Waiting on Durban

While we’re waiting for some kind of decision/communique from COP17 in Durban, may I share a cross post/cross promotion from AllVoices:

This week in Durban young citizen journalists are challenging the popular stereotype of Generation Y. Gen Ys are supposed to be: self-obsessed; apathetic; disengaged; with limited attention spans; shallow online chatterers and gamers; little concerned for the future of the planet they’ll be inheriting.

Move over baby boomers! The twentysomethings are at the gates, in particular a new generation of committed and skilled young women activists. Many of them are in South Africa to cover the current United Nations COP17 climate change conference.
These web warriors are not just reporting the story. Increasingly they are the story, as they lobby to bring about climate action. Meet three of them.

Adopt a Negotiator tracker for Mexico, Andrea Arzaba, is an active blogger withGlobal Voices and Th!nk About It.

Young Ugandan Kodili (Chandia Benadtte Kodili) is an Activista Swarm blogger with ActionAid and Secretary for Female Affairs at the National Youth Council. She also has been part of Global Voices’ mentoring program.

The third young woman doing it for her planet is Gemma Borgo-Caratti, the NSW Coordinator of AYCC (Australian Youth Climate Coalition). She tweets as@beyondthinice and her concerns about Antarctica can be shared on her websiteChanging today for tomorrow.

Durban: Gen Y women doing it for the planet

The full post is here.

110 comments on “Waiting on Durban

  1. Thanks for sharing, Kevin. There’s a lot resting on the inter-governmental negotiations in Durban, but it’s important that we recognise all the grassroots networking that’s going on all the time too. Those women you introduced us to there are so impressive.

  2. America’s Position on Climate ‘A Tragedy,’ Losing U.S. Prestige to China

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2011/12/americas-position-on-climate-a-tragedy-losing-u-s-prestige-to-china/

    Alden Meyer, the Washington-based director of strategy and policy for America’s Union of Concerned Scientists, who has watched the world’s hopes for America as a champion in this field fall steadily in recent years, said today he now sees among negotiators from European and many other countries “not just tremendous frustration, but anger” as America comes to these climate negotiations with what he describes as ”little to put on the table.”

  3. Pingback: What’s the climate in Durban? | ikners.com

  4. Pip, What must Al Gore be feeling about the US position at Durban. And with a Democrat President too! Are individual states represented there, since it’s not all bad news from America? I know our effort has taken much too long and has been much compromised along the way, but at least we finally had sometthing to take to the table. How shameful had the Coalition won government, and possibly not even sent a delegation to Durban. What was their policy on that in the 2010 election?

  5. HI patricia, I imagine Al Gore must be extremely disappointed.

    I think Tony Abbott had a grand plan for ‘Direct Action’ which involved paying the polluters!

  6. Malcolm Turnbull says direct carbon action short-term fix by: Lauren Wilson From: The Australian May 19, 2011

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/malcolm-turnbull-says-direct-carbon-action-short-term-fix/story-fn59niix-1226058596541

    Mr Turnbull told the program that if a government was looking for a long-term solution to making deep cuts to carbon emissions, “a direct action policy where industry is able to freely pollute and the government is just spending more and more taxpayers’ money to offset it, that would become a very expensive charge on the budget.”

    Tony Abbott has committed to scrapping the Gillard government’s carbon tax, if elected. Instead, it has proposed a policy of direct action, which involves funding a series of measures to offset emissions, including boosting soil carbon levels to abate emissions, support for biofuels, and the planting of an extra 20 million trees.

    Obviously the Opposition leader isn’t aware that hundreds of volunteers
    are already nurturing seedlings and later planting them already.

    But 20 million ???

  7. Mr. Turnbull also said:-
    one of the benefits of the policy for its supporters was that, unlike a carbon tax, it could be easily wound back if climate change was proved not to be real or if no international action was taken.

