These denier front bottoms have a lot to answer for. Sooner or later somebody IS going to get hurt and it will be Minchin, Abbott and co. with blood on their hands  :(


Quote:

Scientists hit back amid fresh death threats By science reporter Sarah Clarke The Executive Director of FASTS, Anna-Maria Arabia, says she received a fresh death threat only this morning. (ABC Breakfast) Top Australian scientists have united in a new campaign to defend their credibility amid fresh death threats aimed at key climate change scientists. In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Their concern is that the hysteria has now escalated and is spilling over into attacks on their work and threats to their personal safety. Anna Maria Arabia is the CEO of the nation's peak scientific body, FASTS - the Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies. Ms Arabia, who is launching the 'Respect the Science' campaign at Parliament House today, told ABC News Breakfast she had received a fresh death threat only this morning. "We know there have been some very serious death threats in the past, this is completely unacceptable," she said. "[I had] an email threatening my life. No scientist should ever have to have their life threatened simply for doing the work they need to do." Earlier this month, a number of the country's top climate change scientists, including several at the Australian National University (ANU), were targeted by death threats and reported receiving abusive phone calls for months. ANU was forced to move its scientists to a more secure location and introduced other security measures. Ms Arabia says today's campaign launch is aimed at restoring public confidence in science, as the hysteria in the climate debate spills over into attacks on all research. "It is really aimed at looking at the misinformation campaign that's being run against the scientific evidence largely coming from the climate change debate ... and seeing how that is undermining the nation-building work of our scientists," she said. "So it's really asking the public to have the confidence to respect the science, because there is a very robust methodology behind the scientific information that we use to make decisions every day." Ms Arabia says the misinformation campaign is largely being run by climate deniers. "It's unfortunate, because it's aimed at creating confusion, and it really places a question over the validity of the scientific process," she said. The group of scientists hope that by detailing how the process works, the public will better understand the intense scrutiny the science must undergo in the peer review process, before major decisions can be made. Chief scientist Ian Chubb, who provides advice to government ministers and the Prime Minister, says science results are rigorously tested. "It is about ensuring that people understand that there is proper science, properly conducted, properly reviewed and properly debated," he said. "And the consequences of that debate may change the way we think or they may confirm what we think, but there's a process that underpins everything we do. "I think it's too easy for people to pick one little bit of this or that and constantly ram it home, because there are a lot of people in the world who know that you don't have to be bright, you just have to sow doubt."

Quote:

In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate.

Have they singled out any particular politicians?

astro_surf wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:20pm:

These denier nasty people have a lot to answer for. Sooner or later somebody IS going to get hurt and it will be Minchin, Abbott and co. with blood on their hands  :( Quote: Scientists hit back amid fresh death threats By science reporter Sarah Clarke The Executive Director of FASTS, Anna-Maria Arabia, says she received a fresh death threat only this morning. (ABC Breakfast) Top Australian scientists have united in a new campaign to defend their credibility amid fresh death threats aimed at key climate change scientists. In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Their concern is that the hysteria has now escalated and is spilling over into attacks on their work and threats to their personal safety. Anna Maria Arabia is the CEO of the nation's peak scientific body, FASTS - the Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies. Ms Arabia, who is launching the 'Respect the Science' campaign at Parliament House today, told ABC News Breakfast she had received a fresh death threat only this morning. "We know there have been some very serious death threats in the past, this is completely unacceptable," she said. "[I had] an email threatening my life. No scientist should ever have to have their life threatened simply for doing the work they need to do." Earlier this month, a number of the country's top climate change scientists, including several at the Australian National University (ANU), were targeted by death threats and reported receiving abusive phone calls for months. ANU was forced to move its scientists to a more secure location and introduced other security measures. Ms Arabia says today's campaign launch is aimed at restoring public confidence in science, as the hysteria in the climate debate spills over into attacks on all research. "It is really aimed at looking at the misinformation campaign that's being run against the scientific evidence largely coming from the climate change debate ... and seeing how that is undermining the nation-building work of our scientists," she said. "So it's really asking the public to have the confidence to respect the science, because there is a very robust methodology behind the scientific information that we use to make decisions every day." Ms Arabia says the misinformation campaign is largely being run by climate deniers. "It's unfortunate, because it's aimed at creating confusion, and it really places a question over the validity of the scientific process," she said. The group of scientists hope that by detailing how the process works, the public will better understand the intense scrutiny the science must undergo in the peer review process, before major decisions can be made. Chief scientist Ian Chubb, who provides advice to government ministers and the Prime Minister, says science results are rigorously tested. "It is about ensuring that people understand that there is proper science, properly conducted, properly reviewed and properly debated," he said. "And the consequences of that debate may change the way we think or they may confirm what we think, but there's a process that underpins everything we do. "I think it's too easy for people to pick one little bit of this or that and constantly ram it home, because there are a lot of people in the world who know that you don't have to be bright, you just have to sow doubt."

emails can be traced???

