Victorian MLC Moira Deeming: the pretty face of…

“I can’t wait until I’m legally able to hunt you down.” This curse…

Science & Technology Australia welcomes National Reconstruction Fund

Science & Technology Australia Media Release The nation’s peak body representing 115,000 Australian…

Calculated Exoneration: Command Responsibility and War Crimes in…

Being the scapegoat of tribal lore cast out with the heavy weight…

The Voice: Remember When The Liberals Were Still…

At the moment we're witnessing the Liberal Party at their absurd best.…

Nazis on our streets: don't judge protesters by…

On some level, it is straightforward for a Neo-Nazi protest to be…

Whither Constitutional Change?

Within a very short space of time, we are going to be…

A Hazardous Decision: Supplying Ukraine with Depleted Uranium…

Should they be taking them? Ukraine is desperate for any bit of…

Murdoch's Zero Sum games: divisive propaganda meant to…

The Murdoch media drives resentment with propaganda as constant as drums of…


Any resemblance to responsible factual reporting is purely coincidental

I am wondering how Andrew Bolt is feeling with the release of a trio of new studies in two days which confirm how bad the earth’s fever is.

In November 2013 Bolt wrote an article titled “Fighting the global warming religion”.

He stated that “Atmospheric temperatures have remained flat for at least 15 years.”




The following graph shows the tricks used by deniers like Bolt who pick their data to suit their argument.




Aside from the usual tactics of choosing a very hot year as your starting point, and using a short time period rather than observing long term trends, a report from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) confirmed that 2014 was the hottest year ever since reliable records started being kept in 1880 – and the results weren’t even close.




Average global surface temperature worldwide was 14.58º C – surpassing previous records set in 2005 and 2007 – and making 2014 1.1º C hotter than the average for the entire 20th century. And before you say 1.1º C doesn’t seem like much, think about whether you’d prefer to run a fever of 38º or 40º. The planet is every bit as sensitive to small variations as you are.

Bolt also says “there has been an unexpected pause in warming of the atmosphere, with the IPCC blaming the deep ocean for hiding the missing heat where it can’t easily be found. We’ve seen about 0.85 degrees of warming over the past 130 years (which hasn’t seemed to hurt, I think). That warming slowed dramatically over the past 15 years – to just 0.05 a decade, or virtually zero.”




According to the journal Science, marine life forms are growing sicker, with a “major extinction event” a very real possibility. All through the oceans, the signs of ecosystem breakdown are evident: the death of coral reefs, the collapse of fish stocks, the migration of species from waters that have grown too warm for them to the patches that remain cool enough.

On sea level rises, Bolt says “so far we’ve probably had just 19cms in 110 years. Turns out the median sea level rises tipped under the four IPCC scenarios for 2100 are between just 26cms and 30cms, with a very upper limit of 82cms under the most alarming scenario.”

A study in Nature looked at sea level rise in both the periods from 1901 to 1990 and from 1993 to 2010. It found that sea levels had risen more slowly than believed in the 90 years that followed 1900, and much faster in the 17 years from 1993 to 2010—close to three times as fast per year from 1.2 (+/- 0.2) mm/year to 3.0 (+/-0.7) mm/year.

Whilst this may not seem like a lot, a single centimetre of water globally is a lot of water (in non-metric terms a single inch of water spread around all of the planet’s oceans and seas represents two quadrillion gallons of water). The recent faster rate of rising may also affect predictions for the future.

Bolt also disputes the warning that a rapidly warming climate could affect the quality and quantity of available food.

“Sheer alarmism. Fact is that extra carbon dioxide means more plant food, and moderate warming means more rain overall. That, plus advances in gene technology and agricultural practices, have lead to record global harvests of food crops.

That’s the trouble when you get your scientific information from the Heartland Institute’s favourite ex-TV weatherman, Andrew Watts. Deniers spend a lot of money to cherrypick data, quote it out of context, and produce misleading graphics. Whilst production might be higher in gross tonnage, he ignores demand and yield.

