Bushfires: It wasn't Global Warming, it was Green Party Idiocy

The bushfires here in Australia have devastated huge areas, wiped out many hundreds of homes and killed (what will probably be when the toll is finished) some 200 people.

The Greens, of course, have leapt on the "See! Global Warming disaster!!!" bandwagon. They blame high temperatures and strong winds and all other usual manifestations of Australian Summer weather on causing the fires. Well they are WRONG.

Apart from the fact that some of the most devastating fires were DELIBERATELY LIT, the reason that the fires were so ferocious is because people in the areas concerned were FORBIDDEN to remove trees and vegetation (http://www.theage.com.au/national/fined-for-illegal-clearing-family-now-feel-vindicated-20090211-84sw.html.) Along with the accumulation of many, many tonnes of debris from the likes of the deadly (just add fire) Stringybark trees and thousands of tonnes of leaf litter from all the other Australian native trees that actually REGENERATE THROUGH FIRE, no one was allowed to remove any of it (http://www.theage.com.au/national/angry-survivors-blame-council-green-policy-20090211-83p0.html).

Stupid bloody loony environmentalcases have done it again; this time people paid for idiotic "Green" thinking with their lives...

The Faith of the Climate Changers

CLIMATE CHANGE BELIEVER: " Science has proven the connection between the level of CO2 and the rise in Earth’s temperature."

SKEPTIC: "Oh really? How has science proven that?"

CLIMATE CHANGE BELIEVER: "Well, Science proves it. Scientists have shown it to be true."

SKEPTIC: "Scientists have shown it to be true? Just exactly which scientists? Exactly how have they proven it to be true?"

CLIMATE CHANGE BELIEVER: "All the scientists! Everyone knows that."

SKEPTIC: "Well, there are great differences in climate theory in the scientific community. Can you tell me just which version you mean? Tell me which studies you're referring to so I can look at them and address those issues."

CLIMATE CHANGE BELIEVER: "I don't know which studies. All I know is that they proved it!"

SKEPTIC: "Actually, it doesn't sound like you do know. You can't tell me the scientists to which you're referring, you can't tell me which study and you can't tell me how it was proven true. Just where did you get this information?"

CLIMATE CHANGE BELIEVER: "It's common knowledge. You hear it all the time."

SKEPTIC: "Just because you hear something a lot doesn't make it true. At Christmas I hear about Santa all the time, too. That doesn't make him real. What you're asking me to do is believe in the correlation between CO2 levels and the Earth’s temperature without providing me any evidence for doing so. I'm sorry, but I can't do that. I can't just accept what you say as true just because you say it. That would mean I would have to believe it by faith alone."

CLIMATE CHANGE BELIEVER: "So, you're saying believing in something by faith alone is wrong?"

SKEPTIC: “Yep. Stupid too”

Chicken Little - A Modern Version

Once upon a time there was a group of people known as Middle-class Western post-modern humans. One day, one of these Middle-class Western post-modern humans – let’s call him “Al” - of a sub-set called, “Gullible”, was scratching in the garden when he was told by a Bunch of neo-Luddite Hippies that something had just fallen on his head.

"Oh," cried Al, "the sky is falling. I must go tell the king."

So Al ran and ran, and he met Henny Penny.

"Where do you travel so fast, Al?" asked Henny Penny.

"Ah, Henny Penny," said Al, "the sky is falling, and I must go and tell the king."

"How do you know that the sky is falling, Al?" asked Henny Penny.

"I saw it with my eyes, I heard it with my ears, and a bit of it fell on my head," said Al.

"I will go with you to the king," said Henny Penny.

So they ran along together, and they met Ducky Daddles.

"Where do you travel so fast?" asked Ducky Daddles.

"Ah, Ducky Daddles," said Al, "the sky is falling, and Henny Penny and I go to tell the king."

"How do you know that the sky is falling, Al?" asked Ducky Daddles.

"I saw it with my eyes, I heard it with my ears, a bit of it fell on my head, and someone showed me a chart to prove it" said Al.

"I will go with you to the king," said Ducky Daddles.

So they ran along together, and they met Goosey Loosey.

"Where do you travel so fast, Al?" asked Goosey Loosey.

"Ah, Goosey Loosey," said Al, "the sky is falling. Henny Penny and Ducky Daddles and I go to tell the king."

"How do you know that the sky is falling, Al?" asked Goosey Loosey.

"I saw it with my eyes, I heard it with my ears, a bit of it fell on my head, someone showed me a chart to prove it, and a lot of people got together and agreed that it must have happened" said Al.

"I will go with you," said Goosey Loosey.

So they ran along together, and they met Turkey Lurkey.

"Where do you travel so fast, Al?" asked Turkey Lurkey.

"Ah, Turkey Lurkey," said Al, "the sky is falling, and Henny Penny and Ducky Daddles and Goosey Loosey and I go to tell the king."

