Scientists lay out new plan to save the Darling River
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Thursday 21 February 2019
There isn't enough water in the Darling River system to avoid catastrophic outcomes
Australian
Academy of Science, media
release, 18 February 2019:
Scientists lay out new plan to save the Darling River
Scientists lay out new plan to save the Darling River
Scientists asked to
investigate the fish kills in the Murray-Darling River system in NSW say a
failure to act resolutely and quickly on the fundamental cause—insufficient
flows—threatens the viability of the Darling, the fish and the communities that
depend on it for their livelihoods and wellbeing.
The multidisciplinary
panel of experts, convened by the Australian Academy of Science, also found
engagement with local residents, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, has been
cursory at best, resulting in insufficient use of their knowledge about how the
system is best managed.
The scientists say their
findings point to serious deficiencies in governance and management, which
collectively have eroded the intent of the Water Act 2007 and the
framework of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan (2012).
Chair of the expert
panel, ANU Professor Craig Moritz FAA, said the sight of millions of dead fish
from the three fish kills was a wake-up call.
“To me, it was like the
coral bleaching event for the mainland,” Professor Moritz said.
“Our review of the fish
kills found there isn’t enough water in the Darling system to avoid
catastrophic outcomes. This is partly due to the ongoing drought. However,
analysis of rainfall and river flow data over decades points to excess water
extraction upstream.”
The expert panel
recommends that urgent steps can and should be taken within six months to
improve the quality of water throughout the Darling River.
“That should include the
formation of a Menindee Lakes restoration project to determine sustainable
management of the lakes system and lower Darling and Darling Anabranch,”
Professor Moritz said.
The panel also
recommends a return to the framework of the 2012 Murray Darling Basin Plan to
improve environmental outcomes.
“The best possible
scenario is water in the Darling all the way to the bottom and in most years.
We are hopeful that this could be achieved if the panel’s recommendations are
implemented,” Professor Moritz said.
Australian Academy of
Science President, Professor John Shine, said the scientific advice of the
expert panel is a synthesis of the best available knowledge.
“In undertaking this
body of work the multidisciplinary expert panel has collaborated with other
relevant experts as required and received extensive data from a number of
Federal and State agencies,” Professor Shine said.
These agencies include
the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, the Land and Water Division of the NSW
Department of Industry, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, the NSW
Department of Primary Industries, the Queensland Department of Natural
Resources, Mines and Energy, and the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office,
in addition to data and information provided by researchers in many related
fields. The expert panel wishes to acknowledge the cooperation of these bodies
and individuals in promptly providing data.
The expert panel also
operated closely with the Independent Panel to Assess Fish Deaths in the Lower
Darling, initiated by the Government and chaired by Professor Robert Vertessy,
including sharing data and a reciprocal review of findings.
The expert panel report
Read the report: Investigation
of the causes of mass fish kills in the Menindee Region NSW over the summer of
2018–2019
The main findings and
recommendations are in the executive summary. The report was independently
assessed by seven independent peer reviewers, including one international
reviewer.
Related media releases
Tuesday 8 January 2019
Aboriginal Australia discovered the variability of a bright red supergiant star in the shoulder of Orion millennia before Western science did
Journal of Astronomical History and
Heritage, 21(1), 7‒12 (2018),
Bradley E. Schaefer Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State
University, “YES,
ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIANS CAN AND DID DISCOVER THE VARIABILITY OF BETELGEUSE”:
Abstract:
Recently, a widely publicized claim has been made that the Aboriginal
Australians discovered the variability of the red star Betelgeuse in the modern
Orion, plus the variability of two other prominent red stars: Aldebaran and
Antares. This result has excited the usual healthy skepticism, with questions
about whether any untrained peoples can discover the variability and whether
such a discovery is likely to be placed into lore and transmitted for long
periods of time. Here, I am offering an independent evaluation, based on broad
experience with naked-eye sky viewing and astro-history. I find that it is easy
for inexperienced observers to detect the variability of Betelgeuse over its
range in brightness from V = 0.0 to V = 1.3, for example in noticing from
season-to-season that the star varies from significantly brighter than Procyon
to being greatly fainter than Procyon. Further, indigenous peoples in the
Southern Hemisphere inevitably kept watch on the prominent red star, so it is
inevitable that the variability of Betelgeuse was discovered many times over
during the last 65 millennia. The processes of placing this discovery into a
cultural context (in this case, put into morality stories) and the faithful
transmission for many millennia is confidently known for the Aboriginal
Australians in particular. So this shows that the whole claim for a changing Betelgeuse
in the Aboriginal Australian lore is both plausible and likely. Given that the
discovery and transmission is easily possible, the real proof is that the
Aboriginal lore gives an unambiguous statement that these stars do indeed vary
in brightness, as collected by many ethnographers over a century ago from many
Aboriginal groups. So I strongly conclude that the Aboriginal Australians could
and did discover the variability of Betelgeuse, Aldebaran, and Antares.
