The ‘El Gordo Effect’

Anybody who has been to Hong Kong recently would have noticed it is suffering from the dreaded el gordo effect. The condition is terminal.

“What is the el gordo effect?” you ask. Let me digress a bit in order to explain.

Arguments have been raging for some years now as to whether the planet is faced with the horrible prospect of world-wide climate change or not. I believe it is, but that’s not the argument I’m presenting here. I don’t have any problem with people arguing that climate change is just a big beat up, but I do disagree with the blinkered argument they thrust upon us. The disappointing argument they continually push is that in the case of Australia, as we only contribute 1.34% of the planet’s carbon dioxide emissions it is hardly worth the while for us to initiate any action about climate change. We’re too small. Too insignificant.

So then is Hong Kong, who only contribute 0.13%. In carbon dioxide emissions per capita we leave them in our wake, scoring 18.3 metric tonnes to their 5.5.

Hong Kong thus sounds like a squeaky clean place. But it is not. Again I must digress.

A further disappointing argument from the opponents of climate change is that they see no problem with polluting the country, again based on the argument that we are too miniscule to cause any damage to our environment. It’s quite OK to pollute the waterways, the soil and the air because, after all, we are so insignificant. Goodness, we only contribute 1.34% towards the planet’s carbon dioxide emissions so who really cares what we do? With any luck we’ll slip by unnoticed.

Hong Kong is a shocking example of where unrestricted pollution can choke a city despite being a minnow, like Australia, in the emission charts. Subsequently, it has fallen victim to the dreaded el gordo effect.

I now return to the question, ‘what is the el gordo effect?’

The el gordo effect is the result of:

sterilising a country because it’s OK to ignore climate change as it doesn’t matter to us so we can continue to trash ourselves.

So then, what has the el gordo effect had on Hong Kong? Simply, it is ecologically dead. It is a sterile lump of dirt where nothing can live in its natural state. There are no flies, spiders, insects or even ants. It is too sterile for them to survive. You won’t see any birds. It is too polluted for them. If you don’t like bird shit or spiders then you’ll love Hong Kong, unlike the thousands of people who walk the streets wearing face masks as the air is too putrid for them to breathe.

A bit like the Sydney of the future, really.

Is the el gordo effect coming to a city near you?

220 comments on “The ‘El Gordo Effect’

  1. What is this some justification for a Carbon Tax?
    Better still why not get our Union mates to put a total Embargo on all imports
    from the highest polluting countries? eg China India and all of Asia
    – Simple solution for simple folk.

  2. Is this el gordo’s problem:

    Air pollution causing cognitive decline in seniors

    Los Angeles, California, 17 November 2012

    …Dr. Allshire’s results revealed that participants that were residing in areas with high air pollution had poor scores on the cognitive function tests. After taking into account several factors that had included age race/ethnicity, education, smoking behavior, and respiratory and cardiovascular conditions, the link still remained the same.

    http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13420775-air-pollution-causing-cognitive-decline-in-seniors

  3. The “we’re too small… what about all those big polluting countries…” argument’s always enraged me more than the other arguments from the denialistas because it dovetails perfectly with the arguments of the very people it purports to criticise.
    The people in these countries will say, correctly, that Australia is among the most, if not the most, heavily polluting per capita nations on earth.
    They will point out, correctly, that a pretty average Australian lifestyle is inconceivably grand by the standards of the vast majority of their country’s population.
    They will then say “Well, if a rich, small, fortunate country like Australia can’t be bothered doing anything at all, why the fucking hell should we continue to load the entire family including Grannie & the dog plus a week’s groceries on an underpowered motorscooter???”
    And so it goes round & round…

  4. That’s the conservative approach. Don’t do anything, let the other guy start. If everyone had that attitude, nothing would ever get done. Civilisation would grind to a halt.

    Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.

  5. Cuppa says, If everyone had that attitude, nothing would ever get done. Civilisation would grind to a halt.

    When you think that almost half the voting population of Oz agrees with VOYAGER about this, one has to accept that civilisation is already grinding to a halt.

  6. I….. for …one … have not laid down and given fuck’n up…… I’m a labourer on a council….. one could construe:- not the sharpest ‘tool’ in the shed……ay….. thats as maybe…. but at the very fucking least I have an understanding of how dumb I am…. but I do have the capacity to ‘get it’…. ay Passion v Braims
    I am a founding member of an Arboretum committee… WHY??….. because I understand how many in my community don’t even ‘know’ the local environment (and its flora ) that they are living in…… if I can ‘get it’ there has to be hope…………..
    …thats why I started Wattle Day events in my town….. my simplistic way of trying to inform…… then with a ‘couple’ of fellow dinkoms… we persued the possibility of starting up a LandCare group ..why ??…. BECAUSE THATS HOW ONE CAN GET THE MONEY NEEDED TO ‘DO’ WHATS NEEDED… and that takes more than shouting….AY 🙄 …. sorry my patience is wearing thin 😦 ….. I can’t do much, but I can DO…
    ….. thats why I say to the El Gordo’s of this world *WAKE THE F* UP*…. if a *dumb* F’n labourer from the ‘hill’, who has to spell check everything I write can ‘GET IT’ then there has to be hope ….. there has to be……… cue violins 😀
    …. on the positive side… can one be El Gordo infected… just say’n ….. over to you ‘skinny’ :mrgreen:
    ….. P.S. loves your works Migs 😉

  7. Voyager, what are you gibbering on about? There isn’t a carbon tax as you and your other halfwit mates know.

    And wtf have arsonists got to do with the fact that this country is possibly releasing more pollution into our atmosphere per head of population than any other country on the planet? Something you seem to wear as a badge of (dis)honour.

    Have you found another planet you can escape to and wreck when you stuff this one up so badly that you have no clean air to breath or water to drink?

    Perhaps the English shouldn’t have wasted their time cleaning up the Thames and other waterways just to stop a few thousand a year dying from diseases related to polluted water. After all pollution never hurt anyone, did it?

    And what a waste of time it must seem to you when they introduced laws to prevent the use of coal and wood burning fires for domestic use just to get rid of a spot of smog which after all only killed a few thousand a year and made the city so unhealthy to live in.

    But it couldn’t have been pollution which caused all the trouble, could it? Must have been unionists.

    And then there’s those silly sanitation laws which made it an offence to dump rubbish which included the byproducts (like blood and rotting flesh) of butchery and tanneries in the streets and waterways.

    After all, pollution never befouled the air and killed anyone, did it? Unionists, again. Using witchcraft, no doubt

    Cuppa, Migs, unfortunately I don’t think it’s a case of the conservatives thinking it’s just we who should just sit back and stick more pollution into our atmosphere, they don’t thinkanybody should make any effort to reduce pollution.

    After all, CO2 is just a harmless gas and we’d all like to be a bit warmer in the winter, wouldn’t we? And let’s face it, Queenslanders have always been a bunch of whingers, haven’t they? Moaning about a little bit of extra rain?

    Of course, when they start feeling the effects of inaction, the squealing and casting about for someone to blame for not acting sooner and faster will be fascinating. That’s when they’ll get stuck into Gillard for not going far enough to reduce carbon emissions.

    You will also be interested to note that when the great squeal commences, there will be absolutely no blame attached to Tony AGW is Crap Abbott for his obstructionist bullshit.

    And of course, they too will be completely blameless because nobody warned them that pumping CO2 into the air was dangerous. Who knew?

  8. Voyager, I also think you might have missed the point that I’m taking the mickey out of el gordo. I more or less accepted her challenge.

    Having said that, you might have noted that at least there is a serious side to this post. Again, that was lost on you. It’s just another example of where each post attracts right wingers with nothing sensible to say.

  9. Pingback: “Forgive them father , for they know not what they do” « Iain Hall's SANDPIT

  10. voyager, the revenue was zero, which shows the MRT is working.

    What is it with the wingnuts that they don’t bother reading up on how something works before attacking it, they just blindly and mindlessly attack or support based purely on their narrow minded ideology.

  11. Mo, the wing nuts complain about the introduction of the MRT then complain it doesn’t raise enough. Go figure. 🙄

  12. The Elgordo effect is causing global dimming around the plannet Seriously anyone that uses the scientific reality of climate change as a weapon of mass denial for political advantage is a mushroom. I just could not be bothered engageing…. Great post though migs, you put on a generous trigger feast mate. 🙂

  13. Dear Ed

    You missed the point of the exercise, which was to attract a lot more visitors.

