Up With That on temperature records at Darwin Airport. But this quote is very interesting:

“Those, dear friends, are the clumsy fingerprints of someone messing with the data Egyptian style … they are indisputable evidence that the “homogenized” data has been changed to fit someone’s preconceptions about whether the earth is warming.”

Read it here.

UPDATE: For the first time that I can remember on WUWT, Anthony has made this story a “sticky”:

I feel this story of irrational data adjustment is so important, that I’m giving it a sticky at the top so it doesn’t get buried in the other stories.

OMG! Al Gore writes climate poem


Failed politician writes dire poem about climate change = front page news. Try not to puke when you read the Goracle’s attempts at literature:

One thin September soon
A floating continent disappears
In midnight sun

Vapors rise as
Fever settles on an acid sea
Neptune’s bones dissolve

Snow glides from the mountain
Ice fathers floods for a season
A hard rain comes quickly

Then dirt is parched
Kindling is placed in the forest
For the lightning’s celebration

Unknown creatures
Take their leave, unmourned
Horsemen ready their stirrups

Passion seeks heroes and friends
The bell of the city
On the hill is rung

The shepherd cries
The hour of choosing has arrived
Here are your tools (source)

The debate is over: Al Gore is a freaking awful poet.

Bob Carter: "Kill the IPCC"


Bob Carter

Bob Carter

Essential reading from climate realist Bob Carter:

The IPCC is the official UN body that has presided over this fiasco. It is an organisation that was specifically set up to provide advice to national governments (including Australia’s) for their use in setting climate policy. The IPCC’s incompetence is manifest in its failure to detect the corrupt science that has for so long permeated the activities of the international jetsetters of the climate science power group. The organisation should be closed down (without tears), and the Copenhagen COP-15 meeting would be a good place to start this process happening.

That the global warming scare should turn out to be precisely the scam that climate rationalists have been banging on about for years is shocking enough; many future PhD theses and books will undoubtedly be written about it. Yet it is but the tip of the iceberg so far as the public prostitution of science is concerned. Climategate being currently in full swing, the obvious question is when (not if) the parallel Reefgate, Murraygate and Fishgate scandals will erupt in Australia?

Read it here.

Copenhagen opening video: pure emotional blackmail


Let’s just get this straight. The delegates at COP15 in Copenhagen are aiming to agree reductions in global emissions that will make one of the most significant changes to our economy in centuries, and which will have devastating effects on economies the world over, and yet how do they start off the conference? Not as they should have done with cool-headed analyses of the facts and science, but with a sickening example of emotional blackmail.

Children were the focus at the opening. The launch began with a video showing a young girl having a nightmare about global warming. She watched her playground turn into a desert wasteland, and screamed as she battled terrifying floods. (source)

Here is the video – watch it in full:

More than anything else, this video encapsulates everything you need to know about Copenhagen. It is nothing more than a desperate environmental crusade and a political circus. Nothing, especially the science, will stop it.

Quote of the Day: Danish Speaker of Parliament


Cool-headed

Cool-headed

While the rest of Copenhagen is running round in ever decreasing circles of alarmism and hysteria, it is refreshing that the Speaker of the Danish parliament has some cool-headed words of wisdom:

“The problem is that lots of people go around saying that the climate change we see is a result of human activity. That is a very dangerous claim,” Parliamentary Speaker and former Finance Minister Thor Pedersen (Lib) tells DR.

“Unfortunately I seem to experience that scientists say: ‘We have a theory’ – then that crosses the road to the politicians who say: ‘We know’. Who can be bothered to hear a scientist who says ‘I have a theory’ when politicians go around saying ‘I know’” Thor Pedersen says.

Thor Pedersen adds that the temperature has not risen in the past decade.

“I’m not saying that in the decade that the temperature has fallen or stagnated is enough to evaluate developments. But one should only say what one knows,” the Speaker adds.

“You should say that although we believed in our models, that the temperature would rise from 1998 to 2008, we have to admit that it has not risen. We cannot explain why it has not risen, but we believe we still have a problem. I’m just asking that people say what they actually know,” Pedersen tells DR.

If climate scientists and politicians did that, the world would be a far better place.

Read it here (h/t Climate Change Fraud)