July 2012 Open Thread

Phew, looks the carbon tax has not returned Australia to the Stone Age.

Comments

  1. #1 Richard Simons
    July 9, 2012

    Betula said (July 8, 9:20 pm)

    you incoherently try to bait me with Richards bait

    It’s revealing that you think that my trying to get you to clearly state your views is “baiting”. I am trying to get you to make at least a hint of a suggestion of acting in the tiniest possible way like a scientist. Are you scared that, if you stop jeering and actually give your opinions on what is happening to the climate and why, people might actually jeer back at you? Perhaps they would find holes in your arguments. Horrors! You might even have to change your views.

    People like you think that you are ignored by scientists because they are scared of you. The truth is, they find your inability to learn and to present and support an argument as being beneath their contempt. Although you may affect politicians, you, KarenMackSpot, WUWT, the Curry crowd, etc have not the slightest impact on the progress of science.

  2. #2 John
    July 9, 2012

    Here are the eight “goals” Betula is against:

    eradicating extreme poverty and hunger,
    achieving universal primary education,
    promoting gender equality and empowering women
    reducing child mortality rates,
    improving maternal health,
    combating HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases,
    ensuring environmental sustainability, and
    developing a global partnership for development

    I ask again, why does Betula hate the poor? Why doesn’t Betula believe children deserve eduction? Why is he against AIDS prevention?

    Betula wants children to starve. Just think about how angry and hateful you must be to deny children access to healthcare, immunisation and fresh water because it clashes with your fringe ideology.

  3. #3 JohnL
    July 9, 2012

    Dante is busily crafting an even lower circle for Betty.

  4. #4 bill
    July 9, 2012

    Betty, I have submitted your name to the LA21-UN-NWO, and received the following reply:

    I am delighted to inform you that ‘Betty’ will shortly be among the first to be interred for re-education, followed by ineluctable voluntary 20% tithing of his/her income/pension for whatever period may remain of his/her life post-rehabilitation and release, as per LA21 19:36 Xvii.

    ‘Betty’ may anticipate the arrival of our courtesy black helicopters any day.

    SUBJECT TO NOTE: It is a myth that constructing a cap from aluminium foil will enable you to elude capture. Aside from looking rather silly, such headwear will also interfere with our extensive cavity scanning facilities.

  5. #5 FrankD
    July 9, 2012

    I agree, Betula, its outrageous that someone wants to return to its rightful owners a fraction of the money you continue to steal from the third world and future generations. Outrageous!

  6. #6 Karen
    July 9, 2012

    “A Melbourne family who claim they were slugged an extra $55 “carbon tax charge” when burying a relative were told “even the dead don’t escape the carbon tax”.

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8496121

    The carbon tax component is about 500% higher than than the cost of the diesel that the backhoe used to dig a hole, that had also already paid the carbon tax on the diesel.

    That will really be a brian spin for the mathematically challenged barnturd with the 3 digit IQ of 29.2

  7. #7 Lotharsson
    July 9, 2012

    Here are the eight “goals” Betula is against:

    Fuck, let me go on record as not denying but heartily approving those goals.

  8. #8 Lotharsson
    July 9, 2012

    That will really be a brian spin…

    Has anyone told Brian about this?

    …with the 3 digit IQ of 29.2

    Projecting again, Karen?

  9. #9 chek
    July 9, 2012

    What’s the odds Betty thinks enlightened self interest is all a commie plot?

  10. #10 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    “A Melbourne family who claim they were slugged an extra $55 “carbon tax charge” when burying a relative were told “even the dead don’t escape the carbon tax”.

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8496121

    The carbon tax component is about 500% higher than than the cost of the diesel that the backhoe used to dig a hole, that had also already paid the carbon tax on the diesel.

    That will really be a brian [sic] spin for the mathematically challenged barnturd with the 3 digit IQ of 29.2

    Except that it was all a big false alarm – there is no “carbon tax on funerals”:

    http://news.yahoo.com/video/world-22186928/apology-over-carbon-tax-funeral-fee-29920831.html

    You’ve been suckered again, KMSPMM. Gosh, you’re easy to fool – and impossible to educate.

    As an aside, the Opposition climate spokesman, Greg Hunt, took the chance to say late this afternoon that “the carbon tax will follow you to the grave”, even after it was explained to the public and to the scandle-addicted media that there is no funeral carbon tax. Talk about slimey dog whistling. And this from a man whose Honours thesis was on the benefit of taxing carbon pollution:

    http://www.andrewleigh.com/blog/?p=621

  11. #11 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    As you like pasting linkies, KMSPMM, take a look at this:

    http://www.thepoliticalsword.com/post/2011/03/07/Tony-Abbott%E2%80%99s-Great-Big-New-Tax.aspx

    At least it is a defensible numerical analysis of something real, rather than another of your tabloid wet dreams.

  12. #12 Lotharsson
    July 9, 2012

    Given Tony’s professed religious faith, and his frequent deployment of falsehoods and disingenuities to trick the gullible (a la Karen), I really don’t understand how he has time for any actual politicking – unless he treats his confessional obligations with about as much integrity as he treats the truth in his public pronouncements.

  13. #13 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    And for those who doubt that the Opposition’s climate change spokesman wrote a thesis on taxing pollution, here it is:

    http://www.petermartin.com.au/2011/03/why-we-need-carbon-tax-by-coalitions.html

    It’s interesting to watch the Opposition’s various members use the “but carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, it’s plant food”, gambit when they can. I wonder how much of this is to give Hunt some breathing space?