Keywords:
Aboriginal astronomy, variable stars: Betelgeuse, Antares, Aldebaran
Read
the full paper at https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1808/1808.01862.pdf.
Original
paper by Duane W. Hamacher, Monash
Indigenous Studies Centre, Monash University,
“Observations of red–giant variable stars by Aboriginal Australians”
at http://www.aboriginalastronomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Variable_Stars.pdf?fbclid=IwAR11OnhyKIcvaxcFEJ1n5c0me9_FZtTi6mlNUfSKpa1r2wjgZ-WhMAqHU1s
Both
papers are well worth a read by everyone who has ever looked up at the night
skies in wonder.
Labels:
astronomy,
indigenous culture,
science
Friday 14 December 2018
Australia’s Chief Scientist gives the Clarence Valley’s Daily Examiner a polite serve
This is what
happens when a once proud 159 year-old newspaper
is brought by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp
and begins to publish the political rot that Andrew Bolt spews forth…….
The Daily Examiner, letter to the Editor, 11 December
2018, p.13:
Doing nothing on climate
change not an option
On Tuesday, December 4 you published an opinion piece by
Andrew Bolt titled, ‘Less marching, more learning’, which included a reference to me
‘admitting’ that we “could stop all Australia’s emissions – junk every car,
shut every power station, put a cork in every cow – and the effect on the
climate would still be ‘virtually nothing’.”
Those are Andrew Bolt’s words, not mine, and they are a
complete misrepresentation of my position.
They suggest that we
should do nothing to reduce our carbon emissions, a stance I reject, and I wish
to correct the record.
On June 1, 2017 I
attended a Senate Estimates hearing where Senator Ian Macdonald asked if the
world was to reduce its carbon emissions by 1.3 per cent, which is
approximately Australia’s rate of emissions, what impact would that make on the
changing climate of the world.
My response was that the
impact would be virtually nothing, but I immediately continued by explaining
that doing nothing is not a position that we can responsibly take because
emissions reductions is a little bit like voting, in that if everyone took the
attitude that their vote does not count and no-one voted, we would not have a
democracy.
Similarly, if all
countries that have comparable carbon emissions took the position that they
shouldn’t take action because their contribution to this global problem is
insignificant, then nobody would act and the problem would continue to grow in
scale.
Let me be clear, we need
to continue on the path of reducing Australia’s carbon emissions. The fact
remains that Australia’s emissions per person are some of the highest in the
world.
In response to the
recent IPCC report, I urged all decision makers – in government, industry, and
the community – to listen to the science and focus on the goal of reducing
emissions, while maximising economic growth.
I was upfront about the
magnitude of the task: it is huge and will require a global effort.
We’ve never been a
nation to shy away from a challenge, or from shouldering our fair share of the
responsibility for solving global issues.
Sitting on our hands
while expecting the rest of the world to do their part is simply not
acceptable.
Dr Alan Finkel AO,
Australia’s Chief
Scientist. [my yellow highlighting]
Friday 9 November 2018
When will the Federal Government realise there is a Climate Emergency?
The need for urgent and
effective action on climate change is becoming a major issue in Australia . More people are starting to realise that we
are facing a climate emergency and that we are being caught short largely
because of the incompetence of our Federal Government which continues to be
captive to climate denialists and the coal lobby.
The message from the
October 20 Wentworth byelection does not appear to have resonated with Prime Minister
Morrison and others in his Government.
