Comments on: Is Climate Change 10 minutes of fame over?

By: Bulldust

Bulldust — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 03:17:32 +0000

It is now being reported in The Australian that the Liberal (relatively right wing – opposition) party in Australia is reacting to a perceived reduced support for an ETS from the voting public:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26279367-11949,00.html

Bear in mind that the ruling Labor Party and Liberals are currently locking horns and negoiating changes to the ETS bill (CPRS in Australia) as we speak. It seems that the voter support may be dissoving from under the ETS proposal at the eleventh hour.

By: Indiana Bones

Indiana Bones — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:37:13 +0000

“As I said before, the US People hate Communists and traitors.”

Perhaps “hate” is too strong a word for the communists. They have not matured enough to understand Aristotelian society. But politicians who sell out to interests that would cripple our citizens, and interests that are demonstrably misanthropic – will be hated. For good reason.

By: Bill P

Bill P — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:36:18 +0000

Is Climate Change’s 10 minutes of fame over?

Not if the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew has anything to say about it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704500604574485341504345488.html

“…just as God is indivisible, so too is our global environment… There can be no double vision, no dualistic worldview…”

The allusion to the Manichaean dualists is the age-old, Church-unifying, two-sided evocation: contempt for the heretic / fear of being accused.

If Bartholomew does, indeed, speak as “the spiritual leader of 300 million Orthodox Christians”, it would appear that Hansen’s evangelizing continues to bear fruit, and there there will be more global scaremongering in the months leading up to the U.N. Climate Change Conference in December.

By: Jeff in Ctown (Canada)

Jeff in Ctown (Canada) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:01:04 +0000

How about this Elizabeth May

“My parents generation F*&ked up the economy (Massive debt and no one to pay for their increased health care costs as they age).”

Who is going to help rectify this problem. Not her Marxist party, that is for sure.

By: Vincent

Vincent — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:18:03 +0000

“The AGW mindset is here to stay, even without AGW.”

How about this for a new mindset: CO2 is the basis of all life in the world. The more CO2 the more vigorous plants grow. In the past (ie. before that tiny sliver of time we call the quarternary), CO2 levels were higher than they are today. Further back, in the mesozoic, CO2 levels averaged 5 times the current values. The planet was warm, and teeming with plant and animal life. CO2 means more vegetation. CO2 is GREEN. Lack of CO2 and ice are anti-life, anti-green. Let us celebrate the planet’s life with more CO2.

This is not so ridiculous as it sounds, since every statement is true. All that is open to debate is whether it is “green” or not. It is certainly possible, to imagine turning the clock back, and postulating a global movement that celebrated CO2 as green. It was just an accident of history that it did not turn out that way. Just like it was an accident of history that the Wiemar republic did not execute Hitler for treason, or the Czar did not execute Lenin. In effect, we create our own realities and with have to live with the consequences.

By: Ron de Haan

Ron de Haan — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 02:49:03 +0000

Mitchel44 (09:24:09) :

Thanks, very good.

By: lichanos

lichanos — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 02:26:09 +0000

Andy Warhol said that in the future, everyone would be famous for FIFTEEN minutes. C’mon, I think AGW got at least that much…

By: Rathtyen

Rathtyen — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:34:52 +0000

“Bulldust (01:34:49) :
I don’t trust ‘em … it’s like when the kids get too quiet… they must be up to something. I had expected a lot more CC exposure running into the Copenhagen love in, but it is eerily quiet. Maybe they think they have done enough already to coast it home?”

and a few similar comments: I’m still hearing plenty of doom and gloom announcements, but they are bouncing like dead cats. People aren’t particularly listening anymore. Its a problem with dire pronouncements: they wear a bit thin after a while when nothing keeps on happening.

Its been a second very cool October here in Sydney, where October is normally the most reliably warm/hot and fine weather month of the year (which is why our 2000 Olympics were held in October). Its also been a cold October in the northern hemisphere despite a warm start. Under such circumstances, its hard to keep the global-warming rage fired up.

I think one issue on the minds of the Copenhagen Conference organisers is that it’ll occur in the midst of some really bad (ie cold weather), and that could be a real deathnell to the Global Warming Scare Movement. I wonder if they’ll disinvite Al to try to avoid the Gore Effect!

By: hbht

hbht — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:29:09 +0000

I wonder how many hundreds (if not thousands) of tonnes of Co2 the delegates to Copenhagen generated in flying there in their official or private jets? Not to mention all the hot (Co2 laden) air that will be expelled at this talkfest…

Here in little ‘ol New Zealand the government is beavering away at an Emissions Trading Scheme, to mitigate our impact on Global Warming. Most of the country doesn’t want it – it will increase the price of everything, and where will all the money end up? No surprises there…

Funny that all the talking heads are screaming about reducing carbon footprints, emissions, et al, but none are talking up stopping deforestation, or for that matter, promoting reforestation. I wonder if there’s a correlation between the increase in atmospheric Co2 and the rate of deforestation? Anyone done any good research on that?