  14. #14 Lotharsson
    July 9, 2012

    Karen might also wish to look into when the carbon tax does and does not apply to diesel in case she has been fooled on that point as well.

    (Oh, heck, who am I kidding! Karen doesn’t care a micro-whit for being accurate. She’ll sling around any old bulldust if she thinks it supports her pre-existing position.)

  15. #15 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    Greg Hunt stirring hysteria, when he knows that there is no case for any – it’s the last paragraph:

    http://www.news.com.au/money/cost-of-living/carbon-tax-cost-added-to-familys-funeral-bill/story-fnagkbpv-1226420545281

  16. #16 Lotharsson
    July 9, 2012

    It’s amazing that the party that goes around accusing Julia Gillard of lying tells blatant lies about Gillard lying (as she clearly was making a commitment contingent on being elected with a majority), and blatant lies about various aspects and implications of the carbon tax.

    It’s still more amazing that so many people eat this shit up and beg for more whilst trying to get others to eat it too.

  17. #17 John
    July 9, 2012

    The problem now for the Libs is the economy isn’t imploding. Anyone notice anything different while shopping? I sure as hell haven’t. Unscrupulous vendors will hike prices and blame the price but they’ll lose out. Not Gillard’s fault – whatever happened to “personal responsibility?”

    The carbon tax scare campaign is a house of cards etc etc.

  18. #18 bill
    July 9, 2012

    So what you’re saying, guys, is that the GBNT has actually failed to destroy the Australian economy? Wow!

    Gee, you’d almost think that if we had it a whole year and the economy still hadn’t imploded that all the blood-oaths to repeal it might start looking a bit, um, daft… never mind, Tony always has WorkChoices Redux to win votes with; alleged Aussie ‘Karen’ would be a big fan of that one, I’m sure…

    In all honesty, I really think the Coalition will be praying that Big Stupid’s GFC 2.0: The Depression knocks us around hard enough to allow a supine and witless media to play the ‘we’ve been crippled by the Carbon Tax’ game on their behalf.

    They will.

  19. #19 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    Given Tony’s professed religious faith, and his frequent deployment of falsehoods and disingenuities to trick the gullible (a la Karen), I really don’t understand how he has time for any actual politicking – unless he treats his confessional obligations with about as much integrity as he treats the truth in his public pronouncements.

    Lotharsson, I suspect that Abbott is of the cadre of religious people who think that the rules apply more to others than to themselves.

    There’s a word for that, isn’t there?

  20. #20 Betula
    July 9, 2012

    “I ask again, why does Betula hate the poor? Why doesn’t Betula believe children deserve eduction? Why is he against AIDS prevention?”

    You’re too obvious John. Go back to sleep.

  21. #21 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    Bill:

    In all honesty, I really think the Coalition will be praying that Big Stupid’s GFC 2.0: The Depression knocks us around hard enough to allow a supine and witless media to play the ‘we’ve been crippled by the Carbon Tax’ game on their behalf.

    That’s exactly what they’ll be hoping for. Watch for confabulation of this sort whenever the influence of ailing offshore economies comes to knock on Australia’s front door.

  22. #22 Betula
    July 9, 2012

    FrankD

    “I agree, Betula, its outrageous that someone wants to return to its rightful owners a fraction of the money you continue to steal from the third world and future generations.”

    I thought it was a conspiracy?

  23. #23 Betula
    July 9, 2012

    Loth…

    “Fuck, let me go on record as not denying but heartily approving those goals”

    Which brings us to the issue…how do you plan on paying for them?.

  24. #24 Betula
    July 9, 2012

    Richard…
    July 8th…3:48
    “I have a pretty good idea of Betula’s views on climate change”

    So no need to repeat myself.

  25. #25 Lotharsson
    July 9, 2012

    Which brings us to the issue…

    …that you’re waving about an attempted distraction from the fact that you haven’t even got close to laying a glove on climate science yet. Do you ever think you’re going to get around to it, or is the best you can do to hope the gullible will be persuaded by your fallacious conspiracy theorising?

  26. #26 John
    July 9, 2012

    Betula is right – too many uncertainties. Let’s triple climate science funding. More satellites! More scientists! More research grants!

  27. #27 Jeff Harvey
    July 9, 2012

    You know, the worst thing about poeple like Betula is they think they wre up on events around the world when in reality, thanks to their corporate media that dumbs them down, they know virtually nothing. So they swallow the MSM lines whole.

    Check out some of the UN resolutions vetoed by the United States over the past 50 years and explain to me how anyone with a scintilla of brain matter can honestly belive that the US promotes freedom, democracy and human rights in its foregn policy agendas. The UN hasn’t had any teeth in 30 years, and its more recently become an instrument to be used when it support US political/corporate expansionist agendas (e.g. Libya) and to be ignored when it doesn’t (e.g. Iraq).

    http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/geoff/UNresolutions.htm

    Ever hear of Thomas Carrothers Betty? Or George Kennan? Or Thomas Meachling? Ever read the outcome of Eisenhower’s report commissionedin 1958 to explain why the people in the Middle East hold such antipathy towards the US? And the outcome of the report? Ever read declassified planning documents alluding to US foreign policy agendas in South America, Asia, and Africa? Ever read Brezinski’s ‘The Grand Chessboard’ or the Council on Foreigh Relations ‘Grand Area Strategy’? What about ‘Project for a New American Century’ or Paul Wolfowitz’s ‘Defense Planning Guidance’? What do you think of Africa’s leadiing economist Samir Amin’s assessment of western policy agendas towards Africa? Ever read economist Patrick Bond’s ‘Looting Africa: The Economics of Exploitation’?… or economist Tom Athanasiou’s ‘Divided Plane”t: The Ecology of Rich and Poor’?