:-?

freediver wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:26pm:

Quote: In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Have they singled out any particular politicians?

Coalition MPs deny man-made climate change

The Liberal Leader in the Senate, Nick Minchin, says a majority of his colleagues do not believe humans are causing climate change.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/09/2737675.htm

freediver wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:26pm:

Quote: In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Have they singled out any particular politicians?

Are they hoping to find the IPCC there? Arent they overseas?

philperth2010 wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:26pm: Quote: In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Have they singled out any particular politicians? Coalition MPs deny man-made climate change The Liberal Leader in the Senate, Nick Minchin, says a majority of his colleagues do not believe humans are causing climate change. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/09/2737675.htm

Of course humans are contributing to climate change through carbon emissions

but by how much and what impact are the questions these scientists have no answer for now or in the future

Six million Jews didn’t die so Combet could smear a sceptic

Andrew Bolt
Wednesday, March 23, 2011 at 12:01am

It is deliberate and it is grossly offensive - a foul smear acceptable only to the shameless:

THE Liberal Party has accused Julia Gillard of drawing parallels between climate change and the Holocaust after she branded Tony Abbott a “climate change denier”.

The manager of opposition business Christopher Pyne said that after 11 years as chair of the Parliamentary Friendship Group on Israel, he was offended by the form of words - which he likened to the term “Holocaust denier”.

Amid uproar in the House of Representatives, Mr Pyne asked the Prime Minister to withdraw the comment…

“We know that she is trying to allude to the Holocaust. It is offensive and it must stop”.

Speaker Harry Jenkins refused to accept the basis of the complaint.

Yet the Coalition see no problem with the Pacific Solution which is a direct reference to the Final Soluton!!!
>:(

Maqqa wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:41pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:30pm: freediver wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:26pm: Quote: In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Have they singled out any particular politicians? Coalition MPs deny man-made climate change The Liberal Leader in the Senate, Nick Minchin, says a majority of his colleagues do not believe humans are causing climate change. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/09/2737675.htm Of course humans are contributing to climate change through carbon emissions but by how much and what impact are the questions these scientists have no answer for now or in the future

Not according to the majority of Coalition MP's!!!

;)

philperth2010 wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:44pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:41pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:30pm: freediver wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:26pm: Quote: In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Have they singled out any particular politicians? Coalition MPs deny man-made climate change The Liberal Leader in the Senate, Nick Minchin, says a majority of his colleagues do not believe humans are causing climate change. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/09/2737675.htm Of course humans are contributing to climate change through carbon emissions but by how much and what impact are the questions these scientists have no answer for now or in the future Not according to the majority of Coalition MP's!!! ;)

I would disregard any impact under 5%

Maqqa wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:41pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:30pm: freediver wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 8:26pm: Quote: In an unprecedented move in Canberra today, more than 200 scientists will converge on Parliament House to call on politicians to help stop misinformation in the climate debate. Have they singled out any particular politicians? Coalition MPs deny man-made climate change The Liberal Leader in the Senate, Nick Minchin, says a majority of his colleagues do not believe humans are causing climate change. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/09/2737675.htm Of course humans are contributing to climate change through carbon emissions but by how much and what impact are the questions these scientists have no answer for now or in the future

And if they could, what amount would bring Abbott's faction of the Liberal Party on side?

FASTS has engaged in public masturbation before:


Quote:

FASTS chairman Ken Baldwin wrote an op-ed in the Australian (nasty newspaper that it is) in October 2000 announcing their Technology Clock. It read as follows... The Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies believes what many technology-savvy commentators are now saying: that the low dollar reflects the parlous state of scientific and technological innovation in our economy. To emphasise this dire position, FASTS has set up a Technology Dollar Clock. The idea is simple: the clock predicts what FASTS believes will be the value of the Australian dollar against the US dollar in 10 years’ time, based on its average decline over the past 10 years, but modified to include changes in Australia’s S&T performance. … We assume that, if nothing changes, this trend will continue over the next 10 years. From an average value of US57.48c in August, that gives a value for the Aussie dollar approaching US43c in August 2010. … FASTS will be keeping an eye on our science and technology performance over the coming period, and will publish regular updates of the Technology Dollar Clock on our website. The Dollar Clock is ticking towards US40c, and time is running out.

