You’d think with something so devastating, so frightening, so certain, they would not need to keep changing the name to make it more marketable. Maybe they can take a cue from Coca-Cola and call it: “New post normal science AGW” and “Classic AGW”. Yeah, that’ll work. – Anthony
From the Australian:
THE term “climate change” could be replaced by “climate challenges” if a federal commissioned marketing study is taken onboard.
The study of attitudes to climate change among farmers, commissioned by the Agriculture Department, found only 27 per cent of those surveyed believed human activity was causing climate change, compared with 58 per cent of urban dwellers.
As well, primary producers are “very resistant to carbon trading”. “It fills them with dread, and there were strong negative reactions towards it,” the report says.
Handed to the department late last year, the report warns that terminology that fails to take into account the attitude of primary producers towards human-induced climate change risks failure. The term “climate change” sets up negative reactions among primary producers for a number of reasons, from scepticism through to perceptions that they are being held solely responsible for causing climate change, it says.
“Preferred terms such as ‘climate challenges’, ‘prolonged drought’ and ‘risk management’ are accepted, better understood and more likely to motivate change.”
Read the entire article here
h/t to David Archibald
No matter how many times they change the name, the message is still the same. They aren’t going to fool anyone.
You can rename faeces as poo, but it’s still shit.
Marketing Study? Really??? It’s not science. It’s not even a religion. It’s marketing. Gimme a break.
Old wine, new bottles (labels), Well, it fools some of the people some of the time.
“Preferred terms such as ‘climate challenges’, ‘prolonged drought’ and ‘risk management’ are accepted, better understood and more likely to motivate change.”
You know what? I think it’s high time to motivate change in our political leadership that continues to insult us plebeians with this kind of stuff.
They should just call it “Climate” and give up. I wonder if this will end up as “Global Cooling”? What they really mean is “The End Of Climate As We Know It”, or TEOCAWKI for short. How about “Climate Fear”?
It’s funny that the people who believe in it the least are the ones, who due to there life style have a dependency on it, understand weather and climate the best. While the peoples who’s lives don’t depend on the climate and weather are the ones who believe in it the most.
The ‘hot spot’ at altitude in the atmosphere is missing .
Statistically discernible global warming at the surface over the last 15 years is missing.
Accumulated heat in the oceans is missing.
But they have found a new name for what is not there? Amazing!
Richard
Prolonged drought? Did I see ‘prolonged drought’ as one of the candidates for this Brave New AGW Marketing World? In Australia? Prolonged drought, while huge areas of Queensland are suffering catastrophic flooding?
You couldn’t make this up! They must be so desperate.
I never would have guessed that primary producers aren’t fans of carbon trading. That’s a very perceptive observation.
I thought ‘Global Wierding’ was a good one, if a bit ‘Harry Potter’
that was from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/opinion/17friedman.html?_r=1
You can’t polish a turd…
Idiocracy.
You left out the other phrase: “Climate Justice.”
That’s what they’re really using now, since they don’t have to actually prove anything is happening at all, yet it’s still a great justification for taking money from some people and funneling it through large bureaucracies to others.
“global warming” or “climate change” didn’t come with a negative connotation…
…they made it that way
Changing the name again will not change anything, they will just make the new name another negative connotation.
Says all you need to know when they have to keep changing their marketing strategy.
It’s not in the science, it’s all in the name.
From Coca Cola…………..AGW ZERO!
I think “climategate” about covers it. That or climate delusions. Or climate collusions. Heck, they have a lot more names to use I guess.
In the climate of globalized warmings
Everything is described as more harmings
Giving rise to the fact
That they can’t get their act
Synchronized when they shout out their warnings.
I think I’d far prefer “Risk Management” – maybe it’ll force people into actually quantifying the risk.
“The term ‘climate change’ sets up negative reactions among primary producers […] that they are being held solely responsible for causing climate change, it says.”
I wonder who gave them that idea? Death trains anyone?
So when a poorly thought out science and a poorly thought out morality gets rejected by the public, it is somehow the public’s fault for not understanding?
Like how it is nature’s fault for not agreeing with climate models?
I propose they just fast forward to “Climate Change Con Job”
They’ll end up there sooner than later.
“The study of attitudes to climate change among farmers, commissioned by the Agriculture Department, found only 27 per cent of those surveyed believed human activity was causing climate change, compared with 58 per cent of urban dwellers. ”
In other words, people who rely on the climate for their living know that CAGW is nonsense. Whereas those who sit in air conditioned rooms playing with their Wiis in the city are easily lead to believe that AGW is a problem.