The IPCC report published last year said that the rate of increase in crop yields is slowing – especially in wheat – raising doubts as to whether food production will keep up with the demand of a growing population.

Wheat is the first big staple crop to be affected by climate change, because it is sensitive to heat and is grown around the world, from Pakistan to Russia to Canada. Projections suggest that wheat yields could drop 2% a decade.

The report explored a range of scenarios involving a temperature rise of two degrees or more that saw dramatic declines in production in the coming decades. Declines in crop yields will register first in drier and warmer parts of the world but as temperatures rise two, three or four degrees, they will affect everyone.

In the more extreme scenarios, heat and water stress could reduce yields by 25% between 2030 and 2049.

The report acknowledged that there were a few isolated areas where a longer growing season had been good for farming. But it played down the idea that there may be advantages to climate change as far as food production is concerned.

Overall, the report said, “Negative impacts of climate change on crop yields have been more common than positive impacts.” Scientists and campaigners pointed to the finding as a defining feature of the report.

Other food sources are also under threat. Fish catches in some areas of the tropics are projected to fall by between 40% and 60%, according to the report.

The report also connected climate change to rising food prices and political instability, for instance the riots in Asia and Africa after food price shocks in 2008.

Bolt’s articles should come with a disclaimer: “Any resemblance to responsible factual reporting is purely coincidental.”


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

 948 total views,  4 views today


Login here Register here
  1. JeffJL

    I always like replying to people who say there has been no increase in the last 15 years by saying “but if you use the last 14 or 16 years there has been. What is so special about 15 years?”

  2. stephentardrew

    The science is irrefutable.

    More than I can say about the coalalition.

  3. diannaart

    Excellent, Kaye.

    This point really holds a great deal of concern for me:

    And before you say 1.1º C doesn’t seem like much, think about whether you’d prefer to run a fever of 38º or 40º.

    Even those who claim to believe the science, seem to think a goal of 2 degrees increase is acceptable – we should, really, really set our goal at 0 degree increase, we do not know enough to posit the ramifications and exponential effects of even a 2 degree increase – well there are some scientists who probably do but they’ll be accused of ‘scaremongering’ and we can’t have than, now, can we? Better to aim for the very best we can do. Which, I guess, means taking out a lot of people such as Bolt, IPA, our PM – have a feeling that is not legal or something.

    Oh Well, I think I’ll just run around like a headless chicken for a while – the very least I can do…

  4. Graham Houghton

    Food. Hmm. ‘ Whilst production might be higher in gross tonnage, he ignores demand and yield.’ If production in terms of gross tonnage increases then there is, quite simply, more food available. Yield is irrelevant as it refers merely to profit, which to almost everybody on planet Earth (please note the use of the uppercase for the name of a planet), is of no consequence except for the fact that they are the source of profit for the few that enjoy it. Demand is important and that is the real problem where food and water is concerned. This planet is capable of sustaining us, along with all the other living organisms that call her home, but her resources are finite. Not even our ingenuity is going to be able to conquer that. Earth (uppercase for two reasons) is incapable of infinite human population growth and is rapidly approaching her carrying capacity whether or not there is global climate warming. Likewise with global fisheries. The real problem is not possible global warming, but overfishing. The problem is us everywhere you look. We have, as the first and only species to potentially change our surroundings as to make them incapable of supporting our existence in the manner we have come to expect, to profoundly alter our behaviour. We need to issue humanity, you and me, with an ASBO if we expect to see peace and prosperity for our descendants. Forget global warming, it’s a symptom; we are the problem. We need to clean up our world because we have turned it into a pigsty. Arguing for reducing CO2 emissions, abolishing the use of fossil fuel, vastly reducing our dependence on plastic, or an end to the economy of warfare, all very fine ideals, is pointless because it is a distraction. We should be doing it all and we should be doing it now, not bickering about who should do what, when and where. We need to think not about a global economy, but global self-sufficiency. Whatever your particular interest is, raise your head out of your book, open your eyes and look around; it’s not pretty and it’s not going to get better without you.

