Thanks Chris, it would help if our mainstream media occasionally asked a few hard questions as well, instead of every extreme weather event being mindlessly labelled as evidence of climate change, and every Government press release being repeated uncritically as "news"
Read the Real Global Warming Scandal by a chap called Booker on Audible. Global warming by humans is the greatest boondoggle in history and will discredit "the science". The Sun and volcanoes are bigger than we are.
The CO2 Climate Cult is exactly that. Point out the obvious errors and lousy science the Cult uses and you get angry cries of burn the witch and kill the heretic! Someday people will laugh at the Cult, but they are deadly serious right now. Keep up the good work!
We know it’s a scam and watch the coalition as they flounder around like a beached puffer fish! We see our power bills rise and ugly solar and wind monstrosities! We see our land and sea being poisoned.
Spot on Chris. We need to remember that the data used to justify Global Boiling, previously Global Warming, etc., was also used to justify Global Freezing back in the 70s. Remember Lenard Minoy on his Al Gore like trips around the world, spruiking the end of the world by ice age? 1970s north America had a bitterly cold winter and the world was convinced that if things didn't change and change fast, the world would freeze over. By the late 1980s it was all about Climate Change...the heating kind, and it's only progressed from there. But the data used for both freezing and boiling was the same historical temperature data. Clearly it wasn't about science but about political policy and population control.
It should be noted Chris that crop production yield also benefited from the higher atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and continues to increase yields. Even vege growers use CO2 in their nurseries to increase production...dramatically. And supposedly in the deep past Earth history, ice core samples show a CO2 concentration orders of magnitude higher than today (something like 1800ppm) and yet the world did very nicely thank you...with sufficient flora growth all around the world to support the voracious appetites of the dinosaurs and all other living things. Infact, this floral load formed the bulk of the coal deposits dug up around the world still today!!! Releasing it back into the atmosphere simply encourages high floral growth the world over. CSIRO's satellite survey of the greening of the planet showed over numerous decades that the world had greened by more than 30%, despite the deforestation in Brazil and desertification elsewhere. Greenland was called green land for a reason.
So, you are right...pursuing this Net Zero lunacy will only hurt the poor and needy and line the pockets of the wealthy and nefarious. So, the problem is, how to stop this stupidity???
Climate change was first called "global warming". And when did not stack up everywhere they called it climate change. Now not to sound too silly, but the climate has changed for about 4.5 billion years. Ok a bit faster at present, apparently, but nothing that warrents the hysteria we have at the moment. I understand that we could change our energy "habits" and let's try. But in no way any effort by any individual country will ever change the climate. In the first place we need to learn to adapt to change and secondly we take out time to do our research and science properly. Scientists should not be under pressure of losing a job because they have other ideas and methods.
Yes it has become a religion of the worst kind. They tossed out the good religions, only God knows why. And then we replaced it with climate change. Oh God help us again.
A target is a motivator. It is like a sports team saying we are going to finish in the top four this year, however unrealistic the goal may seem. The problem is not the target, but the way we are going going about trying to reach it. We are adopting a policy of subsidy and not rational economics. The aim is not living with less energy, but producing that energy with less environmental impact and making the transition to that situation at lowest cost. It will involve pain and lower living standards but that is a price worth paying for future generations. The best thing to do would be a scheme similar to the one proposed by Turnbull in his dying days. That was to move the responsibility for lower emissions to the electricity sellers. They would both have to guarantee 24/7 power and achieve carbon targets. Then private companies and not the government would be deciding where to spend the cash needed to achieve the result. The government would simply set the target. It would be so much more efficient then our current cacophany of handouts. The price would be transparent because it would all be encompassed in our power prices. Of course we should not exclude nuclear or any other form of generation or storage, that is madness.
Sins of emission are dwarfed by the sins of omission of the climate movement in its failure to study the only practical alternative to net zero, technology to cool the earth by enhancing sunlight reflection. Until the Coalition recognises this point it will continue to be tarred with the brush of climate denial.
Every sane person who knows the truth needs to speak up against the net zero insanity.
It’s time to pull the plug on net zero.
Brilliant commentary (as always), Chris.
