On the February 15 edition of Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight, the host not only suggested that the freezing temperatures that hit Texas bring into question the very existence of global warming, but he also claimed that the state’s inability to keep the lights on was due to its “reckless reliance on windmills,” which he even acknowledged account for only “a quarter of the energy” makeup in Texas (with the majority of power coming from natural gas and coal). To discuss the outages, host Tucker Carlson invited climate denier and frequent Fox guest Marc Morano, who once claimed CO2 is not pollution because we exhale it.How Fox News is exploiting Texas’ power outages to fearmonger about clean energy | Media Matters for America
A new study from Australian and Chinese researchers adds weight to scientists’ warnings from recent United Nations reports about how sea levels are expected to rise dangerously in the coming decades because of human activity that’s driving global heating.Bolstering Alarm Over Scientists’ Warnings, New Study Finds Sea Level Rise Projections ‘Are On the Money’ | Common Dreams News
So Clive James had various ways to attack the notion of Climate Change. He would deride and belittle those who speak up about IPCC science. He used bon mots or clever twists in language to make jokes about his opponents, who may not be more than political opponents. He approved of those who claim to be experts in scepticism, without bothering to verify them any more than he checked the claims of IPCC science. He asserted claims which were already debunked numerous times. He peppered his writing with historical names as if their name proves something. Far from affirming science, he affirmed denial.
We should challenge climate deniers on every opportunity, not by providing them with factual information, we have tried that, but by challenging their motives, their unwillingness to change, their prejudices and unreasonableness, their intellectual laziness, their lack of credentials, their bias, lack of substance and their lack of caring. We should call them for what they are – future thieves and environmental vandals who are committing crimes against humanity. If you think this is harsh, just remember history show us it is unreasonable people who usually kill off the reasonable. We are reaching the end of the road to salvation and climate deniers are blocking the way forward.
Our Government has enacted so much legislation and specific committees to ensure they are never blamed for any wrongdoing. It’s not wrong if previous corruption is now legal. If an “Opposition” doesn’t provide headlines, how will media give punters a heads up as to how our nation’s taxpayers are being taken for a ride?
Think about it, below are just three examples that do not pass the pub test.
Cushy jobs with big business dealing with Government
Mutual obligation only goes one way
Sorry, I’ll ‘fess up and fix that paperwork
There are many more examples of rules for us and none for them. Worse, we are not even being informed as to how unaccountable and above the law these people in Government are. Kenneth Hayne is spot on saying trust in politics has “been destroyed”, worse, most of us are not even aware of just how secretive and unaccountable our Federal Government is.
Back to the future dirty power and profit fucks Atmosphere, Health, biodiversity the enviroment and the long term future of the planet left for the next generations. All for the sake of a few cents the rich can’t take with them anyway. (ODT
The Coalition has no choice but to try and fix the self-created disaster that is its climate policy
Fear mongering about climate change mitigation by the Liberals, the IPA and mining/coal lobbyists is not based on evidence or the examples of nation-states on this planet. Climate change disharmony (evidenced by increasing global heatwaves, and abnormal climate events) on the other hand, are increasingly apparent. Scientists and experts at these conferences have for decades repeatedly warned us, time is running out, and we need to act soon and fervently. If big business lobbying and political ideology are all that stands in the way of averting a climatic breakdown, then we as Australians need to vote out of office anyone who even remotely risks the future of our planet, in preference for greed and power.
Whoever wins the next election is going to face a monumental task to reduce our emissions in order to tackle the existential threat posed by climate change.
In one way, it would serve Scott Morrison right to have to face the consequences of his lies. But the country cannot afford someone who thinks prayer is the answer to the drought.
Our Prime Minister, the man charged with making the decisions on how to keep us safe, is a bald-faced liar.
Andrew Bolt’s denial was obvious in his editorial stating ” this is normal Australia” “The Big Lie” was his “Big Wet” half a graphic story which is just ” Big BS”. Climate Change is real generations of farmers know it’s real. Bolt’s ignorance his denial and we have seen more rain than ever been seen before. He showed a graphic that ignored the reality of two states. (ODT)
The entire state of NSW has been declared in drought after a drier-than-expected June and July.
According to the NSW Department of Primary Industries, 61 per cent of NSW is either in drought or intense drought, while nearly 39 per cent is drought affected.
“The forecast suggests an increase of drier than normal conditions for the next three months across the majority of NSW.”
Mr Blair assured farmers and the community that the government would “stand with them through this challenging time and continue to make sure we have the right support available”.
The NSW government has announced more than $1 billion in drought relief measures, which include transport subsidies, waivers on farming costs, further bolstering the Farm Innovation Fund, animal welfare measures and mental health support, the statement said.
Koalas are struggling to survive as their habitat is being destroyed and, as the koala is at the top of the pyramid, if you remove their habitat, every other species will also be wiped out. Sue Arnold speaks with wildlife warrior, Clare Gover.
