Don’t know whether the Financial Times intended the pun there, but anyway. More indications that the chances of an agreement in Copenhagen are disappearing faster than the Wilkins Ice Shelf:

Time is running out for climate change talks, with another meeting of world governments ending on Friday, this time in Bonn, with little progress towards a new agreement on greenhouse gases.
…
There are at least two more important UN meetings planned before a crunch conference in Copenhagen in December. There, officials will attempt to hammer out an accord to replace the Kyoto protocol, whose main provisions expire in 2012.
…
China has reinforced the sense of discord by calling on developed countries to cut their emissions by 40 per cent by 2020 – far more than any plan to do – and to give 0.5 per cent to 1 per cent of their gross domestic product in assistance to the developing world.

The lack of progress so far on the big issues – the extent to which rich countries will cut emissions, the commitments poor countries will make and how these will be funded – was underlined this week when Japan unveiled a plan to cut its emissions by 8 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020 – a level only 2 per cent below Tokyo’s commitment under the 1997 Kyoto protocol.

More pointless gab-fests to come in the months ahead – oh joy.

Read it here.

UPDATE: The UN climate chief appears to be suffering from a touch of the old “cognitive dissonances” as reported in the ever-optimistic Brisbane Times:

Yvo de Boer, the top UN climate change official, said he was confident of reaching an ambitious agreement in Copenhagen, though it will lack details that will require further work [And there’s the big get-out clause – Ed].

The latest round showed that governments “are committed to reaching an agreement, and this is a big achievement“, he told reporters.

He’s a kinda “glass half full” guy, ain’t he?

Read it here.

One of the very few journalists who actually supports the line Steve Fielding is taking on the climate debate, in contrast to the distasteful mudslinging that has been going on this past week.

Fielding, who has an MBA from Monash University as well as an engineering degree from RMIT, is confident enough in his analytical ability not to be intimidated by overbearing experts into outsourcing policy to them.

Swamped with emails from the public encouraging him in his quest for answers, he says he is motivated by “trying to do what’s right by Australian workers and families, [which] is enough inspiration to get this decision right”.

Of course, he has been pilloried for being diligent enough to do the job he was elected to do.

He has been derided by people without any training in mathematics or scientific disciplines, who regard science, probably, as they do their computers – as a little black box to be understood only by an elite council of infallible gurus who are incapable of impure motives. Who is the gullible one?

Read it here.

From Weatherzone:

Victoria is experiencing its best start to the snow season in a decade.

There is 56 centimetres of snow at Mt Buller and about 40 centimetres at Mt Hotham, Falls Creek and Lake Mountain.

Snow reporter, Maureen Gearon, says there will be eight lifts open at Mt Buller this weekend and six lifts will be operating at other resorts.

“These are the earliest and heaviest snow falls we’ve had since 2000,” she said.

“[While] 2007 and 2003 were great … this is just spectacular, so we’re sitting around, average base of about 50 centimetres around most of the resorts.” (source)

UPDATE: Looks like the ACT is pretty nippy as well:

Canberra shivered through one of its coldest days on record on Friday with the high reaching just four degrees by 5pm, eight below average and potentially their coldest day in 43 years.

South of the city Tuggerong was even colder, reaching only three degrees, which could be their coldest day on record although the site has only been recording since 1996.

The surprise cold snap is the result of a very cold night followed by a cloudy day.

“After dropping to minus two degrees early in the morning a persistent layer of fog and low cloud completely blocked out the sun and prevented the temperature from rising like it normally would” said weatherzone.com.au meteorologist Martin Palmer.

“But we can’t confirm the coldest day in 43 years until 9am tomorrow because a meteorological day is 9am to 9am” said Palmer. (source)

A very worthwhile read (h/t Jennifer Marohasy):

Scientists often model systems to predict what effects might be expected if variables change in a certain way. In the absence of anything resembling evidence for the causative effect of global warming, computer modelling was enthusiastically embraced to project likely changes on the basis of the understanding of how climate worked. So far, so good, but the output from these models, rather than being seen as indications of what might happen if the hypothesis was right, have taken the place of experimental observation.

So, in a circular argument, the models which are based on a particular hypothesis (the greenhouse effect with positive feedback) are taken to “prove” the hypothesis because they reproduce the pattern of twentieth century temperature change. Similarly, the projections for future temperature rise (which, we should remember, cover a large range) are regularly quoted as what will happen if carbon dioxide emissions are not drastically cut back.

Large numbers of people have been sufficiently convinced by the arguments to take it as read that the greenhouse gas hypothesis is essentially correct and that disaster will occur unless radical cuts are made in emissions. They have moved beyond the stage of questioning to simply not listening to anyone who raises doubts. But, what is worse, they are putting their faith in a hypothesis unsupported by anything more than circumstantial evidence. Because no-one can do more than point to observations, no new evidence is going to be produced which – as in the story of peptic ulcers – will provide direct, irrefutable corroboration of an alternative theory.

Read it all here.

No joke. The Australian Federal Police will be forced to become “carbon cops” to police a range of “climate offences” under Penny Wong’s new world order, diverting resources away from what the AFP should be doing, namely keeping Australia and its citizens safe from real crime, like drug trafficking, people smuggling, fraud, money laundering and organised crime. But clearly those things are less important than “saving the planet”:

The Herald Sun can reveal Australian Federal Police agents will have to prosecute a new range of climate offences.