  5. Kaye Lee

    “Yield is irrelevant ”

    Yield refers to the amount of grain harvested per hectare planted. That is not a profit issue as much as a supply issue. If the same amount of land gets you less grain then you need more land, more plants, more water etc to get the same amount of food let alone keep up with increasing demand from population increase and expanding markets and decreasing availability of arable land. Yield is extremely important.

    “If production in terms of gross tonnage increases then there is, quite simply, more food available.”

    Not true if the increase in demand has outstripped the increase in production thus causing reserves to run down which is what has happened.

    “With food consumption exceeding the amount grown for six of the past 11 years, countries have run down reserves from an average of 107 days of consumption 10 years ago to under 74 days recently.”

  6. Keith

    I think the record temperatures being measured over a number of decades are really a shorthand way of indicating what is going on in the environment. You would have a far greater chance of winning tattslotto than being able to prove that scientists/meteorologists are tampering with temperature data as is often alleged (buckleys and none). Watts had made such an allegation in the US, as he has a wide audience, research was conducted on the sites Watts stated were giving faulty temperature data. Watts was proven to be wrong.
    Features showing a warming planet:
    The thawing of permafrost
    The volume and consistency of sea ice
    Marine species moving to areas that were once considered to be too cold for them (West & East Coast of US, off Greenland, Sydney, Tasmania and Japan
    Marshall Islands being inundated twice in 2014 by sea water
    Noxious diseases being spread further North and South of the Equator
    In a film clip titled Thin Ice a reindeer farmer in Finland expressed concern about the changing consistency of snow and was suggesting he would not be able to continue if the trends developed further
    There are plenty more examples which show a warming of the climate.
    Its the kind of data that deniers have little they can respond to.
    So yes, stephentardrew, the science is irrefutable

  7. Jexpat

    I rather like the way Dr. Ricky Rood of the University of Michigan frames the issue:

    “Here’s an easy prediction for 2015. When we arrive at March 1, 2015, it will have been 30 years since there was a month where the global average surface temperature was below the 20th century average.

    We are creatures who like our milestones in years and decades and numbers divisible by 5, 10, 25 and 50 (like our currency), and a 30 year average is the definition of climate in the standard of climate as the average weather.

    The National Climatic Data Center goes to some effort to strictly define “normal” in terms of 30-year averages. With the arrival of March 1, 2015, all of the months used in the calculation of current climate will have been warmer than the climate of my youth, the previous generation, our grandparent’s generation, Howard Taft’s, Teddy Roosevelt’s, indeed, Benjamin Harrison’s.”

    More here:

  8. Totaram

    ” am wondering how Andrew Bolt is feeling with the release of a trio of new studies in two days which confirm how bad the earth’s fever is.”

    I don’t think Bolt feels anything. He is just a cynical paid shill who couldn’t care less about what he writes, as long as it gets him his readership and his pay. He started off writing for labor but soon found that the pay is better on the dark side. You only have to look at what he wrote before the Iraq war,but you won’t find him apologetic about it.

    I’ll bet he comes out with an article saying that 2014 is hotter by “only” 0.0x degrees which is well within the error margin and therefore does not mean anything. This seems to be the latest denialist meme.