Morrison is equating the devastating swing against the Government with
the electorate’s concern about the dumping of their popular member, Prime
Minister Turnbull. While that was
certainly a factor, there were other concerns about the Government’s poor
performance with a major one being its lack of effective climate action.
Despite all that
Wentworth voters said about climate change (as well as the way they voted),
there are Government members who claim Wentworth cannot be seen as comparable
with other electorates. Wentworth is different! According to them, climate
change is not a major issue elsewhere.
It will be interesting to see if this wishful thinking lasts until next
year’s federal election campaign.
While Wentworth
indicated the growing public concern about climate change, other recent
developments in relation to climate have further shown how out of touch the Government
is.
Morrison started his
Prime Ministership with the determination to assist drought-affected
farmers. But he brushed aside any
linking of this latest severe drought with climate change. However, the National Farmers Federation and
an increasing number of farmers acknowledge the link and understand that simply
throwing drought relief money at the problem is only a short-term solution. Calls for discussion about land use in parts
of the country are growing. These
include consideration of the viability of some forms of farming and whether
farming will be sustainable in some areas as climate change impacts worsen.
The latest data on
Australia’s climate emissions for the twelve months to March 31 was released
late on the Friday afternoon of the Grand Final weekend (September 28). The
Government had been sitting on this data for months and quite obviously did not
want it noticed – for good reason. The
report showed that emissions have continued rising as they have every quarter
since the end of the carbon price in 2014. Emissions continue to increase
simply because the Government does not have an effective policy to curb them.
Despite this bad result,
the Prime Minister and Melissa Price, the Minister for the Environment, managed
to put a positive spin on the figures. Price
claimed Australia would beat its 2020 target – an impossible achievement. And Morrison, ignoring reality completely,
claimed Australia was on track to achieve its 2030 Paris targets and would do
so “in a canter”. This is despite the analysis
of experts who say we will fall drastically short unless there is an urgent
change in government policy.
The recent dire
announcement by the IPCC has shown just how urgent the climate issue is. According to an analysis of the IPCC report
published by the Climate Council “limiting global warming to 1.5°C would
require rapid and far-reaching transitions during the coming one to two decades
– in energy, land, urban and industrial systems”. (The aim at Paris was to keep global
temperature rise well below 2°C above preindustrial levels and to attempt to
limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C. A rise of 2°C would produce
catastrophic effects.)
At war within itself, our
Government just does not have either the interest in the issue or the will do
what is essential - to act effectively across the board to reduce our emissions
drastically. This is in spite of the Wentworth result and all the polls
indicating that a growing number of people are concerned and want effective
action.
As well as concerned individuals, scientists, environmentalists and
farmers, it is significant that many in the business community, who know they
need to take measures to protect their businesses in a carbon-constrained
world, also want effective action from the government.
Just what are the
chances of the current Government coming to its senses and acting in the
national interest? At the moment that
seems unlikely. We may have to wait for
a change in government - unless a grass roots campaign across the nation
persuades Morrison that he has no chance of political survival unless he
changes tack.
Hildegard
Northern Rivers
29th October 2018
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GuestSpeak is a feature of North Coast Voices allowing Northern Rivers residents to
make satirical or serious comment on issues that concern them. Posts of 250-300
words or less can be submitted to ncvguestspeak AT gmail.com.au for consideration. Longer posts will
be considered on topical subjects.
Wednesday 7 November 2018
Science never was the exclusive property of Western civilisations
News Corps goes to battle in the seemingly neverending culture wars, 2 November 2018 |
The
Guardian, 2
November 2018:
I have recently been
involved in working on a project that aims to provide teachers with some
insights and elaborations on how
to teach the mandated science outcomes in the Australian National
Curriculum by using historic and contemporary examples from Indigenous people
and communities.
The work combined
various Indigenous and non-Indigenous scientists, science educators, curriculum
experts, teachers, academics and editors. It looked at examples of traditional
land management practices, understandings of chemical reactions and processes, astronomy,
medicines and any number of fascinating topics of how Indigenous peoples have
worked scientifically for millennia in Australia, and still do. It was a great
project to be a part of.