Thanks Chris, it would help if our mainstream media occasionally asked a few hard questions as well, instead of every extreme weather event being mindlessly labelled as evidence of climate change, and every Government press release being repeated uncritically as "news"
Thank you Chris, the plain truth expressed perfectly, once more.
Exceptional article Chris, with an interesting take, and yes I agree, the new religion of the post-truth anti-God age.
Chris your articles are always filled with reality knowledge & facts - I have passed on to others.
Thank you again
Your essay needs to be read by many more peoplr
The LNP are frightened and unwilling to make the hard headed decisions required on many policy fronts.
Read the Real Global Warming Scandal by a chap called Booker on Audible. Global warming by humans is the greatest boondoggle in history and will discredit "the science". The Sun and volcanoes are bigger than we are.
The CO2 Climate Cult is exactly that. Point out the obvious errors and lousy science the Cult uses and you get angry cries of burn the witch and kill the heretic! Someday people will laugh at the Cult, but they are deadly serious right now. Keep up the good work!
We know it’s a scam and watch the coalition as they flounder around like a beached puffer fish! We see our power bills rise and ugly solar and wind monstrosities! We see our land and sea being poisoned.
Great piece , Chris.
Spot on Chris. We need to remember that the data used to justify Global Boiling, previously Global Warming, etc., was also used to justify Global Freezing back in the 70s. Remember Lenard Minoy on his Al Gore like trips around the world, spruiking the end of the world by ice age? 1970s north America had a bitterly cold winter and the world was convinced that if things didn't change and change fast, the world would freeze over. By the late 1980s it was all about Climate Change...the heating kind, and it's only progressed from there. But the data used for both freezing and boiling was the same historical temperature data. Clearly it wasn't about science but about political policy and population control.
It should be noted Chris that crop production yield also benefited from the higher atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and continues to increase yields. Even vege growers use CO2 in their nurseries to increase production...dramatically. And supposedly in the deep past Earth history, ice core samples show a CO2 concentration orders of magnitude higher than today (something like 1800ppm) and yet the world did very nicely thank you...with sufficient flora growth all around the world to support the voracious appetites of the dinosaurs and all other living things. Infact, this floral load formed the bulk of the coal deposits dug up around the world still today!!! Releasing it back into the atmosphere simply encourages high floral growth the world over. CSIRO's satellite survey of the greening of the planet showed over numerous decades that the world had greened by more than 30%, despite the deforestation in Brazil and desertification elsewhere. Greenland was called green land for a reason.
So, you are right...pursuing this Net Zero lunacy will only hurt the poor and needy and line the pockets of the wealthy and nefarious. So, the problem is, how to stop this stupidity???
Climate change was first called "global warming". And when did not stack up everywhere they called it climate change. Now not to sound too silly, but the climate has changed for about 4.5 billion years. Ok a bit faster at present, apparently, but nothing that warrents the hysteria we have at the moment. I understand that we could change our energy "habits" and let's try. But in no way any effort by any individual country will ever change the climate. In the first place we need to learn to adapt to change and secondly we take out time to do our research and science properly. Scientists should not be under pressure of losing a job because they have other ideas and methods.
Yes it has become a religion of the worst kind. They tossed out the good religions, only God knows why. And then we replaced it with climate change. Oh God help us again.
A target is a motivator. It is like a sports team saying we are going to finish in the top four this year, however unrealistic the goal may seem. The problem is not the target, but the way we are going going about trying to reach it. We are adopting a policy of subsidy and not rational economics. The aim is not living with less energy, but producing that energy with less environmental impact and making the transition to that situation at lowest cost. It will involve pain and lower living standards but that is a price worth paying for future generations. The best thing to do would be a scheme similar to the one proposed by Turnbull in his dying days. That was to move the responsibility for lower emissions to the electricity sellers. They would both have to guarantee 24/7 power and achieve carbon targets. Then private companies and not the government would be deciding where to spend the cash needed to achieve the result. The government would simply set the target. It would be so much more efficient then our current cacophany of handouts. The price would be transparent because it would all be encompassed in our power prices. Of course we should not exclude nuclear or any other form of generation or storage, that is madness.
Sins of emission are dwarfed by the sins of omission of the climate movement in its failure to study the only practical alternative to net zero, technology to cool the earth by enhancing sunlight reflection. Until the Coalition recognises this point it will continue to be tarred with the brush of climate denial.