When you tell people once too often that the missing extra heat is hiding in the ocean, they will switch over to watch Game of Thrones, where the dialogue is less ridiculous and all the threats come true. The proponents of man-made climate catastrophe asked us for so many leaps of faith that they were bound to run out of credibility in the end.
Now that they finally seem to be doing so, it could be a good time for those of us who have never been convinced by all those urgent warnings to start warning each other that we might be making a comparably senseless tactical error if we expect the elastic cause of the catastrophists, and all of its exponents, to go away in a hurry.

To take a conspicuous if ludicrous case, Australian climate star Tim Flannery will probably not, of his own free will, shrink back to the position conferred by his original metier, as an expert on the extinction of the giant wombat. He is far more likely to go on being, and wishing to be, one of the mass media’s mobile oracles about climate. While that possibility continues, it will go on being danger¬ous to stand between him and a television camera. If the giant wombat could have moved at that speed, it would still be with us.
The mere fact that few of Flannery’s predictions have ever come true need not be enough to discredit him, just as American professor Paul Ehrlich has been left untouched since he predicted that the world would soon run out of copper. In those days, when our current phase of the long discussion about man’s attack on nature was just beginning, he predicted mass death by extreme cold. Lately he predicts mass death by extreme heat. But he has always predicted mass death by extreme something.

Australia, unlike Rudd, has a globally popular role in the ¬climate movie because it looks the part.
Common reason might tell you that a country whose contribution to the world’s emissions is only 1.4 per cent can do very little about the biggest moral challenge even if it manages to reduce that contribution to zero; but your eyes tell you that Australia is burning up. On the classic alarmist principle of “just stick your head out of the window and look around you”, Australia always looks like Overwhelming Evidence that the alarmists must be right.

Even now that the global warming scare has completed its transformation into the climate change scare so that any kind of event at either end of the scale of temperature can qualify as a crisis, Australia remains the top area of interest, still up there ahead of even the melting North Pole, ¬despite the Arctic’s miraculous ¬capacity to go on producing ice in defiance of all instructions from Al Gore. A C-student to his marrow, and thus never quick to pick up any reading matter at all, Gore has evidently never seen the Life magazine photographs of America’s nuclear submarine Skate surfacing through the North Pole in 1959. The ice up there is often thin, and sometimes vanishes.

Didn't realise Clive James had gained relevant qualifications and experience while he was shagging Leanne Edelsten

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 6^th, 2017 at 3:22pm:


You mean like mathematician/climate modeller Gavin Schmidt?

Gosh the Greenies will go into hysterical panic.

The Greenies must wonder why everyone is having a go at them these days.

As ye shall sow so shall ye reap.

The Greenies will probably pioneer a NEGATIVE VOTE at the election!!!!


And the bloke who wrote the Greenie Gaia rubbish book has admitted it is all bulldust.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/23/article-2134092-12BBC4F8000005DC-702_3...
James Lovelock


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/23/article-2134092-12BBC4F8000005DC-702_3...

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 7^th, 2017 at 10:33am:



Yooo Hooo. You do show a lick of sense.

No Real Climate blog for you.

What about companies?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 7^th, 2017 at 12:00pm:

Well he was well educated and is an intelligent man.
He would crap all over any of our politicians and can tell truth from a lie.
He uses facts in his article and FACTs are important in this debate they are seldom used and usually denied by the Prog left and Alarmists.
So if you want to shoot messengers I suggest you shoot those misleading you.

Statements from 2012 portray Lovelock as continuing his concern over global warming while at the same time criticizing extremism and suggesting alternatives to oil, coal and the green solutions he does not support.

In an April 2012 interview, aired on MSNBC, Lovelock stated that he had been "alarmist", using the wordsabout the timing of climate change and noted the documentary An Inconvenient Truth and the book The Weather Makers as examples of the same kind of alarmism. Lovelock still believes the climate to be warming although the rate of change is not as he once thought, he admitted that he had been “extrapolating too far." He believes that climate change is still happening, but it will be felt farther in the future. Of the claims “the science is settled” on global warming he states:

    "One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it."