I was quietly hoping
this important project would fly under the radar of the ongoing culture wars
that exist within Australia, but it seems that was wishful thinking.
It began with a piece on
the Daily Telegraph website titled “Fire
starting and spear throwing make national science curriculum”. Not quite
unfortunately, it would be great if they were though.
I can see how it makes
for a better headline though. “Fire starting and spear thrower are two examples
of 95 different optional elaborations that teachers can use to help them meet
the mandatory outcomes of the National Science Curriculum if they want to”
doesn’t quite have the same ring to it.
"I can’t fathom the
hubris required to think that after 60,000 years or so of being in Australia,
Indigenous people wouldn’t have picked up a thing or two that the rest of the
world could learn from."
If you want to
understand the science of how a lever works, about stored energy and kinetic
energy, or about mass, acceleration, inertia, and lots of other cool stuff that
is mandatory in the curriculum, then a spear thrower is a great way to teach
it.
And did you know that
before the match was invented in 1826, most people around the world had to
light fires the old fashion way? And by “old fashioned way”, I either mean by a
fire saw, fire drill, fire plough, or by using flint. All of these examples can
be found traditionally in Australia and you can use these methods to teach
about combustion, friction, heat energy, kinetic energy, density, and any other
number of cool sciencey things.
The article goes on with
the standard emotive phrases we see in the culture wars: “racial politics”,
“dumbing down”, “slammed by critics” – literally all just in the first
sentence.
The front page of the
Daily Telegraph carried the story on its front page on Friday with the headline
“School Kooriculum: outrage over Indigenous school scheme”. Sure, “Kooriculum”
is awesome and I am definitely stealing that in future, but there is no
“scheme” and very little outrage.
There is Kevin
Donnelly decrying this work as “political correctness” and claiming it
is “dumbing down the school curriculum” even though, again, these resources are
entirely optional, and have been created in response to requests from teachers.
Donnelly argues that
“western scientific thought, based as it is on rationality, reason and
empiricism, is not culturally determined”. He quotes Professor Igor Bray as
saying that “science knows nothing about the nationality or ethnicity of its
participants, and this is its great unifying strength”.
He talks about how
Western science is “preeminent” in its value to the world, and can be traced
back “through the Industrial Revolution, the Enlightenment to the early Roman
and Greek scientists, mathematicians and philosophers”. So it seems that while
science knows nothing of nationality or ethnicity, Kevin Donnelly does know
that it traces back to the Greeks and Romans, and clearly thinks that what he
calls “western science” is superior to all others.
Thousands of years
before western science was even dreamed of, Indigenous
Australians were developing a detailed and intricate understanding of,
and relationship with, the world around them.
It allowed people to
intimately understand the relationships of the moon and the tides, measure the
equinoxes and solstices, develop a deep wealth of knowledge of plants, animals,
seasons, the stars and countless other amazing feats of intellect and ingenuity
that have long been denied in the ongoing narrative western civilisation has
created about Indigenous peoples.
The ways in which this
knowledge was interwoven with a holistic view of the world and the place of
humans within it, the ways in which it was encoded and handed down through the
ages is fascinating as well. Instead, Indigenous people have long been framed
as primitive, backwards, deviant, having nothing of value to offer apart from
free land and free labour, in constant need of saving, and deserving of
countless punitive measures.
Western science can
indeed trace much of its origins back to Greek and Roman societies and in
exploring its rich history over the centuries, it’s not a bad idea to look at
all the unscientific beliefs that were once science fact.
Read the full
article by Luke Pearson here.
