Swiftie Nonsense Down Under

Gaza. Palestinians. Israel. Genocide. Taylor Swift? This odd cobbling of words is…

New research highlights the growing prevalence and economic…

New research by the e61 Institute presents five facts on the use…

Ok, So This Is A Boring Post... Or…

Gloria Sty, bud Iyam riting this coz I wanna mayk sum poynts…

Border Paranoia in Fortress Australia

The imaginative faculties of standard Australian politicians retreat to some strange, deathly…

Where the Palestine laboratory takes us all

By Antony Loewenstein Israel's war on Gaza since 7 October has caused the…

No, no, no, no. Not more ‘illegals’!

By Bert Hetebry A group of South Asian men arrived on our doorstep…

Rafah, Gaza: Urgent Statement from CEOs of Humanitarian…

Oxfam Media Release We are appalled by the harrowing developments in Rafah, Gaza’s…

Joe Biden: The Damnation of Age

He was sweet and well meaning, but he was old. He was…


Abrupt Climate Change: there’s strength in the science

By Keith Antonysen

Various contrarian opinions are based on the fundamental premise of anthropogenic climate change in relation to how light interacts with radiated infrared. Seth Miller, a scientist, provides some history; and then, criteria in relation to how science matters can be rationally evaluated (1). Seth Miller uses 9 criteria to show the strength of the science in relation to the greenhouse impact of carbon dioxide (2).

Experimentation has provided credence to the notion of CO2 and how it interacts with radiated infrared, Seth Miller’s article discusses computer experimentation (3); while, a number of physical experiments have also taken place beginning with Eunice Foote (4).

Scientists when they write up their research do so for the benefit of their peers, not for lay people who have no expertise.

It is very clear that lay persons often misinterpret science, for any credible argument to be made the criteria provided by Seth Miller need to be met (5).

The Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) has stated: “Our window of time to act on climate may be shrinking even faster than previously thought” (6). The MCC has come to the conclusion that with the most pessimistic assessment that carbon emissions will extend temperature up to 1.5C over pre-Industrial levels within a year (7). The optimistic view expressed by the MCC is that it will take emissions 4 years before the 1.5C mark is reached (8).

In relation to 2C above pre-Industrial levels the MCC indicates that the most pessimistic view is that it will take 9 years to reach the mark (9). The more optimistic view is that it will take 23 years to reach 2C above pre-Industrial levels (10).

Anton Vaks et al studied cave structure in permafrost areas, areas where permafrost has been intermittent; as well as, caves where permafrost has not been evident (11, 12). Their research found that 1.5C above pre-Industrial levels was a temperature when permafrost began to thaw (13).

The issue being that permafrost areas contain huge amounts of carbon and methane.

A recent study in relation to soils has found that soils are expelling CO2 at quite an alarming rate (14, 15).


“Here we present a comprehensive analysis of warming-induced changes in soil carbon stocks by assembling data from 49 field experiments located across North America, Europe and Asia. We find that the effects of warming are contingent on the size of the initial soil carbon stock, with considerable losses occurring in high-latitude areas.”16


“Under the conservative assumption that the response of soil carbon to warming occurs within a year, a business-as-usual climate scenario would drive the loss of 55 ± 50 petagrams of carbon from the upper soil horizons by 2050” (17).

The Washington Post explains that as soils become warmer microbes increase their rate of respiration leading to an increase in methane and CO2 (18).

The N-ICE2015 Research Team ventured into the Arctic to overwinter from January till June 2015 on the Ice Breaker Lance (19). They were able to show how ice structure is at risk of being melted during storms; storms create upwelling of denser warmer waters which then impacts on sea ice (20).


“Atlantic water (~+3.0°C) that flows into the Arctic Ocean west of Svalbard is relatively heavy and it sinks down to below the fresher and colder Arctic water. If left alone, it ends up at 70 m depth – where it melts little ice! But it isn’t left alone.

Storms over open water mix the ocean and bring the warm Atlantic water to the surface. The same storms set the ice adrift, which also causes mixing. Storms in the Arctic can be fierce….” (21).

Satellite technology is able to display ocean level rise, and temperature of oceans (22). The so-called “hiatus” did not occur, oceans were taking in temperature while surface temperatures were not increasing as quickly as they had previously (23).

For climate change contrarians to have any real arguments, they need to show how the 9 criteria outlined by Seth Miller are met.

The Arctic influences climate of the Northern Hemisphere particularly. Upwelling of warm waters off Antarctica is causing melting of ice sheets from below has been noted. Oceans comprise about 70% of the Earths surface; they store huge amounts of energy. The prospect of stopping temperature increasing over 2C above pre-Industrial times is almost impossible without huge changes being made. Coal must stay in the ground, gas needs to be phased out, and transport needs to be changed to electric power. Currently politicians are fiddling at the edges, when strong policies are needed.


(1) https://extranewsfeed.com/what-climate-skeptics-taught-me-about-global-warming-5c408dc51d32#.ctb2gbxyl

(2) ibid

(3) ibid

(4) http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/09/02/the-woman-who-identified-the-greenhouse-effect-years-before-tyndall/

(5) https://extranewsfeed.com/what-climate-skeptics-taught-me-about-global-warming-5c408dc51d32#.ctb2gbxyl

(6) http://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/01/10/ticking-carbon-clock-warns-we-have-one-year-avert-climate-catastrophe

(7) ibid

(8) ibid

(9) ibid

(10) ibid

(11) https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130619101521.htm

(12) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N71YvYqJWQc

(13) ibid

(14) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/30/the-ground-beneath-our-feet-is-poised-to-make-global-warming-much-worse-scientists-find/?utm_term=.efe2ee660e8c

(15) http://www.nature.com/articles/nature20150.epdf?referrer_access_token=BmdEW8DcS0_ks0i61YBpCNRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Mik0TTmks8PdSiUZYeb2RTaphlX9NVLOupuFx1YhgjDvGGeCLPerMk5rv-tyJz7fQBSvInaTGQGDbQKyl8dEQ3ryikLEhZzteF3zYBsc5xuxW-J1mRmwTlD1g7oRmO-wYU13uaJWxiX_JYo73-QOiw-xbfizWVmxTl7WobjHv0aA3HuaRfCjjDo7iAXcmTnopHAVNo1IUS6t-uks2yPD8Njji9_kt4Cuq_XDe05iWGzAG2Opek86KQOQ56qcKDZ2dz-axysuRpK0HrijYzRjCMBhUKZpSj6yvsSA3vHISGvLc_9lwCgYE7xpjDspdEFU_afQfXEtjGYp3Rj-QzZz3X&tracking_referrer=www.washingtonpost.com

(16) ibid

(17) ibid

(18) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/11/30/the-ground-beneath-our-feet-is-poised-to-make-global-warming-much-worse-scientists-find/?utm_term=.efe2ee660e8c

(19) http://www.framsenteret.no/n-ice2015-following-sea-ice-from-dark-winter-to-sunny-spring.5852100-373134.html#.WIfFXLGr2YX

(20) ibid

(21) ibid

(22) https://youtu.be/aDB7QBjxoW8

(23) ibid

About the author: Keith Antonysen is retired. He is a keen gardener, photographer, and recreational fisher. The Vietnam War and later the flooding of Lake Pedder created an interest in politics which led to a passion for social justice issues. Currently very concerned about lack of action on climate change. Not a paid up member of any political party.


Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button


Login here Register here
  1. Vikingduk

    You might want to check out NASA, who, in conjunction with many credible institutions, are involved with many scary facts in relation to global warming. As the oceans have been absorbing excess heat, the results for the Arctic and Antarctic are that these warmer waters are melting glaciers from below. NASA provide a once a month newsletter, free to your inbox, of the results of their many ways of sampling what is rapidly becoming a we are in deep shit time. Though with the buffoon in Washington we will probably see the end of NASA’s excellent work.

    For me, this subject trumps everything else, we can bitch and winge all we like, but always at the heart of this incredibly shitty scenario we find ourselves in, that elephant in the room that is climate change, is now the herd kicking down the house.

    We need to wake the phuck up…now. How can we progress? How can we pass on a planet with hope to our grandchildren, excuse me while I cry,

  2. Vikingduk

    Thanks for the article, Keith. I try but all I have is tears.. Such a beautiful planet

  3. Harquebus

    Large scale methane release from the northern polar regions is my greatest fear because, once the clathrate gun is fired and the methane monster roars, it will be a human extinction event.
    I have raised this issue many times with the politicians and journalists on my mailing list so, some at least must be aware but, so far, they are totally disinterested.

    Well done theAIMN for bringing this issue to your site.

    “The majority of the Earth’s terrestrial carbon is stored in the soil. If anthropogenic warming stimulates the loss of this carbon to the atmosphere, it could drive further planetary warming”

    “Nevertheless, forget all of the handwringing over 2°C, or 1.5°C for that matter, because humongous problems are already here, right now!”
    “We have reason to believe that such emissions may change the climate. This is due to the fact that the reserves of methane under the submarine permafrost exceed the methane content in the atmosphere by many thousands of times”
    “At some point in time, that’s immensely problematic for life on Earth. Still, nobody really knows for sure when runaway global warming hits hard, 5 years, 20 years, 100 years. It happens unannounced!”
    “the planet hasn’t even come close to hitting the 2° C marker, yet all hell is breaking loose!”

    The Arctic Goes Bonkers

    “This means that even if all human fossil fuel emissions were halted immediately, soils would continue to release approximately the same amount of CO2 and methane emissions as the amount produced by the fossil fuel industry during the mid-20th century.”
    “The discovery of the soil feedback loop intensifies concerns about our rapidly warming climate. Increasing soil respiration — also known as “the compost bomb” — is set to add between 30 and 55 billion tons of extra CO2 to the atmosphere over the next 35 years, as Earth’s temperature warming approaches 2C.”

    “The area of the world’s oceans covered by floating sea ice is the smallest recorded since satellite monitoring began in the 1970s. That means it is also probably the lowest it has been for thousands of years.”


  4. Michael Taylor

    Well done theAIMN for bringing this issue to your site.

    Can someone please pass me the smelling salts! ?

  5. Harquebus

    Credit given where credit is due Michael. I hope that you have started something here.

    Oh, before I forget again, thank you Keith Antonysen for the time spent and research done producing this article.


  6. David Bruce

    A well timed article. The Hopi Indians allegedly forecast the white race would wipe out the planet by destroying the atmosphere. My greater concern right now is the impact of the radiation still leaking from Fukushima, the big blob in the Atlantic Ocean from the Gulf Oil Spill, the massive forest burn offs in Kalamantan (Borneo), and the chemicals being deliberately released into our high altitude atmosphere. Having just spent a year in the Kingdom of Tonga, I was witness to the impact on the fishing industry, particularly on the reduction in pelagic fish species and numbers. The focus on carbon dioxide is a political convenience, and a money-making venture to promote awareness. Al Gore is already $98 million ahead.

  7. Vikingduk

    I think, as has been suggested by many, through various blogs, we need to find a way, non violently, to have our voices heard, now. The AIMN does a fantastic job in bringing reality to those of us who have found our way here. But, ultimately, preaching to the converted. In my mind we are in deep shit and words just aren’t enough.

    At the moment I don’t have a lot of hope that we can find our way to sanity. What can we do to eliminate the toxic twunts that rule our lives? Is there a way to step outside our current reality, to ignore, to shit on our traditions and beliefs, get up on our hind legs and effing well fight for the future. Get passionate, we are in a life or death situation, we need to get off our arses now.

    And do what? I effing don’t know. I’m a parent and a grandparent, with no answers and no faith.

    I have practised Tai Chi as a way to find sanity and the martial arts side of Tai Chi as well. Parts of the teachings tells that all life, energy and abilities are given by the universe – Uni – one, verse – song. One song to guide us, to sustain us and to bring us to sanity.

    No more links, no more horror stories from a planet in distress, how can we find a way to really have our voices heard?

  8. Keith


    I also obtain the NASA newsletter, other sites I find useful are:

    https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php … satellite data is usually obtainable on a daily basis; matters other than the Arctic are discussed. Many references emirate from here.

    http://www.ecowatch.com/badlands-national-park-trump-2213976759.html?utm_source=EcoWatch+List&utm_campaign=bcb267d71a-MailChimp+Email+Blast&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_49c7d43dc9-bcb267d71a-86074709 … has many articles in relation to various climate and environmental matters.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/01/26/leaders-of-science-organizations-dismayed-by-trump-administration-moves/?utm_term=.e1ac9864288c&wpisrc=al_alert-hse … the articles by Chris Mooney are always well researched.

    If you are on Facebook, Skeptical Science provides much material, as does the Climate council.

    Sadly, the news does not get better with the passing of time.

  9. etnorb

    Sadly ALL this Climate change denial crap is spouted by right wing, flat earth, sadly uneducated & uninformed idiots! Until ALL societies & Governments accept that yes, there is such a “thing” as climate change, more than likely, nothing will happen to lessen the shock or to investigate ways of remedying or rectifying all the damage that has & is, going on! BASTARDS!!

  10. Keith

    My apologies Vikingduk, I did not see your last comment.
    My lap top locked up and so was not able to take any further action.

  11. Vikingduk

    Cheers Keith, I need no more links to tell me we are in deep shit. Please don’t take that as criticism, I admire you and all others that compose the stories for this site. Thank you all, a fantastic job you do. Hopefully, you can keep this subject alive with future articles.

    So often lately the comments section of these AIMN articles seem to divert into a shit fight, completely losing sight of the original communication. Rapidly, it seems to me we are losing the art of communication, therefore my admiration for the writers of this site.

    Hope must be here somewhere, perhaps I left it in my other shorts. Cheers all, go hard or go home

  12. Kate Ahearne

    Thanks, Keith. Yes, there are so many contributing factors to climate change. If only it really were just as simple as carbon emissions. One of the biggest problems is, of course, that the science is very difficult for lay minds to get their heads around, I certainly had to make the effort to concentrate when I was reading your article! (Not because it wasn’t well-written, but because there is simply so much to get the hang of.)