This isn’t a marketing problem. It’s a “people who work indoors can be told pretty much anything about the climate” problem.
You know that AGW is a scam when they changed the correct definition GLOBAL WARMING to all sorts of silly news names. I mean man’s extra co2 is predicted to cause runaway warming of the planet so why not stick to global warming or anthropogenic global warming???
‘prolonged drought’
Now that will bring the Australian farmers on side alright. They have just suffered from Biblical floods and now Gore blames the floods on global warming having earlier blamed the drought on global warming. What a snake oil salesman.
Gore blames drought on global warming [2007]
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s1878517.htm
Gore blames Australian floods on global warming [2011]
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/al-gore-chaos-awaits-if-nothing-happens/416000
They need to get with the times. It’s “climate whatever.” Or perhaps “weather . . . whatever.”
Keeping to the Coke motif, maybe the pre-1950 climate can be called ‘climate classic.’
Given the ever moving trend of climate labels, it seems to me that some entrepreneur with foresight ought to produce all possible variations of alarming climate labels, and then copyright them. There’d be big bucks to make in license fees, as green NGOs and Holdrenesque science advisors continue scrambling around for the next PR climate label to flog alarm into public consciousness.
Climate? Challenge Accepted!
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/challenge-accepted
@ Steeptown.
That’s one heck of a comparison; Both faeces and Climate ..whatever stink.
Moderator: For information only, may I draw attention to Ben Miller narrating BBC’s ‘Horizon’ broadcast Monday 10th January on BBC2. Ben Miller of Armstrong and Miller whose sketch was shown on WUWT a few weeks ago, and there was a debate about whether he was a warmist or not. He is a warmist.
For a “settled science” I’ve never seen a name change so often.
Physics would never claim itself to be settled and yet I honestly don’t know the last time it changed names.
The Global Warming renamed to Climate Change is mostly a blog meme, IPCC was was after all never called IPGW. The most recent CAGW word games are however funny and desperate.
Over at Bishop Hill, all were agreed that Irritable Climate Syndrome was probably the best of the bunch :p.
Climate challenges? Far to little drama. It doesn’t trigger fears. It will not force immediate action.
It has only been reported in Australian so it does not really count.
All we need is a CUT (Climate Unification Theory).
Climate challenges for the climatically challenged…..
yeah that’ll work ;^)
next,
Quantum Climate
and finally,
String Theory in quantum climate……the uncertainty principle in eleven dimensions
(very likely) *(very likely)*(very likely) *(very likely)*(very likely) *(very likely)*(very likely) *(very likely)*(very likely) *(very likely)*(very likely)
Micro changes in climate challenges
the grand theory of unification
Unfortunately, whatever label is used, it is clearly a euphemism for “human civilization”. Until the well-being of man and compatible species is given priority, “stop [euphemism]” will be met with resistance.
@mariwarcwm
Yes, Ben Miller demonstrated how we are able to measure the temperature of a bucket of ice with great precision….. and swiftly skipped ahead to saying this meant we could accurately know the temperature of the globe for climate change. It was a real head-scratcher.
All I can imagine is that there is still a lot of money at the BBC for funding anything that mentions climate change, and Miller only had to add one statement at the end of the program for it to be funded. The rest of the program had nothing to do with climate change — it was just physics geeks playing with apparatus, which was quite fun to watch.
I don’t imagine terms like “prolonged drought” or “risk management” will be very popular in Queensland at the moment. Back to the drawing board if they want to convince the Aussies, me thinks.
They want the tax money, no matter how often they have to rename the scam.
‘Prolonged drought’ oh dear.
Toowoomba hit by an inland tsunami and Brisbane waiting in trepidation.
There must be a case for litigation against BOM (A) and gov. for failing to build dams which was recommended after serious floods in 1974. The fixation with AGW and all things environmental must have played a part in the decision making, ignoring the cyclical nature of Australian weather (climate).
Check out Andrew Bolt’s blog link for graphic images.
Climalingus.
It requires a lot of lip service and manipulation to get a positive outcome.
‘Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call’d,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.
William Shakespeare
Romeo and Juliet.
So this makes the supporters of IPCC Climate Challenges, the “Climate Challenged” or “Climate Challengers”? Either way, it makes them look really foolish.