    And yet you appear to have some kindergarten-level belief in thr myth of some global UN agenda to control humanity. Gosh, I though adults would have outgrown this infantile nonsense years ago, but thanks to the corporate media and the inability of people to look beyond the end of their noses many dumbwits still believe it. I have seen it expressed in Deltoid by amny of the climate change deniers, almost without exception. Forget the volumes of evidence (read Michael Klare’s latest tome for an up-to-date account) showing that, thanks to continued de-regulation that began with the disastrous presidency of Ronald Reagan in 1980, the planet has become a casino in which everything, including life itself, is becoming a commodity to be bought, sold and owned. Manufacturing is pretty well dead in the US. Finito. Corporations show no allegiance to communities or countries, and whereas once there was social responsibility that has been discarded in favor of the bottom-line: profit. In 1980, the average corporate CEO in the US earned about 42 times as much as the hourly wage of the company employee. By 1990 that had increased to 85 to 1, and by 2000 a staggering 530 to 1. The median US wage has not increased in 40 years, whereas those at the top have seen their share of the nation’s wealth increase by many factors. The poor in Bangladesh and Jakarta and Port eu Prince and eslewherein the third world are earming pennies an hour in sweatshops whilst the planet’s ecologicla systems are being plundered to support profit margins that benefit < 10% of the population.The US economy relies on defense contracts doiled out to Halliburton, Bechtel, GE or seveal orher multinationals to which the government is beholden, whilst the only thin the US really exports now is junk and trinkets.Read Chris Hedges latest book, 'Days of Destruction, Days of Reckoning' and the ugly picture becomes manifest. And against all of this we have Betula and his sandbox-level rhetoric.

    Un-be-lievable.

  28. #28 Lionel A
    July 9, 2012

    Jeff Harvey

    I take my hat off to you for having the patience to write such a stunningly accurate and hard hitting post, when we know full well that Bet will ignore the message in it and fire back with inane drivel.

    Go on Bet, prove me wrong and take up the reading matter suggested by Jeff to which you could add writing by John Pilger and Naomi Klein.

    I will have a few other suggestions when I check my book shelf but in the meantime you could try here, and check out ‘Vultures’ Picnic’ whilst there. Find a copy and read it.

  29. #29 Lionel A
    July 9, 2012

    We may be looked at as moving off topic WRT global warming and climate change but it is all connected if you can think about the very big picture.

    WRT:

    http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/geoff/UNresolutions.htm

    Now that is one interesting list. Bet, now you go find out the number of UN resolutions that Israel is still in violation of and then consider those US top movers and shakers who have dual nationality or at the very least conflicts of interest.

    And no, I don’t wish Israel to be blown away just reigned in a bit so that all those bulldozed out Palestinians can return to the land that was Treated to them. Trouble is politics on both sides have been infected by US and other Western Nation’s foreign policy agendas. Besides, heat and lack of water will cause socio-political stresses the like of which we have not yet seen.

    The world can do with less conflict right now as wars are so destructive and accelerate the global warming problem. But what people like you are trying to do is to delay action until social order breaks down across the world as resources are depleted and plundered by the super rich who think they are in control – they have not yet twigged that their children and grandchildren will have a dragon by the tail. When the dam bursts we will all, and I mean ALL, be in the path of the torrent unless we start taking sensible actions now and on a global scale.

  30. #30 Lionel A
    July 9, 2012

    Is there a human being in here somewhere?

  31. #31 Richard Simons
    July 9, 2012

    Betula
    11:42 am

    Richard…
    July 8th…3:48
    “I have a pretty good idea of Betula’s views on climate change”

    So no need to repeat myself.

    You can’t repeat what you’ve never stated. Still avoiding actually telling us your views, I see.

  32. #32 Lionel A
    July 9, 2012

    And for the Duffer brigade who still fail science:

    Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes

    More analysis here

    and what it leads to here.

    Boxers, climate, weather and punches – dots linked.

  33. #33 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    Jeff at 1:24 pm directly above:

    Chris Hedges latest book, ‘Days of Destruction, Days of Reckoning

    I think that’s “Revolt” rather than “Reckoning”?

    For the curious, there’s some ecommentary from Hedges her.

  34. #34 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    Crap. Misplaced an ‘e’. And no, not thatsort…

    Lionel A, at 2:12 pm above:

    Is there a human being in here somewhere?

    If Rinehart treats her own children like that (not getting their money until 2068?!), how are we to expect her to treat mere proles?

    There’s one to watch, as carefully as one would watch a rabid dog…

  35. #35 Lionel A
    July 9, 2012

    Bernard J

    For the curious, there’s some ecommentary from Hedges her.

    A song to go with that then

    I still have ‘Ride This Train’ around here somewhere with that long roll call of native indian tribes.

    Been making myself uncomfortable with bitter-sweet memories listening to Marianne Faithfull over the last few days after posting that last song link.