Labels:
culture war,
education,
indigenous culture,
science
Saturday 13 October 2018
Quotes of the Week
“I fear that the danger of plastic bags is much exaggerated” [Former sacked prime minister & Liberal MP for Warringah Tony Abbott quoted in The Guardian on the subject of plastics polluting the environment, 6 October 2018]
“A key architect of the landmark Paris climate
deal has lambasted the Coalition government’s inaction on greenhouse gas
emissions, saying it “goes against the science”, squanders economic opportunity
and risks Australia’s international standing. Laurence Tubiana, a respected
French diplomat and economist, also says Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s claim
that Australia will meet its Paris targets “at a canter” is contradicted by
international scientific opinion.” [Journalist Nicole Hasham in The
Sydney Morning Herald, 3 October 2018]
“To me this particular event seems to show the Liberal party has
been taken over frankly by extremists on the hard right who aren’t particularly
motivated to win elections and aren’t particularly motivated to serve the
public. They’re just motivated by a crazy agenda.” [Alexander Turnbull, son of deposed Liberal prime minister Malcolm
Turnbull in The
Guardian, 11 October 2018]
Labels:
climate change,
Liberal Party of Australia,
pollution,
science
Friday 31 August 2018
A reminder that the world has known about the negative effects on the atmosphere of burning coal for over 100 years
Live Science, 14 August 2018:
A newspaper clip
published Aug. 14, 1912, predicts that coal consumption would produce enough
carbon dioxide to warm the climate.
Credit: Fairfax Media/CC
BY-NC-SA 3.0 NZ
A note published in a
New Zealand paper 106 years ago today (Aug. 14) predicted the Earth's
temperature would rise because of 7 billion tons of carbon dioxide produced by
coal consumption.
"The effect may be
considerable in a few centuries," the article stated.
The clip was one of
several one-paragraph stories in the "Science Notes and News" section
of The
Rodney and Otamatea Times, published Wednesday, Aug. 14, 1912.
The paragraph seems to
have been originally printed in the March
1912 issue of Popular Mechanics as the caption for an image of a large
coal factory. The image goes with a story titled "Remarkable Weather of
1911: The Effect of the Combustion of Coal on the Climate — What Scientists
Predict for the Future," by Francis Molena. [Photographic
Proof of Climate Change: Time-Lapse Images of Retreating Glaciers]
Labels:
climate change,
history,
science
Wednesday 6 June 2018
Australian climate change denying journalists are at it again
.@chriskkenny: Australia’s total
carbon emissions is around 550 million tonnes. That is lower than the annual
emissions from volcanoes. If our emissions go up or down, it will make
precisely no difference to the planet. #kennyonsunday
News Corp journalist, author, former Liberal Party political
adviser and Sky News host of "Kenny on Sunday", Chris Kenny is toying with comparisons in an attempt to downplay climate change facts
and figures.
According to
the Dept. of Environment and Energy Quarterly
Update of Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory annual
greenhouse gas emissions for 2017 stood at 531.9 million tonnes carbon
dioxide equivalent (Mt CO2-e) by September that year.
That
represents a 1.1 per cent increase in Australia’s annual emissions.
While
according to U.S.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Since the start of the Industrial Revolution, human emissions of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels and cement production (green line)
have risen to more than 35 billion metric tons per year, while volcanoes (purple line) produce less than 1 billion metric tons
annually. NOAA Climate.gov graph, based on data from
the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis
Center (CDIAC) at the DOE's Oak Ridge National Laboratory and
Burton et al., 2013. [my
highlighting and emphasis]
Leaving aside the fact that Australia has no active volcanoes so no
direct comparison can be made between domestic man-made greenhouse gas
emissions and domestic natural volcanic emissions, it is clear that the level of human
emissions far exceed volcanic emissions at global levels.
It is also clear that a rise in Australia’s annual greenhouse gas emissions
will have an impact, because carbon emissions are still rising globally and
this country's annual increase is factored into that total global increase.
It is precisely that total global greenhouse emission figure which is definitely making a difference to the planet and, according to established climate science, that difference is already causing global warming induced problems world-wide.
No amount of sophistry will change that fact.
This was also @SkyNewsAust tweeting on 3 June 2018:
This was also @SkyNewsAust tweeting on 3 June 2018:
.@rowandean: On the first day of the
calendar winter we've also had a record breaking cold start to the season
despite, only a day earlier, the climate change-loving Bureau reassuring us all
how warm it would be.
News Corp journalist, magazine editor, author and Sky News commentator, Rowan Dean, is confused about what the term "record breaking" actually means.
On 1 June -
the exact date of the start of calendar winter - in Sydney the lowest temperature was 13°C. The lowest recorded temperature for 1 June was 2.1°C in 1932 and the average minimum for June is 18.6°C.
In Melbourne on the same
day the lowest temperature was 3°C. The lowest June record for Melbourne
was previously set at 3.3°C in 1937 and the average minimum for June is 6.9°C.