Do they know anything about Positioning and communications and could they possibly be more foolish? Changing the name 3 times in the past 2 years speaks volumes.
Why not just call it “Climate Drivel” and be done with it.
Actually Roy, Mythbusters recently showed that you can…
Roy UK says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:39 am
You can’t polish a turd…
But even polished it is still …
Wonder if they’ll ever get around to what I call it? Volcanic perturbation of climate. In fact Pinatubo and Cerro Hudson started it and we continue to see more of the same.
Heck, why just call it climate “challenges”…let’s get the full spin on this and call it climate “opportunities”. Those diplaced by the climate disruption will have the “opportunity” to find new places to live.
Ever changing, ever spinning like the windmills of your mind.
Why don’t they just go back to the phrase our forefathers used: The Weather.
You could call it “Pink Fluffy Cloud Preservation” and all would be well. As soon as it becomes the “Pink Fluffy Cloud Preservation TAX”, people will have strong negative reactions towards it. As long as there is a tax involved it’s a loser whatever the name.
Jeremy wrote:
For a “settled science” I’ve never seen a name change so often.
Physics would never claim itself to be settled and yet I honestly don’t know the last time it changed names.
Before the 20th century physics was sometimes known as “natural philosophy.” I wonder what people who don’t know that would say if they were asked to guess what subjects “natural philosophy” covered? It would not surprise me if they said the environment and climate change!
Oh, and regarding that ‘Horizon’ with Ben Miller; after talking for some time about accuracy in temperature measurement, guess where he sited his brand new home weather monitoring station – yes, up on a flat asphalt roof where it can bask in all that re-radiated infra red!
Brilliant! Spend taxpayer money to research how to sell a bad agenda to the victims of the bad (scam) agenda.
Governments are supposed to be on the side of the people, not trying to hoodwink them into shooting themselves in the foot and crippling their economy and futures.
Call it what it is:
The Global Warming Get-Rich-Quick at Everybody’s Expense, Wealth Redistribution, One-World Government, Power Grab Scam. If it does not sell, so be it.
”
Pull My Finger says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:32 am
Climalingus.
It requires a lot of lip service and manipulation to get a positive outcome.
”
Quote of the week?
Climate has always changed and always will. Plan to move or insulate a lot when another ice age hits and in the mean time enjoy our inter-glacial garden planet.
There. That’s my plan. Where do I get funding to study the options in depth more? I think I would start by seeing how people adapt to warmer climates. Let me see .. I’ll need a couple of years (maybe a decade or two) of study in Hawaii.
Cheers
Jimbo says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:52 am
Australian farmers……………… have just suffered from Biblical floods and now Gore blames the floods on global warming having earlier blamed the drought on global warming. What a snake oil salesman.
======================================================
The current massive flooding in Queensland is truly appalling by any measure. But then so is Al Gore’s comment reported that it’s all due the “Global Warming” even more so. The media cries “unprecedented” and worse than the 1974 flood. Well yes. But here are some additional reports just come in:
Lower part of Brisbane submerged. And water still on the rise; the “Elamang” and “Paluma” riverboats were carried by the flood into the Botanical Gardens.
Numbers of houses at Ipswich and Brisbane have been washed down the river. Seven miners drowned due to flooding of the Eclipse Colliery at North Ipswich. The Indooroopily railway bridge was washed away by the flood. The lower part of South Brisbane is completely submerged. The flood has risen 7.3 metres above the mean spring tides. North end of Victoria bridge has been destroyed. Business is at a standstill in Brisbane and there have been several deaths by drowning.
Yes appalling, but can it be due to recent global warming? Well no it happened in 1893 with Brisbane river rising nearly 4 metres above the level in 1974. It’s Australia’s wild climate in the past and so it will be in the future.
Pull My Finger says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:32 am
Excellently droll!
Jimbo wrote:
Now that will bring the Australian farmers on side alright. They have just suffered from Biblical floods and now Gore blames the floods on global warming having earlier blamed the drought on global warming.
Abraham Maslow wrote in his book, The Psychology of Science. p. 15. “It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.”
Global warming is Al Gore’s hammer.
Is the climate a challenge? That is what they say.
Hot from the presses, the term for today.
A marketing study,
the reason still muddy,
coined it. The weather will probably blow it away.
