Guest post by Alec Rawls
Anthony posted the video earlier. Professor Lindzen as casually bemused dragon-slayer. Highly quotable, so I thought I’d create a transcript. Here is Lindzen’s damning conclusion (after demolishing any scientific basis for Australia’s new carbon tax):
If they can fool the people into thinking that they really want to pay taxes to save the earth, that’s a dream for politicians.
Transcript follows:
Full transcript
Andrew Bolt: Professor Lindzen, thanks for joining us from Paris. Now our government says we must have a carbon dioxide tax to help stop global warming, which it says is damaging Australia already. Can we start with some basics? First, how much is the planet actually warming?
Richard Lindzen: Well… over the century, or maybe 150 years, it may be somewhere between a half and three-quarters of a degree Centigrade. I don’t know what it is locally in Australia. Since ’95 , … 1995, there hasn’t been much warming, certainly not that can be distinguished from noise.
AB: Is that warming lower than what the climate alarmists have been telling us to expect?
RL: Oh yeah. You have a constant game going on. The IPCC once said that they thought it probable that man’s emissions had accounted for most of the warming over the last 50 years. A more correct statement might have been that according to current models man has accounted for between 2 and 5 times the warming we’ve seen in the last 50 years, and the models have cancelled the difference by arbitrary adjustments, and they call them aerosols, but they vary from model to model and they’re just fudge factors.
AB: Now if we see a rise in carbon dioxide emissions as we have, a very big rise, in this last decade or more, but no real warming, what does that say about global warming theory?
RL: What is says is that—and it doesn’t uniquely say anything—it says there are certainly other things going on that are just as big. These things like El Nino, Pacific Decadal Oscillation, are giving you as much variability as whatever man is doing, and because of that you can’t even tell if man is doing anything.
AB: Can I ask you? If we do get further warming caused by man, will that warming be good for us, or bad?
RL: That’s always hard to tell. It will be good for some people, a little worse for others. It will be completely within the range of what human beings have shown they are capable of adapting to and even prospering under.
AB: What effect would a carbon dioxide tax in Australia—the aim is to cut emissions by 5% by 2020—what effect would that have on the world’s temperature?
RL: I don’t think anyone could possibly detect it even with future technology. It would be nothing, for all practical purposes, and it would be nothing if the whole world did the same.
AB: So does it make any sense at all to adopt a tax, or to spend directly on programs to cut emissions?
RL: Depends on who you are. For governments, you know, they want taxes and they know people don’t like to pay them, and I think if they can possibly confuse people into thinking they’re doing it save the earth, they’ll do it more willingly.
AB: So you’d consider this more a sort of big government measure than anything that could really influence the world’s climate for the good.
RL: I think there’s no disagreement in the scientific community that this will have no impact on climate, so it’s purely a matter of government revenue. And, as I say, I mean if they can fool the people into thinking that they really want to pay taxes to save the earth, that’s a dream for politicians.
AB: Well, it’s a very depressing scenario you paint, but thank you very much Professor Lindzen for joining us from Paris. I appreciate it.
RL: Good luck. Good luck.
As an Australian, I can firmly say with no fear of contradiction that Ms. Gillard is the political equivalent of a zombie, a walking putrescence who is so disconnected with reality that she firmly believes that driving a stake into the heart of her own country’s economy will win her support from those who are left bloodied, disenfranchised and unemployed by her Quasi-Stalinist policies. He address to the nation was almost painful to watch for most Australians, with one subsequent opinion poll with News Limited suggesting that only 8% of the population would vote Labor at the next election! Like Custer at Little Big Horn, her arrogance and overconfidence knows no bounds and the upcoming massacre will lead to the decimation of her party for a generation. She remains immune to logic, reason or scientific discourse. She is without doubt the worst Prime Minister in our history, against extraordinarily stiff opposition from such totally inept predecessors as Whitlam, Fraser and Rudd, who are god like figures in the pantheon of political failure. After only 12 months in the job, she has managed to alienate huge segments of the community with every deceit, platitude, knee jerk reaction, policy catastrophe and half-baked crackpot ideology she espouses. Let her fate, and the fate of her party at the next election give pause to other world leaders who seek to perpetrate the AGW fraud. The apathy of the general public is slowly being awakened by word of mouth which is far more powerful than any propaganda methodology the spin doctors of government can dream up. This carbon tax is the ultimate pyrrhic victory for Gillard, and will be indelibly inscribed on her political headstone. So be it. Bring it on!
Pretty clever rabble rousing, this bill. Designed to appeal to the “entitlement” community, which will be compensated to an extent greater than their costs and of course, to the precautionary morons who think we must do “something” while also ripping off business. Those two constituencies might be a majority in the US.
.