  36. #36 Bernard J.
    July 9, 2012

    Jeff.

    You might be interested in the conversation over at SkS, here:

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/dave-roberts-ted-talk.html

  37. #37 Betula
    July 9, 2012

    Richard…

    “You can’t repeat what you’ve never stated”

    Then how is it you….”have a pretty good idea of Betula’s views on climate change”

  38. #38 chek
    July 9, 2012

    That’s too easy Betty.

    Let me count the times you’ve sniped at Skippyduff, or “Karen” or GSW or PantiesizeZ or Uncle Tom Cobbley and all his denier minions.

    That would be a big fat zero, regardless of the most galloping stupidity and clinical grade paranoia they frequently display. It’s not hard to work out. You’re about as mysterious as Ronald McDonald, if not as sophisticated.

  39. #39 GSW
    July 9, 2012

    Salve Plebes!

    Anything of interest occuring in this backwater?
    ;)

  40. #40 chek
    July 9, 2012

    Just shootiin’theshit about the very apparent mental state of climate denier trolls. Tell me, when was your last episode or visit to Pope Montford’s, GSW? Whichever occurred latest will do.

    In fact IIRC, you were attempting to claify “Karen” MacSpot’s half-comprehended ravings about Julia Slingo, as understood for you via Ridley and Montford to parrot.

  41. #41 GSW
    July 9, 2012

    @chek

    Ah, still the same old chek! Paranoia personified, haven’t a clue what you’re on about, what’s rattled your cage this time, is it something we can all share?
    ;)

  42. #42 chek
    July 9, 2012

    Of course you don’t know Griselda.
    As you were.

  43. #43 GSW
    July 9, 2012

    @chek

    Fair enough chek, always happy to engage if you need a shoulder to cry on, you know that.

    ;)

  44. #44 chek
    July 9, 2012

    Yeah, whatever Griselda.
    Now off back to your organ grinder, there’s a good monkey.

  45. #45 Betula
    July 9, 2012

    chek…

    “Let me count the times you’ve sniped at Skippyduff, or “Karen” or GSW or PantiesizeZ or Uncle Tom Cobbley and all his denier minions”

    Let me count the times you have answered other peoples questions without answering the question…. here’s one;

    “Let me count the times you’ve sniped at Skippyduff, or “Karen” or GSW or PantiesizeZ or Uncle Tom Cobbley and all his denier minions”

  46. #46 chek
    July 9, 2012

    Point proven, Thanks, Betty the AGW Denier.

  47. #47 Betula
    July 9, 2012

    Jeff the lying embellisher Harvey…

    Please explain to me what your incessant ramblings have to do with anything I’ve said.

    Here was my question to John , July 8th @ 2:27

    “And what is the main goal of the Millenium Developement Goals? And how do they plan obtaining financing to ahieve that goal?”

    Your response is to drop names of people and titles of books you are supposed to have read because you want hear yourself be impressed….yet it has nothing to do with the issue. It’s all about you, with unrelated comments thrown in to make you feel smarter than you are…..classic superiority complex. Like the time you embellishing on things you saw @ Algonquin to make your trip seem more meaningful than it really was beyond the frostbite.

    The closest you came to being on subject was dropping Thomas Carrothers name, who has his fingers dipped in the Millenium Developement Goals.

    You rambled on about the evils of the U.S, , the MSM (who is the MSM in your view?), corporate media, Ronald Reagan, the average earning of a CEO, the poor in Bangladesh, Halliburton, Bechtel, GE and sandboxes….

    None of your ramblings answer how the Millenium Developement Goals are to be financed…..

    And then there’s the delusional Lionel A, who’s so impressed by your egotistical -incohterent – related to nothing -diatribe that he can’t contain himself…

    “I take my hat off to you for having the patience to write such a stunningly accurate and hard hitting post”

    Put your hat back on, your bald spot is blinding.

  48. #48 chek
    July 9, 2012

    Q: How many Betty’s does it take to write a coherent sentence?

    A: Nobody knows, because it’s never been done.

  49. #49 bill
    July 10, 2012

    Hasn’t the weather been strange lately?

    NOAA

    During the June 2011-June 2012 period, each of the 13 consecutive months ranked among the warmest third of their historical distribution for the first time in the 1895-present record. The odds of this occurring randomly is 1 in 1,594,323.

    Leaving aside Pratchett’s ‘Narrativium’ Law – 1 in 1 million events always happen – that’s a pretty tough statisitc to dismiss.

  50. #50 Richard Simons
    July 10, 2012

    Betula @July 9, 7:16 pm

    Richard…

    “You can’t repeat what you’ve never stated”

    Then how is it you….”have a pretty good idea of Betula’s views on climate change”

    Your continual sniping and jeering at those who understand that anthropogenic climate change is taking place and will have serious effects, together with your absence of criticism of even the most stupid argument from those who say otherwise, provide what is known as ‘evidence’.

    Why so scared to actually state your opinion? When you go out to lop trees, if people ask you whether a specific branch should come off do you prevaricate and refuse to give an opinion, then jeer at whatever the customer decides or are you just gutless here because you feel so thoroughly out of your depth?

  51. #51 bill
    July 10, 2012

    Betty would be out of his/her intellectual depth in a bird-bath…

    SkippyDuff may well have the brain of a Macropod, but this one could be outwitted by a Hills Hoist.