    Instead, in your infinite wisdom, you have put the fat one in stocks so that the rabble can throw stuff.

    Particulate pollution has nothing to do with climate.

    Massive Fail

  14. Migs, you’re out and about early this morning, what happened? 😀

    el dildo, the fat one needs to be put in the stocks and have things thrown at her.

    It is all that she deserves.

    Cheers

  15. El gordo, it’s not like you to have lost your sense of humour. I was hoping for some robust debate on why some of the methods used to tackle climate change should not be good for the planet..irrespective of one’s belief in the issue.

  16. The IPCC predictions correct

    Once more, the religious ravings of the denialists shown to lack any substance.

    Professor Matt England from the University of New South Wales says the findings send a message to doubters.”Anybody out there lying that the IPCC projects are overstatements or that the observations haven’t kept pace with the projections is completely off line with this … the analysis is very clear that the IPCC projections are coming true,” he said.

    Professor England says the IPCC has prepared forecasts for low levels of emissions right through to the high end.

    “At the moment we are tracking at the high end in terms of our emissions and so all of the projections that we look to at the moment are those high-end forecasts,” he said.

    “Without any action on greenhouse gas emissions, it will be those high-end IPCC scenarios that are extremely costly to society in terms of extreme events bearing out in time.”

  17. The evidence has been around for years that the underlying cause of Global Warming has been anthropogenic in nature, and the evidence to hand now are that climate change is happening more rapidly than expected. And yet, we do nothing except vacillate about taking real steps to bring it under control. Should the thawing of the permafrost continue to increase we will see a runaway effect sooner than anticipated as all the stored methane is released into the atmosphere. Even implementing the precautionary principle makes sound sense now.

    http://deknarf.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/en-passant-8-climate-change-sceptics-conspiracy-theories/

    http://deknarf.wordpress.com/2012/07/19/food-for-thought-13-climate-change-the-elephant-in-the-room/

    http://deknarf.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/food-for-thought-3-spaceship-earth-%e2%80%93-%e2%80%98houston-we-have-a-problem/

  18. 😆 😆 😆

    Lord Monckton booted from UN Climate Summit

    Lord Christopher Monckton (pictured) had an opportunity to educate representatives of governments and dictatorships at the United Nations climate change summit in Doha, Qatar, about the fact that there has been no global warming for the last 16 years. However, after pretending to be a delegate from the regime ruling Burma to get at the microphone, the prominent climate realist was escorted from the UN Conference of the Parties (COP18) by the organization’s security.

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/13872-after-educating-delegates-monckton-booted-from-un-climate-summit

  19. loud munktoon is suffering his own grodo affect it seems Min. Others simply call it irrelevance . I hope they throw the book at him.

  20. ‘El gordo, it’s not like you to have lost your sense of humour.’

    Migs has the wrong headline to attract a broader field.

    El Gordo’s Dirty Weather is parody.

  21. Shows how low the denialists have got, when they have sunk to this to try and peddle their snake oil.

    He was always an embarrassment, now he’s just sunk further.

    The saddest thing is, I recall when they got the scientists together to present their case to the American senate, and munktoon was all the denialists could provide. The fact that America still finds itself where it is reflects that they are voting on their ideologies, not scientific knowledge

  22. ‘Although I’m sure he’ll deny that ‘

    That’s funny, so what could be more neutral that What’s Up With The Weather?

  23. Miglo
    DECEMBER 10, 2012 @ 8:29 AM
    I disagree, el gordo. It has been a fun exercise.

    OK

    Hovering somewhere between denial, irrelevance, exercise and fun

    Mad monkton…I am i
    n stitches @ the moment, thats funnier than the two Mathematicians solving his puzzle and he had to hock his house…:-)

  24. Squirm all you want Voyager; there is no carbon tax, but there is a MRRT. Those are the FACTS, something you don’t seem capable of understanding. But hey, you are a dingbat, so that explains a lot.

    Revenue is not a subject raised and it’s not the issue in this discussion, otherwise Migs would have used it as a discussion point for this post; another FACT you seem incapable of understanding.

    I suggest you acquaint yourself with the definition of a tax before you shoot yourself in the foot again or just get your hand off it.

  25. Deknarf
    There is a big difference between acting on the precautionary principle when the precautions that you are taking have the potential to be of value if the events you are worried about actually happen, however if the things you do are not going to give you any benefit in that worst case scenario then it is no precaution you are taking is misguided magical thinking that tries to do the pious thing to buy the indulgence of the deity.
    If I can use a motoring analogy.
    Imagine that you drive a Ford and you discover that it lacks a spare wheel the guy down at “Spiv and Sons” tells you that he has a really great wheel that comes off a Lamborghini its expensive but very pretty and you lay your credit card down and buy that pretty wheel even though you know that the wheel won’t fit your Ford. Now you have acted on the precautionary principle of buying a spare wheel but how useful will the wheel that you have bought , at great expense, be when you have a flat tyre?

  26. I have no idea what Hall is talking about, it is just gibberish,I don’t think he does either.

    Either the sauce or something he grows in the bush near his house.

  27. The residents of the UK are fortunate in that they can experience ice age conditions for a few months of the year.

    ‘IT could be a remote Alpine landscape. But this was Cumbria at the weekend after northern England was hit by an icy blast and a spectacular covering of snow.

    ‘Fair-weather hikers who frequent the desolate uplands stayed indoors while skiers, like this one enjoying the solitude of the hills around Alston, revelled in the conditions.

    ‘Most of the country will face bitterly cold temperatures for much of the week. Counties along the east coast are likely to be hit by sleet and snow over the next 48 hours.’

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2245382/UK-weather-Wednesday-set-coldest-day-year-temperatures-dropping-8C.html#ixzz2EbtO9PQI
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  28. No, I believe our visitors needs nothing to keep themselves wound up.

    Their egos carry the day for them.

    It is the belief that they know more that others, that drive them.

  29. This is where the rest of the world is..minus the sceptics that is..negotiating.

    DOHA: The two week long climate talks in Doha came to a close with 194 countries agreeing to implement a second phase of the Kyoto Protocol, from 2013 through 2020. The Doha round of talks mark the beginning of a transition to a new global climate change regime that will come into effect from 2020 and include within its ambit all countries….

    Opening up the possibility of rich industrialised countries compensating developing countries for losses due to climate change. This is perhaps the most important contribution of the Doha talks. A recognition that was hard won by developing countries and likely to be contentious in the years to come.

    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/un-climate-change-negotiations-2012-admitting-to-20-years-of-mixed-results-doha-agrees-to-fresh-gas-emission-cuts/articleshow/17546299.cms

  30. ‘Despite a flurry of grand initiatives, Doha 2012 has yielded few specifics – with Europe the only major carbon emitter prepared to set clear emissions targets. Its zeal is likely to hamper growth, while doing little to lower worldwide CO2 levels.

    ‘The two-week UN climate change conference in the oil-funded opulence of Qatar had to be extended by a day to produce an agreement that is only as much in name. The lasting image of the summit was chairman Abdullah bin Hamad al-Attiyah bringing down his gavel and declaring “It is so decided!” as delegates in the auditorium continued to bicker.’

    http://rt.com/news/europe-doha-kyoto-carbon-emissions-670/

  31. Min
    its stuff like this that makes we sceptics so cynical about the Climate change religion:

    Opening up the possibility of rich industrialised countries compensating developing countries for losses due to climate change.

    Why on earth should the “rich industrialised countries” pay “compensation” and foot the bill for “mitigation” on top of that? the whole thing just smacks of socialist wealth redistribution using the pretext of the AGW hysteria. Its dishonest and entirely unsustainable.

  32. Iain Hall I agree with you, it couldn’t be any clearer.

    Iain if you have a spare wheel, it must be versatile and be able to fit a Lamborghini and also lawn mower. It must also be of a colour that makes it visible on rainy days, and preferably round. A tyre on it is usually good, but not mandatory. One should never pay a carbon tax on the valve in the said spare wheel.

    Pink Batts must not be put in the boot of the Lamborghini, Italian cars are not designed for global warming, they should only be driven with the spare ready and available should one find out the tyre has to much air in it.

    I am not now or ever been a member of the communist party.

    Iain your brilliance is like a beacon of light. Like your blog’s motto ” Bringing light into the darkness ” I don’t why people have been taking the piss out of you all these years, Iain I understand perfectly.

    Iain you old dog, you’ve been sneaking in those lessons in Swahili to impress us all haven’t you?