    VIkingduk, Thanks for your passion. Just a couple of things. People, including me, have been asking for links because there is an alarming tendency for ‘facts’ to be thrown around without any attempt to support them. A huge proportion of those ‘facts’, when investigated, turn out to be flat-out lies, or else unfounded or of dubious origin. This is what the ‘post-fact’ society is all about. People are influenced by these doubtful ‘facts’, and a great deal of damage is done. Donald Trump knows all about it! You may not need the links, but other people, perhaps not as informed as yourself, do need them – not just so that they can be convinced of the enormity of the problem, but also so that they can understand what’s causing it, and what needs to be done.

    As for climate change being the greatest problem we have ever faced, I agree with you. But then we are polluting the planet in so many, many ways, not all of them clearly or directly related to climate change, such as the Fukishima disaster, as David has pointed out. So there is some sense in viewing climate change, as huge a problem as it is, as one huge part of the bigger problem of pollution.

    harquebus, Thanks. The feedback loop is a really horrible concept to think about, and it’s a self-feeding system, as I understand it – the warmer the atmosphere becomes, the more methane is released, which increases the RATE of warming, which increases the RATE of methane release, which in turn increases the rate of warming – so the system is feeding itself and growing like Topsy. It’s a galloping graph. The problem is not so much about speed as it is about acceleration.

    etnorb You say that ‘Until ALL societies & Governments accept that yes, there is such a “thing” as climate change, more than likely, nothing will happen to lessen the shock or to investigate ways of remedying or rectifying all the damage that has & is, going on! BASTARDS!!’ Yes, but this can be a very dangerous concept. It has been used by our own government many a time to excuse any action on climate change – the rationale being that other nations are not doing anything, so why should we? As you say, Bastards!

  13. Vikingduk

    Well, Kate, what you don’t seem to appreciate is that I was expressing my personal opinion which relates to me and my needs. At no stage have l suggested that because I don’t need any more links or any more proof of climate change that my personal opinions should be adopted by all. As I have already made clear, I have utmost respect for Keith and all others that write for this sight. The amount of work Keith put into this article is tremendous. I really don’t need your condescending attitude. Funilly enough, when I commented on so often this section went shitfight I had you in mind.

    Anyone with the skills to use Google could have the scientific facts of climate change, it’s just that some of us don’t need to be spoon fed, we go looking

  14. Rossleigh

    Vikingduk, the trouble is that the “skills” to use Google are actually skills. How do you establish the credentials of people or sites? Even established media organisations get lots wrong, so how do we find the truth?
    I’ve had a number of discussions with people who thought that one link to one site was proof of something.
    One person on Facebook would accuse people of being unable to think for themselves and then provide a link to a website to show how he’d learned to think for himself by following the teachings of xxx!

    That’s why it’s important to engage, to argue, to explain, to listen and to learn. Personally, I don’t know a lot, but I know how to pick a vested interest when I hear one, and I’ve developed a pretty good bullshit detector. However, me simply telling people that won’t be enough for them to believe me – nor should it be.

    Keep up the good work, mate!

  15. Kaye Lee

    Communicating via the internet is difficult. I don’t think Kate meant to be condescending. I know I am often part of that shitfight and I am trying to work on it to improve the way I express myself.

    We all learn differently. Some want links, others don’t. Some want the author’s conclusions, others would prefer to make them themselves. Some like numbers, some don’t.

    And it is exactly this diversity that is our strength and makes it such an interesting world.

  16. helvityni

    Rossleigh and Kaye, thank you for your comments, there is a condescending element creeping in here and it is not going to make any new friends for AIMN, or for that matter helping to keep the old ones.

  17. Kate Ahearne

    Vikingduk, Your own words: ‘No more links, no more horror stories from a planet in distress…’ No reference to you – a general statement, surely.

    And then, ‘Cheers Keith, I need no more links to tell me we are in deep shit. Please don’t take that as criticism,’
    The first quote is definitely general. And what does the second one mean? That Keith should not put in his links because YOU don’t need them? I’m sorry, but the words you have put on the page really do seem to be saying that you are opposed to links.

    Sometimes, you know, ‘shitfights’ are necessary. If we’re not prepared to fight for what we believe in, and to fight against what we believe to be nasty or dangerous or downright wrong, we’re just a bunch of cowards. You, for instance, have indicated that you are prepared to fight against climate change, and that’s a wonderful thing. It’s not easy to be a committed human being.

    Sometimes, though, we just want to point things out. We don’t intend to be shitty – just to query, perhaps to disagree, perhaps to elucidate a different point of view. When we do this, we have to be prepared for the fact that some people will take our points or remarks as being somehow malicious, some kind of personal attack. Then we have what you have called a ‘shitfight’ – unless, of course, we’re prepared to allow the other person to become personally abusive, and just do nothing about it.

  18. Vikingduk

    Yes Kate my opinion my words expressing my feelings as they relate to me. Unlike you, I don’t expect or want or need anyone’s blessing when expressing my personal opinions.

    Here we are facing the potential of the end of life on planet earth, and all you do is throw a little herring into the mix, get the focus away from the article and on to you.

    I would suggest you find some valid climate science, and then, perhaps you can offer some answers. And if you read my original comment in total, you will find I was offering no answers, simply a plea . . .

  19. Kate Ahearne

    Vikinduk, You have made a personal attack on me. Let’s be perfectly clear about that. In your most recent comment, ‘ Unlike you, I don’t expect or want or need anyone’s blessing when expressing my personal opinions.’ You have no right to make assumptions about what my motivations might be.

    ‘Here we are facing the potential of the end of life on planet earth, and all you do is throw a little herring into the mix, get the focus away from the article and on to you.’ Ditto. Personal attack. I have stated quite clearly why I made the remarks I did. You have no right whatsoever to be making assumptions and derogatory statements about my motivations. How dare you?

  20. Vikingduk

    Yes, how dare me. One thing for certain, I’ve had enough of your condescending attitude and your constant desire to make the subject all about you. How dare I? How dare you?

  21. Johno

    Vikingduk, Interesting name, particularly because I so far haven’t missed one episode of Vikings since it began. So what does the duk bit mean ? Back to the article re good ole Climate Change. I used to sit on the beach in adelaide in the morning and watch the brown smudge (pollution) drift out across ocean and think ‘this happens every day, it must eventually catch up with us.’
    And it is, anthropogenic climate change is on the door step. I am very very far from being a scientist, and to me it is clear as day (without links) as what humans are doing to this wonderful blue and slightly green planet.

  22. Roswell

    This is a blog site where people have the opportunity to share ideas, information and opinions.

    I learn more from listening to a person than being critical of their every word.

    How a person dots their ‘Is’ or crosses their ‘Ts’ doesn’t concern me.

  23. Roswell

    For the record, I don’t need links either to tell me the world is in trouble, but I do like links that direct me to sites that detail the trouble. So I see where Vikingduk is coming from.

    By the way, what the hell is a Vikingduk?

    Don’t tell me. I’ll Google it.

  24. Vikingduk

    No great mystery, I’m merely a figment of my own imagination and, like Leunig’s direction finding duck, I take my dukyness wherever I roam. Johno, look for one of my family inthe village scenes, must be a duk somewhere.

  25. jim

    Tony Abbott’s attacks on the renewable energy industry in 2014 saw investment collapse by 88%, with the loss of thousands of jobs. Tony Abbott and Greg Hunt oversaw a resurgence of coal fired power with a resulting increase in carbon pollution from the electricity sector of almost 6% in two years.

