Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Conic Tonic's avatar

Please forward to your ex employer the ABC. When I hear they cost the Australian taxpayer $1 billion a year I laugh. They will end up costing us $1 trillion and our enviable living standard in short time … at the very least be substantially responsible. They have pounded the case for ‘net zero’ ever since it became a ‘thing’ to a point in which politicians are too afraid to do back their own convictions.

We sell our coal to China cheaper than we should because we don’t use it. They build ‘ghost cities’ and ‘roads to nowhere’ because of it. Result more carbon emissions not less. We export or uranium but we can’t use it… as if we’re living on another planet!

And, when you forward this to the ABC pls add a subscription to ‘Doomberg’ … I’ll even pay for it.

Ps. Doomberg follows you work.

Erl Happ's avatar

I agree. The elephant in the room of human progress is access to cheap energy that, when not used directly to create warmth or power engines, can be converted to electricity that can be conveyed by wire to drive motors that drive transportation and magnify the creativity of man.

The test of the utility of a source of energy is whether it will be employed in the absence of a subsidy from the public purse.

As for the climate, there is such diversity. We have lots of choice.

As for the so called average climate, our ability to measure the change in the temperature of the air at ground level accurately and comprehensively remains in doubt.

The change that we see from day to night, from winter to summer and from year to year exceeds by far the degree of change that, if our measurement were indeed to be correct has occurred over the period of a hundred years.

The back radiation argument is falsified by the unequal rates of warming and cooling of the two hemispheres over time. The atmosphere is well mixed.

The 'chicken little' alarmists should be disregarded.

8 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?