  33. Iain, this is not about climate change denial, it’s about creating a less-polluted environment.

    Do sceptics think pollution is OK?

  34. No Migs I don’t think that pollution is OK, its just that I don’t define “pollution” to include something as innocuous as CO2 nor do I confuse the issue with things as misleading as “per capita emissions”, something that is utterly irrelevant to the “problem” let alone any “solution”. If one were to assume that the AGW proposition is valid then surely what you should be concerned with is the absolute amount of emission and any nation state’s jurisdiction over them.

  35. Particulate matter in the atmosphere is pollution, the smog over China drifts to other countries and they’re not happy about it.

    At the other extreme there is a greenhouse gas causing concern, water vapour is on the increase.

    There has been wild speculation that our star might be indirectly responsible, needless to say this is wildly disputed in the halls of academia.

  36. The Doha negotiations coincide with the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in San Francisco, a five-day conference attended by 20,000 scientists, myself included, which provides a glimpse at the leading edge of climate research around the world. This is the research that helps us understand the reality of climate change…..

    and

    …….The Doha meetings are also accompanied by signals from the fantasy world of climate denial, as usual expressed not in the peer-reviewed literature but as an ‘open letter’ by purported climate experts to the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon. The letter claims that current scientific knowledge requires no action on climate change.
    To understand why climate denial inhabits a fantasy world we need to look no further than a few of the purported luminaries who sign such letters………

    and

    ………………So what is the real state of the science being presented at the AGU meeting in San Francisco? What do the geophysicists tell us about the state of the climate and of our planet?
    The program for a single day of this meeting consists of a 50-page broadsheet that lists literally thousands of events: you can follow along online here. Talks, workshops, scientific posters, keynote addresses, all running in multiple parallel sessions in three buildings. Even with the help of the daily program booklet and the AGU iPad app it takes an hour every morning simply to navigate the smorgasbord of science and to select interesting sessions to attend.
    There was the session on The Climate of the Common Era, or the presentations of the New Atmospheric Sciences Fellows. Then there was the particularly interesting session on Construing Uncertainty in Climate Science (maybe that one was particularly interesting because I chaired it).
    There was the keynote address by Sir Robert Watson, who explored the implications of our current emissions path, and the fact that we are likely heading for a world that is 4 or 5 degrees warmer by 2100 than it was before industrialisation, with consequences that are alarming rather than alarmist………..

    and

    ………..here is, however, one issue that is not being debated: Nowhere is there a debate about the fundamental facts that the globe is rapidly warming and that human greenhouse gas emissions are responsible for that warming.
    That scientific debate ceased decades ago.
    It is only in the fantasy world of climate denial that ignorant chatter about those physical fundamentals continues, to the detriment of the public which would be better served without such distracting noise.
    Among the 20,000 geophysicists and scientists from other disciplines in attendance at the AGU meeting, there is no mention of the denialist troupe of cranks who do ‘science’ by writing letters to the editor.
    With one exception..

    http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/real-debate-climate-was-san-fran

  37. Joker.

    It really just re-enforces it doesn’t it lol

    It is only in the fantasy world of climate denial that ignorant chatter about those physical fundamentals continues

  38. In 1990, climate scientists from around the world wrote the First Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It contained a prediction of the global mean temperature trend over the 1990–2030 period that, halfway through that period, seems accurate. This is all the more remarkable in hindsight, considering that a number of important external forcings were not included. So how did this success arise? In the end, the greenhouse-gas-induced warming is largely overwhelming the other forcings, which are only of secondary importance on the 20-year timescale.

  39. P.J. @ 1:38 ptm

    Iain Salono mi konsentas kun vi, ne povis esti iu pli klara.

    Nu vi nun parolas la diskuto lasas vidi kiel vi iradas …

    Iain se vi havas liberan rado, ĝi devas esti versátil kaj povos persvadi Lamborghini kaj ankaŭ gazono mower. Ĝi devas ankaŭ esti de koloro kiu faras videbla en pluva tagoj, kaj prefere ĉirkaŭvojo. Al pneŭo sur ĝi estas kutime bona, sed ne deviga. Oni neniam pagos karbono imposto sur la valvo en la diris anstataŭigoj rado.

    Neniu Se mi volas anstataŭigoj rado mi volas scii, ke ĝi havas la korekta PCD kaj kompensi kaj se “Spiv kaj Filoj” proponi al mi unu, kiu ne persvadis estus mi estos sagxa pagi multan monon por io ne tauxgas por mia celo?

    Rozo Batts devas ne esti metita en la kofro de la Lamborghini, itala aŭtoj ne estas desegnita por tutmonda varmiĝo, ili nur devas pelita kun la libera preta kaj disponebla se oni ekscias de la pneŭo devas multe aero en ĝi.

    Neniu vin klare ne komprenas italan automovilismo tute ne, lia tuta pri rigardas akran tiel bona vestoj estas pli grava ol tiu rozo Batt, ke vi povus havi en la trunko de Lambo …

    mi ne nun aŭ iam estis membro de la komunista partio.

    Nu tio estas tick en via favoro PJ 🙂

    Iain vian brilon estas kiel lumturo de lumo. Kiel viaj blog moto “Bringing lumo en la mallumon” Mi ne kial homoj estis prenante la piss el vi ĉiuj ĉi tiuj jaroj, Iain Mi komprenas perfekte.

    Awww shucks …..

    Iain vi maljuna hundo, vi estis sneaking en tiuj lecionoj en la svahila impresi ni ĉiuj ne?

    Neniu esperanto …..

  40. No new coal-fired power stations will be constructed in the US for some time to come, and that many old ones will close, thanks to cheap gas and EPA regulations. And, while there are some new stations coming on-line in the EU, closures will predominate there too, although they still need to work out what to do with Poland.

    But the big news is from China. Not that long ago, the standard story was that China was turning on two new coal-fired power stations every week. Now as this AFR report says, China is cutting back hard on coal expansion. China Electricity Council says that it expects coal consumption in 2015 to be below the 2011 level.

  41. Miglo will be pleased about the hits coming in from Europe, el gordo. They’re even commenting. They must have heard about the cellar.

  42. for those like Paul who have such trouble with English let alone Esperanto:

    P.J. @ 1:38 pm

    Iain Hall I agree with you, it couldn’t be any clearer.

    Well you are now talking the talk lets see how you walk…

    Iain if you have a spare wheel, it must be versatile and be able to fit a Lamborghini and also lawn mower. It must also be of a colour that makes it visible on rainy days, and preferably round. A tyre on it is usually good, but not mandatory. One should never pay a carbon tax on the valve in the said spare wheel.

    No If I want a spare wheel I want to know that it has the correct PCD and offset and if “Spiv and Sons” offer me one that won’t fit would I be wise to pay a lot of cash for something not fit for my purpose?

    Pink Batts must not be put in the boot of the Lamborghini, Italian cars are not designed for global warming, they should only be driven with the spare ready and available should one find out the tyre has to much air in it.

    No you clearly don’t understand Italian motoring at all, its all about looking sharp so good clothes are more important than the one pink batt that you could fit in the trunk of a Lambo…

    I am not now or ever been a member of the communist party.

    Well that is a tick in your favour PJ 🙂

    Iain your brilliance is like a beacon of light. Like your blog’s motto ” Bringing light into the darkness ” I don’t why people have been taking the piss out of you all these years, Iain I understand perfectly.

    Awww shucks…..

    Iain you old dog, you’ve been sneaking in those lessons in Swahili to impress us all haven’t you?

    No esperanto…..

  43. Oh Iain efectiviga.

    Bunga bunga mentell expressio. Yim ant a dumer stampa conna.

    ” That’s the most understandable post ians ever put up ”

    Exactamundo.

    iain is a man for all seasons.

  44. Iain Hall
    DECEMBER 10, 2012 @ 4:44 PM
    While we are on amusing vids how about this?

    Its shit and not funny. Neil Diamond would be horrified

    The difference is this guy is serious and a gold plated nutter

    This is a guy who claims:

    Hitler Youth …

    1: To be in the house of lords… NOT http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/july/letter-to-viscount-monckton/

    2: To have a cure for aids NOT

    So this is the poster boy for the Liberals on climate change…like everything the fiberals do its ill thought out and expedient for political advantage…

  45. People with a mortgage will be happy to know that interest rates are lower right now than at any time under Howard/Costello.

    Interest rates will always be higher under the Lieberals.

  46. Sadly with Paul its more than Grammar that is his challenge when it comes to the English language

    Look who is talking. the man who talks gibberish.