Roy UK says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:39 am
You can’t polish a turd…
Actually a time honoured term in my profession is the turd polisher, the associate that takes the work of a partner and makes it good and worthwhile. This goes along with fart catcher (the associate that never allows anything to splash the partner) and the shaker (the associate that does everything for the partner, so the partner’s hands don’t touch nasty things)
Steeptown says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:23 am
You can rename faeces as poo, but it’s still shit.
Indeed. Of the bull variety, if my sense of smell is not mistaken.
There has always been a certain ‘genius’ in the marketing of AGW. They tied their cause to not just weather, but bad weather. There is always bad weather, and it always makes the news. And it evokes an emotional response instead of a logical one. At the risk of a bad pun, it’s a perfect storm.
If Schrodinger were alive today he’d lock climate change in a box give it the quantum treatment and declare it neither dead nor alive .
Oh dear trouble coming in Oz and its the Green fanatics causing it !
James Delingpole: Queensland floods: but at least the ‘endangered’ Mary River cod is safe, eh?
Tuesday, January 11th 2011, This is a guest post from one of our regular commenters, Memory Vault. He’s understandably upset about the Australian floods, which may have claimed more than 70 lives. But what really upsets him is that this disaster could have been prevented. He blames green campaigners so wedded to their ideology they never stop to consider the human consequences. It is to them his bitter letter is addressed.
Andrew Bolt has similarly harsh words for Australia’s eco nuts. Were it not for the actions of Environment Minister Peter Garrett, for example, the Queensland town of Gympie would not now be underwater. Unfortunately, Garrett took it upon himself to block the proposed dam that would have prevented it.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100071290/queensland-floods-but-at-least-the-endangered-mary-river-cod-is-safe-eh/
How come all euphemisms end up converging on “challenged”?
Orwell’s version of Newspeak had a small vocabulary, but we’re heading for a ONE-challenge challenge, and we’re challenging the challenge very challengingly.
So, in addition to the complexities of climate, and the many aspects of physics, chemistry, astronomy, geology etc that involve climate, we now have to suffer semantics.
Robinson says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:06 am
“Over at Bishop Hill, all were agreed that Irritable Climate Syndrome was probably the best of the bunch :p.”
I still think that ‘Climate Bollocks’ was the best suggestion.
*R Gates is right, people displaced by Climate……….. will have to find someplace elsewhere to live. People here in the UK have been moving to Spain to escape the appalling climate for some years now.
*Hasn’t he been sin binned?
Climate chaos is another one to add to the big board.
Surely a scam remains a scam whatever the name you give it.
“Federal commissioned marketing study”? They’re selling soap?
I’ll help them. If no one wants your soap? Don’t worry about the name. Worry about the soap.
R. Gates says:
January 11, 2011 at 11:11 am
‘let’s get the full spin on this and call it climate “opportunities”. Those diplaced by the climate disruption will have the “opportunity” to find new places to live.’
Surely, Mr. Gates, you mean ‘opportunities’ to tax and control on the basis of unfalsifiable assertions, do you not? After all, this is marketing not science. isn’t it?
R. Gates says:
January 11, 2011 at 11:11 am
“Heck, why just call it climate “challenges”…let’s get the full spin on this and call it climate “opportunities”. Those displaced by the climate disruption will have the “opportunity” to find new places to live.”
____________________________________________________
Would those be the people forced to sell their houses at greatly reduced value and move away from wind farms for health reasons? Or Australian farmers forced off their land due to government climate policy restricting effective land management techniques?
I feel that “Climate Challenges” may an appropriate re-branding. Those involved in the AGW hoax will certainly be facing some serious challenges throughout the next two decades. So many scientists, politicians, environmentalists, journolists (sic), and UN kleptocrats will be facing the challenges of getting the population of planet earth to forget their involvement in the scam. Failing to meet these challenges will have a major impact. There may be no “Biocrisis”, no “Energy crisis” and no UN global governance. To the guilty facing these challenges in the age of the Internet, all I can say is – good luck with that.
Pull My Finger says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:32 am
… and tongue-wagging?
Good one!
So only 27% of people who actually live in the climate, and it actually affects their livelihood (unlike all us urban dwellers who rely on them to feed us) believe the climate is changing because of us.
That leaves 73% who do not…..
You really do need a scorecard to keep up with the name changes.
Totally on message, Master.
Fodder for the faithful.
But…siiiigh…one of those ‘waste of time and space’ threads, methinks (just read the comments!), that doesn’t really get the baby bathed
Let’s call a dogs tail a leg. How many legs does a dog have. Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it one.