"How do you know that the sky is falling?" asked Turkey Lurkey.

" I saw it with my eyes, I heard it with my ears, a bit of it fell on my head, someone showed me a chart to prove it, a lot of people got together and agreed that it must have happened, and all of the newspapers and TV stations are saying it is so" said Al.

"I will go with you to the king," said Turkey Lurkey.

So they ran along together, and they met Foxy Loxy.

"Where do you travel so fast, Al?" asked Foxy Loxy.

"Ah, Foxy Loxy," said Al, "the sky is falling, and we go to tell the king."

"Do you know the way to the king's house?" asked Foxy Loxy.

"No," said Al.

"No," said Henny Penny.

"No," said Ducky Daddles.

"No," said Goosey Loosey.

"No," said Turkey Lurkey.

"Then come with me and I will show you," said Foxy Loxy.

So they all followed Foxy Loxy who took them to a huge locked gate in an enormous unscaleable wall. After Foxy Loxy unlocked the gate, they followed him through into a village where others who also believed that they had been hit on the head were living. There, no one had running water, no sewerage, they lived in mud huts, the mortality rate was very high, diseases that could have been cured with simple medicines were rife, and most people died at a very early age.

“I am a trustee to the King, and this is where he gets me to take everyone who claims to have been hit on the head by something as you say you have been.”

“Oh,” said Al

"Oh," said Henny Penny.

"Oh," said Ducky Daddles.

"Oh," said Goosey Loosey.

"Oh," said Turkey Lurkey.

“Yes,” said Foxy Loxy and then turned away through the gate and locked it behind him, leaving Al, Henny Penny and all the others to their fate.

Then Foxy Loxy went home to his house in a suburb of a neighbourhood where there was fresh, clean running water, sewerage, a local hospital, a low mortality rate and all the myriad other wonders brought to humankind by Science and Technology.

“Idiots” thought Foxy Loxy as he rolled over in his comfortable bed and went to sleep.

The End

One Second Being Added as Earth Slows Down

An extra second is being added next year to allow for the slowing rotation of the Earth.

Someone out there want to blame this on humankind as well?

How about "Anthropogenic Global Slowing"?

--------------------------------------------------------
Seems to me the debate on Global Warming (sorry, "Climate Change"; much more nebulous) has begun again in earnest; more people are seeing that the world didn't warm one bit (see my blog entry of November 26th) in the last decade and are beginning to ask, "Where is all the disaster?" "Where is all the doom?"

I notice, also, that none of it has come to pass.

From the BBC News Webstite:

"La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world.

El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.

It has contributed to torrential rains in Australia and to some of the coldest temperatures in memory in snow-bound parts of China.

...the effect was likely to continue into the summer, depressing temperatures globally by a fraction of a degree.

This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.(My emphasis)"

So El Nino warmed the world in 1998 and La Nina has cooled it ever since. There has been absolutely no temperature rise globally in the last ten years.

Ten years is a long time to go without any warming, particularly when the Sky is Falling brigade shout doom and gloom about the CO2 increase that must have occurred during that time.

Y2K, here we come again.

Scientific Knowledge has Nothing to do with Consensus

The current climate debate fails to mention one significant factor: Scientific knowledge has nothing whatsoever to do with consensus.

The origin of today's so-called "scientific consensus" on climate change is based on a survey of the abstracts of 928 science articles published between 1993 and 2003 which showed that none disagreed explicitly with the notion of anthropogenic global warming.Scientific consensus, as used by political and other groups to form the basis for changes in business, society and the law is, then, merely a general collection of opinions that do not question anthropogenic global warming. Yet, on an individual level, quite the reverse occurs. The peer review process in most scientific journals does not use a consensus based process at all; instead, referees submit their opinions individually and there is no concerted effort made to reach a group opinion.

Scientific consensus has been used as a means of protecting the accepted worldview for centuries – look to the examples of Galileo, continental drift, and the much more recent Helicobacter controversy, for a start – and is a political construct, not a scientific one. Even the act of seeking such a consensus as a form of proof goes against all tenets of empirical science.

The claim of a consensus in scientific opinion is simply a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. The true test of science – making a theory more robust by stridently attempting to disprove it with experiments, rather than attempting to "prove" it with computer simulations – has fallen by the wayside through socio-political pressure, it would seem.

Less Arctic Ice 6000-7000 Years Ago

Oh dear. Evidence that the Arctic was ice free (or nearly so) 6000-7000 years ago, according to the findings reported in Science Daily, here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020095850.htm

Not much to say on this, as the evidence supports itself.

I do like the statement from the scientist in the article being careful not to upset the environmentalcases however, "..."Changes that took place 6000-7000 years ago were controlled by other climatic forces than those which seem to dominate today,”.

Yeah. Right.