    The man who backs mockton, the man who wants TA to be PM and cannot give a reason why he should be PM. the man who think CO2 is not a pollutant. The man who doesn’t believe in AGW, the man who believes in everything that the LNP says without giving a reason why, the man who says he use to vote Labor but cannot give a reason as to why he changed his vote, the man who say ……..

  47. Sadly with Paul its more than Grammar that is his challenge when it comes to the English language

    This is another reason as to why people do not like you Hall, degrading people and thinking that you are better then them.

  48. the man who wants TA to be PM and cannot give a reason why he should be PM

    NONE of the Fiberals presented evidence of why Abbott should be supported. They were invited to do so by Miglo in a thread dedicated just to them. They came up empty-handed. They squirmed, spun, changed the goalposts …even denied that the invitation had been made!

    For those who missed it, here’s the thread. More than 620 comments and NOT ONE that made a case for Abbott.

    Right-wing ‘Liberals’ are All Spin, No Substance.

    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/the-right-to-be-heard/

  49. Miglo
    DECEMBER 10, 2012 @ 5:43 PM
    Ricky, to you mean to say Monckton is a fraud?

    Who would have thunk?

    Not many fiberals it would seem….

    This week I thought he was the sheikh from scrubby creek!!!

  50. Cuppa and,

    They came up empty-handed. They squirmed, spun, changed the goalposts …

    . The one exception being anyone but Gillard. This of course is no reason whatsoever, and especially considering when challenged about Why not Gillard, the only thing presented was the lie that “she lied” and other Liberal Party talking points.

  51. Hmmm…

    ‘CLIMATE Change Minister Greg Combet has disputed estimates of a cost to taxpayers from a global agreement to cover “loss and damage” by developing nations amid a row over compensation claims for extreme weather events.

    ‘Mr Combet hit out at The Australian’s report on the obligations today after developing nations and environmental groups welcomed the climate change deal as a way to increase help to poor countries hurt by rising sea levels, hurricanes or other events.’

    David Crowe in the Oz

  52. DOHA delegates are certain global warming is real.

    ‘This is despite the fact that nobody seems able to point to any great problems caused by the modest warming of the globe at the end of the last century — with global flood and hurricane levels plumbing levels rarely seen in the historical record, global sea ice levels at around their long-term average, new research suggesting that claims of increased levels of drought have been overstated, oh yes, and a distinct absence of any warming — there has been precious little for the delegates to get alarmed about.’

    Andrew Montford in the Spectator

  53. with global flood and hurricane levels plumbing levels rarely seen in the historical record, global sea ice levels at around their long-term average, new research suggesting that claims of increased levels of drought have been overstated, oh yes, and a distinct absence of any warming

    😯

  54. el gordo
    DECEMBER 10, 2012 @ 7:07 PM
    DOHA delegates are certain global warming is real.

    ‘This is despite the fact that Pigs fly out of my but and howdy doody in fact having fiberglass balls (citation needed, welcomed, encouraged,)

    I constructed a graph for you Gordo..You like em I see

  55. Mr Combet hit out at The Australian’s report

    And he has every right too. They are just making shit up again. If I was him, I’d start suing them for misleading readers

  56. “A further disappointing argument from the opponents of climate change is that they see no problem with polluting the country”

    Umm, no that is not exactly true…Opponents of MAN MADE climate change (formerly global warming) have serious issue with pollution but understand CO2 is not a pollutant.

    “It’s quite OK to pollute the waterways, the soil and the air because, after all, we are so insignificant”

    Another very disingenuous statement…It is one thing to dump toxic chemicals into the drinking water and quite another to think we are causing the glaciers to melt as they have before over the last 4.5 billion years…

    I would refer to the “el gordo” effect as the modern day version of “questioning and testing” as science is meant to facilitate such a phenomenon, not the alternative of unquestioned loyalty and demonization of opposing viewpoints shrouded in “science”. We already have religion doing that demonizing and unfettered faith thing…I am for science and scientist not neo-religious movements…

    Aside from the above there is this problem with the “warming crowed” in that with warming of the planet we have never seen life extinguished; no it flourishes…What we should fear and rightly so is cooling…The last time are species was in danger of extinction came from cooling not warming…So if you do accept or embrace the AGW theory you are afraid of what ultimately? Inconvenience and mass migration; we have that already?

  57. Sparta, one “inconvenience” will be that 10% of our arable land will become unavailable for food growing purposes. This is particularly important in Australia where so much of this scarce resource is already under concrete and bitumen, plus coastal. Unlike many nations we do not have vast fertile river plains.

  58. Roswell asked earlier about our star.

    As I mentioned before, its at solar max (we know this because its about to flip) and we have few spots. This is serious.

  59. @ sparta

    CO2 is not a pollutant.

    This is one of the more stupid assertions of the denialist religion.
    Anything can become a pollutant if it is in excess, particularly when its presence acts to degrade the environment in which it is present.
    For example. salt (NaCl) is necessary in maintaining human metabolism – consume too much and it will kill you, spread it over your garden, and the results will not be favourable to continued existence of the garden.
    In the same sense, any plant can be regarded as a weed, (despite the fact that it may be of some utility) if it occurs undesirable locations or numbers.
    Glaciers have melted before, and the reasons for such melting have been attributed.
    None of those factors apply currently – the search for current cause(s) behind current melting has clearly implicated increasing CO2 in our atmosphere, leading to warming (seen as, among other signs, the melting of glaciers, and thawing of the permafrost). Isotope studies show that the increased C originates from fossil sources, (oil and coal). Given that our civilisation has been burning fossil fuels in immense quantities, and no other source of such burning can be attributed, logic dictates that the “A” in AGW is correctly attributed.
    The claim that

    with warming of the planet we have never seen life extinguished; no it flourishes

    needs support, and with particular reference to the “flourishes” claim. as I understand, no human has experienced such a climate, although the so far accurate projections from the IPCC indicate that’s where we are headed.
    If one is addicted to a purely anthropocentric view of our problem

    Inconvenience and mass migration; we have that already?

    is an oversimplification at best.

    However, such a purely anthropocentric world view is limited, and incorrect, as it ignores the environmental services upon which we, and all other organisms depend.
    The fallacy in attempting to apply such a statement more generally, so to include other (macro-)organisms is demonstrated through the barriers our civilisation has created to their free movement.

    One is also obliged to consider that the current climatic changes are occurring at a blindingly rapid pace (geologic time), given the “epochean”(sounds like a word 😀 ) nature of previous changes, which occurred over millenia. The rapidity of current change precludes evolutionary adaptation for most macro-organisms.

  60. ‘Queensland senator Barnaby Joyce said the whole debate about whether humans were causing the climate to change was ”indulgent and irrelevant”.

    ”It is an indulgent and irrelevant debate because, even if climate change turns out to exist one day, we will have absolutely no impact on it whatsoever … we really should have bigger fish to fry than this one,” Senator Joyce said.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/sceptics-cool-on-climate-studies-20121210-2b5kg.html#ixzz2EhJUIU6K

  61. el gordo
    DECEMBER 11, 2012 @ 11:13 AM
    ‘Queensland senator Barnaby Joyce……….

    I always take run my scientific advice by Barnaby. He’s so,…., how can put it…hmmm…… “scientific”. I don’t know why he isn’t running the csiro with that towering intellect.. Maybe he could get Hartsuker to help him, he’s another pillar of intellect within that great scientific community that is the Nats..

  62. even if climate change turns out to exist one day, we will have absolutely no impact on it whatsoever

    So, even if it turns out we have an impact, we have no impact

    ROFL

    I guess he means that, by the time the denialists stop pretending that we can’t have any impact, it will be far to late for any impact we take to take effect 😉

  63. By the way Elgordo you are inline as a main contender for the whispers grand pisstake award 2012.

    here have a graph

  64. Sparkles of Arizona wrote:

    I would refer to the “el gordo” effect as the modern day version of “questioning and testing” as science is meant to facilitate such a phenomenon, not the alternative of unquestioned loyalty and demonization of opposing viewpoints shrouded in “science”. We already have religion doing that demonizing and unfettered faith thing…I am for science and scientist not neo-religious movements…

    This conflation of climate science with a type of religion, sometimes described as neo-pagan, sometimes as worship of nature or Gaia, and is typical of the el gordo effect. It is part of the ideological armoury of the denialists and is designed by right-wing think tanks such as Heartland to appeal to libertarians who are “religious” followers of Ayn Rand, who described herself as an atheist, and who mocked altruism and progressivism as religious beliefs.