    One party reduces carbon emissions the other increases them….one party reduces the suicide rate the other increases them.

  26. Kaye Lee

    And now they want to lend a billion dollars to an Indian company who is already under investigation by Indian authorities and whose financial position makes the repayment of the loan highly unlikely which is why no commercial financial institution will back them.

  27. Harquebus

    Kate Ahearne
    “The problem is not so much about speed as it is about acceleration.”
    You got it.

  28. MichaelW

    I could be sarcastic here and say you should contact Andrew Bolt, the well known expert on everything, especially climate change.
    But I won’t. Ooops I did…

  29. Harquebus

    “Since my days measuring the thickness of Arctic Ocean ice from British nuclear submarines in the early 1970s, I have witnessed a stunning decline in the sea ice covering the northern polar regions — a more than 50 percent drop in extent in summer, and an even steeper reduction in ice volume.”
    “By my calculations, the terrestrial warming in the Arctic is roughly equivalent to a 25 percent boost in global CO2 emissions.”
    “But the most worrisome feedback, which could lead to catastrophic effects in the near future, involves the release of seabed methane — a potent greenhouse gas — from the continental shelves of the Arctic Ocean.”
    “As the various Arctic climate feedbacks show, we are fast approaching the stage when climate change will be playing the tune for us while we stand by and watch helplessly, with our reductions in CO2 emissions having no effect in the face of, say, runaway emissions of methane.”
    “These changes represent a spiritual impoverishment of the earth, as well as a practical catastrophe for humanity. The time for action has long since passed.”

  30. Harquebus

    “Human Extinction by 2026, a controversial/questionable idea”
    “They really believe it is a serious risk. These scientists go against the grain, telling it as they see it, not pulling any punches.”
    “Alarmingly, some scientists also believe a burp of 50 gigatons of methane (CH4) could happen within the extremely shallow waters of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf at any time without notice because of the striking loss of ice cover in the Arctic.”

    Human Extinction 2026

    If global warming is fact and I do believe it is, then why do this sort of thing? It can only hurt the cause. If the warming data is false then, that also should be made known.

    “Mr Smith thanked Dr Bates ‘for courageously stepping forward to tell the truth about NOAA’s senior officials playing fast and loose with the data in order to meet a politically predetermined conclusion.”
    “Like Climategate, this scandal is likely to reverberate around the world, and reignite some of science’s most hotly contested debates.”
    “NOAA not only failed, but it effectively mounted a cover-up when challenged over its data.”

  31. LOVO

    We are at a paltry 1.1 % above pre…..at the moment……
    … worse case scenario is 1.5% in 12 months…best case scenario is 1.5% in 4 years. …brighten up ya all..we all gots 4 more years to talk about this…at the very least…..at the very least……at the very least….
    At least our kids won’t have to worry about the ravages of old age…..At least our kids won’t have to worry about the ravages of old age…..At least our kids won’t have to worry about the ravages of old age…. we are the first generation(s) to have to deal with human induced climate change. …and we are the last generation(s) that can deal with it…..*clink*
    Don’t worry about thinking Global and acting Local…..try thinking local and acting local (same thing really) except your walking in your own shoes….as opposed to someone else’s (phew). ….which is a very convoluted way to say “walk the talk” and give a bit of help to your local environmental groups….be a part of the solution. ? or be like H. …eeww ?

  32. Johno

    Peter Wadhams has 46 years experience with the arctic sea ice.(Harqubus’s link) One would think he knows a bit about it yet the world is still partly dictated to by climate change denialism. Crazy, madness and all of the above.

  33. Keith

    Johno; Peter Wadhams has overstated matters in the past; however, what he is now stating is very much in the ball park. The volume of sea ice in 2016 in the Arctic was 25% of what it had been in 1979. Less sea ice extent and ice thickness allows for it to be attacked more readily from above by longer fetch of waves, and upwelling of warm water from below.

  34. Harquebus

    You underestimate me. My family, friends and importantly, my neighbors are all taking these things seriously, preparing as best we can and developing networks all at the local level.
    I have several options, the first and which I recommend is, staying put. For a while at least.
    Trade depends on transport depends on oil. Peak oil mate, peak oil. Paraphrasing someone from another forum, “For the natural world, collapse can’t come soon enough.”
    The longer the delay, in my opinion, the less chance that collapse survivors will have.

  35. Keith

    Harquebus, I have come across David Rose a few times; a journalist who specialises in climate change denial ( your reference at 12.08).
    I had this published elsewhere:

    There should be no surprise Rose came up with wrong commentary.
    Rose has been caught out pushing “alternative facts” in the past.

    “In an article in today’s Mail on Sunday, David Rose makes the extraordinary claim that “world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data”, accusing the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of manipulating the data to show more warming in a 2015 study by Tom Karl and coauthors.”


    Factcheck: Mail on Sunday’s ‘astonishing evidence’ about global temperature rise

    Zeke Hausfather goes on to discuss how data was sourced which had been ignored by Rose.

    Even if Rose for once was right, Earth is warming anyway, regardless of his drivel.

  36. Harquebus

    Many thanks for that.
    Sea ice loss and glacial retreat are phenomena that can be photographed and mapped from space. This is what makes me doubt the deniers. That is if you believe that the photographs and maps that appear in scientific journals and websites are genuine. I have no reason to doubt them.

  37. John L

    A lot of people forget about the inertia in the system – not necessarily the Climate scientists, but a lot of others. I think climate lags CO2 input by about 8-12 yrs atm? I may be wrong on that (often are) but all these people spruiking the optimistic scenario should dwell on that. The climate scientists I know (2) are not happy with the way things are developing, particularly in the Arctic, and are thinking along the lines of 5-8m sea level rise in 20yrs at the way things are developing, in business as usual, and 30 yrs if we stop all CO2 production now (not going to happen with the kamikaze governments and businesses around the world.)

  38. Harquebus

    John L
    I have read that the time lag for CO2 is 40 years but, that also might be wrong. Regardless of that, CO2 emissions don’t even look like slowing and we are already now past 400ppm atmospheric CO2 permanently.

  39. Johno

    Keith/Harquebus… Do you think the present heatwave on the east coast of Australia is related to climate change or just a natural hot spell ?

  40. Keith

    Johno, a hard question. Certainly, attribution is something that scientists are studying at present. I think a lot of back computer modelling could very well show a relationship. An immediate question is what is remarkable about temperatures now when viewed over decades, has there been a trend line going up despite yearly fluctuations? Have the number of warm days been increasing over time? What about night temperature? Are there regional variations? Where I live there has not been great increase in temperatures, and have not been following whats happening elsewhere to any extent in Aus. A good question for BOM.

  41. Harquebus

    My opinion is a combination. A natural weather event exacerbated by the atmosphere’s increased ability to retain heat. What percentage can be attributed to increased atmospheric CO2 I can not off the top of my head say.
    During a heat wave in Adelaide a few years ago, we had one extremely hot day. Mid 40’s somewhere. That one day was enough to kill everything in my garden. What will happen when these extreme events start destroying crops on an irregular basis. Can agriculture survive and if it can’t, what happens to us?
    I am glad that I learned this hard lesson early and have subsequently taken steps to lessen the impact of these extreme heat events.