Mark Twain
As the CO2-driven global warming meme dies a natural death, the institutions founded on that ill-conceived notion will need to reshape people’s thinking in order for them to survive. In 5 to 10 years the climate change industry will morph into the disaster prediction and mitigation industry so they might continue to latch onto the public teat.
It is noticeable (to those with an eye for these things) how the terminology is becoming more and more ambigous in its ‘real’ definition!
Clearly, the term ‘climate challenges’ can encompass ANY type of climate variability and to all intent and purpose, will cover ANY +/- up/down/sideways/etc ‘move’ in ANY measured (or modelled – LOL!) climate variable!
so therefore, any climate challenge can and will be designated as anthropogenic in origin! I think they suddenly thought that ‘disruptions’ was too much of an exaggeration and decided to make the terminology more PC!
*ambiguous – sorry!
Some people would say that the Earth is “special” when in fact it’s “Climate Challenged”
(Anthropogenic) Climate Con.
If anyone remembers the free Nelson Mandela (with every gallon of petrol).. I’ve got a picture in mind of sad CO2 molecule behind prison bars, Free me from this climate con
Using the argument that a body of science is somehow invalidated or weakened since it has a few synonyms doesn’t make any sense. Anyway, the way I have understood it, global warming referenced the warming climate, while climate change referenced the changes in climate that can result from a warming climate and more thermal energy / moisture in the atmosphere. Personally, I don’t like “climate disruption” or “climate challenges”, but maybe those terms will fall by the wayside over time.
I had a class in high school that was called “biology”, but it changed to “biological sciences” after I graduated. I hear they were considering renaming it “evolution studies”. Should I be in serious doubt concerning what I learned in that class? This post is about as logical.
“You’d think with something so devastating, so frightening, so certain, they would not need to keep changing the name to make it more marketable. Maybe they can take a cue from Coca-Cola and call it: “New post normal science AGW” and “Classic AGW”. Yeah, that’ll work.”
This is pure speculation coupled with a (somewhat) humorous jab. It has no value to climate science whatsoever, but hey it passes for a blog post. If you want any reasonable people to take these posts seriously, critique the actual science, not the name of the science.
Relevant sayings that come to mind:
You can’t make a silk purse from a sow’s ear
As useless as putting lipstick on a pig (it’s still a pig)
A rat in a tuxedo (is still a rat)
Thank you, coalsoffire, for reminding me that I occasionally write limericks. So here are 11 of them…
The Warmist’s Lament
At first, we proclaimed: “Global Warming
Is the cause of all droughts and all storming.
If it’s dry, or it’s hot,
If it’s windy, or not,
It’s all YOUR fault.” Our meme was forming.
We claimed that emissions of gases
Would heat the earth under our asses,
And it’s all humans’ fault!
So progress must halt,
And poverty be forced on the masses.
We predicted ‘MaGeddon was coming,
We foretold that the heat would be numbing,
And the suckers must pay,
There is no other way.
Meanwhile, we pushed hard on down-dumbing.
But skeptics cried out, “It’s a lie!
It is weather, not climate, that’s dry,
Cold, windy, hot, wet.
No! We owe you no debt!
Show the evidence we’re going to fry!”
So, we formed a political alliance.
We’d blind them with what they called science.
Of course we all knew,
That it just wasn’t true.
So we painted our hoax like a faience.
We had some enjoyable capers,
Suppressing the skeptical papers.
All reputable journals
Rejected the infernals
As if they were still in diapers.
But then came McKitrick and McIntyre,
Who exposed our stats as a hack entire.
We had to go back
To the radio shack.
And how do you think we felt? Back hint: Ire.
So, we needed new marketing ploys,
To convince the obtuse girls and boys,
To pay yet more taxes,
And more, to the maxes,
Then they’d be no more than our toys.
So next we proclaimed, “Climate Change.”
We blathered about how much dang-
er it put us all in,
And we turned up the spin.
They didn’t believe us. How strange.
We went next for “Climate Disruption.”
We thought that might cause an eruption.
But no, one more dud.
So, it’s your turn now, bud.
Just don’t mention “climate corruption”.
But your new “Climate Challenges” meme,
Isn’t really aligned with the theme.
Where’s the blood? Where’s the gore?
Where’s the fast closing door?
You’re a traitor to Warmism, I deem.
Amended from Mac’s comment on Bishop Hill.