That's AU$ .43c for every USA dollar.

Just what was the AU$ in October of 2010, 10 years after the omniscient FASTS made its bold statement?


Quote:

The Value of the Australian Dollar Posted on 16 Oct 2010 The Australian dollar overnight in the United States hit $1.00 for the first time since it was floated in 1983.  I think I heard my stash of US dollar bills in my cupboard quivering overnight! http://www.money-mechanics.com.au/2010/10/the-value-of-the-australian-dollar/

Respect the science! Hell, if FASTS says the sky is blue my advice would be to look up.

As President Dwight D. Eisenhower said in 1961:

   Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity….

   The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present—and is gravely to be regarded.

    Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite….

Hat tip to Catallaxy and manalive for most of the above.

Scientists are human hating genocidal Nazi ratbags... :D :D :D :D

well personally I wouldnt know one of these scientists if I fell over them   and I am sure that goes for most people..unless they have their faces plastered all over the websites..plus where they work or live.. sounds pretty melodramatic to me,.

people are angry! however this I admit is going too far.. but thats the way of the world today.. over reaction...

does it accure to these scientists that they too may be over reacting.. to the science.. not the death threats...

I am sure the police would be able to handle this and who knows maybe these guys are looking for a bit of sympathy as gillards polling figures hit the skids.. and one has to put two and two together and come up with CARBON TAX for the reason for that.

she has listened to the scientists yet refuses to listen to the people..

must have got up some folks noses who knows.?

salad in wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 8:59pm:

FASTS has engaged in public masturbation before: Quote: FASTS chairman Ken Baldwin wrote an op-ed in the Australian (nasty newspaper that it is) in October 2000 announcing their Technology Clock. It read as follows... The Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies believes what many technology-savvy commentators are now saying: that the low dollar reflects the parlous state of scientific and technological innovation in our economy. To emphasise this dire position, FASTS has set up a Technology Dollar Clock. The idea is simple: the clock predicts what FASTS believes will be the value of the Australian dollar against the US dollar in 10 years’ time, based on its average decline over the past 10 years, but modified to include changes in Australia’s S&T performance. … We assume that, if nothing changes, this trend will continue over the next 10 years. From an average value of US57.48c in August, that gives a value for the Aussie dollar approaching US43c in August 2010. … FASTS will be keeping an eye on our science and technology performance over the coming period, and will publish regular updates of the Technology Dollar Clock on our website. The Dollar Clock is ticking towards US40c, and time is running out. That's AU$ .43c for every USA dollar. Just what was the AU$ in October of 2010, 10 years after the omniscient FASTS made its bold statement? [quote] The Value of the Australian Dollar Posted on 16 Oct 2010 The Australian dollar overnight in the United States hit $1.00 for the first time since it was floated in 1983.  I think I heard my stash of US dollar bills in my cupboard quivering overnight! http://www.money-mechanics.com.au/2010/10/the-value-of-the-australian-dollar/

Respect the science! Hell, if FASTS says the sky is blue my advice would be to look up.

As President Dwight D. Eisenhower said in 1961:

   Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity….

   The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present—and is gravely to be regarded.

    Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite….

Hat tip to Catallaxy and manalive for most of the above.
[/quote]


Haha, don't believe it for a SECOND. I like that the ONLY piece of "damning" evidence is a remark that the author of the piece just HAPPENED to have kept for ten years and is the ONLY shred of such evidence to exist across cyberspace! How convenient ;D

http://www.google.com.au/search?rlz=1C1CHKB_en-GBAU430AU431&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=Technology+Dollar+Clock#hl=en&pq=technology%20dollar%20clock%20fasts%20&xhr=t&q=%22Technology+Dollar+Clock+FASTS&cp=1&pf=p&sclient=psy&rlz=1C1CHKB_en-GBAU430AU431&source=hp&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22Technology+Dollar+Clock+FASTS+&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=f068e0c5e7ca2203&biw=1366&bih=667

And I love how you so-called "sceptics" won't accept rigorous, peer reviewed evidence published by experts at the top of their fields, yet you swallow crap like this without question. ::)

They are not scientists, they are Philosophist at best.

cods wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 9:13pm:

does it accure to these scientists that they too may be over reacting.. to the science.. not the death threats...

You can't even spell a simple word like 'occur' and you think you are in a position to question scientists who have dedicated their lives to understanding their field of expertise?