    Inain has also been known to describe “warmenistas” (his derisive term for followers of climate science) as religious, and it is ironic that he has described himself as atheist, just as the followers of Ayn Rand do, yet has also recently described himself as a spiritual person who demonstrates the very same “religious” belief in the goodness Nature that he derides in others. Such intellectual confusion and moral hypocrisy is typical of the el gordo effect.

  65. ‘So, even if it turns out we have an impact, we have no impact’

    Barney can be funny on doorstops, but on this occasion he should have said “even if global warming returns, we will have absolutely no impact on it whatsoever.”

  66. “This is one of the more stupid assertions of the denialist religion. Anything can become a pollutant if it is in excess, particularly when its presence acts to degrade the environment in which it is present.”

    LOL….Now those that don’t subscribe to “your religion” are religious…You guys love taking an argument and making it your own when you have nothing left. Unfortunately by your definition so is H2O but I am not about to declare that a pollutant. Try not to confuse a “pollutant with toxin”. One is subjective the other is not…..Water can be toxic but it is not a pollutant.

    http://www.populartechnology.net/2008/11/carbon-dioxide-co2-is-not-pollution.html

    What I find comical is that to assert CO2 is a pollutant is to first subscribe to a “belief” in a) manmade climate change and b) that its ill effect “warming” is detrimental to us…You can do neither at the moment genius, only theorize as I am doing.

    “CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.” – Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Science, MIT

    Control…..”bureaucratic mentality”, ah the left in a nutshell….

    “needs support, and with particular reference to the “flourishes” claim. as I understand, no human has experienced such a climate, although the so far accurate projections from the IPCC indicate that’s where we are headed.”

    What support do you need that isn’t already readily availed? Thus far it is simply “warming” your “kind” state we must “fear” correct and if so why? Our ancestors have experienced extreme cooling (like an ice age for example successfully hence our common lineage to Africa) and I think without playing games we can both contend that life tends to flourish where there is warming not cooling (shall we compare the Arctic with the Congo for example). Perhaps you could point to some equatorial location in comparison to another (south or north) and find where I am wrong? That seems easy enough and requires no algorithm unlike your own theory? It is ludicrous to state I need particular “reference” other than the obvious when your entire “dire” theory is predicated on not being able to do the same…That is hilarious…

    “However, such a purely anthropocentric world view is limited, and incorrect, as it ignores the environmental services upon which we, and all other organisms depend.”

    Of which is under threat by “warming” how genius?

    “The fallacy in attempting to apply such a statement more generally, so to include other (macro-)organisms is demonstrated through the barriers our civilisation has created to their free movement”

    Oddly organisms have been transcending natures barriers over eons; ours included and had you a inkling of historical reference outside of your religion you might have easily notice these things (like how there are Europeans in Australia or cane toads or perhaps Sri Lankans?). The fallacy is in attempting to assert what you cannot by deriding my assertions which can be demonstrated as easily as gravity…

    “One is also obliged to consider that the current climatic changes are occurring at a blindingly rapid pace (geologic time)”

    LMAO! Ok, fine and at what pace and when can we expect total inhalation from “WARMING” genius (and what is that inhalation) given the algorithmic predictions? Since we are talking about 150 years of data vs. 4.5 billion? Oh wait, is the Jurassic period and its end sufficient enough for you? Honestly, I love debate and discussion but please try to refrain from starting things off with an insult. From what I can tell your assertions, though smug are hardly intelligent and simply highlight a historical ignorance on many levels and complete lack of COMMON SENSE….

  67. LOL. the “international man of sophistry” (© joni 2008) strikes again 😆

    What a load of fine sounding, but meaningless crap, as usual 😉

    pollutant (p-ltnt)
    A substance or condition that contaminates air, water, or soil. Pollutants can be artificial substances, such as pesticides and PCBs, or naturally occurring substances, such as oil or carbon dioxide, that occur in harmful concentrations in a given environment. Heat transmitted to natural waterways through warm-water discharge from power plants and uncontained radioactivity from nuclear wastes are also considered pollutants.

    The American Heritage® Science Dictionary Copyright © 2005 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

    Yes H₂O can be a pollutant 🙄

  68. I assert that denialism is a religion, as rather than evidence, denialists choose “belief” as a basis for their trolling.

    OTOH, there is extensive research behind, and evidence supporting the existence, mechanisms, and potential severity of AGW, which any who choose to can access, and query – although most has already been “queried” through the process of peer review, an important and necessary criterion in establishing scientific credibility, something denialism and its propenents generally lack.

    Thus, science (and its processes and outcomes) bears no relation to a religion, and in fact represents our best attempts at understanding reality through direct interaction, rather than through the ideological lens of an irrational belief system in conflict with reality, as is exemplified by denialism.

    I wonder at the genius thinking which decided that a “war on reality” was a way for the right, lacking policies, that would provide a route to power. Worked well in the US, didn’t it. ?

  69. Tom R & Bacchus,

    This is so amusing…We have an entire industry trying to define what CO2 is and isn’t…Ok, let me break this down for you guys…

    “Carbon dioxide, that occur in harmful concentrations in a given environment”

    From Bacchus’s post so what makes it “harmful” guys and in what concentration? Answer that one for me and we can go on. Or I can save you a bit of time, at what LEVEL is it harmful and in what context? If the context is WARMING right, so what’s the problem? Like I said, you have to first subscribe to the idea that WE are causing global warming or climate change and warming (the change) is bad for us/ the planet. Unfortunately for you “devotees” the geological record doesn’t really look doom and gloom. Are deserts more inhabitable then rain forests? Cooling iwould have been the proper way to scare people and politicians, for future reference…
    Oh and Bacchus, nice try but I was referring to water in the atmosphere (vapor) and not water which has been used to cool reactors etc…Water in itself like CO2 in itself…Now stop breathing or you will kill us all! LMAO….

  70. “I assert that denialism is a religion, as rather than evidence, denialists choose “belief” as a basis for their trolling.”

    Oh dear god….Are you familiar with the Scientific Method? Do you understand how a theory works and what it is?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

    How about a theory vs. a hypothesis?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis

    In a nutshell, science requires, demands “SKEPTICISM” and all theory should be challenged. When you go on about not being challenged or calling people who “question” a denialist you smack of a “disciple”…From the beginning it has been this way, your “lot” declaring game over when there is so much you can’t prove or replicate so please…If anybody is non-scientific it is you man. Come to grips with the concept of a “working hypothesis”…

    “OTOH, there is extensive research behind…….. necessary criterion in establishing scientific credibility, something denialism and its propenents generally lack.”

    Man…Look, I am not going to change your belief system here but there is a problem with your assertion like most believers who assert this and why it is losing credibility accept with its followers. You don’t understand the process for one. It has been so politicized and turned into a left vs. right thing it is way beyond emotional. The “devote” went right from saying CO2 is bad to we should tax it without getting into the details. Now you don’t have to be a “scientist to smell a used car salesmen”…Sorry, doesn’t really make for a convincing argument. Plus, credibility you say…I keep posing this question but perhaps you can answer it…

    If we have had heating and cooling throughout the last 4.5 billion years on a global scale (ice ages then warming, then ice ages) without mankind, what caused it?

    Answer: they don’t know but theorize…

    If you can at least agree on the question above, how do we know it is not these same factors we cannot explain from previous heating and cooling and is indeed man made now?

    Answer: they can’t and won’t explain…Hence the FAITH….

    This is a very basic question but I have yet to see it answered by any “devotee”…The plain answer is, that despite all the “peer reviewed” and endless government sponsored research a lot of the basics were skipped right over; ignored. Why?
    Yes, I don’t have a peer reviewed paper to refer to but I have something called the geological record which tends to be a bit more reliable than an algorithm; wouldn’t you say? Chew on that….

    “I wonder at the genius thinking which decided that a “war on reality” blah, blah”

    Now, now…there you go, just like a “believer” to change the subject and go on a rant about something that has nothing to do with what we were talking about. I think they call that a “distraction”…Do try to focus….LOL

  71. ” Oh dear god….Are you familiar with the Scientific Method? Do you understand how a theory works and what it is? ”

    Dear oh dreary dear, Same old bullshit, here we go again , more bollocks from the right wing denialist cracka jacks.

    So a lot of basics were skipped over were they?We don’t know who. But I bet it’s dollars to donuts you’re gonna tell us.

    So an entire industry is trying to work define what CO2 is or isn’t but, only the Sparta knows.