  52. #52 ianam
    July 10, 2012

    Then how is it you….”have a pretty good idea of Betula’s views on climate change”

    Betula is incapable of rational inference or even grasping that others are capable of it. The bottom of the D-K barrel.

  53. #53 Capax Tresus
    July 10, 2012

    Don’t you people get it?
    The UN has admitted they want to alleviate poverty using money.
    And where do they plan on getting this money?
    From people with money!

  54. #54 John
    July 10, 2012

    Great compilation of news reports about the US heatwave from Climate Crocks.

    What future catastrophes amirite

    Deniers argue that any speculation of future catastrophes is just alarmist, and when they occur the warmer climate in which they happen miracuously has nothing to do with global warming.

  55. #55 John
    July 10, 2012

    As meteorologist Dr. Jeff Masters puts it, “Thus, we should only see one more 13-month period so warm between now and 124,652 AD–assuming the climate is staying the same as it did during the past 118 years. These are ridiculously long odds, and it is highly unlikely that the extremity of the heat during the past 13 months could have occurred without a warming climate.”

  56. #56 Karen
    July 10, 2012

    Oh deary me, more evidence of a warmer past.

    “An international team including scientists from Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (JGU) has published a reconstruction of the climate in northern Europe over the last 2,000 years based on the information provided by tree-rings. Professor Dr. Jan Esper’s group at the Institute of Geography at JGU used tree-ring density measurements from sub-fossil pine trees originating from Finnish Lapland to produce a reconstruction reaching back to 138 BC. In so doing, the researchers have been able for the first time to precisely demonstrate that the long-term trend over the past two millennia has been towards climatic cooling.

    “We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low,” says Esper. “Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy, as they will influence the way today’s climate changes are seen in context of historical warm periods.”

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/09/this-is-what-global-cooling-really-looks-like/

    With a cooling trend, golly.

  57. #57 Karen
    July 10, 2012
  58. #58 Karen
    July 10, 2012

    Here is another peer reviewed paper that demonstrates that the current temperatures in the US are neither high nor uncommon.

    Long-term perspective on wildfires in the western USA

    “We use sedimentary charcoal accumulation rates to construct long-term variations in fire during the past 3,000 y in the American West and compare this record to independent fire-history data from historical records and fire scars. There has been a slight decline in burning over the past 3,000 y, with the lowest levels attained during the 20th century and during the Little Ice Age (LIA, ca. 1400–1700 CE [Common Era]). Prominent peaks in forest fires occurred during the Medieval Climate Anomaly (ca. 950–1250 CE) and during the 1800s.”………….

    http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/09/1112839109

  59. #59 John
    July 10, 2012

    You do realise that Northern Europe is not global, right Karenmackspot?

  60. #60 John
    July 10, 2012

    Karen, thanks to that fire paper. If you had bothered to read it you would see it uses Mann’s hockey stick and at no point says it was hotter in the past.

    More dramatic increases in temperature or drought are likelyto produce a response in fire regimes that are beyond those observedduring the past 3,000 y. Since the mid 1800s, the trend in fire activity has strongly diverged from the trend predicted by climate alone and current levels of fire activity are clearly out of equilibrium with contemporary climate conditions. The divergence in fire and climate since the mid 1800s CE has created a fire deficit in the West that is jointly attributable to human activities and climate changeand unsustainable given the current trajectory of climate change.

  61. #61 Karen
    July 10, 2012

    Yes Johny, and I also realize that the US is not global. It has been a bit of a laugh watching all the hype about all the temperature records being broken there, problem is that most of them are very short records, some 12 yrs short, lol

    This is an example, http://www.fox54.com/story/18920344/uahuntsville-study-on-heat-and-climatology of the alarmanistic temperature hypocrisy

  62. #62 Jeff Harvey
    July 10, 2012

    Betula, the grade school-level educated tree pruner:

    What I note from your reply is that you don’t know a whole lot about the unmistakable link between economics, politics and environmental destruction. True to form, you dismissed my last post without a single coherent rebuttal – instead, you refer to it as ‘rambling’, which of course is the standard method of dismissing material that goes over your head. You’ve clearly been spending too much time up birch trees or reading the New York Times or watching other corporate media drivel over in your own backyard to learn a little bit about the ways in which the world works. That’s why my posts and lectures aren’t aimed at people like you who have pre-determined world views and whose views are firmly locked up in profound ignorance. There are a lot of open-minded people who want to seek the truth and to better understand why our current economic system is heading for collapse, and to join efforts to pull humanity back from the brink. You just aren’t one of them, so you can get lost for all I care.