But they are yet to be offered extra resources, stretching the thin blue line to breaking point.

“The Government is effectively saying to us, ‘Ignore other crime types‘,” Australian Federal Police Association chief Jim Torr said.

The group had been trying for months, without success, to discuss the issue with Climate Change Minister Penny Wong, he said.
…
Ms Wong’s office said AFP agents would be expected to enter premises and request paperwork to monitor firms’ emissions reductions. They would act on the 30-strong Australian Climate Change Regulatory Authority’s orders.

With a hint of understatement, the Opposition responds, with Andrew Robb calling the scheme

problematic.

Read it here.

As always, a great read!

We’ve had emotional blackmail from Penny Wong, and now political shenanigans in order to force through the pointless, and almost universally loathed, ETS. The government is in hot water for trying to link another piece of legislation to the ETS to get it through by the back door.

The Coalition’s environment spokesman, Greg Hunt, says the Government is jeopardising a deal on renewable energy to score political points.

“We want to do the right thing. We are extremely sympathetic on renewable energy legislation. It would be a disgrace if this Government held up renewable energy projects for naked political gamesmanship,” Mr Hunt said.

Greens Senator Christine Milne says the Government is resorting to trickery to get its emissions trading scheme through.

“They are now sinking to low levels in order to wedge the Coalition on climate change policy, saying they have to pass both the renewable energy target and the CPRS or neither, because they have interlinked the two policy positions,” Senator Milne said.

ACM agrees with Christine Milne for the first (and probably the last) time.

Read it here.

The enviro-headbangers at the SMH are unable to comprehend how anyone isn’t taken in 100% by the misrepresentations and political posturing of the IPCC (like Fairfax has been), and goes into full slime mode, in an article entitled “Senator blows hot and cold on science”:

THE Family First senator Steve Fielding has challenged the work of thousands of the world’s top scientists, saying he is not convinced by the work done by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. [Note no mention of the “thousands of top scientists” who disagree with the consensus – and I’m surprised they missed the chance to call it “the Nobel Prize-winning” IPCC – Ed]
…
Senator Fielding’s newfound scepticism is a result of his trip to the US to listen to the Heartland Institute of Chicago, an organisation that is funded by the fossil-fuel industry. The organisation also believes public health campaigns against smoking are based on “junk science”. [Note how the SMH attempts to smear the organisation, and avoids actually addressing Senator Fielding’s arguments. Typical alarmist tactics. It’s also amazing that no-one ever complains about the billions of dollars that flow from the green lobby to perpetuate climate alarmism, way more than has ever come from the “fossil fuel industry” – Ed]

One can almost hear the heads popping!

Read it here.

Given Steve Fielding’s heresy about solar activity being a possible cause of climate change, it’s an interesting coincidence that global temperatures are dropping (if you look at the satellite record, and ignore “urbanisation-measuring” surface stations on which other records, like GISS, are based) at the same time as the sun is the quietest it has been for a century. Could they possibly be related?

Watch here (from April 2009).

See also here.

No discussion of the science, you will note. Just thinly veiled threats if the crossbenchers don’t play ball. Note to Steve Fielding: DO NOT SUCCUMB TO THIS KIND OF BLACKMAIL.

Crossbench senators thinking about voting down Labor’s climate change legislation should consider how they’ll explain the decision to their constituents, Climate Change Minister Penny Wong says.
…
“Every senator is going to have to front up to their electorate and tell people if they vote no, why they voted to ensure Australia’s emissions keep rising, voted to ensure our carbon pollution keeps increasing, voted to ensure we continue to contribute to climate change,” she told ABC TV on Wednesday.

I’m amazed she didn’t go on to say “for the sake of our children, and our children’s children, and our children’s children’s children… etc etc.” For what it’s worth, here’s what I would say, if I were explaining it to my constituents:

The theory of anthropogenic global warming is flawed. CO2 emissions are rising, yet temperatures are falling and have been for nearly a decade. The climate system is clearly affected by factors which the IPCC models, on which the Rudd government’s policy is based, do not include. Until or unless there is irrefutable proof that man-made CO2 emissions are directly causing dangerous climate change, I am not prepared to bankrupt our economy, and substantially lower the standard of living of all Australians, including you, based on flawed models which do not reflect reality.

Read it here.

UPDATE: Here’s Penny Wong’s latest “cracked-record” pronouncement on the theory of climate change:

Senator Wong has told ABC 2’s News Breakfast there is no doubt human activity is driving climate change. [Yeah, “no doubt” if you live in a hermetically sealed bubble, keep your hands over your ears and shout “la, la, la” all day, which I’m beginning to think you probably do, or maybe it’s because you’re trying to force through this legislation irrespective of the science… I wonder – Ed]

“We’ve had 13 of the 14 hottest years in history in the last 15 years,” she said. [Weasel Word Alert: “In history”. What does that mean, Penny? Do you mean since the earth cooled, 4.5 billion years ago, or do you mean since 1851, when records began and the earth was emerging from the cold period known as the Little Ice Age, which, oddly, coincided with a minimum in solar activity, known as the Dalton Minimum? It’s actually a porkie whichever, since the 1930s were warmer – Ed]

“Solar flares does not explain the phenomenon that we are seeing.” [Simple as that – Ed]

Gee, I’m convinced. Read it here.