Can you spell hokey stick?

astro_surf wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 9:18pm:

cods wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 9:13pm: does it accure to these scientists that they too may be over reacting.. to the science.. not the death threats... You can't even spell a simple word like 'occur' and you think you are in a position to question scientists who have dedicated their lives to understanding their field of expertise?

tsk tsk... I couldnt careless about you or your spelling B.. I have seen many mistakes by you but its trivia and I wouldnt be so rude. or obnoxious as yourself..

Soren wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 9:24pm:

Can you spell hokey stick?

lol soren...

cods wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 9:13pm:

well personally I wouldnt know one of these scientists if I fell over them   and I am sure that goes for most people..unless they have their faces plastered all over the websites..plus where they work or live.. sounds pretty melodramatic to me,. people are angry! however this I admit is going too far.. but thats the way of the world today.. over reaction... does it accure to these scientists that they too may be over reacting.. to the science.. not the death threats... I am sure the police would be able to handle this and who knows maybe these guys are looking for a bit of sympathy as gillards polling figures hit the skids.. and one has to put two and two together and come up with CARBON TAX for the reason for that. she has listened to the scientists yet refuses to listen to the people.. must have got up some folks noses who knows.?

Thing is, Cods, that: sometimes the people are confused and misled by prominent people - who have a self-serving agenda to create fear and uncertainty in the people - and who are prepared to cynically use dishonest propaganda and doublespeak to achieve their agenda at any and all costs...

Sometimes, the people can be manipulated into distrusting their own judgement - and into declining to support policies that they previously supported and would deliver good outcomes overall for both their descendants and their nation...

At some point, not acting on something, by listening to the most vocal of the mis-informed people, becomes detrimental to the interests of the the majority of people and their nation...

Abbott has such an agenda - he delusionally believes that he is born to rule the nation - and he has repeatedly demonstrated that is prepared to sabotage his country's democratic institutions and socio-economic and environmental fabric, in his doGmatic attempts at becoming PM...

Equitist wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 9:29pm:

cods wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 9:13pm: well personally I wouldnt know one of these scientists if I fell over them   and I am sure that goes for most people..unless they have their faces plastered all over the websites..plus where they work or live.. sounds pretty melodramatic to me,. people are angry! however this I admit is going too far.. but thats the way of the world today.. over reaction... does it accure to these scientists that they too may be over reacting.. to the science.. not the death threats... I am sure the police would be able to handle this and who knows maybe these guys are looking for a bit of sympathy as gillards polling figures hit the skids.. and one has to put two and two together and come up with CARBON TAX for the reason for that. she has listened to the scientists yet refuses to listen to the people.. must have got up some folks noses who knows.? Thing is, Cods, that: sometimes the people are confused and misled by prominent people - who have a self-serving agenda to create fear and uncertainty in the people - and who are prepared to cynically use dishonest propaganda and doublespeak to achieve their agenda at any and all costs... Sometimes, the people can be manipulated into distrusting their own judgement - and into declining to support policies that they previously supported and would deliver good outcomes overall for both their descendants and their nation... At some point, not acting on something, by listening to the most vocal of the mis-informed people, becomes detrimental to the interests of the the majority of people and their nation... Abbott has such an agenda - he delusionally believes that he is born to rule the nation - and he has repeatedly demonstrated that is prepared to sabotage his country's democratic institutions and socio-economic and environmental fabric, in his doGmatic attempts at becoming PM...

sorry nem I dont see it that way and as you believe in democracy you will allow me and a few other to have that opinion. I am sure.

you are so sure Abbott is behind all this in your mania to see him done like toast... but he isnt you see


YOUR govt the one you voted in... isnt telling us anything its a tall dark secret...and I do believe that Mr and Mrs Average out there are worried sick.. this govt and especially this woman have done not a thing to put anyones mind at rest..not a bloody thing.

if they knew what they were doing they would have told us already.. its coming across loud and clear even from her own back benches..that people are over being told what they want us to know..

answer a few questions tell us the facts.. stop sending out the likes. of Garnaut with his wordy economics.. on what is expected or what could happen..

TELL US THE FACTS.

we are not stupid although some on here like to think we are..

if we dont believe then try and convince us.. tell us what to expect give us your solemn word that it will work and when it work. you are so convinced its real, that shouldnt be too hard.you have had enough time to build the bloody Ark for godsake..

so stop blaming Abbott for all the ills this lot have brought on themselves..he is the opposition and its his place to oppose..

she has the numbers on her side.. so stop pretending that Abbott is the problem.look to the real cause.. the phoney gillard

Quote:

When scientists take to the streets it’s time to listen up CLEARING UP THE CLIMATE DEBATE: Dr Michael Brown exposes the tactics used by purveyors of “non-science” to attack climate change research. It takes a lot to get scientists out of their offices and marching on Parliament. But in recent weeks that’s exactly what some of Australia’s top researchers have taken to doing. Former Governor of Victoria and scientist David de Kretser brought an open letter to Parliament House last week and just today the Federation of Australian Science and Technological Societies (FASTS) has launched its Respect the Science campaign from the same location. The Federation claims that attacks on climate scientists are “undermining the national building work of all scientists.” The Conversation has also hosted an open letter from dozens of concerned scientists trying to get the message across that human-induced climate change is a real threat. So what is it that has got our science community so riled up? It might be something to do with the death threats many climate scientists have been receiving. CEO of FASTS Anna Maria Arabia was on the wrong end of one just this morning. But for many, it’s simply the tactics of “the other side” of the climate change debate that has spurred on their public demonstrations. When the forces of non-science are this strong, it’s time for scientists to respond. Cherries and missing ingredients Those denying the science of climate change present arguments that appear scientific, with measurements, theories, statistics and jargon. But many of those denying climate change are not truly doing science. Science tries to provide the simplest explanation for a wealth of measurements in the natural world. Non-science, on the other hand, cherry-picks evidence. A classic example is only plotting a few years of temperature records, rather than the past 150 years. When non-science tries to describe all the observations, it requires contrived explanations as it attempts to avoid the simplest scientific explanation. Ian Plimer invokes underwater volcanoes to increase atmospheric carbon dioxide, but the numbers required are vast compared to the actual number of volcanoes. Purveyors of non-science charge that thousands of scientists are ignorant of basic science. This would be shocking, if it were not patently false. A central claim of climate change denial is that the physics of thermodynamics is in conflict with climate models. Even a quick Google search reveals that this claim has been refuted many times. So why is this false claim continually repeated? I can only speculate. Perhaps it is now a negative political catchphrase, which is repeated often so it can be confused with truth. Practitioners of non-science loudly proclaim that climate models cannot be trusted, as they are missing key components. When subjected to scrutiny, these supposed key ingredients are often speculative and not backed by robust evidence. To include speculative theories in climate models would only make the models less trustworthy, not more so. The medium, message and messenger The practitioners of non-science claim peer review is used to enforce groupthink. This is not the case. Most scientists review as thoroughly and impartially as possible because peer review is central to the health of science. Many scientists will recall reviewing papers where they doubted the conclusions but accepted the paper, as there were no obvious flaws in the method, data and theory used. Both sides of the climate debate communicate to the public via the media, and this is at the crux of recent activism on the part of Australian scientists. Science uses media to communicate results from science journals to the public and policy makers. Non-science uses the media as its principal means of communicating its conclusions. But often, both get equal play. Press releases, popular articles, books, letters, websites and think tank reports do not undergo peer review. Conclusions may not be backed up by sound methodology, accurate data and appropriate use of theories. Personal attacks, rhetorical flourishes, witticisms and point scoring make good copy, but do not alter the basic science. If the media is the only means being used to present supposed scientific results, there are good reasons to be suspicious. Letters signed by esteemed scientists can highlight that an issue is important. But there are millions of scientists, so it is not surprising each side can muster hundreds of signatories. Think tanks are often present in the climate debate, but these organisations are often ideologically driven and associated with particular political beliefs. At best, think tanks present science that is consistent with their political beliefs. At worst, think tanks commission reports and books that are politically motivated non-science. A sceptical view of think tanks is probably better justified than a sceptical view of climate science.

Quote:

It’s all a mistake Non-science claims science is not to be trusted. To back this claim they provide examples of where there have been paradigm shifts in science; relativity, dinosaur extinction, plate tectonics and the causes of ulcers. But there are stark differences between these paradigm shifts and the current climate debate. When paradigm shifts have occurred, often the evidence for the prevailing theory had been weak. Paradigm shifts have also been accompanied by robust evidence contrary to the prevailing theory. For example, relativity was preceded by precision measurements of the constant speed of light. In contrast, those denying climate change only use weak evidence. Classic non-science evidence includes plots where temperature appears to vary along with something other than carbon dioxide. Such plots can be suspect. If one generates large numbers of plots, one can find apparent correlations between two unrelated quantities. For example, the increasing number of HIV infections has been accompanied by an increasing number of personal computers. Only a fool would suggest one directly causes the other. In contrast to randomly generating plots, climate science makes predictions for the relationship between carbon dioxide levels, air temperature and sea level rise. Observations are then be used to test these predictions and significant discrepancies are always investigated. This is how good science is done. If it takes a march to the halls of government to highlight the different between good science and non-science, then that is what the scientific community must do. .

cods wrote on Jun 20^th, 2011 at 9:49pm:

Equitist wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 9:29pm: cods wrote on Jun 20th, 2011 at 9:13pm: well personally I wouldnt know one of these scientists if I fell over them   and I am sure that goes for most people..unless they have their faces plastered all over the websites..plus where they work or live.. sounds pretty melodramatic to me,. people are angry! however this I admit is going too far.. but thats the way of the world today.. over reaction... does it accure to these scientists that they too may be over reacting.. to the science.. not the death threats... I am sure the police would be able to handle this and who knows maybe these guys are looking for a bit of sympathy as gillards polling figures hit the skids.. and one has to put two and two together and come up with CARBON TAX for the reason for that. she has listened to the scientists yet refuses to listen to the people.. must have got up some folks noses who knows.? Thing is, Cods, that: sometimes the people are confused and misled by prominent people - who have a self-serving agenda to create fear and uncertainty in the people - and who are prepared to cynically use dishonest propaganda and doublespeak to achieve their agenda at any and all costs... Sometimes, the people can be manipulated into distrusting their own judgement - and into declining to support policies that they previously supported and would deliver good outcomes overall for both their descendants and their nation... At some point, not acting on something, by listening to the most vocal of the mis-informed people, becomes detrimental to the interests of the the majority of people and their nation... Abbott has such an agenda - he delusionally believes that he is born to rule the nation - and he has repeatedly demonstrated that is prepared to sabotage his country's democratic institutions and socio-economic and environmental fabric, in his doGmatic attempts at becoming PM... sorry nem I dont see it that way and as you believe in democracy you will allow me and a few other to have that opinion. I am sure. you are so sure Abbott is behind all this in your mania to see him done like toast... but he isnt you see YOUR govt the one you voted in... isnt telling us anything its a tall dark secret...and I do believe that Mr and Mrs Average out there are worried sick.. this govt and especially this woman have done not a thing to put anyones mind at rest..not a bloody thing. if they knew what they were doing they would have told us already.. its coming across loud and clear even from her own back benches..that people are over being told what they want us to know.. answer a few questions tell us the facts.. stop sending out the likes. of Garnaut with his wordy economics.. on what is expected or what could happen.. TELL US THE FACTS. we are not stupid although some on here like to think we are.. if we dont believe then try and convince us.. tell us what to expect give us your solemn word that it will work and when it work. you are so convinced its real, that shouldnt be too hard.you have had enough time to build the bloody Ark for godsake.. so stop blaming Abbott for all the ills this lot have brought on themselves..he is the opposition and its his place to oppose.. she has the numbers on her side.. so stop pretending that Abbott is the problem.look to the real cause.. the phoney gillard

Facts, one fact is the alarmists have no facts.
Just hockey stick graphs and dodgy computer models based on guesses.
If one wants a fact on the issue of Global warming, look at your thermometer and see what the actual temperatures are.

Quote:

If one wants a fact on the issue of Global warming, look at your thermometer and see what the actual temperatures are.

This comment says it all about the confusionalists. I'm sorry chook, but that is the most retarded comment I've ever read. You do yourself no favours making such simplistic statements, so simplistic its scary. But what your comments show is that there are many in our community who are beyond simple comprehension.

skippy. wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 9:09am:

Quote: If one wants a fact on the issue of Global warming, look at your thermometer and see what the actual temperatures are.       This comment says it all about the confusionalists. I'm sorry chook, but that is the most retarded comment I've ever read. You do yourself no favours making such simplistic statements, so simplistic its scary. But what your comments show is that there are many in our community who are beyond simple comprehension.

Would you like to look at a thousand thermometers then skip, or do your eyes simply lie to you and you find it all confusing?
Record cold temperatures is what many areas are experiencing.
Dams are chock full of water where the prediction was they were going to be empty along with the Murray Darling.
The long drought is officially over.
Queensland still has it's mothballed desalination plant at Tugan gathering cobwebs despite the fact it costed Queensland taxpayers $1.2 Billion because State Labor got jittery over the alarmists predictions and needed to be seen doing 'something'.
Where are the 50,000 climate change refugees we were supposed to get by 2010?
Well, they haven't left yet.
The oceans havent reclaimed any islands, the people on Tuvalu are wondering what the fuss was all about, and whilst the Arctic is shrinking the fact remains the Antarctic is expanding.
And come November the temperature in Nth Queensland will be fine and 31c, as it always has in living memory.
Are they too many simplistic retarded facts for you to absorb, or do you really prefer a hockey stick graph to use as a substitute? :)

We are going to send out power bills back to the state unpaid....The Nazis are handing all of the power to us....:)

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 9:28am:

Would you like to look at a thousand thermometers then skip, or do your eyes simply lie to you and you find it all confusing?