  9. Kyran

    I am fascinated with this fascination with Bolt. If I step on a turd, I wipe my shoes as best I can and promise myself to be more careful next time. Unless the circumstance is extraordinary, I rarely study the turd. I recall when the other imbecile invoked the “died of shame” remark, even MSM turned on him. His “fellow journalists” started paying careful attention to his diminishing audience and his lack of relevance in any “real” world. As with Bolt, these are dying (commercially) cretins devoid of any substantial intellect. As other posters have noted, the science is in and irrefutable. We have a problem and we must deal with it now.
    On a positive note, I heard an interview this morning of a solo sailor based on the Isle of Wight. She returned from her “round the world sail” and studied the effects of finite economics. It appears if you sail around the world, you have to prepare your food, fuel and everything else in the context of your limited space and the reality you will most often be at least 2,500 kilometres from a port. Her major sponsors assisted her research on her return and applied it to various appliances. The example she used was a washing machine. The technology doesn’t change remarkably, so why buy a machine, use it and dispose of it when it “breaks”. If you can lease the machine, you can return it to the manufacturer and they can strip down and reuse many of the components. The experience is that costs of production of the machine are nearly halved because they reuse the copper, harnessing, internal bowls etc.
    There are many good, intelligent people coming up with good, intelligent ideas about “finite” economics. Bolt who? Take care

  10. corvus boreus

    Ms K Kitching has another staunch supporter and sponsor(apart from her conman ‘hubby’ Andy Landeryou and ‘friend with alleged benefits’ Anders Blot) in W Shorten, faction player and current LOTO.
    Why don’t I trust Billy Shorten?

  11. Kaye Lee


    As my husband and I wandered around France we many times heard people say to others “Attention” (with a lovely French accent). We quickly worked out they were alerting others to the presence of dog poop. It has become part of my family dialect. Consider this not a fascination with dog poop but an alert for others not to step in it.

  12. Kyran

    I respectfully acquiesce. It was a “long bow” to suggest you were fascinated with “poop”, I was merely trying to say what I thought of the git. Take care

  13. Möbius Ecko

    And before you say 1.1º C doesn’t seem like much, think about whether you’d prefer to run a fever of 38º or 40º. The planet is every bit as sensitive to small variations as you are.

    Not the best analogy. You hit it with sea level rises where you ask readers to think about how much it takes to rise the entire planets oceans by a small amount. Now think on how much energy it would take to not only raise the oceans by 1cm but to also increase the entire planet’s temperature by 1°.

    That goes some way to explaining the enormity of the challenge but also why the opponents, especially those who deliberately misinform, have an easier time of it. The scientific numbers are small, a few centimetres, a fraction of a degree over decades and a small percentage of man made gases compared to the huge amounts of natural ones against the size of planet.

    Here’s a little context:

  14. DanDark

    Corvus ohhh how interesting, I wouldnt trust BS as far as I could throw him, and that’s not far,
    And being mates with Roskam goes against him, he dosnt want a federal ICAC and has stated so
    why Bill why, something to hide maybe….

  15. corvus boreus

    Möbius Ecko,
    Regarding the illustrative image,
    I realize this is probably superfluous information for you(as in likely already known), but I will point out that of the huge grey sphere depicting Earth, only the thin surface is habitable(the biosphere).
    Strip off the very outer shell of that sphere, roll it into a ball and you will have the part of the earth we(life) can occupy. Viewed as such, the comparative amount and influence of air and water might seem a little more significant(like as in making the difference between habitable and lifeless).
    Likewise, the relatively small current human contribution to overall C02 emissions(around 3-5%) are outside the parameters of the relative ecological stability of the biological systems of decomposition/respiration release being balanced by photosynthetic sequestration(acting a bit like excessive fat in one’s diet), and are steadily building in both volume and proportion. As feedback loops kick in(like the decline of photosynthesising organisms, methane melts etc) the problem intensifies(the increasingly obese subject becomes less able to exercise effectively and starts suffering serious health problems).
    I wonder if the increases in greenhouse gasses from the Arctic methane releases will be included as human emissions in future atmospheric analyses.

  16. Phi

    Bolt is a fanatic – a believer – a fanatical believer. He’s an uber priest for the religion of science denial.

    Always a pleasure to read a damned good debunking of Bolt, a tabloid employee whom I hold in equal contempt with ‘pommie’ Abbott and his anti-Australia associates.