Brisbane's lowest temperature on 1 June
was 8°C. The lowest recorded June temperature for Brisbane
was 5°C in 2001 and the average minimum for June is 10.9°C.
So yes, it was a cold start to winter. However the cold was no across the board record breaker.
When it comes to what the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) stated about Winter 2018 - it didn't state every single day would definitely be warm or warmer.
What it did state on 31 May 2018 was that:
When it comes to what the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) stated about Winter 2018 - it didn't state every single day would definitely be warm or warmer.
What it did state on 31 May 2018 was that:
NOTES
*timeanddate.com at https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/australia for Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane temperatures on 1 June 2018
*BOM at http://www.meteorology.com.au/local-climate-history for climate histories of Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane
* http://www.eldersweather.com.au/climate.jsp
* http://www.eldersweather.com.au/climate.jsp
It doesn't take a genius to see that Sky News Australia (founded by Rupert Murdoch in 1989) appears to be running an anti-science agenda.
Wednesday 11 April 2018
It seems climate change deniers may be looking to that far-right lobby group the Insitute of Public Affairs (IPA) to organise defence fund appeals in the future
For more
than a decade, Ridd
[Peter Vincent Ridd] has been happily criticising the science linking dangerous climate
change to greenhouse gas emissions and the science showing the impacts of
humans on corals.
Ridd has also
repeatedly, over many years, said that the impact of agricultural runoff and
water quality on the health and growth rate of corals is overstated.
But his employer, James
Cook University, initiated its own action against Ridd after he had criticised
specific organisations at his own university in media interviews, saying they
could not be trusted. This, the university alleged, went against the
university’s code of conduct.
So this is not about
Ridd’s “freedom” to say what he wants but is about an alleged breach of
the university’s code of conduct — whether you agree with that code
or not.
When the university
censured Ridd in 2016, he ignored them. He gave an interview
in August 2017 to another climate science denier, Alan Jones, on Sky News.
Ridd was there to talk about his chapter in a climate science denial book produced by the Institute
of Public Affairs (IPA).
Ridd said 'we
can no longer trust' the Government-backed Australian Institute of Marine Scienceand
the Center of Excellence for Coral
Reef Studies, based at James Cook University…..
The university alleged
this constituted further “serious misconduct”, so Ridd took the issue to his
lawyers and a case is proceeding.
To help fund his legal
bills, Ridd got some help from the IPA (a key organisation pushing
climate science denial in Australia for two decades) to set up a crowdfunding
campaign that raised the necessary $95,000 in just 49 hours.
The IPA’s executive
director John Roskam was
the first donor with $500. Other notable givers included climate science denier
and blogger Anthony
Watts, U.S. Interior Department employee
and climate science denier Indur Goklany, Perth
philanthropist and IPA funder Bryant Macfie and author and political
scientist Don Aitken. The Washington Post and others have also reported how
Goklany has had a key role in re-writing Department of Interior
climate documents.
Many of Ridd’s
cheerleaders have taken his scientific claims without scepticism and have not
entertained the idea that he might be wrong.
Ridd’s marine pollution?
But Ridd repeated in
detail several of his criticisms in a November 2017 "viewpoint" article in the journal Marine
Pollution Bulletin — opening up his arguments for scrutiny.
Now, as reported in The Guardian Australia, a team
of nine scientists, many based at the Australian Institute of Marine Science
and the James Cook University centre Ridd has attacked, have issued a response through the same journal. Their
assessment of Ridd’s claims is sharp.
They say Ridd’s
criticisms are based on 'misinterpretation, selective use of data and
over-simplification' and that they ignore 'formal responses to
previously published critiques'.
Wednesday 14 February 2018
Climate change sceptics started the ball rolling again in 2018
It would appear that climate change denial remains alive and well, but with the same hearing and comprehension problems it acquired at birth.........
The Daily Examiner and Townsville Bulletin, 10 January 2018:
In today’s crazy world,
western politicians are wasting billions of taxpayer dollars force-feeding
costly unreliable green energy in the bizarre belief this will somehow change
Earth’s climate.