Why do you keep lying? Are you REALLY so deep in denial that you actually BELIEVE this crap?  :o

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-blended-mntp/201105.gif

Quote:

Would you like to look at a thousand thermometers then skip, or do your eyes simply lie to you and you find it all confusing? Record cold temperatures is what many areas are experiencing.

Again you show your utter lack of any education past 3rd class.
here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain.
But, what the confusionalists get totally messed up on is looking at the thermometers, LOL I really am pissing my self laughing at you, ask a five year old what effect ocean temperatures have on land mass, dont bother answering me until you do, you've already made yourself look a total fool, dont make it worse.

Its going to be real embarrassing when they get their power bills sent back to them unpaid...Soylent Green is people - its people they are taxing us for emitting what all life does - CARBON.  You have no right to tax me for my chemical and biological composition you NAZI losers.  They are calling US polluters not their Industry, not coal - its us and our very biological Composition they want to tax. ::) ::) ::) ::)

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 9:28am:

skippy. wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 9:09am: Quote: If one wants a fact on the issue of Global warming, look at your thermometer and see what the actual temperatures are.       This comment says it all about the confusionalists. I'm sorry chook, but that is the most retarded comment I've ever read. You do yourself no favours making such simplistic statements, so simplistic its scary. But what your comments show is that there are many in our community who are beyond simple comprehension. Would you like to look at a thousand thermometers then skip, or do your eyes simply lie to you and you find it all confusing? Record cold temperatures is what many areas are experiencing. Dams are chock full of water where the prediction was they were going to be empty along with the Murray Darling. The long drought is officially over. Queensland still has it's mothballed desalination plant at Tugan gathering cobwebs despite the fact it costed Queensland taxpayers $1.2 Billion because State Labor got jittery over the alarmists predictions and needed to be seen doing 'something'. Where are the 50,000 climate change refugees we were supposed to get by 2010? Well, they haven't left yet. The oceans havent reclaimed any islands, the people on Tuvalu are wondering what the fuss was all about, and whilst the Arctic is shrinking the fact remains the Antarctic is expanding. And come November the temperature in Nth Queensland will be fine and 31c, as it always has in living memory. Are they too many simplistic retarded facts for you to absorb, or do you really prefer a hockey stick graph to use as a substitute? :)

to be fair, the Tugan desal plant is still important. during the floods it was the only supply of clean drinking water for some time. desal plants are often stop-gaps against drought as opposed to ones like in perth where they form a large part of the day-to-day regular water supply.

astro_surf wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 9:54am:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 9:28am: Would you like to look at a thousand thermometers then skip, or do your eyes simply lie to you and you find it all confusing? Why do you keep lying? Are you REALLY so deep in denial that you actually BELIEVE this crap?  :o http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/map-blended-mntp/201105.gif

The problem with averages astro, is they are all so.........average.

skippy. wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 9:57am:

Quote: Would you like to look at a thousand thermometers then skip, or do your eyes simply lie to you and you find it all confusing? Record cold temperatures is what many areas are experiencing. Again you show your utter lack of any education past 3rd class. here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain. But, what the confusionalists get totally messed up on is looking at the thermometers, LOL I really am pissing my self laughing at you, ask a five year old what effect ocean temperatures have on land mass, dont bother answering me until you do, you've already made yourself look a total fool, dont make it worse.

Well then put a Tena pad on if you are incontinent, and try not to go out and embarrass yourself.
I'm quite sure the current global warming theory will be meaning something different in a few years time.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 11:52am:

skippy. wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 9:57am: Quote: Would you like to look at a thousand thermometers then skip, or do your eyes simply lie to you and you find it all confusing? Record cold temperatures is what many areas are experiencing. Again you show your utter lack of any education past 3rd class. here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain. But, what the confusionalists get totally messed up on is looking at the thermometers, LOL I really am pissing my self laughing at you, ask a five year old what effect ocean temperatures have on land mass, dont bother answering me until you do, you've already made yourself look a total fool, dont make it worse. Well then put a Tena pad on if you are incontinent, and try not to go out and embarrass yourself. I'm quite sure the current global warming theory will be meaning something different in a few years time.

I can see your childish response, but you obviously forgot to ask the 5 year old how the ocean affects land mass, back to pre school for you.

Quote:

here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain.

Actually, that's precisely what 'Global Warming' meant...