    Sparta is smarter.

    “Nanu Nanu”

    Sparta keep coming back, I would surely give up the will to live if not for my daily dose of comedy.You right wingers are funnier than a full season of the three stooges.

  72. P.J. and Silkworm,

    Well, I am always comforted by “intellectuals” who go right to personal insults minus the rebuttal. And the disciples wonder why “Joe public” is turned off by them and their “religion”…LOL…How about answering the questions? Any of them if you can or is this all you got? LMAO…The intellectual “left”….HILARIOUS….

  73. I gave you the answer, knucklehead. It’s called the greenhouse effect, but you are too conceited to notice.

    You have your head in the sand, and every time you laugh at us, you are getting a mouthful of sand.

  74. “greenhouse effect”

    Fine, you subscribe to that contribution as the end all be all in the “AGW” debate…But the short and sweet is, we have had heating and cooling minus said “greenhouse effect” in the past…CO2 rising doesn’t always coincide with warming for instance…Simply put, I respect your theory (unlike you, mine) but when the circumstantial evidence is so readily available, and easily calls in to question your “belief” it is rather perplexing that any group or person would declare the “debate” done…That’s all, “KNUCKLEHEAD”…..LOL

    What I find even more perplexing is that those who cling to the “CO2” warming correlation admit it is the “long term” we must look at…Well fine, so how long? 250 thousand is enough lets say in a system of 4.5 billion? What caused it to rise and fall in the past? I think it far more simplistic to say, “CO2 bad, we release CO2, we must be bad, we win, now lets tax”….LMAO…The intellectual might of that argument is astounding, or should I say, telling….

  75. We have an entire industry trying to define what CO2 is and isn’t

    No we don’t, what we have is a group of people denying not only scientific facts, but the English language as well.

  76. we have had heating and cooling minus said “greenhouse effect” in the past

    But not of this extremity without experiencing major environmental consequence, consequences that will affect the way we live detrimentally, far more detrimentally than turning off a light globe.

  77. ‘But not of this extremity without experiencing major environmental consequence,’

    This recent warming, the modern climate optimum, has been hugely beneficial.

    Unfortunately the global cooling period we are now entering (going on past examples) should produce starvation and war.

  78. An informative article by Associate Professor Peter Christoff..

    Think of how we view sellers of asbestos or heroin or tobacco. We no longer buy the argument that harm is a case of ”buyer beware”. We ascribe responsibility to the knowing, predatory traders of harmful substances. Coal is another such substance.

    Second, the more we depend on coal and gas export jobs and revenue, the more vulnerable we are economically and socially. Australia’s energy exports boom is unregulated, unstable and unsustainable.

    The retreat from fossil fuels has already begun in earnest, including in countries such as China, as renewable technologies come on line and the threat of global warming increases in urgency. Australia itself has adopted an emissions mitigation policy of -80 per cent by 2050. This is less than 38 years away.

    As I have stated a number of times..China is now the world leader in research into alternative fuel sources..the Chinese are not prone to flights of fancy nor do they spend a LOT of money purely for the fun of it.

    http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/end-old-king-coals-reign-now-or-wait-for-a-perfect-storm-to-hit-the-planet-20121211-2b7p7.html#ixzz2EmWHeYGD

  79. Fancy quoting Barnaby Goose! It just goes to show how halfwits find their own (right-wing) level. Right, el drongo?

    Key independents berate “fool” Barnaby Joyce

    The Age, 22 August 2010

    Two of the independents whose vote appears crucial to forming a minority government have expressed loathing for Barnaby Joyce, one of the Coalition’s most prominent frontbenchers.

    […]Bob Katter and Tony Windsor have derided Mr Joyce; with one calling him a fool and the other labelling him a “piece of incredible unfortunateness.”

  80. @Sparta

    If we have had heating and cooling throughout the last 4.5 billion years on a global scale (ice ages then warming, then ice ages) without mankind, what caused it?

    If one is claiming credibility, one should first examine the science, before attempting to recycle “worn out” denialist arguments. Constant repetetion of falsehoods neither validates those lies nor promotes your credibility.

    Ludicrously, (I certainly don’t have to consult Wiki to define scientific method) you claim that I don’t understand scientific method (although lacking evidence for this assertion), and go on to further claim of peer review,

    It has been so politicized and turned into a left vs. right thing

    By whom ? Certainly, the only times I have seen such a claim made, it’s being made by denialists unhappy that they are unable to provide any evidence capable of passing peer review in support of their fantasies – sort of like “Reality has a left wing bias”.

  81. “If one is claiming credibility, one should first examine the science, before attempting to recycle “worn out” denialist arguments.”

    Perhaps on that entire page you can find the reasoning for WHY it warmed in the PAST via CO2 or not? There is a vague mention of “volcanoes” but nothing else. I am all for “recycling” said questions when they have never been answered and happen to be FUNDAMENTAL to your “theory”….If this is basic stuff should be easy to find, right?

    Again, very clearly…WHY DID IT WARM IN THE PAST? Try to focus instead of linking to a page that explains how greenhouse effect is the purported culprit without answering the BASICS…You are the expert, I am just a crazy “denier”, should be easy…Prove me wrong, in simple terms for a simple man…I wait patiently.

    I will help, “CO2 is the cause and we can see in the past it was because XYZ happened etc”…Come on, you can do this…

  82. “But not of this extremity without experiencing major environmental consequence, consequences that will affect the way we live detrimentally, far more detrimentally than turning off a light globe.”

    How so Tom? What are these dire consequences that come with heating? Pretty easy question for such an expert as yourself…Want to take another stab at me or actually have a discussion?

  83. ‘The consequences of climate change become increasingly bad after each additional degree of warming, with the consequences of 2°C being quite damaging and the consequences of 4°C being potentially catastrophic.’

    Its a theoretical construct, concocted on models found to be flawed.

    The consequences of climate change becomes increasingly bad after each additional degree of cooling, with the consequences of 2°C being quite damaging (a mini ice age) and the consequences of 4°C being potentially catastrophic.

    There… fixed it.

  84. concocted on models found to be flawed

    bullshit. You not liking the story they tell does not make them ‘flawed’.

    They have stood up under more scrutiny and outright hostility than almost any other scientific process before it has. And still you make this bogus claim.

  85. No Sparta, I don’t claim to be an expert in climatology, (or anything else, for that matter) but will accept your assertion that you are

    just a crazy “denier”

    .

    Wrt to AGW I do however, respect the consensus of all global science institutions, and the vast majority of the actual experts in the field(s) involved, as opposed to the drivel of recycled lies, smears and misrepresentation so characteristic of denialism.

    If you actually knew about scientific method, you would perhaps have realised that the onus of “proof” lies with those making an assertion at variance with existing theory, as you are.

    It is up to you to validate your claims (mine are widely validated), as you are the one in denial, and I’m not the one to do your homework for you.

    Oh, and SHOUTING doesn’t actually lend credibility to your claims . 🙄

  86. the onus of “proof” lies with those making an assertion at variance with existing theory,

    Precisely pterosaur1. As it was back in the 50’s and 60’s, when AGW was just another theory. But, as the weight of evidence grew, it became an accepted theory, and now, the onus lies on the other side. To date, nothing has been provided to make a dent in the science. In fact, as with wtfuwt and his station analysis, it simply re-enforces the existing science

  87. @Tom R

    In fact, as with wtfuwt and his station analysis, it simply re-enforces the existing science

    Indeed, and “If memory serves me well” did not Watts proclaim before the B.E.S.T. study that he would back the findings of this study, no matter the result, only to recant once the study concluded ?

    I see an apt analogy for the deniers as being someone denying gravity, as it cannot be directly detected, and putting his faith to the test by leaping out of a high building, shouting triumphantly as he falls “See everthing’s OK, I’m free from your gravity scam”

    Unfortunately, for such a mythical character, reality promises a rude awakening, probably involving a loud SPLAT!!

    Reality always prevails.

  88. After DOHA

    Wealthy countries are expected to compensate poorer ones for the damage done by global warming.

    They ran a poll in the Guardian and 61% said it wasn’t a good idea.

  89. Pretty sure Guardian blogs and polls are ‘worked’ by astroturfers. The Guardian is a ‘natural’ and highly prominent target. Right, el gordo?

  90. So why would you cite online polls from there, given the (high) likelihood they’ve been gamed by RW astroturfers?

    Because RWFs are All Spin, No Substance. Right, el drongo?

  91. This thread has been derailed by the deniers. They should be punished for not restricting their pseudoscience to the dedicated AGW thread.