    “If you take that rather grim, fatalistic view of the future and you want to abandon all that activity, a scheme like this is easier to stop,”

  8. Aussies score high at Durban climate conference

    http://asiancorrespondent.com/71371/aussies-score-high-in-durban%E2%80%99s-climate-rating/

    It’s probably time for the right wing opposition party to back off. For opposition Leader Tony Abbott specifically, it is time to review his hard-line stance against the carbon tax. Sadly, the Liberal Party missed the opportunity to score in this significant issue on Australia’s clean energy future. Abbott’s ‘direct action’ missed the international climate agenda.

    Clearly Asian journalists are paying attention; imagine what they would be missing if Murdoch was in charge of the Australia Network!

  9. Pip
    No doubt the Murdoch incharge scenario would be articles by (lord)Monkton and of course the hacked “climategate” emails.

    And talking hacked emails, a lot more to be revealed in the UK in coming months.

  10. Wow! – Cosa fareste voi a Durban? It all reads so liltingly! Reminds me why I chose Italian Renaissance studies half a century ago. The language is pure music. How satisfying for you to have your work translated, Kevin!

  11. Sue @ 7.20am, re the Murdoch scenario..

    How can climate change denialism be explained?

    http://www.themonthly.com.au/blog-how-can-climate-change-denialism-be-explained-robert-manne-4386

    Every time an article concerning the climate crisis appears somewhere in the United States, the United Kingdom or Australia, an army of climate change denialists emerges.

    and
    How, then, is the existence of climate change denialism and indeed its increase in recent years to be explained? There seem to me five plausible hypotheses.

    1. The first concerns the influence of vested economic interest.
    2. The second hypothesis helping to explain the contemporary profile of climate change denialism relates to the role played by the mass media

    3. To be effective, the roles played in the rise of climate change denialism by fossil fuel corporation propaganda and the right wing mass media probably required some overarching ideological rationalisations.

    4. Ideologues only feel comfortable when they hunt in packs.

    5. The leaders of the denialist campaign are however not whistling in the dark. The message they are selling is popular. The reason is reasonably straightforward. The majority of people in Western countries live now in a state of material comfort beyond the imaginings of all previous generations.

  12. It is good news, we should be two decades into a mini ice age by then.

    ‘If reached, the legal deal would not start until 2020.

    ‘Australia and other delegates at the conference welcomed the agreement as a breakthrough, but environmentalists warned it would do little to slow emissions in the short-term and left the world on a path to potentially dangerous effects of climate change.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/big-emitters-vow-action-on-climate-change-20111211-1opgw.html#ixzz1gDN2ilgx

  13. Ottawa, Canada, December 11, 2011: “Developed nations are not guilty of causing the climate change that developing nations claim they are suffering,” said Tom Harris, executive director of ICSC which is headquartered in Ottawa, Canada.

    “Climate changes all the time—both warming and cooling—due to natural causes and there is nothing that we can do to stop it. However, to the degree possible, and considering our economic circumstances, developed nations still have a moral obligation to devote a proportion of their foreign aid to helping the world’s most vulnerable people adapt to natural climate events.”

    Hear, hear!

  14. I fully agree with Patrica @1.44pm, how very inspiring Kevin to have your work translated into Italian.

    El gordo..ICSC..the International Council of Shopping Centers???? :shock:

  15. And an article on a farming method to be used in Africa,
    FARMER Mick Dennis believes a unique crop planting method that pumps his tractor’s exhaust fumes into the soil to boost the yield and health of his crop is the way of the future
    His biggest hope is for the technology to spread to other African nations. He plans to build affordable smaller kits for use by small-scale farmers in farming groups.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/environment/farmer-pumped-about-improving-crop-quality-20111211-1opu7.html#ixzz1gGBqDyu0

  16. “China’s current position actually remains pretty much what it has always been,” Reason magazine’s Ronald Bailey reported Tuesday from Durban. “It will accept legally binding limits on its greenhouse gas emissions when hell freezes over.”

  17. All signs are that Durban was a great success.

    To all but the oo that is.

    They must be having fits lol

    Also note the greens aren’t happy? Talk about hard to please.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-11/combet-says-climate-pact-validates-carbon-tax/3724698

    The Greens have also criticised the Government for failing to do more in Durban.

    Greens climate change spokeswoman Christine Milne says the Australian delegation drove loopholes into agreements and weakened targets during the talks.