    Of course the point of my post was to show – and there’s tons of evidence to back it up – that unfettered corporate capitalism is destroying our planet’s ecological life support systems at an ever increasing rate. The Brundtland Report (1987) claimed that it was necessary to increase the world’s economic output by a factor of at least 5 to lift half the planet’s people out of grinding poverty. Current development goals are aiming to achieve the same noble target, only corporate and state planners in the US, UK and other developed nations fully realize that if this were to be realized, then we’d need another 3 or 4 uninhabited Earth-like planets to sustain consumption (and waste production) in the developed countries alone at current rates. So our planners pay lip service to sustainability and poverty alleviation, band in fact they do everything to ensure that capital and resource flows remain largely one-sided: from the underdeveloped south to the rich developed north. And, as I said, this is, or should be, considered hardly controversial. Yet the media, owned largely by huge corporations or dependent on them for advertising tries to give us the impression that the developed countries are doing everything in their power to help and aid the poor countries (lie #1), to promote true, bottom-up democracy (lie # 2) and to alleviate poverty (lie # 3). If you bothered to read some of the US-vetoed UN resolutions – such as those describing a range of goals such as economic justice, equity and poverty reduction, as well as ecological protection, you’d fully realize that the US is opposed to them. Why is this? because they conflict with the short-term agendas of big business, which sees the south as a huge source of resource wealth to be plundered with impunity for profit. If you had enough intelligence to understand my narrative, and to put two and two together, you’d realize that the current economic system of nakedly predatory capitalism and deregulation are the by-products of policies implemented by Reagan and Thatcher some 30 years ago, and that have been continued by successive governments. And that the consequences for the environment and for humanity are dire. You’d also realize, if you read some of the historical comments by the likes or Kennan, Carrothers, Brezinski, Kissinger and others that US foreign policy has never been aimed at promoting democracy but at doing everything in its power to promote US business interests, usually at the expense of democracy. Kissonger famoulsy said in 1975 that the US should promote de-population of third world countries because larger, wealthier populations in the third world would conflict with US economic interests on the basis that the US economy needed a large and ever increasing amount of resources from less developed nations to sustain its # 1 position. Put this into the context of Kennan’s famous 1948 memo, where he wrote that the US controls 50% of the global economy with only 5% of its population, and everything should be done to maintain this disparity without threat to our national security. Or Carrothers saying that the US only promotes limited forms of top-down [elite-contolled] democracy when it is their interests to do so; when it isn’t it is downplayed or ignored. Or PNAC effectively saying that no country should be able to challenge the power, prestige or priviledge of the United States, and Brezinski arguing that the US should aim to control the planet’s economic heartland – meaning the oil and natural gas rich Caucasus region – in order to have ‘ veto power’ over the global economy, or as he termed it, ‘ critical leverage’. Then economists like Samir Amin and Patrick Bond convincingly argue that western economic policy towards the third world has never been based on the nobel goals I already described, or in economic integration, but simply at the ‘ looting of resources’ from poor countries.

    Putting this all within in the context of climate change and other burgeoning environmental problems and it should be easy to connect the dots. Well, at least for most people. I’ve hardly scratched the surface of the information I present at lectures and the material I have gleaned from reading over the past 20 years. But it gives a pretty good idea of what is going on, and how the mainstream media are feeding us pap and vacuous garbage that have little to do with reality. Recent books by Greg Grandin, Chris Hedges, John Perkins, Pepe Escobar, as well as the others I have suggested lay it out in clear English. But the system ensures that their voices are drowned out by a chorus of pro-establishment pundits that supported the Iraq War, try to suggest that the Afghan occupation is a noble intervention, and leave out salient little points about the real agendas: outright expansionism, nullification of alternative models, and subjugation of other countries assets. And to link these to the looming environmental crises facing humanity.

  63. #63 John
    July 10, 2012

    Yes Johny, and I also realize that the US is not global.

    This is a drastic departure from when you claimed that cold weather in the US disproved AGW!

    problem is that most of them are very short records, some 12 yrs short, lol

    Sort of tells you something about warming, doesn’t it?

  64. #64 Marco
    July 10, 2012

    Karen manages to cite Alabama as support for her boo-hoo.

    Tamino just happens to have a relevant post up:
    http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/seasons-change-2/

    Now, note in particular the long-term trend for summers across the USA (5th graph). How funny, Alabama happens to lie in the Midwest, the only part of the US that has *not* seen a warming trend in summer. Cherry-picking much, Karen?

  65. #65 Lionel A
    July 10, 2012

    Bet @ July 9, 10:48 pm

    And then there’s the delusional Lionel A…

    How so when you prove me right:

    I take my hat off to you for having the patience to write such a stunningly accurate and hard hitting post, when we know full well that Bet will ignore the message in it and fire back with inane drivel.

    Go on Bet, prove me wrong and take up the reading matter suggested by Jeff to which you could add writing by John Pilger and Naomi Klein.

    And insults from ignorance are of no account for they, like a boomerang, return to the excuse for a human that issues them.

    So I’ll ask again, ‘are you negligent, incompetent or complicit’.

  66. #67 Richard Simons
    July 10, 2012

    KarenMackSpot:

    Oh deary me, more evidence of a warmer past.

    Have you forgotten that an implication of the Roman and Medieval periods being warmer than is generally thought is that climate is more sensitive than climatologists currently believe and therefore that we’re headed for even worse trouble?

  67. #68 Betula
    July 10, 2012

    Jeff Hardly…

    One thousand words without answering the question….How are the millenium Developement Goals going to be financed?…. a new global wording record!

  68. #69 John
    July 10, 2012

    Betula wants children to starve. Just think about how angry and hateful you must be to deny children access to healthcare, immunisation and fresh water because it clashes with your fringe ideology.

  69. #70 Betula
    July 10, 2012

    “Betula wants children to starve. Just think about how angry and hateful you must be to deny children access to healthcare, immunisation and fresh water”

    Ok, I’m thinking….you left out a roof over their heads.

    Nighty night John.

  70. #71 chek
    July 10, 2012

    “How are the millenium Developement Goals going to be financed”?

    That’s already been proposed, but if you’re looking for creative input, how about a troll tax? With a punitive element added for those trolls who could look shit up quicker than they can type their irrelevant questions, but choose not to.