NASA
What’s in a Name? Global Warming vs. Climate Change
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html
1. Global Warming – (Svante Arrhenius – 1896 | Wallace Broecker 1975)
2. Inadvertent Climate Modification – 1970s
3. Climate Change | Global Climate Change – 1975
4. Global Change – 1988
5. Climate Disruption | Global Climate Disruption – (Professor John Holdren – 2007)
6. Climate Challenges – (someone challenged – 2011)
Feel free to suggest corrections.
“”””” sterar says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:35 am
Prolonged drought? Did I see ‘prolonged drought’ as one of the candidates for this Brave New AGW Marketing World? In Australia? Prolonged drought, while huge areas of Queensland are suffering catastrophic flooding?
You couldn’t make this up! They must be so desperate. “””””
Australia, is the boundary between the Ayres Rock Desert, (Uluru) and the Indo-Pacific ocean. You can tell whether you are in the desert or the ocean because Australia is all surf, to separate the two. In addition, Australia keeps New Zealand from drifting up into the Indian Ocean. We thank them for that.
Neil says:
January 11, 2011 at 3:27 pm
Thank you, coalsoffire, for reminding me that I occasionally write limericks. So here are 11 of them…
The Warmist’s Lament
==========
That’s very funny!!!!
10:1 it ends up on youtube in rap.
The warmist spin on the Australian floods is that the increased sea surface temperatures (SST) caused by climate change have magnified the effect of La Nina.
Any of you clever people out there know what the increase in SST around Queensland is and what effect that increase would have on evaporation?
Might be the subject of a new topic perhaps?
It’s nice to see them progressively taking on board the uncertainties and tending toward the Lorenzian position. Climate Chaos would make great headlines , ‘though the really is little better than Climate Cluelessness.
They can think of names until hell freezes over but in the end a train wreck is a train wreck and a train wreck it is.
At No Tricks Zone Prof. Nir Sharviv informs us that he tells his students to stay away from Global Warming.
If this becomes business as usual within the walls of our universities and the alarmist propaganda flood continues as it is, there will be a total collapse public opinion, no matter how much money they invest.
Really, changing the name of the scam doesn’t change anything.
http://notrickszone.com/2011/01/11/professor-nir-shaviv-advises-grad-students-to-stay-away-from-global-warming/
love it when gov’t steals your money thru taxes and then uses said money to propagandize….they’re doing the same thing here in the U.S. with obama healthcare bill…nobody wants it so obama admin hires Andy Griffith to star in commercials extolling the virtues of obamacare and also the admin is paying google to put gov’t propaganda sites as the top search results whenever someone googles obamacare…
Dr T G Watkins –
brisbane did build a massive flood mitigation dam, Wivenhoe, after the ’74 floods.
however, when the region went on water restrictions, the public were told by the State Premier that the restrictions would be lifted when the combined dam capacity reached 60%, which it did about 18 months ago.
however, the Premier changed her mind:
8 March 2010: Courier Mail: Wivenhoe Dam ready for big spill in Brisbane
River
“We can’t be complacent and we must treat water as a precious resource not
to be wasted whether our dams are 50 or 100 per cent,” Ms Bligh (Qld Premier Anna Bligh) said.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/wivenhoe-dam-ready-for-big-spill-in-brisbane-river/story-e6freoof-1225838427960
how can u fill a flood mitigation dam to capacity if it is meant to prevent the flooding we are seeing now in Brisbane, Ipswich and surrounding areas. this is what Wivenhoe is having to spill right now, when the rain has virtually stopped:
SEQWater: Water Release Update (Wednesday 12 January, 08.00am)
Wivenhoe Dam
The Flood Operations Centre has begun an appropriate closure sequence to reduce releases.
The releases from Wivenhoe Dam have been temporarily reduced to 215,000 megalitres per day to allow the peak of Lockyer Creek to enter the Brisbane River.
After the downstream peak in the lower Brisbane River has passed, releases will be increased to maximum of 301,000 megalitres per day.
http://www.seqwater.com.au/public/home
The CSIRO in australia need some Arts training on top of their science. It seems it’s teh only way we can teach them history – Here’s an iconic Australian Poem from over 100 years ago for them…..
The love of field and coppice,
Of green and shaded lanes,
Of ordered woods and gardens
Is running in your veins.
Strong love of grey-blue distance,
Brown streams and soft, dim skies –
I know but cannot share it,
My love is otherwise.
I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,
Of droughts and flooding rains.