It is a bit early for the penny to drop with the Australian public yet (although they are unhappy about it – resulting in over-compensation right now), but when analysis is done and the usual green ‘we did it for the world’ grows a little thin, some of the unreality will sink in.
Australia’s largest export is coal, coal provides most of its base-load power.No nuclear. The stated aim is to prevent any more coal-fired power stations being built in a country which has hundreds of years of coal, to cover current exports and home use.
Secondly, we shall go to a carbon trading scheme, yet there will not be enough carbon credits to cover their quota and will have to pay billions of dollars to overseas traders to “reduce” nominal emissions. Official economic assumptions even then are based on the rest of the world having a carbon trading regime also. Did I mention that assumptions also presume that geothermal, solar and wind will be economically viable by then?
In summary, they throw away cheap power, risk sending all mining investments – iron ore is a huge money-spinner also – to other countries (Africa is just one location) which have no carbon trading or taxes and then use taxpayers money to ‘buy’ their carbon credits from out of the country. It looks like a death wish for the Australian economy.
Last point: for all that, Australian emissions will still INCREASE from 578 megatons of CO2 in 2009-10 to 621 megatons of CO2 in 2020!!
I’m really upset right now. Julia Gillard has just claimed on ABC that sceptics have been disrespectful to scientists during this debate. This coming from a woman who calls anybody who questions any aspect of her quasi-religious belief in “Dangerous Climate Change” a Holocaust Denier. If she could find a way to brand sceptics “Child Molesters” I reckon she would. This woman is the head of a political party that funds an organisation called GetUp!. GetUp! is opposed to free speech. GetUp! is on record threatening venues who have let Monckton talk. On record blackmailing companies who oppose the carbon tax. The only up side is the latest poll released a few hours ago has her falling even further in the polls. Two more years we have to put up with this.
It is all about transfering power from THE PEOPLE to THE ELITE .
of course to safe us from doom.
It has nothing to do with Climate.
step by step they take our freedom away
Andrew Bolt is the journalistic equivalent of a zombie, a walking putrescence who is so disconnected with reality that he firmly believes that driving a stake into the heart of science will win him support from those who are find themselves in dire need of a dose of indignation.
(Note, I would never be so rude, I’m just copying the creative writing of Winston above.)
I know I am repeating myself, but it’s because I don’t get an answer to my simple question.
Why would it be so difficult to take a government to court to make them first prove that more carbondioxide does cause warming? The government here (in South Africa) has recently put a carbon tax on cars.
If it cannot be proven in court that more CO2 does cause warming, and, if on the the other hand, it can be shown that more CO2 is probably beneficial, then surely the tax becomes invalid?
I mean, surely, people like Bob Carter and Lindzen, myself and many others, could be brought in as witnesses and testitfy that CO2 produces little or no warming?
http://www.letterdash.com/HenryP/henrys-pool-table-on-global-warming
http://www.letterdash.com/HenryP/more-carbon-dioxide-is-ok-ok
“Mick says:
July 11, 2011 at 3:31 am”
Minor nitpick. Ms. Gillard said….”There will be no carbon tax in a Govn’t I lead.” Labor didn’t win, but the Labor leader, Gillard, is leading Govn’t.
There is a trend here. In my experience, countries that have “done the hard yards” in terms of implementing “painful Govn’t policy”, Thatcher (UK), Clark (NZ) and now Gillard (Aus).
An assertion accompanied by nothing resembling evidentiary or supporting material …
Such that we may learn, understand and come to comprehend on a level on a par with your own, could you please provide support for this/these assertions … the alternative being a request to “dissipate noiselessly into thin air”?
.
“John Brookes says:
July 11, 2011 at 7:02 am”
At least Bolt is in touch with reality. Gillard, I am convinced she still thinks she is a politics student. I recall a politics student once who actually complained about the size of the seats in a parliament house and associated buildings. They weren’t quite wide enough to acomodate this particular student and it was claimed that this was some form of discrimination. I kid you not!
First of all, nobody can show the real climate works the same as the models. (More correctly – nobody can show the climate models correctly model the actual climate).
Second, if the models are correct, then the changes being advocated won’t amount to anything. This is easier to argue than the first point, as the models simply need to be run with before and after inputs to show the changes will be insignificant.
I am happy that Canada is ignoring the lead of other countries in economic suicide. The current U.S. administration seems intent on tanking their own economy. Australia, too, it appears. WUWT? is a powerful voice, but I despair that it will not be enough to prevent what these leaders clearly intend to do. Thanks to Dr. Lindzen for his clarity.