  42. Johno

    Thanks for the answers. This is something that happened a few days ago and was what made me wonder if it was more than just a natural hot spell.

    Turtles hatching on Queensland’s Mon Repos Beach aren’t making it to the ocean as scorching weekend temperatures proved fatal for eggs and hatchlings in unprecedented numbers.
    A heatwave hit the region near Bundaberg as turtles were hatching, and scientists recorded sand temperature of up to 81°C.
    That’s hot enough to kill turtles before they hatch or as they make their way from the nest to the shore.
    Department of Environment and Heritage Protection chief scientist Colin Limpus said it was unprecedented.
    “We’ve had hot years but we’ve never experienced anything like this before,” Limpus told HuffPost Australia.
    “Large numbers are dying in their nests while they wait for the night to come. Then as they leave their nests, they’re dying on the sand before they get to the water.
    “Every morning we wake up hoping for rain to cool the beaches down but it doesn’t happen. We’re into our third week of very elevated temperatures.”

    Life is getting very tough for turtles.

  43. Harquebus

    Yes, I read that.

    Here’s something else from a little while ago that also did not get much attention.

    “Close to 10,000 hectares of mangroves have died across a stretch of coastline reaching from Queensland to the Northern Territory.”
    “International mangroves expert Dr Norm Duke said he had no doubt the “dieback” was related to climate change.”
    “These are the most shocking images of dieback I’ve ever seen.”

    “Drought and heat are the apparent culprits in the largest killing of mangrove thickets ever recorded in the world — 17,000 acres along 400 miles of northern Australia’s Gulf of Carpentaria. This catastrophe for all sea life in the region, just reported last week, coincides with the world’s worst ever coral bleaching event, on the Great Barrier Reef, and the death of a 60-mile-long stretch of kelp forest off Australia’s western coast.”

    The Bonfire of the Banalities

    I weep.

  44. Johno

    Yes, I also knew about the mangroves. I haven’t followed that story up for quite a while. I am guessing it would take a long time for signs of recovery/regeneration to occur ( if at all ).

  45. Harquebus

    The expected increase in these severe weather events does not favor recovery.
    I apologize for being pessimistic. With the daily barrage of worsening climate information, It is difficult not to be.

    “Climate change deniers are irrelevant to reality.” — Captain Paul Watson


  46. Johno


    Yes, I agree. Vegetation/forests attracts rain and we are hell bent in felling what we have left. Madness on steroids.

  47. Keith


    An explanation as to why I was cautious in relation to your question; it partly involves meta matters in comparison to individual matters.

    Coral bleaching around Earth has been a feature of 2016. It knocks the denier opinion on the head in relation to a “hiatus”, Oceans (plural) have been picking up warmth. Due to the sheer volume of Oceans, it takes a long period for them to become warmer. Data from a number of sources show Ocean warming has happened.
    Individual incidents are more difficult to push as identifying climate change.

    In relation to Australia we have:

    .The pristine section of the Great Barrier Reef being severely hit by coral bleaching; luckily, remnants of Cyclone Winstone provided protection for the Southern area of the GBR.
    .Mangrove areas hit hard
    .The Tasmanian bush fires in January 2016 burnt alpine areas not hit for thousands of years. Dry lightening appears to be a new occurrence.
    .Now the sad impact on turtles in Queensland through overheating of sand.

    Through adding those matters it becomes difficult to deny warming happening in Australia; whereas, with individual extremes, deniers will try to knock them down through suggesting they are part of natural variation. Deniers will argue about temperature measurement, it is pretty well impossible for them when nature displays temperature increase in a number of environments.

  48. Johno


    I agree with what you are saying. Because there are many other factors at play. Eg.. Clearing, development and land use changes along the coast of NSW/Queensland has happened on an ever increasing scale. So the pollutants from industry and agriculture have been washing into the ocean for many decades. Add a slightly warmer ocean to this and the result is not gonna be healthy for any ecosystem.

  49. Harquebus

    “Climate change is now influencing all extreme weather events – with some of the most severe climate impacts occurring in 2016”
    “Extreme heat is projected to increase across the entire continent, with significant increases in the length, intensity and frequency of heatwaves in many regions.”

    I have downloaded the report but, I haven’t read it yet and I have couple ahead of it. If anyone bothers to, I wouldn’t mind knowing their opinion and conclusions.


  50. Terry2

    The unrestrained glee of the coalition over the SA power shedding is very worrying and it is very difficult to get impartial and informed information on exactly what happened yesterday : reading between the lines it appears that there was plenty of excess capacity from the gas fired number two station at Pelican Point but due to the overriding authority of the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) it was not commissioned.

    AEMO manages the NEM (National Electricity Market) and is responsible for national electricity transmission planning and security of the national electricity grid. It seems that NEM should have been ensuring that Pelican Pt, came on line but evidently didn’t.

    The coalition want to place all the blame on Labor and the renewable energy targets of the states and they blame the lack of wind power yesterday for the load shedding but this doesn’t seem to be correct as far as I can see. Much as the severe storms when numerous transmission pylons were demolished, the coalition blamed renewable energy targets.

    I noticed today that Turnbull, Frydenberg, Joyce and Bishop all attacked Labor for power load shedding – Julie Bishop even warned WA voters that if they put Labor into office at the coming state election, they too would be facing load shedding and power outages.

    Does anybody have any facts ?

  51. Alan Baird

    SA’s blackout fuss is is a symptom of the mendacity that afflicts the climate debate. This became more salient because Malcolm launched that first unbidden attack on the SA Labor govt when a storm knocked over transmission lines and it was the generation that was blamed, not the storm… And so it was a given that he’d revisit instantly the second (heatwave) blackout occurred.
    If the energy market looks at the blackout situation like this: we might get through this heatwave without kicking in the gas plant at Pelican Point, the plant electricity costs more than renewables, gee, it’s a choice between profit and continuity of supply, if electricity supply is interrupted Labor gets the blame for being in favour of renewables and being a private company we just could prefer the Liberal Party (just maybe) so what’s not to like about taking a gamble with supply? When profits, public anger at blackouts, a propaganda gift to the conservatives and a hit to the Labor Party ALL LINE UP wotcha gonna do? Everything fell into place as predictably as a tap on the knee, the perfect cheap shot. Malcolm opened his gob and out it came. It’s pissweak world folks.

  52. Johno

    I did download the report. Had a quick look at it. Eastern australia is still getting baked. Not sure how long it will last.
    We are having a coolish wet summer here in southern south australia.

  53. Johno

    For the first time, researchers have developed a mathematical equation to describe the impact of human activity on the earth, finding people are causing the climate to change 170 times faster than natural forces.

    The equation was developed in conjunction with Professor Will Steffen, a climate change expert and researcher at the Australian National University, and was published in the journal The Anthropocene Review.

  54. Johno

    I am a computer dumbarse. How do you add links to a comment ?

  55. Harquebus

    Johno and Keith

    Copy the link (URL) from your browsers address box and then return theAIMN page and paste it into your comment.

    Search google for: windows copy and paste


  56. Johno


  57. Harquebus

    “The breakdown of methane hydrates due to warming climate is unlikely to lead to massive amounts of methane being released to the atmosphere, according to a recent interpretive review of scientific literature performed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the University of Rochester.”
    “The USGS Gas Hydrates Project has been advancing understanding of U.S. and international gas hydrates science for over two decades. The Project focuses on natural gas hydrates and their potential as an energy resource, interaction with the climate system, and possible association with geohazards such as submarine landslides.”