  71. #72 Betula
    July 10, 2012

    “With a punitive element added for those trolls who could look shit up quicker than they can type their irrelevant questions”

    Questions Irrelevant to what? A carbon tax?

    Are you saying a carbon tax is irrelevant to eliminating poverty?

  72. #73 zoot
    July 10, 2012

    One thousand words without answering the question…

    Pot. Kettle. Black.

  73. #74 Jeff Harvey
    July 10, 2012

    *How are the millenium Developement Goals going to be financed?*

    By ensuring that the rich pay their fair share instead of avoiding tax…. heck, apparently Shell won’t pay a penny of tax in the US this year. That’s utterly obscene.

    I might also ask you is paying for the endless expansionist wars being fought to secure resources in Asia and Africa…. where does that money come from? Where did the money come from to bail out the banks when they committed massive fraud that almost bankrupted the US economy in 2008? Wake up man and get some common sense into that wooden head of yours. I know that you are pretty thick, but sheesh!

  74. #75 chek
    July 10, 2012

    Betty:Are you saying a carbon tax is irrelevant to eliminating poverty”?

    Chek: July 9, 12:18 am
    “Realistic alternatives are all yours for the inventing of”

    I’m not holding my breath on that one.

  75. #76 Betula
    July 10, 2012

    “Betty:Are you saying a carbon tax is irrelevant to eliminating poverty”?”

    Yes, if the carbon tax is enacted for another purpose.

    Now, what were the irrelevant questions you were referring to?

  76. #77 Lotharsson
    July 11, 2012

    One thousand words without answering the question…

    ROFL!

    You’ve spent about ten thousand words avoiding clearly stating your understanding of climate science and its implications, except for (a) your obsession with the Millennium Development Goals and (b) your near constant implication that the science is corrupted – but exactly how, you cannot say.

    Do you reckon you could get the massive log out of your own eye before you start pointing at tangential splinters?

    (Bet you don’t.)

  77. #78 bill
    July 11, 2012

    Ooh yeah – let’s have a JFGI Tax! Let’s get a little back from the neural-outsourcing movement…

  78. #79 Lotharsson
    July 11, 2012

    Yes, if the carbon tax is enacted for another purpose.

    So…you would be just fine with a carbon tax provided it is levied to address climate change.

    Right?

    And…you appear to assert that climate change has and will have nothing to do with driving poverty…?

    Is that right? And if so, how do you know?

    If climate change (say) exacerbates poverty in some places around the world…then climate change is linked to poverty, and dealing with climate change is (unfortunately) linked to dealing with poverty. Especially if anthropogenic climate change cannot be avoided, as is the case.

    Your (apparent) confident assertion of unrelatedness depends on a lack of uncertainty in understanding consequences – which is rather curious, given that you spend half your posts trying to play up uncertainty (albeit fallaciously implying that it is one-sided, given that you never seem to point out that uncertainty allows for future impacts to be much worse than the average prediction.)

  79. #80 Betula
    July 11, 2012

    Loth…

    There are two “if’s”, one “apparent”, one “(say)”, one “appear” and three question marks in a comment where you “seem” so sure of yourself.

    I’m convinced.

  80. #81 bill
    July 11, 2012

    Um, Betty, he’s trying to get you to understand something via logical baby-steps, which are, sadly, what’s required…

    Personally I think you’re indeducable; I reckon I’d have more success teaching my cat to play piano…

    ‘None so bliind’, etc.

  81. #82 John
    July 11, 2012

    Yes, if the carbon tax is enacted for another purpose.

    Betula, darling, if you are going to build up a conspiracy at least bother to read the source material.

    The World Economic and Social Survey that is the basis of your ranting explicitly outlines the future effects of global warming on the Third World as the reason for the proposed carbon tax.

    I thought you would have learned from Karenmackspot’s humilating blunder above to always read the primary material.

    For some reason it never says what the deniers’ state it does.

  82. #83 John
    July 11, 2012

    In a 2010 speech in Melbourne Christopher Monckton claimed that since 2001 there had been statistically significant cooling. I wonder how that claim is working out?

    Badly, as it turns out. Very very badly.

    And Pentaxz claims deniers never said it was cooling!

  83. #84 Karen
    July 11, 2012
  84. #85 John
    July 11, 2012

    Karenmanckspot, Monckton made the mistake of cherrypicking a too short time period to make a reliable estimate of warming or lack thereof.

    To prove me wrong you…. make the mistake of cherrypicking a too short time period to make a reliable estimate of warming or lack thereof.

    But seriously though, how long did it take you to find a dataset that gave you the result you wanted?

    You must have clicked through every single option and you still failed.

  85. #86 John
    July 11, 2012

    “Nobody talks about” the UHI effect! This is GOLD!

    hhahahahaha

  86. #87 MikeH
    July 11, 2012

    Queensland Premier Campbell Newman’s accidental solar boom.

    http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/newmans-accidental-solar-boom

    That’s why they call him “can do” Newman

  87. #88 Lotharsson
    July 11, 2012

    There are two “if’s”, one “apparent”, one “(say)”, one “appear” and three question marks in a comment where you “seem” so sure of yourself.

    (Idiot. Or question dodger. Hard to tell the difference.)

    So your actual point was…what? Or were you just hoping to avoid the questions?