  92. Sparta of Phoenix, AZ USA

    December 12, 2012 @ 2:32 am

    ” P.J. and Silkworm,”

    I am not going to rebut anything you put on this blog, for the very reason there is nothing to rebut. Zero, Zip, Zilch. I will give you the same treatment as I give to any denialist, nothing but contempt.You are not a scientist and like 99.9 % percent of the denialist camp, you repeat ad nauseum the postulation’s of other denialist half wits.

    Where as we believers act on consensus and logic and not as you do, on fairy story’s. I will not swap links or anything else to buttress my argument with you, the minute people do this, it gives you credibility that is not warranted and patently absurd.

    Global warming is a reality, so you can wax lyrically until the cows come home, it wont change that fact.

    You are so typical of right wing nongs, if it was the left that were in the denialst camp, you would be with the believers. It is not about global warming with you people, it is about ideology. The left have been warning the population for years that rampant capitalism would be the ruination of this planet, that reality is coming home to roost.

    So stick your theories about global warming where the sun don’t shine.

  93. ” Global warming appears to be over, but we won’t know for certain until at least 2020″

    Absolute horse shite. Global warming is here and it is getting worse.

    It warms the cockles of this old heart knowing that you and the other denialist kooks who comment on this issue, will have no say in any future action to mitigate it’s effects. This fortunately will be left in the hands of the scientists and other qualified people.. This is a far to important an issue to be left in the hands of dish washers and used car salesman.

    As you were.

  94. “Return of ‘Lord Monckton”

    I mean I feel sorry for him really. I mean as well as being as dumb as a bag of hammers, he’s got an orrible head. Last time I clapped a pair of eyes like that was when I went fishing. I pulled out a huge squid.’

  95. “I am not going to rebut anything you put on this blog, for the very reason there is nothing to rebut”

    LOL…Because you can’t genius nor any of you; you have absolutely no idea where to start like most “know it all” believers they just always refer to the “science” of which they don’t even understand. Like clinging to a bible I suppose. So confident is the Left that their timid ideology can’t even stand up to the most basic of inquiry. It’s about the science, my ass…LOL…

    “The left have been warning the population for years that rampant capitalism would be the ruination of this planet, that reality is coming home to roost.”

    Ah, the crux of the “believers” camp; not saving us from utter destruction at the hands of warming (LMAO) but capitalism; imagine that (the ends justify the means right)… The little handbook that condones lying in the name of something higher, like saving the simpletons from themselves, lol….Your lot is as obvious as they come and you are typical of a “believer”…Run, run, run…You guys have NOTHING…Not sure if you looked around but claiming to be anything GREEN/ORGANIC is big money now. All you guys have done is opened up a new market, well done. But as far as any concrete plan on stopping “warming”, LOL…Cap and Trade…LOL

    Politicians will give you lip service because they need your vote but NOTHING is going to be done about “warming” the horror…

    Qatar came down to the usual, more aid being sought by the developing world in the name of global warming to fill corrupt politicians coffers, nothing more…So please, go stick your head back in the sand where it can do no harm…

    Anybody care to take a guess at the very basic question I posed before about warming in the past etc? Nah, didn’t think so…I am sure there is a link out there somewhere that will require you to think not? Oh yes, and when you can’t actually articulate the basics the inevitable call or insinuation to ban or remove posters you deem “heretics”….Congratulations guys, this is the usual “liberal left” evolution into its usual totalitarian leanings; dehumanizing (denier), call for banning and eventual imprisonment and finally death. Thankfully this is just a blog!

  96. Congratulations guys, this is the usual “liberal left” evolution into its usual totalitarian leanings; dehumanizing (denier), call for banning and eventual imprisonment and finally death

    Now there’s a thought. I have a few people in mind. :mrgreen:

    Don’t worry Sparta, you’re not one of them. We go back a long way.

  97. Sparta isht Smarter sounds like the type of bloke that is the reason for the fall of the US ‘civilisation’…… a country that leaves its ‘own’ hung out to dry, dog eat dog America 🙄 …… The fall of the USA brought/bought about by RW self-serving ‘patriot’ types….. then comes here and trys it on…. if I had my way I’d ‘gaol’ him……. 😀 …. ma-a-atte. sooo glad I’m not a yank…. must be terrible coming from one of them new second world countries ….. and the world moves on….. ay, Sparts 🙂

  98. Smarta has delusions of grandeur. Not only does he think he is a climate scientist, he now thinks he’s a regular Alexander Solzhenitsyn. This way the gulag awaits, for the non-believers. They’re coming for the Smarta in the middle of the night to water board him, and make him confess. They’ll beat the soles of his feet until he renounces his belief and gives the rampant loony lefties, the names. Yea all the names.The names of the global warming dissidents. They must be purged before they bring pax Americana down to its knees.

    Still ya got cut Smarta some slack this dude is from the land of the free, apple pie and all things good. Yea, where T.V. programs like My Three Sons is on an endless loop, and Bonanza is the real story of the wild west. They feed the gullible yanks this schlock 24/7 they can’t get enough of it. Smarta being A typical. I’m giving up the will to live just thinking about it. Still hope springs eternal after 8 years of that Moron Bush they had a fair idea what Romney had in store for them.

    He he ol Smarter I don’t know what I would do with him and his ilk. Banning you Smarter, yikes , perish the very thought. I get my jollies everyday reading the bunkum you and your right wing buddies spew out.

  99. ” P.S. ….. and would ya like CHIPS with that…….”

    Yea with lots of vinegar. Well mostly vinegar.

    I wonder what the Arabs make of him? They are probably thinking we are taking the piss.

  100. P.J.,

    Thanks P.J. reading your rant makes it all worth it…When I can so easily and demonstrably bring out the intellect in all of you…LMAO…Oh those who “think” of themselves as the intellectual left, quibbling and hobbled by a nameless “denier” with basic facts and questions…Feels me with joy, really…

    No counter argument, just name calling? LOL….No prob….I have had more than one back and fourth with those who can defend their faith, none here fit that bill…Was at Columbia University the other day, had a wonderfully interesting conversation. I did not walk away feeling my “theory” was any less valid but she sure made me modify my arguments…You poor chaps are truly lacking…If your are going to believe in something so deeply, try to have the courage and conviction to stand up for it as she did.,,,,,

  101. “We were having too much fun in Vegas to want to leave”

    Hey Migs…No worries, I understand completely…I have a brother that lives in Vegas and when I visit it is always hard to make the family get together a few miles from the strip! City Center is pretty cool, eh? Arizona isn’t going anywhere so perhaps next time….

  102. ” Thanks P.J. reading your rant makes it all worth it…When I can so easily and demonstrably bring out the intellect in all of you…LMAO”

    I’m glad I entertained you. However, you are a little confused though, you are not filled with so much as basic facts, than so much as basic, bullshit. If any of your argument had any credibility, you would not be wasting your time here. Using your words not mine, you said… ” This is just a blog ” I agree, a very entertaining blog, a blog I like to read, but most of all a blog that is not a bad litmus on how the right thinks. Not much is my answer to that.

    The subject of global warming is settled it is a reality, the only thing not settled is what we are going to do about it. As I said previously, there are thousands of scientists and other academics so qualified that have come to the same conclusion, the opposing opinion in the scheme of things, is a nothing.

    If and when you are ready put up your peer reviewed paper on the subject I’ll read it, until then, your opinion on the matter is the same as mine. That and 4 bucks Oz, will get you a cup of coffee.

    The reason the left turns to insults is not because they have not grasped the question o don’t runderstand the point of view, they are sick to death of flogging a dead horse. The science is on the side of the believers not yours. So put all the links up you like, I can’t be bothered.What’s more I don’t have to, the science is in, deal with it.

  103. “there are thousands of scientists and other academics so qualified that have come to the same conclusion”

    Yes, I am well aware as I am constantly reminded and happens to be a favorite talking point of your crowd…LOL…I suppose we must brace for the inevitable .1-1 degree jump in the next 100 years then and the impending doom it will bring and discount the rest of the system, geological record and definitely abandoned common sense….

    “If and when you are ready put up your peer reviewed paper on the subject”

    You guys must get away from this concept my friend…I have worked in research plenty and there is nothing mythical about the “peer-reviewed” process, I can assure you. When your peers are like minded and all seeking the same grant funding this whole process loses its veracity. Still, it is the best we have unfortunately…But I take it with a grain of salt. I have always found it odd people that swear by the process also know very little about it and happen to be the most trusting of fools.