  18. I reckon this falla underestimates the level of the oo’s pettiness

    The successful conclusion of Durban’s UN climate convention should draw to a close not just those negotiations but also phony debates here in Australia about a lack of international action, laying to rest once and for all a persistent argument against acting on climate change

    http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3725136.html

    I think we are about to witness another level to the ‘unhinging’

  19. Climate Change
    Momentum builds in Durban: smart countries take climate action

    http://acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=3583&eid=24344

    Date: 12-Dec-2011

    The agreements reached at the climate negotiations just concluded in Durban will advance action on climate but require strengthening over time, according to the Australian Conservation Foundation.

    Durban has succeeded in establishing a Green Climate Fund with commitments of $100 billion and a pathway for a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. It has also taken steps to establishing a 2015 timeline for a new global climate agreement, to include the US, China and all major emitters.

  20. As far as being a news item, Durban is now dead in the water. Does this suggest it was a success, given that the media no longer want anything to do with it?

  21. The media attacked it the only way they could, and they are right in this line. Nothing really happens until 2020.

    But the unbelievable thing was Abbott agreeing with the Greens.

    I just cannot work out what Abbott’s position is. He’s now saying Durban was a failure because it’s not doing enough and taking to long to do anything.

    I look forward to his expansive actions and the short implementation time frame he has articulated, wait on, I haven’t heard any actions from him let alone expansive ones and the only quick time frames he has articulated has been to dismantle stuff, not for anything constructive to help the world and Australia.

  22. Mobius, I think for Abbott to start getting some credibility back he needs to keep his mouth shut. And I don’t mean a head wobble.

    How is it possible for anyone to have no idea what they are talking about, and how come the media lap it up?

  23. Mobius, it would seem that Abbott would quite readily side with which ever team it was that would earn him anti-Gillard points. Abbott doesn’t have a plan or a philosphy, his sole aim is to ‘bring down the government’ and install himself as PM. I think that it was Cu who said, either Pope or PM.

  24. New book takes climate debate back to school

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/new-book-takes-climate-debate-back-to-school/story-e6frg6xf-1226220367220

    HE sparked outrage after questioning the science of global warming in 2009, but Ian Plimer remains as determined as ever to challenge mainstream science with a new book aimed at a much younger audience.
    John Howard launched Professor Plimer’s controversial new book How to Get Expelled from School, which received a standing ovation from the packed room of about 200 predominantly mining and business executives, at Tattersalls in Sydney last night.

    LOG IN ….or not.

    Cardinal Pell’s mine of climate misinformation

    http://www.readfearn.com/tag/ian-plimer/

    { Cardinal Pell quotes Ian Plimer. }

    Think tanks, oil money and black ops

    http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/32974.html

    No wonder that the battle for action on climate change is up hill all the way !

    .

  25. Howard at that book launch. John Howard now correcting his lie to the australian voting public, where he supposedly supported carbon trading. Yes he sniffed the voting public wind and thought yep i will support that.
    but it was just one too many lies to the electorate from johnny.

  26. HE sparked outrage after questioning the science of global warming in 2009

    I thought he sparked outrage because he butchered so much of the science.

    The crap about volcanoes was the most well documented at the time, although there were many other similar cases.

    Yes, howard back peddling quickly. It is all about the ‘rest of the world’ moving that way.

    Obviously, he missed a great deal of the Durban talks.

  27. No doubt Howard and Plimer will be arguing “balance” in schools and with the help of Vic, NSW and WA the public schools will purchase the book for all the students.

  28. the public schools will purchase the book for all the students.

    I think if they did that, after the way his previous book was exposed for the scientific fraud it was, there would be a fair outcry.

  29. Yes Migs, there was none of this talk of ‘we will wait for the rest of the world’ prior to the 2007 election (although I would have assumed that, had they won, it would have materialised)

  30. Perhaps it could have bee called How to lose lose your seat while serving as Prime Minister.

    OMG, it’s nearly 9:30! Time to head downstairs for a latte.

  31. From the Unleashed link @ 2.37am, http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/32974.html

    The bloggers are motivated not by financial gain (indeed, their activities may have a financial cost) but by political grievances and an anti-elite worldview at odds with the mainstream.