FARMERS and farm animals are doing it tough out there.
But there’s little media about what’s happening to wildlife struggling to survive in a moonscape of cleared land, without food, shelter and water.
Clare Gover runs Return to the Wild, a rescue organisation in the Darling Downs,
IDIOTS HERE AND ABROAD STILL SOWING DOUBT WITH MEDIA ASSISTANCE
Extreme heatwaves, droughts, raging fires. What we are observing is climate change in action. The debate is over.
- by Nick Miller
The Global Warming Policy Forum in Britain has striven greatly to sow doubt on climate science and counted high-profile politicians in its ranks. It has hosted former prime ministers Tony Abbott and John Howard. The former said climate change, if it existed, was “probably doing good” and the latter dismissed global warming as a “religion” and the “latest progressive cause”.
“It just doesn’t make sense any more in 2018 and, in the middle of this summer, it just isn’t good enough any more to just frame the debate ‘is climate change real?’
“If you ask an adult of 30 years or older how was it like when you were young, they can tell the difference themselves. It’s the same story all around the world.” and we can all now observe it.
“As long as the BBC and other media give the impression that there is any significant doubt about this … then people won’t take action.”
It’s part of a bigger trend: extremists have weaponised free speech, insisting on platforms to publicly debate the absurd, to spread conspiracy theories and clog up sane debate. Any move to ignore them is branded censorship.
For precious decades experts have explained, over and over, that the science of climate change is incontrovertible, the consequences of blindly sticking with fossil fuels catastrophic and the costs of inaction far higher than switching to a low-emissions economy.But these facts had no impact on the sceptics, who cling to a worldview where they find “alternative facts”, where fossil fuel power is the only path to prosperity and mounting environmental and economic evidence to the contrary is some kind of dastardly leftwing plot.
Details on how exactly the US would withdraw are still being worked out, according to reports.
As records tumble on east coast, politicians debate the energy mix they need to combat climate change and ensure supply
A senior Nasa scientist has told Donald Trump he is wrong if he thinks climate change is not happening and warned the President-elect that government scientists are “not going to stand” for any interference with their work. Mr Trump has described global warming as a “hoax” perpetrated by China, vowed to unratify the landmark Paris Agreement and appointed a renowned climate-change denier to a senior environmental position in his transition team.
From droughts to floods to mega-storms, extreme weather over the past 365 days raises disturbing questions about future of climate chaos.
Skeptics think they’ve debunked global warming. Once again, they’re wrong.
The article, written by Christopher Booker (who flat out denies human-induced global warming), is somewhat subtly titled “The Fiddling With Temperature Data Is the Biggest Science Scandal Ever.” In it, Booker claims that climate scientists have adjusted temperature readings from thermometers in Paraguay to make it look like the temperature is increasing, when the measurements off the detectors actually show the opposite. The theme of the article is that scientists “manipulated” the data on purpose to exaggerate global warming.
This is nonsense. The claim is wrong. The scientists didn’t manipulate the data, they processed it. That’s a very different thing. And the reason they do it isn’t hard to understand.
Imagine you want to measure the daily temperature in a field near a town. You want to make sure the measurements you get aren’t affected by whether it’s cloudy or sunny—direct sunlight on the thermometer will increase the temperature you measure—so you set it up in a reflective box. Look: Right away you’ve adjusted the temperature, even before you’ve taken a measurement! You’ve made sure an outside influence doesn’t affect your data adversely. That’s a good thing.
So you start reading the data, but over time someone buys the property near the field, and builds houses there. Driveways, roads, houses leaking heat…this all affects your thermometer. Perhaps a building is erected that casts a shadow over your location. Whatever: You have to account for all these effects.
That’s what scientists do. That’s what scientists did. They examined the data from these thermometers all over the world, and tried to minimize the impact of outside influences. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be able to trust the data.
How you correct the data is important, of course, and this is where the second claim comes in: Scientists manipulated the data specifically to make it look like global warming is stronger than it really is.
Ah, but we know that’s not true! A few years ago, an independent group at Berkeley Earth took that same temperature data and re-examined it, processing it in a different way. Guess what they found?
Yup. The planet’s warming up, and pretty much just as the other scientists had said. You can read more about this in an excellent article by Neville Nicholls, who is an expert in how meteorological measurements need to be adjusted in this way. There’s more at the “…and then there’s Physics” blog and at Real Sceptic, and Skeptical Science has an article debunking this as well.
A graph is worth a thousand words. Here are the results of the Berkeley research compared with various other groups:
As you can see, there’s virtually no difference. As long as the measurements are processed properly they show what we know, what we’ve known, for quite some time: The world is warming up, and it’s warming up rapidly.
So, far from being “the biggest science scandal ever,” this isn’t even a scandal at all, and is in fact how science works. You can’t just take raw data off a detector and claim it’s real; if you do so, then at best you’d be fooling yourself, and at worst you’d be trying to fool others. And that’s certainly not how science works.