  58. Alan Baird

    “POLICY SUPPORT”! The weasel words from King Coal!
    A break from the depressing chemistry experiment in the air: a spokesperson has just responded enthusiastically to Malcolm’s “clean coal” explanations for the polity of Australia, extolling the literally “fabulous” potential benefits of carbon sequestration which, almost certainly, are “done and dusted”. The other great thing about carbon sequestration is, IT’S CHEAP! All you silly lefties didn’t realise this, did you? Yes, carbon sequestration is really cheap IF you give the coal industry “POLICY SUPPORT” (as the coal industry bod went on to explain to the ABC audience). Where does “POLICY SUPPORT” come from and what the hell is it? I’ll give you a clue. Before I retired, I was the grateful recipient of thousands of dollars of “POLICY SUPPORT” every year for turning up to work. Some cynical people call this mercenary terms such as “income” and “money” but I’m converted by “coal industry thinking” and have realised that “POLICY SUPPORT” is a far more satisfying and less money-grubbing term. In short, it’s “wholesome”.
    So, there you have it! Simple! Carbon sequestration IS CHEAP if you give it “POLICY SUPPORT”! If you give it enough “POLICY SUPPORT” it’s free! And all the way through that silly interview here was stupid me thinking the coal industry was after the services of some “facilitator” to conduct the coal industry bods through a “policy construction session” for an afternoon in a convention centre, costing a coupla thou tops and the carbon capture stuff was the easy part.
    The Left is going to work on obfuscatory language, as the right have it well sorted. And I thought I was cynical. I know Xmas is long distant but I wish everybody at AIMN is showered with lots of “POLICY SUPPORT” this year from the Federal Govt. No doubt they’re frightfully keen! Just burn some coal to get their attention…

  59. Doug Evans

    Many people have expressed concern about impending climate armageddon (for that is what it is) in their comments. All other issues pale into insignificance beside this one looming threat. Some people have asked rhetorically what can we do? How can we make our voices heard? The answer to those questions is: Not a lot but there is still one thing we can all do. Vote for a Party (if you can find one) whose climate, energy, transport and industry policies are consistent with saving our backsides. For years there has been only one of these with a significant presence in Australian Parliaments and it is NOT Labor. Despite recent promises and expressed aspirations (50% renewables by whenever etc) Labor is still not that Party. The Australian Greens IS that Party. For years I made this argument here and on similar sites. The reception was pretty uniformly somewhere between dismissive and abusive and I found better ways to use my time. My years as a (slightly elderly) climate change activist taught me that the only way to seriously get a politician’s attention is to threaten his/her seat. Impassioned, logical argument, bleating on blogs, demonstrating …… background noise. But threaten their Parliamentary pensions: Now you have their attention.

    The policies of the Coalition lead us off the environmental cliff-edge. The policies of Labor – the same, just a bit later. The policies of the Greens – not strong enough but they might just about be adequate. If the extreme weather we experience with increasing frequency at 1ºC of warming has concerned you imagine how it will be as we sail past 3ºC of warming. If 90% of the world’s coral reefs, breeding grounds of a huge percentage of the world’s seafood are headed for extinction at 1ºC of warming (they are) what are the implications for feeding the world of 3ºC of warming? The ice caps of Greenland and Antarctica are plainly dwindling threatening many metres of sea level rise. The glaciers that feed the mighty rivers of East and South Asia are melting threatening starvation for countless millions of people.The ice cap of the North Pole is melting exacerbating the rate of warming. The policies of BOTH Coalition and Labor (extrapolated globally) are inadequate to avoid this future.

    Now I don’t think that voting for the Greens will save the world as we know it. My personal opinion is that the opportunity to halt global warming has already passed and humans will be lucky to survive into the next century. But I am absolutely sure that voting in any other way is tantamount to giving up on this problem. Now you may begin to abuse me, explain to me why I am wrong, tell me about the awful Green you have met who decided you never to vote for them again, flood me with links explaining that global warming is a socialist hoax, or ignore me as an alarmist crank. I can hardly wait (but I may not bother to look).

  60. Harquebus

    Doug Evans
    Your views match mine very closely.
    For the natural world, collapse of industrial civilization can’t come soon enough.

    “Models have consistently underestimated ice losses in the past, causing scientists to worry that the declines in the next few decades will outpace projections.”
    “There will be an ecosystem. It will function. It just may not look like the one we currently have.”


  61. Johno

    You won’t get any abuse from me. I agree with pretty much everything you say.

  62. Keith

    Doug, my view is that the Greens policy on climate change is not stringent enough.
    A recession is highly likely through a number of countries being on the edge of economic collapse. Trump provides no positives in relation to the economy picking up.

    From a climate point of view a recession might be positive on the basis that politicians are not making any decisions that are helpful.
    A recession would see less emissions being voided.

    With ENSO, we are seeing very unusual circumstances; in 2015, we almost had an El Nino event, then El Nino occurred in 2016. Modelling by BOM and other Agencies is suggesting an El Nino could happen again in 2017. El Nino is a cyclic event not yearly , or almost yearly.

  63. Harquebus

    “Sea ice volume is now tracking about 2,000 cubic kilometers below the previous record low trend line for this time of year.”
    Frailest-Ever Winter Sea Ice Facing a Cruel, Cruel Summer

    “Carbon dioxide levels measured at NOAA’s Mauna Loa Baseline Atmospheric Observatory rose by 3 parts per million to 405.1 parts per million (ppm) in 2016”

    Carbon dioxide levels rose at record pace for 2nd straight year in 2016 – “The rate of CO2 growth over the last decade is 100 to 200 times faster than what Earth experienced during the transition from the last Ice Age”

  64. Harquebus

    Science is under attack. Let’s hope its strength can outlast the onslaught.

    “Each defunct page is an effort by the Trump administration to deliberately undermine our ability to make good policy decisions by limiting access to scientific evidence.”

    “Climate sceptics widen their net to claim all science – from medicine to physics to computing – is ‘in deep trouble'”


  65. Keith

    Thanks Harquebus
    I’m very aware that Lamar Smith and his cronies ihave been playing silly buggers for sometime. The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well in the Republic Party.

  66. David Bruce

    When we talk about “abrupt climate change” I would consider the comments by Dr Paul Laviolette to be relevant. If our solar system experiences a Galactic Super Wave as predicted, we will experience very abrupt climate change. Perhaps this is why Obama was warning the Americans on TV last year, to be prepared to evacuate for three days, with sufficient food and water? Happy Easter!

  67. Helen

    What no-one mentions is the 30-40 volcanoes that are active RIGHT NOW and have been very active for well over 12 months. This is all part of the pole shift that the earth is currently undergoing, which of course has stirred up the volcanoes.

    No one is also mentioning the fact that the US military is using HAARP to alter the weather as a weapon.

    “HAARP Boils the Upper Atmosphere. HAARP will zap the upper atmosphere with a focused and steerable electromagnetic beam. It is an advanced model of an “ionospheric heater.” (The ionosphere is the electrically-charged sphere surrounding Earth’s upper atmosphere. It ranges between 40 to 60 miles above the surface of the Earth.) HAARP aims to learn how to “exploit the ionosphere for US Department of Defense purposes.