He criticizes environmentalists for treating global warming like a religion.

    “It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed

    “I don’t think people have noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use … The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon dioxide) in the air.”

In the MSNBC article Lovelock is quoted as proclaiming:

    "The problem is we don't know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened;" he continues

    "The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now," he said

    The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time ... it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising - carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that", he added.

In a follow up interview Lovelock stated his support for natural gas; he now favors fracking as a low-polluting alternative to coal. He opposes the concept of "sustainable development", where modern economies might be powered by wind turbines, calling it meaningless drivel. He keeps a poster of a wind turbine to remind himself how much he detests them.

I asked lee first and he is stumped....

Ah lee answered you....  are you so dumb you don't get his answer....  it aint rocket science you know.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 15^th, 2017 at 10:36am:

Then its time to recognise you are wrong then....

Trainspotting....  choo-choo, choo-choo..... 
I don't understand you...   choo-choo, choo-choo.....
But who does eh?

Grendel wrote on Jun 15^th, 2017 at 7:30pm:

Still unintelligible I see Choo-choo...

Grendel wrote on Jun 16^th, 2017 at 2:42pm:

Or off his meds or both...

We all love practical jokers

I didn't vote for copper internet so I'm not the practical joker: you are 

TheFunPolice wrote on Jun 26^th, 2017 at 3:19pm:



Assertions without foundation. So like you.

You voted for copper internet: are you going to tell me I'm a liar?

Oh dear. We have another 7 year old on the forum.

What facts am I denying, roach?
So many I could never list them all here.

That CO2 is a greenhouse gas? Nope, don’t deny that.
Nor do I or anyone here so far that I've seen.  You however like to imply differently don't you.  Tsk tsk, tsk, how dishonest of you.

That other gases with three or more atoms are GHGs? No, don’t deny that H2O, CH4, N2O, O3 and HFCs etc are greenhouse gases.
See above....

Do I deny that water vapor in the atmosphere leaves only a small window for IR to escape to space through? No, I don’t deny that.
Yet you concentrate on CO2 and never mention that Water Vapour is the Major Greenhouse gas.  Tsk, tsk, tsk, more dishonesty.

Do I deny that the other GHGs close more of the window that H2O leaves? No, I don’t deny that.
Do I deny the sky is usually Blue?  How many more pointless points will you not deny?

Do I deny the consequent heating from the increasing GHG content of the atmosphere? No I don’t deny that.
But you support a theory based on correlation not causation, ignore all negative feedbacks and spout nonsense. 

Do I deny that measurements of IR spectrum from space and from the surface show more and more IR is in fact being blocked from escaping from earth to space? No, I don’t deny that.
Yet you cant prove it either can you??  You never mention the fact that many scientists state that CO2 release happens many years after heating has occurred, not the other way around.  You've never proved them wrong either have you?  You have never considered that the current concentrations are due to such an earlier warming and we just happen to be in a solar heating cycle at the same time.  You deny the "pause" even when the IPCC accept it.  You ignore the fact that CO2 concentrations and heat increase seems to be non-linear and in fact at times seem to have no real bearing on each other.  You deny every fact most people post here from various scientific sources and peer reviewed papers.

Do I deny that this and the past few years are the hottest recorded years? No, I don’t deny that.

Well have I?  Many have merely stated that the warming is mostly natural, something you seem to deny quite strongly stating that it is due to AGW.  If we are in a warming phase I'd expect temperatures to be going up. Wouldn't you.  No one has proven the theory you support is correct? Yet you certainly deny this.

Do I deny that 2017 is hot even tho it is not an El Nino year? No, I do not deny this year is hot nor do I deny it isn’t an El Nino year.

See above...

So, come on roach, what “facts” do I deny?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 1^st, 2017 at 11:43am:


There you go, roach. You don’t have the knowledge or reasoning ability to comprehend that but nevertheless that is the situation and Clive is clueless about AGW really, isn’t he? As are you.

Modelling and observations suggests that the middle atmosphere (10–100 km altitude) is cooling in response to rising greenhouse gas concentrations and ozone loss.

Is it?

Proof?

So no proof.