Wednesday 11 November 2009

Are we in danger of entering a new faith-inspired Dark Ages or are we witnessing conservative right-wing religion's last hurrah?


The media quite often throws up quotes by religious leaders on the subject of global warming and some journalists have a penchant for picking those clerics who are most likely to be firmly anti-science.

So, are we in danger of entering a new faith-inspired Dark Ages or are we witnessing conservative right-wing religion's last hurrah? Now there is a question which itself smacks of as much wishful thinking on my part as that demonstrated by climate change sceptics within the clergy.

I don't think that there is any danger of paternalistic traditional religion fading away or its right-wing cadres disappearing into thin air. It's much more likely that when climate change descends on the heads of these faith-based sceptics we will all be told chronic water scarcity, food shortages and all our violent weather woes are God's punishment for our manifest sins.

Still, egged on by certain dominant groups and paid lobbyists, those against the idea that there is any such thing as catastrophic man-made global warming are now firmly entrenched in the religious arena. It would be folly to ignore the ability of religious groups to influence government policy, particularly in the role of stalking horse for big business.

Recent shifts in COP15 2009 rhetoric from binding legal agreements to non-binding political agreements being the goal for Copenhagen this December are no coincidence, as the alliances forged between anti-science groups supported by polluting industries and right-wing religious groups are emerging into the light.

On the U.S. faith-based Cornwall Alliance website currently there is a copy of An Open Letter to the Signers of"Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action"and Others Concerned About Global Warming which states:

In the accompanying document, "A Call to Truth, Prudence, and Protection of the Poor: An Evangelical Response to Global Warming," we present extensive evidence and argument against the extent, the significance, and perhaps the existence of the much-touted scientific consensus on catastrophic human-induced global warming. Further, good science–like truth–is not about counting votes but about empirical evidence and valid arguments.

The website also features The Cornwall Stewardship Agenda and is listed by that secular anti-global warming group The Heartland Institute as one of its 2009 conference co-sponsors.

Even Australia is not immune - for years Catholic Cardinal George Pell has been a member of the anti-science chorus and been quoted in media as saying that he is not convinced that climate change poses a threat, which shores up Monbiot's theory that many of the vocal global warming denialists appear to be middle aged to elderly.

While Christian right-wing political parties Family First and the Christian Democratic Party have both frequently taken highly sceptical, contradictory and often unreasonable positions on the existence of man-made warming. Although these two political parties are not alone in their desire to deny. The Liberal-Nationals Coalition is also riddled with anti-science sentiment as illustrated by the recent ABC Four Corners episode Malcolm and the Malcontents [Program Transcript and Reports and Resources].

It would not surprise me if findings of the October 2009 Pew Research Centre survey on attitudes to climate change were mirrored in Australia (this American survey found that the belief that global warming was a very serious problem had fallen by 27 percent within the combined 50 years of age and over groups and only 9 percent within the combined 49 years of age and under groups. These changes occurring in a sixteen month period). Indeed the summary of The 2009 Lowy Institute Poll appears to indicate that this is possible, however the 1,003 respondents do not appear to have been differentiated across all age groupings - at least for public consumption.

I suppose it doesn't surprise that anti-asylum seeker venom is starting to seep out in viral emails


It is hard to imagine where all this hate comes from.

Last weekend's sad little venomous, error-ridden, misspelt, viral email doing the rounds on the NSW North Coast and in Queensland:

Let Me See Why This Is So.

If you cross the North Korean border illegally, you get 12 years hard labour.
If you cross the Iranian border illegally, you are detained indefinitely.
If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.
If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally, you will be jailed.
If you cross the Chinese border illegally, you may never be heard from again.
If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally, you will be branded a spy and your fate will be sealed.
If you cross the Cuban border illegally, you will be thrown into political prison to rot.

However, if you cross the AUSTRALIAN border illegally, you get a job, a driver's licence, a social security card, welfare benefits, food stamps, credit cards, subsidized rent or a loan to buy a new house, free education, free health care, a lobbyist in Canberra and, in many instances, you can VOTE.

Why is this so?
Because we voted for incompetent polititians !!!
A bunch of pansies !!!
That is why !!!

Tuesday 10 November 2009

NSW North Coast begins to wonder what may happen if goverment doesn't get climate change coastal planning provisions right


One can almost see the shape of a looming battle between Northern Rivers communities, local & state governments and developers over how to proceed with climate change adaptation and growth.

The NSW Government trying to appease big political donors and the building industry, councils trying to expand their rate bases to cover costs and please local developers, communities lobbying hard to ensure that risk levels are not increased by the burden of higher populations on vulnerable land and individuals fighting tooth and claw to protect that family home, expensive retirement 'castle' or superannunation investment.

Excerpt from NSW Government NSW Sea Level Rise Policy Statement, October 2009:

In simple terms, sea level rise will raise the average water level of oceans and estuaries. As the average water level rises, so too will high and low tide levels affecting the natural processes responsible for shaping the NSW coastline. Exactly how the coast and estuaries will respond is complex and often driven by local conditions but, in general, higher sea levels will lead to:

increased or permanent tidal inundation of land by seawater

recession of beach and dune systems and to a lesser extent cliffs and bluffs

changes in the way that tides behave within estuaries

saltwater extending further upstream in estuaries...........

The sea level rise planning benchmarks can be used for purposes such as:

incorporating the projected impacts of sea level rise on predicted flood risks and coastal hazards

designing and upgrading of public and private assets in low-lying coastal areas where appropriate, taking into account the design life of the asset and the projected sea level rise over this period

assessing the influence of sea level rise on new development (see below for further details)

considering the impact of sea level rise on coastal and estuarine habitats (such as salt marshes) and identifying valuable habitats at most risk from sea level rise

assessing the impact of changed salinity levels in estuaries, including implications for access to fresh water.

The Northern Star reported on 6 November 2009:

COASTAL erosion problems at Lennox Head will be as bad as those at Belongil in less than 20 years, an environmental engineer has warned.
GeoLINK's Charlie Hewitt yesterday hosted a field trip to coastal hazard zones between Ballina and Lennox Head as part of the NSW Coastal Conference.
He said Lennox Head was 'on the emergency radar'.
"Planning and processes can't keep up with what science is discovering about climate change," he said.
"In 20 years, or less, we will be having the same problems in Lennox that Belongil is having now.


Also from The Northern Star; Crunch time for coastal erosion .

Meanwhile developers complained about the Draft NSW Coastal Planning Guideline: Adapting to Sea Level Rise in The Sydney Morning Herald last Saturday:

PROPERTY groups have criticised a planning policy aimed at limiting development in coastal regions, raising fears it has the potential to prevent construction in huge areas. As the Planning Minister, Kristina Keneally, defended the draft policy to stop development in areas subject to sea-level rises, developers said it went too far and could unfairly restrict the right to build in many areas. The Urban Development Institute of Australia's NSW chief executive, Stephen Albin, said he was worried that hazard lines to be drawn up by councils based on predicted sea-level rises of 90 centimetres by 2100 could determine which projects were allowed to proceed. "We would be concerned if the 2100 hazard line becomes the default planning control," he said.

NSW Dept. of Planning 05 Nov 09 - Draft Sea Level Rise Guideline - have your say.

An environmentally friendly domestic cat and a dog promoting GMO Red List chocolate




Cadbury's Glass and a Half chocolate advertisement

The leafy cat and garden friends are quite colourful and innocuous. However, the poor dog is lumbered with not only promoting a company which won't guarantee that it will not use genetically modified ingredients in its products - the advertised chocolate is poisonous to all domestic dog breeds.
DON"T FEED YOUR DOG CHOCOLATE!