    “Peer review is a process of self-regulation by a profession or a process of evaluation involving qualified individuals within the relevant field” (from wiki)

    That “self-regulation” part is my point. It’s like government regulating itself. Qualified as determined by their peers as well…Do you know a lot of “qualified” government workers…LOL..But like I said, it is all we got…Sad to see science become so political.

    “The science is on the side of the believers not yours.”

    Umm, not really dude, I am a man of science, indirectly anyway (medicine)…In science, as all REAL scientist know a working hypothesis is SUPPOSED TO BE, DEMANDS to be challenged. That is the whole point. In science, nothing is ever FINAL; a point, which you and others of your kind MISS ENTIRELY. ALL SCIENTIST agree with this concept. You call it “flogging a dead horse” but in all honesty, it is part of the PROCESS….

    “So put all the links up you like, I can’t be bothered.What’s more I don’t have to, the science is in, deal with it.”

    Somehow I doubt that on many levels, you’re talking about it aren’t you? We went from global warming to climate change why? Because the data changed and suddenly we weren’t “warming but cooling”…that is what happens in science…You are constantly altering positions, modifying etc…

    Here is the crux…CO2, now termed a PROBLEM aka pollutant because “some” see WARMING to be a threat (which is so funny on so many levels); a contributor of the “greenhouse effect”. Ok, and since we release “CO2” we must be contributing to this warming (yes, we all get this, a child can follow).

    Question: Say I buy that CO2 is the primary trace gas that is causing said warming, why has it risen in the past without man; ending ice ages in the past or?
    Answer: THEY DON’T KNOW (PEER REVIEW VERIFIED)
    Dilemma: We are not certain of what caused CO2 increases in the past but they did rise NATURALLY; that is not in doubt (no man or machines or worse yet, CAPITALISM, NO!!!!!), just the cause (volcanic activity, solar etc)
    Dilemma: Logically, if we are not certain of WHY previously without man, why are we certain NOW?
    Dilemma: We are certain because we have ICE cores and climate modeling etc, like meteorology for example…We have difficulty predicting the weather next week but are certain we are in control over the next 100 years.
    Sub dilemma: Climate modeling is DEPENDENT on man’s inputs and algorithms he designed (garbage in garbage out); inputs/variables which we cannot know for certain. Ice cores are subject to REGIONAL influences, not necessarily global (FACT, PEER REVIEWED)
    Dilemma: If we can accept that it is a whole host of influences (we readily accept we don’t fully understand; also PEER REVIEWED) that are feeding on themselves (feed forward mechanisms etc) in conjunction with “our” activities it logically follows that you must accept that there is much WE DON’T UNDERSTAND.
    Question: If we buy that we are causing warming, is that a bad thing or good thing?
    Dilemma: Good thing, PEER-REVIEWED along with a geological/fossil record. Where there is warmth there is life (Cambrian Explosion ring a bell)
    Dilemma: Theoretically, rising oceans over the next 100 YEARS OR MORE. Fact, man is inconvenienced and has to adapt. Fact, we seem to be pretty good about this; humans almost driven to extinction by the last ice age but managed to migrate, populate and thrive over the entire globe with Paleolithic technology and means; somehow I think we can manage without a new TAX or global welfare which is all you end up with at the end of this, really as the PEER-REVIEWED already says we are too late, right?
    Question: The age old question “who benefits” by panicking and scaring mass numbers of people into “action” aka adopting a lifestyle that is counter capitalistic. THE LEFT AND ITS IDEOLOGY.
    Dilemma: What is that exactly? The left has tried to CONTROL human behavior in the past with disastrous results; this is no different.
    Dilemma: The “left” simply is a controlling ideology at its heart advocates all things can be controlled with the right planning, even human behavior.

    It does not take an academic to understand the “big picture” here shrouded in science and a “warming” boogey-man. Just one problem, Human beings have been programmed over thousands of years to act in their “own” best interests. Until the “left” can learn to “incentivize” behavior as the “right” has this warming boogey-man and capitalism is going nowhere PEER-REVIEWED or not.LOL…Yes, the “science” is in but clearly COMMON SENSE hasn’t quite caught up but it will, always a bit of lag time…Anybody can parrot something dude and it is clear used car salesmen are still around for a reason. Now, interested in buying a bridge?

  104. ‘Global warming is here and it is getting worse.’

    I respect your opinion, but adaptation is smarter than mitigation on climate change, warming or cooling.

  105. “He was born to argue”

    You may be right…Mother always says I should have gone into law not medicine…LOL

  106. el gordo,

    Honestly, the “particulars” of the AGW debate aside, what is this fear of warming? As you have suggested “cooling” would get me worried for obvious reasons…Even if you and I conceded every point made by the AGW proponents without question what is this fear of “change” from a warming perspective? Geesh…..Yes, if we were talking days to adapt, fine but we are talking over the next 100 years given all else remains static….

  107. Yeah, well that’s noice Migs, but we can do better with a more satirical approach.

    ‘Honestly, the “particulars” of the AGW debate aside, what is this fear of warming?’

    Its been a beat-up from the beginning, this global warming scare, as the Holocene draws to a close.

  108. El gordo, the number of hits for the subject haven’t been the greatest, just bordering under 1,000 to date, but it’s not a disaster. It was, after all, a bit of satire.

    People come here to read about Abbott, not follow the trail of dodgy links. :mrgreen:

  109. ….not follow the trail of dodgy links.

    Or a string of local cold weather reports, but most all not read a whole bunch of single paragraph devoid of context bumptious nonsensical statements posted solely to troll.

  110. Yes Tom….From your link…

    “However, by and large these are impacts which we should be able to adapt to, at a cost, but without disastrous consequences.”

    “There are of course many people who believe that the planet will not warm as much, or that the impacts of the associated climate change will be as bad as the body of scientific evidence suggests. That is certainly a possiblity, and we very much hope that their optimistic view is correct. However, what we have presented here is the best summary of scientific evidence available, and it paints a very bleak picture if we fail to rapidly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.”

    So ultimately NOBODY knows but looking to the fossil record we can see that life hardly suffered under warmer conditions in the past. Unfortunately, everything they mention is exacerbated by exponential population expansion already and we see this in the developing world already….Again, nothing to panic about. If you’re really worried you might want to start trying to convince a couple billion Asians they are not going to be allowed to live your lifestyle first before you try and make some headway with the politicians…Just saying…

  111. ‘exponential population expansion’

    Warm times produce population explosions, in cool times its disease, starvation and population decrease.

    Something to look forward to.

  112. Channelling Notrickszone

    Deutsche Bank is a strong supporter of mitigation to stop global warming.

    Die Welt writes:

    ‘Hundreds of police officers marched into the twin towers of Deutsche Bank, more than 20 police vehicles were parked in front of the high-rises and other office buildings. At times staff were not even permitted to use the elevators. Eight police officers were posted in the entrance with large caliber guns in reach.”

    ‘This is not the first time DB has been investigated for tax evasion involving the trade of carbon emission permits. Investigations were conducted in 2010. There have been other raids. Die Welt writes:

    ‘Indeed it became clear that the affair has reached a new level of escalation today.’

  113. All the models are flawed….. reality lingers below their lowest estimate. Its looking bad for the Klimatariat.

    Jo Nova wonders if Matthew England is incompetent?

  114. Let’s suppose for a minute that CO2 causes global warming, we should thank our lucky stars because we’ll be needing that carbon dioxide.

    The transition to glacial conditions may take 400 years or less, going by research on the previous interglacial.

    ‘Though the time at which the Eemian interglacial ended is subject to some uncertainty (it was probably around 110,000 years ago), what does seem evident from the sediment records that cross this boundary is that it was a relatively sudden event and not a gradual slide into colder conditions taking many thousands of years.

    ‘The recent high-resolution Atlantic sediment record of Adkins et al (1997) suggests that the move from interglacial to much colder-than-present glacial conditions occurred over a period of less than 400 years (with the limitations on the resolution of the sediment record leaving open the possibility that the change was in fact very much more rapid than this).’

    Humanity will manage a two degree temperature drop, as in the Little Ice Age, but once it gets to four degrees below average it will be like living on another planet.

  115. To troll in a “leftwing” echo chamber= to fundamentally disagree with its group thought/consensus…LOL

    Somethings never change…Lemmings sure are amusing. They bring so much to the discussion…

  116. Pingback: The ‘Right’ to be heard: what we heard. | Café Whispers

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