    Nevertheless, it is true that the raw material that feeds their anger is generated overwhelmingly by a network of right-wing think tanks and websites in part funded by Big Carbon. These links, which have been heavily documented, are close enough to provoke the Royal Society to take the unprecedented step of writing to Exxon Mobil asking the company to desist from funding anti-science groups.

    Yet the funding continues, often through foundations that in effect launder oil and coal money to make it more difficult to trace to its sources. One of the more important conduits is the Washington-based Atlas Economic Research Foundation. Atlas supports financially a network of some 200 libertarian think tanks around the world, including (according to an investigation by US magazine Mother Jones) the Institute of Public Affairs and the Centre for Independent Studies in Australia.

  32. Howard launches ‘anti-warmist manual’ for kids

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-13/howard-lends-support-to-anti-climate-change-book/3727650

    Mr Howard helped launch the book and last night said the “progressive left” had a “grip on the commanding heights of education instruction in this country”.

    and

    A peak body representing science teachers says Mr Howard does not understand the way science is taught in schools.

    Science Teachers’ Association of NSW president Margaret Watts says Mr Howard is wrong when he says climate change has a “significant capture” on the education system.

    “What science teachers do is put all of the facts, pro and con, against any topic, whatever it is, and show the children how to work through the evidence,” she said.

    Ms Watts says its clear Mr Howard does not understand the current syllabus.

    1. What happened to Bonsai’s declaration after he lost his seat that he would nor be commentator ?

    2. Is this a part of Mr. Howard’s new career on the speaker’s circuit.

  33. Pip

    And every day the ABC has the IPA on the tele, the ABC needs to run across the screen IPA funded by Exxon, anti-scientists and other climate denialists.
    But they may have started doing that on the Drum, it is just I have given up on watching.

  34. No Sue, the IPA parrots are still there !

    Over confident, dogmatic parrots.

    Kevin’s article, at the top of this page, proudly mentioned the young citizen journalists
    and Mr. Howard and Professor Plimer had their critics last night.

    Guests to the book launch were greeted outside by members of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition.

    “We’re here to remind people that it’s so irresponsible to put out false science when the science is in,” coordinator Kirsty Albion said.

    Four lines at the end of the Howard story. I look forward to an opposite view given the same number of lines in the near future, which is what the Prime Minister requested on the day that she replied to a journalists question about their reportage style.

  35. Also from the Unleashed article:-

    Black ops

    The deployment of think tanks and sceptic websites to attack climate science has been a carefully planned strategy that was developed in the United States in the mid-1990s. It was refined with the advice of political consultant Frank Luntz who in 2002 urged the Republican Party to undermine the credibility of climate science by commissioning “independent” experts to “make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate”. The strategy is comprehensively exposed by former PR insider Jim Hoggan in his recent book Climate Cover-Up.

  36. Howard openly supporting this propaganda book for the polluting industries categorically proves he went to the last election on an absolute lie.

    His ETS, the one Rudd mostly took up, was a sham and he would have abandoned it the moment he won the election, just as Abbott will abandon his hair brained scheme.

    Rudd reneging on his ETS based on Howard’s lost Rudd the confidence of the people and the leadership and going on that, Howard would also have been canned for dumping his ETS.

    At least there is no hiding the fact or making excuses for Howard, he has now clearly shown to everyone he is an opportunistic liar when in pursuit of his own ego and interests, and screw everyone else, the nation and the world.

  37. Mobius,
    Howard is a ‘whatever it takes’ kind of bloke… well no he’s never struck me as being a ‘bloke’, but ‘whatever it takes’ rings true.

    He also clarified why he went to the 2007 election promising an emissions trading scheme.

    “I proposed an emissions trading scheme and some people say, ‘Well why on earth did you do that?'” he said.

    “[It was] predicated on the rest of the world moving in the same direction and also predicated on a structure that would preserve the international competitiveness of those industries that gave our country a competitive trade advantage, it could do no harm.”

    And, could, as has been said of Abbott’s useless Direct Action, be easily unwound at any time, in order to keep sweet with Big Carbon.