It just seems such common sense that to deal with the increase in Co2 levels, one needs something to absorb Co2, and the most efficient way is to plant trees, and start reforestation projects on a massive scale. Why don’t governments put some of the money received from ETS schemes towards that? Suppose common sense is not that common anymore!

By: photohand

photohand — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:22:03 +0000

There is a lot of confusion in this matter. First, “climate change” doesn’t equal “global warming”. Some parts of this planet will become colder. Second, pollution causes warming as much as it causes “dimming” – it helps the formation of clouds. The situation need profound studying by scientists and not agitation spurred by any populist movement.

By: J.Hansford

J.Hansford — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:06:11 +0000

People may have cooled on Anthropogenic Global Warming, but Governments are drooling over the tax revenue and political power that taxing CO2 and Fossil fuels will generate….. I think Government and their corporate complexes have become so powerful, that they no longer need the okay of the people they are supposed to serve anymore…. It is going to be an interesting couple of years to see who wins…..

Historians in the future are gonna have a field day with this period of idiocy….. But that is assuming we, the people, win. For the victor writes the history.

By: BernieL

BernieL — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:52:16 +0000

We should be careful not to take too much comfort in the low turnout at the 350 demonstrations.
In most countries discussed in the reports the 350ppm campaign is aligned with the current direction of government policy. Historically, demonstrations tend to be large when there is a groundswell frontally AGAINST a government action – like their waging of war.
Demonstration sizes also swell when there is a perception that the views of (potential) participants are not being heard. The saturation propaganda for the invasion of Iraq compares well with the saturation propaganda for AGW. Consider how the vilification of those sceptical of the AGW panic as ‘deniers,’ (akin to Holocaust deniers) is accepted without a breath of protest from any but its victims.
No, we should be looking for the size of the groundswell against AGW – not in support of it.
In assessing street demonstration, it also helps to consider whether the (potential) protester will directly benefit from the success of their opposition – e.g., the benefit for young men in opposing conscription to war in Vietnam. In most of the 350ppm protest countries, the governments are proposing a new taxation and the prospect of higher energy costs.
Again, if we are looking for signs of a the groundswell against AGW – not in support.

But the politics of Alarmism is unlikely to turn in this way – with street protests. It will follow the pattern of millenarian movements of the ages past, where there is a crisis of confidence among the adherents, a sense of being cheated by the leaders, and then a collapse.
If it turns on the science then it will be in the most basic way. If the current decade-long pause in warming continues while the demands on the people (taxes, lifestyle changes etc) increase, then this pattern is more likely, and likely soon.

If such a collapse does happen soon it will be monumental, and it will give tremendous momentum to the US right. But it will be a great set-back to the credibility to the scientifically-grounded environmentalism that requires international co-operation (eg rainforest preservation in 3rd world countries) – which is already loosing now in the AGW obsession with carbon pollution.

By: Bulldust

Bulldust — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:30:53 +0000

I spoke too soon – or perhaps I was right about the kids being too quiet:

Turn Vegan to save the planet (Stern)
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26265639-601,00.html

Rising oceans threaten billions in Aussie properties
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/2bn-threat-from-rising-oceans-20091026-hgqv.html?autostart=1

Perhaps building the Gold Coast is irresponsible
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26265342-11949,00.html

It must be time to regulate where we can build in accordance the Canute-like advance of the oceans…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26265701-11949,00.html

By: jtom

jtom — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:37:34 +0000

Mitchel44: the most effective way to breed apathy into young people is to get them to invest themselves emotionally in an issue that later proves to be false. I suspect Obama has just done that in the States, and has created another generation of non-voters (I already see an attitude of ‘been-there-done-that-it doesn’t work-screw it’). Congratulate Liz for helping produce another generation of people who are becoming apathetic as a result of being played for suckers by AGW.

I know a ‘we have to save the polar bear’ soccer mom who now realizes that the bears are not at risk. She’s so embarrassed she doesn’t want to talk about it or anything else related to climate.

By: CodeTech

CodeTech — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:34:48 +0000

Kath, you’re disappointed in the CBC for being gullible?

That’s like being disappointed in the communists for supporting socialism… it’s like being disappointed in your cat for being a carnivore, it’s also like being disappointed in an oil company for drilling holes in the ground.

For far too long, canada has been chipped away and damaged by the left. From what I can see, a good chunk of that came from draft dodgers in the 60s, but hey, that’s just personal experience. The CBC has been completely infiltrated since at least Trudeau’s day.

It will never get better.