    Earth cannot maintain life as we know it with a damaged ionisphere!!!!!


    Oh yes global warming is happening, and yes humans are partially responsible or should I say irresponsible and selfish. But it isn’t Mr & Mrs normal, its our governments who are colluding with the US, who are supposed to be our allies. Is this the new form of M.A.D. (mutually assured destruction)?

    There is no way the bulk of the earths population can stop the pole shift, volcanic activity and the US government from destroying our planets atmosphere! The earth will do what she needs to do and the US will do what ever it wants, to anyone it wants, whenever it wants – friend or foe.

    Please do your own research – that is what the internet is so very good for. Use discernment and think it through.

  68. Kaye Lee

    Oh Helen….

    the Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI) is used to temporarily excite a limited area of the ionosphere. Even though the power HAARP radiates is very large, it’s minuscule compared with the power of a lightning flash—and there are 50 to 100 lightning flashes every second.

    This is another of those whacko conspiracy theories.

    I’m not sure about pole shift. Are you referring to the change in the magnetic field?


    And what role do greenhouse gases play in your theory?

    As for volcanoes, 2016 was a pretty average year. Out of an estimated 1,500 active volcanoes, 50 or so erupt every year.

  69. Matters Not

    The burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes. Our understanding of volcanic discharges would have to be shown to be very mistaken before volcanic CO2 discharges could be considered anything but a bit player in contributing to the recent changes observed in the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere.

    Note: before volcanic CO2 discharges could be considered anything but a bit player in contributing to the recent changes observed in the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere.

    In short, the contribution of volcanoes to climate change is (often) vastly overstated. As are bushfires.


  70. Harquebus

    My favorite theory for increased volcanic activity is isostatic rebound due to large volumes of melting ice redistributing the Earth’s mass.

  71. Michael Taylor

    LOVO, I first heard about it in high school in 1969 (Blackwood High School, Adelaide. Teacher Mr Mableson). Once again I’m well ahead of you. ?

  72. Keith

    A reasonably old article in relation to climate change, the author Brendan Barrett, commented on how there had been rapid change prior to January 2015 in climate. There have been significant changes since 2015; examples being thawing of tundra, pingoe explosions, severe droughts followed by rain bombs.
    Dr Mann has stated that to keep temperature below a 2C increase above pre Industrial times CO2 levels must be kept below 205ppm. We have now reached the CO2 205 ppm point, currently the increase is about 3ppm per year.


    Receding glaciers can have a profound effect on water courses:


    The Arctic is in a mess:


  73. Harquebus

    “Scientists in the Northwest Territories, Alaska and Siberia are now realizing that as the ground under them melts, it will not only make life harder for the people living in the Arctic, but will in fact speed up climate change around the globe.”

    I popped in earlier to post another link but, Keith had beaten me to it. In fact, I had already read the three posted.
    Goodonya Keith. I have seen you around in other fora. Keep it up.


  74. Johno

    AIM Network… No mention of the March for Science.. WTF

  75. Keith

    A snap shot of extreme conditions happening in a number of countries:

  76. Johno

    Bill Nye the science guy is making waves in America.

    On one episode of the program, Dr. Travis Rieder, a philosopher at Johns Hopkins University, said that “the average Nigerian emits 0.1 metric tons of carbon annually. How many does the average American emit? Sixteen metric tons.” He argued that when it comes to climate change, “our two kids are way more problematic” than large families in the developing world.


  77. Keith


    Overpopulation is often overstated in relation to climate change. It has been suggested that the wealthiest 10% of people contribute 30% of emissions. Very few people have their own aircraft, or mansions.

  78. havanaliedown

    Yes Keith, when Al Gore reduces his lifestyle, eschews all air travel, mansions, heated pools, SUVs etc… I might take notice.

  79. Harquebus

    “These scientists go against the grain, telling it as they see it, not pulling any punches.”
    “many climate scientists have been fudging their work; edits make bad seem less bad. Otherwise, those scientists stand to lose grants and funding.”
    “It all starts with the Arctic where temps are running 2-3 times significantly ahead of the planet, shaking lose millennia-old methane buried within ice for eons that is fast melting away.”

    Human Extinction 2026

  80. Keith

    Thanks for the reference, Harquebus.
    There is no doubt that matters are becoming serious; your reference relies on possibilities and maybes to come to the conclusion that humans could be extinct by 2026 through climate change. Their premise relies on huge methane explosions knocking out 1% or more of the huge amount of methane stored in the Arctic Circle.

    Bru Pearce has displayed how global temperature is increasing by a number of standard deviations. In a comment quoting Naomi Klein, stating that in the 1970s there were 660 disasters happening, and 3,322 happened in the 2,000s.

    Clips displaying current disasters:

    With the loss of sea ice in the Arctic, should the long term trend line continue; then, the Arctic being ice free in 10+- years is highly possible. As a result, temperature increasing at a rapid rate is highly likely (dark water absorbing more warmth than white ice), though that would not necessarily lead to extinction.

  81. havanaliedown

    Naomi Klein? Why not go to the source and quote prominent gravy-train rider and waterfront dweller (well until Abbott sacked him), Professor Tim “Flanasonic” Flannery who declared that the rain, IF it does fall, won’t fill our dams (Warragamba currently 93.9% full). What a clown. Thankfully he is now only spruiking for private donations, when he isn’t organising luxury cruises on diesel-sucking, helicopter-pad-quipped, pollution-spewing megayachts!


  82. Roswell

    Again you bring nothing to a debate but ridicule.

  83. Keith


    Desalination plants have been set up in WA, they would be in big strife without them.

    Now can you provide a critique of the Bu Pearce clip, I have asked two professional people with expertise in standard deviations to critique the possibility of going beyond 2-3 standard deviation points.

    Tim Flannery has absolutely nothing to do in what my last post presented; nothing but a distraction.
    Bru Pearce quotes Naomi Klein; I can understand many do not believe the arguments she presents; but, that does not mean that when she states that there were 620 disasters in the 1970s compared to 3,322 in the 2000s, that those figures are wrong. I gather that they only relate to the Northern Hemisphere. Your comment can only have credibility if you can provide properly researched figures that show Naomi Klein’s figures are wrong. Otherwise, we can conclude you simply do not know.

    The 2 clips about current catastrophes displays several happenings beginning on 18th to 22nd June 2017 relating to a number of countries.

    I have yet to come across a denier who is able to knock the concept of “rain bombs” on the head. Scientists tell us that as more CO2 is voided into the atmosphere more warming takes place, allowing for more water vapour to be carried. “Rain bombs” happen due to more water vapour being carried in the atmosphere. “Rain bombs” being where a rain storm drops a huge amount of rain in a very short time frame; for example, a months rainfall drops in a 24 hour period.

    Your comment displays prejudice/ideology rather than a rational critique.

  84. havanaliedown

    Hmm, blocking/moderating me for just using the facts and no more hyperbole than the rest of the commenters here? Hear it from Flannery’s own mouth: https://youtu.be/wM_C_-2MGWU

  85. Kaye Lee

    He did not say that the dams would never fill again at any time from the date he was speaking, which is the thick-as-a-brick intentionally distorted view presented by Bolt and fellow travellers. Flannery was pointing to a long-term outcome of normalized water shortage based on current data and climate trends.