  38. Cu, that is certainly true. Sometimes one has to wonder when the MSM is going to catch up with Howard and remind us about the Howard Years. I suspect not until the Liberals are once again in their rightful place, in government. However, even then I’m not hugely optimistic.

    But then on the other hand, two years is a long time and the media does like close race so we may see some more scrutiny surface in the lead up to the next election.

  39. With thanks to Race Mathews for the link:

    The problem has always been the same: National governments lack the will to challenge entrenched constituencies and take economic risks in the name of a problem that most populations still see as geographically and temporally distant. Only when a critical mass within those populations becomes noisy and powerful enough to push governments into action will the U.N. process come unstuck.

    http://www.grist.org/climate-change/2011-12-12-the-top-five-takeaways-from-the-durban-climate-talks

  40. Tom..awww, don’t worry about being late for the party..we’ll wait for you. :)

    The science isn’t good is it. The thing that gets to me at times is how can we humans be so stupid. My Torres Strait Islander/Aboriginal/Solomon islander inlaws have a deep respect for the land, I suspect that they consider themselves part of the land yet we from other climes treat the environment to be either something to be tamed, something to be ignored, something to be shaking a fist at (see shaking of fists when the rains don’t come), but certainly respect is not a part of the agenda.

  41. Tom, I am sure most teachers will have answers to the questions.

    Maybe then the kids can go home and correct the parents.

    Most of the questions are not hard to answer, as most are taken out of context or straight out lying.

    The teacher has only to say to the child, go and check yourself.

  42. Most of the questions are not hard to answer, as most are taken out of context or straight out lying.

    I agree, for a trained science teacher, they shouldn’t be hard to answer. Unfortunately, many schools don’t have trained science teachers, they use any teacher they can get to teach science from a syllabus. Also, many other teachers might be bugged by these questions, who might have no idea about how to answer. The correct one should be ‘go and ask a scientist’. Unfortunately, in my experience, many teachers don’t like to reveal a lack of knowledge to students (to their own detriment).

    The fact that howard has put his name behind such a disingenuous book speaks volumes, and perhaps hints into how serious his ETS plans truly were.

  43. I think that we are fairly safe, from Pip’s link yesterday 10.27am

    Science Teachers’ Association of NSW president Margaret Watts says Mr Howard is wrong when he says climate change has a “significant capture” on the education system.

    “What science teachers do is put all of the facts, pro and con, against any topic, whatever it is, and show the children how to work through the evidence,” she said.

    Ms Watts says it is clear Mr Howard does not understand the current syllabus.

    I admit to not having taught in NSW schools only in Victoria but one has approved texts to teach the syllabus. A teacher might then have something called ‘optional reading’. The Plimer piece as endorsed by John Howard “might” be optional reading, if a teacher chooses it, “if” it is approved as optional reading.

    According to Ms Watts it would seem that this book could be approved as optional reading, but as Ms Watts states the job of science teachers is help children learn how to research and analyse and that children need to be presented with contrary views. I agree. However, I have found that for the most part children have a good deal of common sense.

  44. It’s just not the same debating this subject without el gordo’s gems of wisdom. Although I do find the current commenced rather balanced, a dissenting opinion should be encouraged. I am still a bit disappointed she was only here for a stir as I believe she could have much to contribute, if she had the intention to do so.

  45. Roswell, I agree. Although I agreed with el gordo on just about nothing to do with climate change, I did admire her persistence. I think that we were about to embark on a subject to do extraterrestrial life which I think that a number of us here would have enjoyed debating.

  46. Roswell, she was a failure as a stirrer.

    I do miss having no one to disagree with though.

    I suspect she will miss us more than we do her.

  47. Catching up,
    I’m sure that we can disagree if we work on it. There is a difference between debate as we saw earlier here where Shane stated his opinion and I disagreed with him. I think that a number of others also disagreed with him. Shane also said that that is what debate is all about. I find name calling tiresome if I want to listen to name calling I’ll visit the neighbors kids.