Even more incredible,
they fear global warmth and seem hellbent on creating global cooling. They
should study climate history. It is snow and ice, cold dry air and carbon
dioxide starvation we need to fear, not a warm, moist, fertile, bountiful
atmosphere.
Climate change is
natural and unstoppable. Just 20,000 years ago, Earth was in one of its
recurring glacial phases.
A thick massive ice
sheet smothered Canada, Alaska, Iceland, Greenland, North Asia and Europe as
far south as present-day London.
Much of the animal and
plant life of the previous warm era was extinguished. Even in warmer lands not
covered by the ice sheet, plants suffered as the cold oceans removed moisture
and carbon dioxide plant food from the atmosphere.
Then, because of
changing cycles in Earth’s orbit and tilt, reinforced by changing solar cycles,
the sun warmed the frozen lands.
The great ice sheets
melted, sea levels rose and the warming oceans expelled moisture and CO2 plant
food into the atmosphere. Plant life recovered.
Tundra, forests,
grasslands and herbivores advanced towards the pole and fish became abundant in
the shallow seas that flooded coastal plains. Hunters, herders, farmers and
fishermen followed the food.
Human population
increased greatly. They gave thanks for the warmth, and worshipped the sun. But
the peak of the modern warm era is past, and the natural cycles controlling
global temperatures are pointing downwards.
Only an idiot with a
death wish for life on Earth would attempt to accelerate our inevitable descent
into the next ice age.
Luckily, their costly
war on warmth is totally futile, but their war on carbon energy will prove
tragically misguided in the cold times ahead.
VIV FORBES, Washpool,
Qld
NOTE: According
to DeSmog, “Viv Forbes is the
Chairman of the Carbon
Sense Coalition, which was created to “defend the role of carbon on earth
and in the atmosphere,” and which describes Forbes as a “pasture manager, soil
scientist and geologist from Rosevale in Queensland.” [2]
Forbes
has also had a long association with the coal industry. According to his biography at Stanmore Coal where he acts as
director, Forbes has over 40 years of coal industry experience and has worked
with Burton Coal, Dalrymple Bay Coal Terminal, South Blackwater Coal Mine,
Tahmoor Coal Mine, Newlands/Collinsville Coal Mines, MIM, Utah
Goonyella/Saraji and Gold Fields.
He is
also associated with other skeptical organizations including the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC) and
the Australian Climate Science Coalition (ACSC).
According
to Forbes, the “Green Elite” has a “long-term agenda … to destroy human industry
and reduce human population. Thus they are opposed to farming, mining, fishing,
forestry, exploration and cheap power.” [3]”
The Daily Examiner, 17 January 2018, p10:
Sceptic miscue
Savvy DEX readers
certainly realise that sceptic science/climate denial mumbo jumbo has its
origins in the ultra conservative religious right of the US political
landscape.
Coincidentally but sadly
for the rest of the world, many in the Trump administration are of this ilk.
Dedicated sceptic and
Rosevale, Qld resident Viv Forbes has once again (DEX Jan 10)
produced a pitch- perfect melody from the sceptic songbook.
As Viv points out,
naturally occurring climate change takes place over thousands of years.
On the other hand,
global warming is measurable over decades, is a direct result of human activity
over the last century in particular and so is everything but natural.
Moreover, Viv is warning
us of an impending frozen armageddan (in sceptic speak that should read
OhMyGodden!)
I hope Viv appreciates
that in the very same week as he made this dire forecast, the BOM has confirmed
that 2017 was the warmest year on record for NSW and SE Queensland – timing is
everything Viv.
The world may well cool
in 25000 years or so, but world leaders rightly are more concerned with the
immediate effects of global warming over the next few decades.
Nevertheless, we should
probably remain grateful that Viv actually gets his name correct because
everything else in his letter is nothing more than irrelevant nonsense.
Ted Strong, Seelands
The Daily Examiner, 27 January 2018, p15:
Tampered temperatures
TED Strong (17/1)
commented: “As Viv Forbes points out, naturally occurring climate change takes
place over thousands of years. On the other hand, global warming is measurable
over decades, is a direct result of human activity over the last century in
particular and so is everything but natural.”