I love her far horizons,
I love her jewel-sea,
Her beauty and her terror –
The wide brown land for me!
The stark white ring-barked forests,
All tragic to the moon,
The sapphire-misted mountains,
The hot gold hush of noon,
Green tangle of the brushes
Where lithe lianas coil,
And orchids deck the tree-tops,
And ferns the warm dark soil.
Core of my heart, my country!
Her pitiless blue sky,
When, sick at heart, around us
We see the cattle die –
But then the grey clouds gather,
And we can bless again
The drumming of an army,
The steady soaking rain.
Core of my heart, my country!
Land of the rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine
She pays us back threefold.
Over the thirsty paddocks,
Watch, after many days,
The filmy veil of greenness
That thickens as we gaze.
An opal-hearted country,
A wilful, lavish land –
All you who have not loved her,
You will not understand –
Though earth holds many splendours,
Wherever I may die,
I know to what brown country
My homing thoughts will fly.
Is there a competion for coming up with a new name? If so, what is the first prize?
(I’m in Brisbane, but I can still post because the prolonged drought caused by Global Climate Inconvenience Challenges doesn’t quite rise up to where I live.)
Actually, it’s the effort expended in defending a bad theory that makes climate so challenging.
Has Terry Pratchett done a satire on AGW yet? He could call the book Discal Wyrding. The plot could be that the government wants to ban magic so blames The Eight Colour (the colour of magic) making all wizards pay a tax on magic emmissions until the scam is uncovered by the librarian
I humbly nominate “Church of Climatology.”
Damn, now I’m going to be harassed by the group Anonymous!!
Seamus Dubh says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:33 am
It’s funny that the people who believe in it the least are the ones, who due to there life style have a dependency on it, understand weather and climate the best. While the peoples who’s lives don’t depend on the climate and weather are the ones who believe in it the most.”
Exactly! That’s exactly the first thing that popped into my head. Reminds me when the local radio station is telling me it’s raining while I’m outside riding my tractor and it’s nice and sunny. Who ya gonna believe?
I second the Church of Climatology.. A good reminder that it’s not science they’re selling.
One of the underlying errors in the AGW conjecture is that humans are powerful and have dominion over nature (where did I read that? – never mind).
The AGW gang believe that humans are altering the climate.
Now we must be careful not to fall into the same trap.
Yes dams and general flood mitigation are quite useful in controlling normal floods.
But when the big ones come, they are REALLY powerful.
I happen to know Toowoomba.
It is located high on an extinct volcano.
There are no large rivers that could cause a flood in normal times.
Just a few, insignificant creeks which barely flow in a dribble in normal times.
Last Monday afternoon at about 1 pm, a small storm broke and it rained.
(The storm was so insignificant that it did not register on the BOM’s radar).
The rain was quite heavy.
Within several minutes those creeks became a raging flood.
Cars, people and parts of buildings were swept away down the main street of town.
Within half an hour it was over.
At least two dead and a number of people still missing.
You would need to build a massive dam to hold back such a torrent which would take up much of the town and stand empty for probably one hundred years or more.
Waiting for the nest “minor” storm”.
Most of the whole state of Queensland is now covered in flood water, an area far larger than France and Germany combined.
Building dams to protect against this, to my mind would be dreaming.
It’s the old glib-lib-rename-game. When people hate what you’re doing and want you to change what you’re doing, change the name instead…
1) racial discrimination against white people
2) reverse discrimination
3) affirmative action
What is it called today, anyways?
Climate Disruption had the required touch of accusation in it; Climate Challenge does not. How about coming straight out with “Climate Damage”? Or even “Climate Destruction”? Though that’s probably a bit over the top even for CAGWers.
Another fact: 97% of those farmers know more about both weather and the climate than ivory tower scientists.
Well the Australian floods are being spun to death. The spin is incredible. For a start “reporters” asking 10 year olds if they’d seen anything like this before? Well, they should be asking people who are at least 40 who remember the 1974 floods.
The other issue being reported is the climate event called El Nino, is the strongest since weather records began in Australia. Interesting timelines there. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t La Nina/El Nino events not discovered until 1995?
Regarding “Environmental Justice,” this just popped up….worth reading & following the link to EPA’s website!
http://blogs.forbes.com/docket/2011/01/11/activists-work-to-inject-environmental-justice-concept-into-all-epa-actions/
Why 2014? Because that’s the 20th anniversary of President Clinton’s Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. The Plan EJ2014 document describes various activities EPA will pursue including “identify[ing] opportunities to utilize EPA’s statutory authorities to advance environmental justice.”