    My use of “apparent” is to specifically point out what you seem (to me) to be saying, rather than to assert that is what you meant. Furthermore, it was an open invitation to specify what you meant if I read you wrong.

    My use of “if” in “And if so, how do you know…” is also there precisely because I’m giving you the chance to correct my reading of you if that reading is mistaken.

    These are specifically there to avoid “seem[-ing] so sure of myself” about your position.

    Are you really that poor at English comprehension?

    But let us continue.

    My use of “if” in “If climate change is linked…” was as bill said – it specifically calls out a logical induction step – but I guess it’s easier to avoid the question by pretending to misunderstand that usage.

    My use of “(say)” is to denote one example (implying that others probably exist). I guess that’s too advanced a concept for you.

    My use of “if” in “Especially if” is coupled to an expression of certainty, but it’s one more “if” than you were able to count to, so perhaps you didn’t ponder that.

    So … how about my questions? Or are you only good for more evasive waffle?

  88. #89 zoot
    July 11, 2012

    KMS @9:22 Am:
    Plot for 30 years (which makes it climate rather than weather, right?).
    http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1983/to:2013/plot/rss/from:1983/to:2013/trend

  89. #90 Karen
    July 11, 2012

    An aerial view of 80 years of climate-related glacier fluctuations in southeast Greenland

    “Here we present a unique record that documents the frontal positions for 132 southeast Greenlandic glaciers from rediscovered historical aerial imagery beginning in the early 1930s. We combine the historical aerial images with both early and modern satellite imagery to extract frontal variations of marine- and land-terminating outlet glaciers, as well as local glaciers and ice caps, over the past 80 years. The images reveal a regional response to external forcing regardless of glacier type, terminal environment and size. Furthermore, the recent retreat was matched in its vigour during a period of warming in the 1930s with comparable increases in air temperature. We show that many land-terminating glaciers underwent a more rapid retreat in the 1930s than in the 2000s”

    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v5/n6/full/ngeo1481.html

  90. #91 Bernard J.
    July 11, 2012

    An aerial view of 80 years of climate-related glacier fluctuations in southeast Greenland

    And consistent with the pattern of human-caused global warming.

    The broken clock finally coincides with temporal measurement.

  91. #92 Deep Climate
    Canada
    July 11, 2012

    Can Enbridge be trusted on Northern Gateway … and Climate
    Change?

    Can Enbridge be trusted to build and operate the Northern Gateway oil sands pipeline in a safe and sustainable manner? Judging from today’s scathing National Transportation Safety Board report on Enbridge’s
    horrendous pipeline spill in Michigan two years ago, the answer would appear to be a resounding “No”! But that’s just one of the difficult questions faced by Enbridge today.

    [P]olicies enabling “meaningful reductions in GHG emissions” – meaningful in the sense of actually having a good chance of realizing the global 2C/450 ppm target to which all nations have agreed in principle – can not possibly be “tailored” to a Canadian economy that is becoming ever more dependent on the exploitation of fossil fuels. That is the simple, bald fact of the matter.

    Of course, this remarkable confluence of misleading government and industry rhetoric is hardly a coincidence.

    Which brings us back to the beginning. Can Enbridge – along with the rest of the oil industry and the Canadian government – be trusted to address the real implications of climate change?

    Once again, the answer is obvious.

  92. #93 Lotharsson
    July 11, 2012

    I don’t know why I used the whale analogy?

    Because you haven’t got an actual argument.

  93. #94 John
    July 11, 2012

    Shorter Karenmackspot:

    I was wrong! Better change the subject!

    Typical coward, unable to stand up for his own argument.

  94. #95 bill
    July 12, 2012

    hmmmm…….I don’t know why I used the whale analogy? I like whales?

    This is a cry for help. KMS has become so addled ‘she’ desperately needs our help to explain her motivation, her use of language, and even how she feels about cetaceans…

  95. #96 Chris O'Neill
    July 12, 2012

    “And Pentaxz claims deniers never said it was cooling!”

    Ah yes but the strategy is to deny everything. Deny denial, deny denying denial, etc, etc.

  96. #97 John
    July 12, 2012

    Of course Chris, I just enjoy watching Karenmackspot squirm and get trapped into saying something I can repeat again and again and again and again.

  97. #98 ianam
    July 13, 2012

    Loth…

    There are two “if’s”, one “apparent”, one “(say)”, one “appear” and three question marks in a comment where you “seem” so sure of yourself.

    I’m convinced.

    If it weren’t for KMS, it would be hard to imagine anyone being more stupid than Betula.

  98. #99 Betula
    July 13, 2012

    I Am Not A Moron…

    “If it weren’t for KMS, it would be hard to imagine anyone being more stupid than Betula”

    Ianam, I’m going to go against my better judgement and try and help you here…

    The Ianam daily affirmation needs to be more positive. “I Am Not A Moron” just increases your feelings of really being a moron and It’s not healthy.

    Here’s an example:

    “The affirmation should be positive. ” I feel safe” works but the affirmation ” I am not scared” does the opposite of what you want. It focuses your mind on the word “scared” and increases that feeling. It is as if the word “not” didn’t even exist”.

    “All this negative thinking, if allowed to persist, will guarantee that you fail”

    http://affirmations.homestead.com/

    I hope this helps.

    Respecfully,

    Betula

  99. #100 Chris O'Neill
    July 13, 2012

    Betula is a moron.

    Yep, it works.

1 3 4 5 6 7 10

Current ye@r *