Actually Viv said:
“Climate change is natural and unstoppable.” He did not mention time, although
the changes often occur rapidly.
During the Pleistocene
Epoch, there have been many ice ages. The latest, which covered large portions
of the northern hemisphere with mile-high ice, peaked 21,000 years ago and was
gone by 11,700 years ago.
Since then there was the
little Ice Age between 1400AD and 1850AD and a number of warm periods, which
included two Holocene Optimums, the Roman Optimum from 250BC to 400AD, and the
Medieval Warm Period from 800 to 1400. These four were as warm as, or warmer
than, the Modern Warm Period, commencing around 1850.
So Ted could you explain
what caused the previous warming periods, because they definitely weren’t
“unnatural”?
But we keep being told
that our current temperatures are the “hottest ever recorded”. So how do NOAA,
NASA and the BOMs define “ever recorded”?
Our BOM stated: “…2017
was the third-warmest year on record, at 0.95 degrees above the 1961 to 1990
average” and that “Seven of the 10 hottest years, have occurred after 2005”.
Years ago the BOM
decided temperatures taken before 1911 were “incorrect” and would no longer be
taken into account. Obviously the 1890s temperatures were too high to explain.
But that left the 1939
era, which is still regarded as being the hottest since 1900. To overcome that
pesky problem they established a baseline temperature using a 30-year average
between 1961 and 1990.
This was a great choice
because it included the chilly 1970s, when the world panicked that an ice-age
was coming.
So our BOM, with a
straight face, tells us that the “warmest on record” years have actually been
selected from the last 28 years, and the 0.95 degree increase is based on the
chilly 1961-1990 average.
So although the BOM
openly says what period its figures are based on, it knows that the gullibles,
and (unfortunately) the media, will submissively accept their fallacious
statements as being from time immemorial.
JOHN IBBOTSON,
Gulmarrad
The Daily Examiner, 31 January 2018, p11:
Climate warriors rattle
cages
The war of words between
the two climate change adversaries, one upriver and his opponent from down
river, has reached a point where one party has delved into his “unseemly” bag
to crudely criticise and try to belittle his opponent.
John Ibbotson can make
his case with facts and figures garnered from research by Scientists that are
not locked into the one eyed ideology that has evolved from the suspect science
of climate change computer modelling.
Of course the Bureau of
Meteorology can make mistakes, and has freely admitted to errors in the past,
while Tim Flannery is an example of just how far off the planet these fear
mongering so called gurus can get.
The scandal involving
climate change scientists in the British Met in East Anglia will not go away
nor will the fact that in the early 1990s temperature readings used to falsify
average ground temperature data came from thousands of sites situated close by
or near to, major heat sources such as American airports and bustling highways.
John Ibbotson makes his
case in a calm and methodical way, Ted Strong just doesn’t like his precious
cage being rattled.
FRED PERRING, Halfway
Creek.
The Daily Examiner, 3 February 2018, p13:
Climate desperation
Blimey, things must be
getting desperate in the John Ibbotson climate sceptic camp. He now
has to rely on Fred Perring (DEX 31/1) for his great science knowledge.
PAUL STEPHEN, Yamba
The Daily Examiner, 7 February 2018, p11:
Wrong horse, wrong track
When compulsive scribe
Fred Perring submits his favourites – ie maligning left-wing pollies or bashing
the ABC – he does OK because the only requirements are bias, bluster and
righteous indignation which Fred does in spades, while fact and logic seem to
be of little consequence.
But when Fred comes out
swinging, (DEX 31/1) in support of downriver sceptic, John Ibbotson, fact and
logic become vital and so Fred flounders. Not only is he backing the wrong
horse he is not even at, or on the right track.
The tiresome “facts” he
trots out are Fred repeats, straight from the sceptic science hymn book and
still unsupportable.
Even Fred’s well-known
visually impaired namesake would by now have recognised that, particularly in
the past decade, global warming is no less than the bleeding obvious.
Advice for Fred is the
same as for John – stay away from sceptic websites and stick to the things you
do best. Also thanks for the “heads-up” re my cage – I’ve checked it out and it
appears quite solid if not completely foolproof.
TED STRONG, Seelands.
Labels:
climate change,
climate change denialists,
science
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)