Actually, I think they should rename it once again, but this time for the final time. They should call it “BS”, and for once it’d be truthful, too.
Patrick Davis says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:52 pm (Edit)
….
Well the Australian floods are being spun to death. The spin is incredible. For a start “reporters” asking 10 year olds if they’d seen anything like this before? Well, they should be asking people who are at least 40 who remember the 1974 floods.
The other issue being reported is the climate event called El Nino, is the strongest since weather records began in Australia. Interesting timelines there. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t La Nina/El Nino events not discovered until 1995?
Better yet, those 1893 floods in the same area.
El Nino events have been named from the old observations of the coastal fishermen whose lives depended on predicting the temperatures and currents off of the Peruvian coasts. From the Spanish for “The Boy” (linking them to the baby boy (Jesus)) because these changes usually came near Christmas. So the events have been seen for many, many years.
But have been ignored by “serious” climatologists for just about equally as long.
“racookpe1978 says:
January 11, 2011 at 10:49 pm”
Yes, after my post and after Googling, I found that out. I guess I shoud have done the reverse and then asked why La Nina/El Nino events seem to be worked into extreme weather events AND proof oceans are warming as a direct result of C02 emissions. It’s is clear, the alarmists will be milking the Russian bushfires, the US/EU snows and the floods and bushfires in Australia all the way to the carbon bank.
.
.
Has “climaticus interruptus” been withdrawn?
.
.
Global Warming Panic explained
A liberal tries to explain why she thinks the world will end, and what should be done about it.
When “challenges” is out-dated, it’ll be labeled “Climate Excitments” …for higher taxes.
Darren Parker says:
January 11, 2011 at 5:17 pm
Has Terry Pratchett done a satire on AGW yet? He could call the book Discal Wyrding. The plot could be that the government wants to ban magic so blames The Eight Colour (the colour of magic) making all wizards pay a tax on magic emmissions until the scam is uncovered by the librarian
It should involve the Auditors of Reality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auditors_of_Reality
Hey, folks – we haven’t got to ‘climate opportunities’ yet..!
To paraphrase a famous Doonesbury cartoon: “We still can’t explain what the hell’s going on, but we sure are picking up a damn fine vocabulary!”
I suspect we are working towards the social concept of being “Environmentally Correct” (EC). At that point every thing can be labeled as being ‘EC’ or not. Cold is EC, warm is not apparently. (attempting humor with what I fear is inexorable truth)
How about:
ICE: Inconvenient Climatic Events
or maybe they should go in the direction of a more descriptive, “more is better” approach:
RAICDACDEBOIWAN: Reversible Acclerating Inconvenient Climatic Distractions from Anthropomorphic Carbon Dioxide Emissions But Only if We Act Now.
I personally still like ICS: Irritable Climate Syndrome
timc says:
January 11, 2011 at 9:43 am
From Coca Cola…………..AGW ZERO!
—-
good one!
I see the handy brisbane 5 or 7 netre flood sim..how handy, like it was pre made to be used to scare people with for the AGW cause maybe?
no way they whizzed it up so fast..pre made agit prop?
The NYT’s climate bedwetter Thom Friedman likes Global Weirding as the phrase to describe what’s happening climate-wise. The phrase is not new, and apparently the first known use was in 2002 by Katy Moss Warner who said ‘‘It could be colder, it could be drier, it could be wetter, it could be warmer. If you can’t exactly point to the climate changes as evidence of global warming, perhaps you can call it global weirding.” Hunter Lovins, co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute liked the phrase, and is sometimes credited with coining it.
Joe Romm disagrees with the use of the phrase, though, saying that it implies
something “supernatural or bizarrely unexpected”.
Exactly so. That describes the belief in manmade climate change very well.
“Climate Weirding” it is, and its’ proponents could be called “climate weirdos”.
.
.
I think I’d rather have suffered from Irritable Climate Syndrome than adulterated Climitis.
The only cure for Toxic Mega-Con-nin’ is to cut it out.
.
.
Make up a name, make up a remedy, levy a fee on us for the remedy. Hmmmm sounds like the pharmaceutical industry. One things for sure, the AGW lovers are definitely on drugs.
I guess you carry out New Post Modern History here?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming.htm
And how does a marketing study undermine the science exactly?