  48. Roswell/AntonyG, I tend to side with Cu on this one. El gordo doesn’t come close to providing dissent. She doesn’t even come close to offering a challenge. She waffles on about all sorts of crap and has the hide to call it debate. I’m afraid I don’t find the links she provides of any value. She cherry picks a couple of sentences to suit herself but if she was smart enough to read the full articles she’d find that on many occasions the links have actually turned against her argument. That’d make most people look foolish, which is spot on with her.

    You both may forget that it was noted that she has admitted elsewhere that her only purpose here was for a laugh. She was never serious about the debate. Her words, or something to that affect.

    I have received a number of emails about her. People find her a waste of time with nothing to offer. A hundred el gordo’s wouldn’t be worth one Möbius, one Shane, one Tom R or any other bloggers who used to take her on.

  49. I find name calling tiresome

    I know, and I also think it is a low, baseless act. However, the disingenuous way grodo presented his case, and the numerous times he was exposed as being a liar, and remained unrepentant over it, just made me throw away all forms of polite dialogue and call it for what what it was. I put up quite a few posts exposing grodo’s history, and, since he never attempted to explain, or, god forbid, apologise for flaming threads, then he gets what he gets imo. In fact, when I first called him a troll, he in fact agreed with me. I think it was only after it became my constant reply, it started to grate on him, at which point, he would just run away and cry about it and complain about those nasty melons. Well, at any time, he could have challenged it, he didn’t, he just kept on trolling.

    As good as opposing views in a debate are, I find most of them either just flaming of any kind of false argument, like grodo, or purely abuse sessions where two sides end up slanging each other off, without any kind of light being shone on the discussion.

    I have found just commenting on the one site here, without the distractions of the abuse or the flaming (now that grodo has scurried away), to be far more rewarding. And far less a waste of my time.

    Perhaps is because the opposing view is so thin on the ground that true debate never goes too far? (my flame for the day) ;)

  50. Fine then. I still liked her.

    I will add that, when he kept himself to politics, he often added quite positively to the debate. His consistent mangling of the AGW debate was intolerable to me however.

  51. Meanwhile, plimer is out humiliating himself. It makes you wonder just what kind of expm would put his name to a book about climate science written by a geologist who gets pwned on his own ground by a journalist

    That link from Lionel is well worth a look. http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2011/s3390224.htm

    Plimer dancing around a simple fact like a dervish, all so he doesn’t have to admit he was wrong about asbestos. He can’t barely even bring himself to say the word.

    “MATT PEACOCK: With respect, Professor, it’s called asbestos scientifically too.

    IAN PLIMER: I’m sorry. You are just a journalist. I have spent my life studying minerals. Look up any basic mineralogy textbook, the sort of thing that we give to 18-year-old students at university, and you’ll see that chrysotile is a serpentine mineral.

    MATT PEACOCK: Called asbestos.

    IAN PLIMER: A family of serpentine minerals.

    MATT PEACOCK: Called asbestos.

    IAN PLIMER: Whereas asbestos minerals are amphibole minerals.

    MATT PEACOCK: Amphibole but crocidolite and amosite but chrysotile but is part of the family called asbestos. Is it not?

    IAN PLIMER: I am sorry. You are demonstrating mass ignorance. You are out of your depth. I invite you to come to some elementary first year mineralogy lectures and you will learn…

    MATT PEACOCK: And isn’t chrysotile ….

    IAN PLIMER: … the difference between amphiboles and….”

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/12/monckton_debunks_monckton.php#comment-6167707

    The audio from the link (within the link) IS worth a listen to. As the commentators at deltoid say, plimer does the munkton, and tries to bluster over the journalist with his credentials, which appear to be disintegrating around him. Adelaide Uni should hang their heads that one of theirs could so badly bring the sciences to this level.

  52. With thanks to friend Margaret M. for the link:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=species-face-move-die-climate-change

    The climate is changing faster than many species can adapt, forcing them to move to new habitats and drastically altering their range, according to new research.

    Shifting weather patterns and rising temperatures are rapidly outpacing biological adaptations in certain organisms. Two studies that emerged last week highlight how this has happened in the past and may play out in the future in cold- and warm-blooded animals.