“Man Bearpig says:
July 11, 2011 at 5:07 am
What is totally bizarre about this ‘carbon price’ is that they are taking the money with one hand and giving it back with the other .. By penalising Australia’s largest export industry, what happens if Australian Coal becomes too expensive? I bet there are plenty of other countries willing to take their place. ”
CANADA is trying – CP/CN rail and coal companies are upgrading facilities and shipping just as much as they can to port … closed coal mines are being reopened as demand rises and rises …
Maybe OT, but I have just had a chance to catch up on news items of the day, Monday, in Aus. On the ABC’s 7:30pm report, they had aired views on the “carbon” tax. A couple, living in a nice looking house, probably a 750 square metre block of land, here in Sydney were worried about “…reducing their carbon…” to protect the future. The woman who looks into her childrens eyes “knows” she is doing the right thing. One of their claims to lowering their “carbon footprint” is an installation of 18 PV solar panels. Not sure which ones, and their rating, but get this…and it is a real doozie…they claim it generates…wait for it…3 MEGAWATTS. That’s right 3 MEGAWATTS.
John Brookes says:
You sir are an idiot and I suspect a real Zombie
“driving a stake into the heart of science” What planet are you living on, what science? can’t you see the crap that the IPPC have been promoting, take of the blinkers man and look at the doctored and cherry pick facts, data manipulation the warmist have dished out for years, none of it can stand the light of day!
Winston’s comments are spot on!
Andrew Bolt has covered this CAGW hoax for many years and I would put him up against any Warmist spin-doctors anytime, anywhere, no matter what their profession!
Australia owes Andrew Bolt and people like Winston a debt of gratitude for fighting for Australians and all freedom loving people the world over.
Truth always wins and Bullshit always stinks!
Attention moderators:
I have tried a few times now get a a notifications link on follow up comments –
it seems it does not work
( I will now try again)
And now it works….
…sorry…
It’s not so much the climate debate that is depressing, it’s the constant wheedling to tax more in the name of saving the Planet. As time goes on, the CO2 tax (aliases and variants included) scheme looks more like a train wreck. The cost of doing business like this is beyond taking a hit on prosperity and well-being, it will kill it….for nothing.
Lindzen for President!!
Can’t you see it? Can’t you see the end result? I’ll let you in on it. The tax WILL be implemented, the Labor party WILL lose the next election but, crucially, the TAX WILL STAND. There is no way any ‘new’ government will repeal a tax that allows the politicians to ‘manipulate’ the electorate. The opposition that cries ‘foul’ today is the party that blames the outgoing lot but ‘carries on regardless’.
There is scant difference between ANY political parties these days and a carbon tax would be introduced by any party colour if they thought they could (and they CAN) get away with it.
Ah, but the weasel words from some government muppet yesterday was that this is NOT a tax (hence the Prime Bogan did not lie in her promise not to levy a carbon tax by her government) this is an ETS.
I despair – I sense a rise in the prescription of anti-depressants coming on in Australia in the not too distant future.
The worst thing about this tax is that it won’t have a large financial impact on people to start with, they will all think it is not a big deal. The real impact of this tax will be 10-15 years down the track. An increase of 2.5% a year over inflation will soon grow into a VERY big number and with this amount of revenue flow the Government (Red or Blue) will fight to keep it as Kellys_eye states above.
It is very similar to the international free trade agreement that conservative prime minister John Howard (a drop kick of the first order) signed. It seemed to have little impact early on but now it is decimating farmers and manufacturers. There was only 2 countries stupid enough to sign this agreement Australia and New Zealand, now we have severe restrictions on what we can stop from coming into our country, the latest is Chinese apples, whilst all the local apple growers in my area are going broke.
Adelai Stevenson stated on a trip to Australia last century that Australia was so rich in resources that a donkey could run it. We have had a long line of politicians who have made donkeys look very smart.
But once the tax is in place, and the Liberal/National coalition gets into power, you can be pretty sure that they will find all sorts of reasons for not dumping it. They might rename it, and fiddle with it a bit, but it will stay.
So we are still doomed.
Australians, get used to it. This tax has been approved by the lower house, and the new Senate is a joke that will rubber stamp everything from the Reps. The tax will become reality next year, just as we are now all paying extra income tax this year to bail out Queensland for not managing its dams (or its accounts) properly. The mining tax will become a reality. The demise of contractor labour will become a reality.
This government has two years left to serve. We do not have any say in the administration until then (think NSW for the past 4 years). By then the tax will be embedded and it will require the movemement of heaven and earth to rescind it. Won’t happen. Apart from perhaps Greece, Australia is now the most economically suicidal nation in the West. What a stupid, ignorant bunch of possums we are.
“If they can fool the people into thinking that they really want to pay taxes to save the earth, that’s a dream for politicians.”
~ Lindzen ~
Indeed it’s an approach advocated by famed free-marketeer economist Milton Friedman … it’s called a “Pigovian Tax”.
REPLY: I had to look that one up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_tax
-Anthony