    Flannery’s quote in context is:

    We’re already seeing the initial impacts and they include a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, which is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we’re getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that’s translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers. That’s because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

    He was basing his comments on IPCC reports

    “To summarize the rainfall results, drier conditions are anticipated for most of Australia over the 21st century. However, consistent with conclusions in WGI, an increase in heavy rainfall also is projected, even in regions with small decreases in mean rainfall. This is a result of a shift in the frequency distribution of daily rainfall toward fewer light and moderate events and more heavy events. This could lead to more droughts and more floods.”

    If you rely on information from Andrew Bolt and the IPA then you will invariably be wrong.

  86. Roswell

    You weren’t blocked or moderated at all. Your link must have been considered spam by the spam filter – which is where I found this comment and was able to save it before it was deleted.

    Any more conspiracy theories?

  87. havanaliedown

    Nice try, Kaye “even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems”. Nobody is putting words in his mouth, it’s pure unadulterated chicken little stuff straight from The Professor.

    His alarmist catastrophism in pursuit of filthy lucre is evident everywhere one looks… here he is spruiking for Panasonic at 1:05 https://youtu.be/P30HDvnSFMI angling for an all-expenses trip to Japan. Here’s hoping he went by carbon-neutral canoe.

  88. Freethinker

    Roswell, it appears that the spam filter in this case was doing a very good job.

  89. David Bruce

    Our atmosphere, Moon, solar system, galaxy and more, are subject to cycles which oscillate between maximums and minimums. What if these cycles all approached their maximum or minimum at the same time? Would we see anomalies and trends similar to what we are being told now? Just wondering, because I am coming to the conclusion that no one really knows. Consensus science is rarely good science!

  90. Keith


    “…for just using the facts and no more hyperbolefor just using the facts and no more hyperbole ….”

    What is hyperbolic about:

    …There is no hyperbole in asking for different figures when you scoff at Naomi Klein’s figures for disastrous events.
    …Oceans warming
    …Drought in Sahel area of Africa
    …Rain bombs being experienced in different areas of Earth
    …The volume of sea ice being lost in the Arctic
    …Bolivia having experienced lack of water through Glaciers regressing
    …Tsunami in Greenland
    …Greening of tundra displaying extra warmth

    AS stated, nobody has been able to debunk “rain bombs” which display extra warmth in the atmosphere.
    You might also like to explain whats going on with “drunken trees”.

    But you won’t, which is a display of the shallowness of the denier point of view.

    Please provide references or data; making sophist type comments is meaningless.

    Where are the cheaper energy prices promised by Abbott?

    David Bruce

    There is huge number of Journal articles about various impacts on the climate from paleo-climates to the climate of present times.

  91. Kaye Lee

    hanaliedown, I could quote one sentence from your comment out of context. I could say havanliedown said “even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems”. That would misrepresent the point you are trying to make but you certainly typed those words. I gave you the context – you choose to run with the Dolt’s line of taking that phrase out of context. That is deliberately misrepresenting what was said as deniers always do.

  92. Kaye Lee


    Scientists keep track of natural forcings, but the observed warming of the planet over the second half of the 20th century can only be explained by adding in anthropogenic radiative forcings, namely increases in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.

    I would highly recommend you read this article.


  93. Keith

    Thanks Harquebus

    A very concerning matter.

  94. Keith

    Very noticeable when a denier is challenged, they are not able to come up with anything to support their sophistry … eh… havanaliedown.

  95. Zathras

    The Greenhouse Effect has been known about for decades, both theoretically and practically.

    When scientists advised the US government they said that there would be early indications expected “in about forty years” and in reply one politican actually said “get back to me in thirty-nine”.

    Even Reagan and Thatcher were convinced and took tentative steps to reduce greenhouse gasses but something seems to have changed.

    There was no such resistance or manufactured denial about the notion of the hole in the ozone layer – probably because the industry that caused the problem (chemical) also provided the solution. The fossil fuel industry is much different and has very much deeper pockets.

  96. Harquebus

    “Abrupt changes outside the boundaries of natural variability are signs of climate fatigue, Mother Nature overwhelmed, defeated, breaking down. It’s happening fast and faster yet mostly on the fringes of the ecosystem with fewest people, other than, on occasion, a handful of scientists.”

    Extremely Nasty Climate Wake-Up Calls

    “The possibility of biologically inspired melting was not included in the estimates for sea level rise published by the UN’s climate panel, the IPCC, in its latest report in 2013.”
    “only a small amount has to melt to threaten millions in coastal communities around world.”

    “President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan.”

    Climate Change and the Catastrophe of Trumpism

    “The Energy Department, IEA, and possibly other government agencies are making plans to announce in November an effort “to give new momentum” to carbon capture technology, Fatih Birol, executive director of the IEA, told me last week.”

  97. Harquebus

    “”Also, as the Earth warms, we are seeing beneficial changes to the earth’s geography,” he writes. “For instance, Arctic sea ice is decreasing. This development will create new commercial shipping lanes that provide faster, more convenient, and less costly routes between ports in Asia, Europe, and eastern North America. This will increase international trade and strengthen the world economy.””
    “Smith is “slowly advancing through the stages of denial … having apparently now moved from ‘it’s not happening,’ to ’ok—it’s happening, but IT WILL BE GOOD FOR US!””

  98. Keith

    As you would understand Harquebus, a melting Arctic Ocean would lose its albedo effect. Smith apparently does not know that dark surfaces pick up warmth more so than light. The Arctic Ocean has quite an influence on climate. We don’t want fireworks from those 7,000 mounds/pingos that have been picked up by satellite photos.

  99. Harquebus

    Of course. I posted that link as it is an example of what we are up against.
    I don’t post everything that I read on this subject because, they repeat what has already been stated.
    You and I are on the same page in regards to recognizing the danger of Arctic methane. If the clathrate gun fires, we are toast; literally.

    Here are a couple more from yesterday.

    “The ice reflects 90% of the sun’s radiation, whilst the dark water that surrounds it reflects only 10%.”

    The ARC (Australian Research Council) Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies has been closely monitoring the coral, releasing annual reports since 2005. Of 911 reefs surveyed in 2016, only 68 or 7% have escaped coral bleaching.

  100. Harquebus

    I learnt a new term today. ‘Big Bog Theory’. No shit.
    I will looking this one up.

    “Among the benefits of climate change will be milder temperatures, less permafrost, and the hope of vastly increased crop production, enticing in more settlers, with a potential three-fold rise in the population, say scientists.
    ‘By the end of the 21st century, 50%-80% of central Siberia might have a climate suitable for agriculture, with traditional Siberian crops shifting northward by as much as 70 kilometres per decade,’ according to one study cited by the experts.”
    “Permafrost holds some 1,400 gigatons of carbon globally, more than twice the amount of carbon currently in the atmosphere. As it melts, greenhouses gases like methane are released, enhancing the impact of warming, in a vicious circle.”

    Some just do not get it, even amongst the science community.

  101. Pingback: Topic: Videos, Links, Reports, Arguments – Climate Change – Survival Acres

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page