  53. Of course Min, we would hear from certain corners that .the climate has changed before’. But previous changes have had identifiable natural causes to them. What the deniers don’t provide is a reason for why it is changing so rapidly now.

    This article also highlights the vast adaptations that a small change in climate requires.

  54. Tom, that was my argument on my earlier topic that it is not possible to adapt quickly enough. El gordo mentioned about migration of species, and I agreed that certainly did happen however in a 21st Century world the options for migration of species are far far more limited. We humans have taken up a good portion of viable land, one way or the other.

  55. Precisely Min.

    Also, from your link

    The rate of climate change is substantially faster than climate shifts observed over the past 5 million to 10 million years,

    With no other valid hypothesis to explain it. Makes plimers arguments seem even more ridiculous.

  56. Plimer’s arguments are as extinct as many species are destined to become. We are custodians of this planet and the topic of the extinction of species is one thing that the denialati avoid. Their argument is that it isn’t going to happen when all valid scientific sources know otherwise.

  57. The problem is that they take a small part of the facts or truth and then proceed to twist it to serve their arguments.

    Example. There has always been climate change. Yes, that is true.

    The mis-truth is that these changes occurred over a much long time frame than what is occurring today.

    The Other is that CO2 is not an pollutant, and is necessary for plant growth. True, but only in small amounts. When in excess, it becomes a pollutant.

    There are many more. In fact their whole case is based on similar claims.

    Mr. Howard was upset at the word deniers, saying that it misrepresented what those against climate change were trying to say.

    Mr. Howard believed the word was used to demonise these people. What Mr. Howard ignores that anti warmist continue to do, is twist language for their own use.

  58. Catching up, this is what the denialati do not under stand, that there is a difference in the climate changing and climate change. A naturally changing climate given time for adaptation, one that accelerates due to climate change does not.

    The argument is correct, CO2 is not a pollutant per se as it is naturally occuring substance compared with an artifically manufactured substance.

  59. Cu, you are right and a comparison that I’ve used previously is arsenic..in appropriate amounts it is not a poison. The US EPA decided that any positive aspects of excessive CO2 were far outweighed by the negative.

  60. The argument is correct, CO2 is not a pollutant per se as it is naturally occuring substance compared with an artifically manufactured substance.

    But naturally occurring substances can be pollutants, when found in excessive quantities, which why they are correct to refer to it as C02 pollution. It is important that they specify the pollutant part, as they are not referring to C02 per se, but the excess C02 we are putting into the environment.

    Of course, the denialiti need to even argue over this word, as I guess science is a losing ground for them.

  61. Tom R, I do recall your writing one time that if CO2 is not a pollutant then that person should go an live on Venus. That caused me to chuckle at the time and I’ve always remembered your comment.

    I do not understand the Denialati’s argument at all, it is so simplistic to deny all reasonable explantion. It is equivalent to stating that one Big Mac is good so that 100,000 Big Macs won’t hurt you.

  62. I wasn’t sure where to put this one… :)

    ‘God particle’ does not believe in God

    THE particle named after God last night stressed it was not religious in any way.

    Higgs Boson admitted he was responsible for the paint, the brushes, the artist and the ceiling.

    Higgs Boson, a 14 billion year-old particle from the absolute centre of the universe, used its first fleeting contact with humanity to reject the notion of an omnipotent space wizard.

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/science-%26-technology/'god-particle'-does-not-believe-in-god-201112134669/

  63. Actually, the planet was Mars Nimue, but either works fine. ;)

    They still haven’t taken up the challenge yet either..

  64. Tom, I was speaking with a couple of scientists recently..ok, so they’re my daughters, but both stated that Australia is so far behind the times..here we are still arguing about the reality or otherwise of climate change while the rest of the world (with the exception of the USA of course) are all about looking for solutions.

    The denalists, so much hot air..so few solutions.

  65. I read recently Min that denialism is strongest in English speaking countries. Can’t recall where it was now, although, but I would wonder if there was a reason for that.

    No probs Nimue At least someone is reading ;)

  66. El gordo had an explanation for the extinction if animals due to climate change. She called it survival of the fittest.

    I think it was an ill thought out explanation whilst moderately true.