That's why it magically changed to 'Climate Change'....because CC allows for some place to be warmer and others colder...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 1:32pm:

Quote: here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain. Actually, that's precisely what 'Global Warming' meant... That's why it magically changed to 'Climate Change'....because CC allows for some place to be warmer and others colder...

Well just look at that skippy, the theory is changing already.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 1:42pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 1:32pm: Quote: here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain. Actually, that's precisely what 'Global Warming' meant... That's why it magically changed to 'Climate Change'....because CC allows for some place to be warmer and others colder... Well just look at that skippy, the theory is changing already.

Really? I first read about Britain being colder due to global warming over 10 years ago. You really need to get an education, you've obviously never heard of the gulf stream. Do they have schools in Nth Qld?? why didn't your parents send you to one?

skippy you taking the piss out of someone's schooling is like an Aussie taking the piss out of New Zealand for lacking in culture.

I would bet my bottom dollar you went to a public state school too.

Kids who we used to challenge "Your dad works for my dad"
:)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 1:49pm:

skippy you taking the piss out of someone's schooling is like an Aussie taking the piss out of New Zealand for lacking in culture. I would bet my bottom dollar you went to a public state school too. Kids who we used to challenge "Your dad works for my dad" :)

I did go to a state school,until year 10. We used to kick the sh it out of fairy little faggots like you. But then my old man thought it a good idea to send me to a private school for year 11 and 12, so I could get into Uni with better grades, it was great,got into Uni, and  I still got to kick the sh it out of faggot little fairies like you, but I had all day to do it. ;D

skippy. wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 1:47pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 1:42pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 1:32pm: Quote: here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain. Actually, that's precisely what 'Global Warming' meant... That's why it magically changed to 'Climate Change'....because CC allows for some place to be warmer and others colder... Well just look at that skippy, the theory is changing already. Really? I first read about Britain being colder due to global warming over 10 years ago. You really need to get an education, you've obviously never heard of the gulf stream. Do they have schools in Nth Qld?? why didn't your parents send you to one?

Really...and the CRU was predicting 'snow-free' winters 11 years ago...

"Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past

By Charles Onians


Monday, 20 March 2000

Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.


Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.

Related articles
•Steve Connor: Don't believe the hype over climate headlines
Search the news archive for more stories
The first two months of 2000 were virtually free of significant snowfall in much of lowland Britain, and December brought only moderate snowfall in the South-east. It is the continuation of a trend that has been increasingly visible in the past 15 years: in the south of England, for instance, from 1970 to 1995 snow and sleet fell for an average of 3.7 days, while from 1988 to 1995 the average was 0.7 days. London's last substantial snowfall was in February 1991.

Global warming, the heating of the atmosphere by increased amounts of industrial gases, is now accepted as a reality by the international community. Average temperatures in Britain were nearly 0.6°C higher in the Nineties than in 1960-90, and it is estimated that they will increase by 0.2C every decade over the coming century. Eight of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the Nineties.

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.
The effects of snow-free winter in Britain are already becoming apparent. This year, for the first time ever, Hamleys, Britain's biggest toyshop, had no sledges on display in its Regent Street store. "It was a bit of a first," a spokesperson said.

Fen skating, once a popular sport on the fields of East Anglia, now takes place on indoor artificial rinks. Malcolm Robinson, of the Fenland Indoor Speed Skating Club in Peterborough, says they have not skated outside since 1997. "As a boy, I can remember being on ice most winters. Now it's few and far between," he said. "

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

At school in England, the UEA is known as

"University of Easy Access"

basically because all the thick kids who don't get the grades for decent places can go to UEA.

So his credentials with me are worth shite to start.

Oh and this one too from 1995, by the IPCC..

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/ipcc-1995-shrinking-snow-cover-in-winter/

So what point exactly are you making?  Oh thats right - no point you cant explain it, you just want to tax us... ;D ;D ;D ;D

Who Prev??

skippy. wrote on Jun 21^st, 2011 at 1:47pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 1:42pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Jun 21st, 2011 at 1:32pm: Quote: here's a tip, global warming doesn't just mean its hotter on land mass, in fact some places will be colder, like Britain. Actually, that's precisely what 'Global Warming' meant... That's why it magically changed to 'Climate Change'....because CC allows for some place to be warmer and others colder... Well just look at that skippy, the theory is changing already. Really? I first read about Britain being colder due to global warming over 10 years ago. You really need to get an education, you've obviously never heard of the gulf stream. Do they have schools in Nth Qld?? why didn't your parents send you to one?

And then we heard the predictions that snow in Britain was going to be a rare event skippy.
Guess what, it didn't happen.
Surprise surprise.
That's the point skippy.
The predictions are always wrong so the goal posts get changed.