    Naturally, but not by natural selection, species are going to die out if you destroy, diminish or pollute their natural habitat.

    Can’t agree with you on that one, el gordo.

  67. Will Greg Hunt get to work for big solar?

    http://100percent.org.au/blogs/will-greg-hunt-get-work-big-solar

    There are lots of unanswered questions when it comes to the Coalition and their approach to renewable energy.

    They support the Renewable Energy Target and they supported the creation of Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA). But more recently Shadow Treasurer, Joe Hockey, has promised to tear down the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and Shadow Finance spokesperson, Andrew Robb, launched an extraordinary attack on the renewables industry, describing them as “vested interests” and “white shoe salesmen”.

    Nero fiddled….

  68. Ferguson’s Energy White Paper ignores renewables

    http://100percent.org.au/blogs/fergusons-energy-white-paper-ignores-renewables

    Well, after sitting a team of fossil fuel execs down in a room together for a year or two, Energy and Resources Minister, Martin Ferguson has a produced a plan for Australia’s energy future that recommends….you guessed it, more fossil fuels. Gas, gas, gas! to be precise, with an option to go nuclear in the long term.

    Somehow, discussion of our energy future shunts renewables off to play in a corner while the big boys get on with the job of continuing pollution-as-usual.

    Putting the dirty into Clean Energy Future.

  69. Ferguson really seems to be captured by big oil doesn’t he.

    I would have liked to have seen far more come of this, and yes, far more in the way of renewables.

  70. I am too Pip. Imagine Ferguson there. He would probably have plimer in charge of the show.

    Speaking of which, and further to the Venus/Mars scenario, a Bernard J has an excellent idea for plimer

    Ask Plimer if he would be willing to breath for five minute eachs day, over a period of one year, from a bag filled with chrysotile dust. More interestingly, would he be willing to let his grandchildren do so?

    That would get to the nub of the issue.

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/12/monckton_debunks_monckton.php#comment-6185886

  71. Tom R, I don’t think these types have any concern for future generations, only theirs. As long as the kids have got money everything will be fine.

  72. I have wondered for years where Martin Ferguson is coming from, especially when he comes from a very strong left wing family.

    He seems to be in a world of his own.

    He does worry me a bit, but I do not think he will be given a long leash.

  73. Roswell @12.50pm and “the extinction if animals due to climate change” and survival of the fittest.

    Agreed, during the course of the history of the earth many species have appeared and disappeared due to the survival of the fittest. However, the ultimate result would be a type of monoculture, and no human wants to see this because the human brain thrives on diversity.

    Who would want to live in a plastic world, just you, me and cockroaches.

  74. Tim Lambert has a full post up about plimers melt down on radio when faced with a record of his own inability to know basic facts about his chosen field of expertise, far less his hobby of climate science denialism

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/12/plimer_suffers_from_crank_magn.php

    There’s a link to a post by tim blair, complaining that the nasty ABC is out to get the guy. But, as one brave soul posted there
    It’s not bias you people can’t stand at the ABC… it’s the truth.

    It truly is amazing that someone so exposed in his own field is given so much airtime on a subject he not only knows little about, but has been exposed so often as being completely wrong on.

    All in the aim of this so-called ‘balance’

  75. It is truly amazing that someone so exposed in his own field is given so much airtime on a subject he not only knows little about, but has been exposed so often as being completely wrong on.

    Gosh, one could think you are talking about certain bloggers. Now who could I be referring to?

  76. Migs and Tom..that quote that Tom stated is well worth repeating:

    It’s not bias you people can’t stand at the ABC… it’s the truth.

  77. Howard endorsed Plimer’s latest book and went further in saying it should be taught in schools and the left wing teaching on climate change be removed from the curriculum.

    Howard has never shown himself to be an idiot but he did so in fully supporting Plimer and his book, yet showed even further base ignorance in his remark on supposed left wing teachings and school curriculums.

    Without his tax payers’ army of advisers and PR people surrounding him, and guiding his every step, look and word, the real Howard is always revealed and you can see why he was banished to the darkest recesses of the Liberal backbench for so long and why he should have been left there forever.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s