  17. Kaye Lee

    What are we to do when Tony Abbott looks to Maurice Newman and Cardinal Pell for advice on climate change.

    Regardless of the lack of any scientific qualifications, Cardinal Pell has been quite vocal about his view on climate change over the years.

    Pell stated in his 2006 Legatus Summit speech:

    “Some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness, of Western fear when confronted by the immense and basically uncontrollable forces of nature. Belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect, although it is no guarantee of Utopia, no guarantee that the continuing climate and geographic changes will be benign. In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.”

    In a 2007 article for The Sunday Telegraph, Pell wrote that while climate had changed, he was ‘”certainly sceptical about extravagant claims of impending man-made climatic catastrophes, because the evidence is insufficient”.

    Responding to the Anglican bishop and environmentalist George Browning, who told the Anglican Church of Australia’s general synod that Pell was out of touch with the Catholic Church as well as with the general community, Pell stated:
    “Radical environmentalists are more than up to the task of moralising their own agenda and imposing it on people through fear. They don’t need church leaders to help them with this, although it is a very effective way of further muting Christian witness. Church leaders in particular should be allergic to nonsense….. I am certainly sceptical about extravagant claims of impending man-made climatic catastrophes. Uncertainties on climate change abound … my task as a Christian leader is to engage with reality, to contribute to debate on important issues, to open people’s minds, and to point out when the emperor is wearing few or no clothes.”

    In October 2010, the Senate’s Environment and Communications Legislation Committee agreed to table a letter from Cardinal Pell which quoted heavily from Ian Plimer’s book Heaven and Earth to claim there were “good reasons for doubting that carbon dioxide causes warmer temperatures”.

    Director of Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology Dr Greg Ayers said “At one stage [Cardinal Pell] lists greenhouse gases. Included in the list is the gas nitrogen. That is not a greenhouse gas; it is 78 per cent of the atmosphere. You cannot have people out there telling the public that nitrogen is a greenhouse gas, because it is not.”

  18. Kaye Lee

    To those who suggest we should just ignore Bolt and hope he goes away, the Power Index lists Andrew Bolt as the most influential commentator in Australia, and describes him as “the nation’s best-read columnist”. They estimate that “over four million Australians pick up a paper featuring his column each week and more than a million actually read it”. His TV show brings in approximate 233 000 more viewers, and he appears regularly on radio too. Bolt reaches a lot of Australians. We need to arm others with facts to counter his misinformation.

  19. Rosemary (@RosemaryJ36)

    I think Bolt may be the most read columnist but I doubt he is the best read. I hope he reads this article and has the grace to apologise for misleading people.

  20. Möbius Ecko

    corvus boreus. A good expansion on what I was attempting to illustrate.

    Man made methane hasn’t been flagged as a significant global warming contributor for though it is a far greater forcer than CO² it breaks down far quicker. CO² hangs around for a very long time.

    Now suddenly flood the atmosphere with a significant GHG and it will be disastrous.

  21. brustep

    What I find fascinating about the whole climate change debate is, what to me, is just obvious proof. Over the millions of years this planet has been in existence human beings have never reached such huge numbers – a fact. It is also a fact that human beings “invented” the industrial revolution as well as other “revolutions” The industrial machines require fossil fuels to run them. Industrial machines produced and still produce goods which also require fossil fuels and now chemicals which were also invented and thus never existed in the history of the planet. Plastics which are a man-made chemical product are almost impossible to dispose of.

    As populations increase in size and wealth, more and more people demand goods and services. This have never happened before. With increased production comes increased waste to pour into the envirnoment. This has also never happened to our planet before.

    For me, and I admit to have an average tertiary education, it is just plain common sense that of course all this extra pollution, the main one being carbon, being released into the environment will have damaging effects and increasingly so.

    Isn’t just obvious if a species continues to increase somewhat unchecked then it will sow the seeds of its own demise? But what if that species also produces waste with little regulation that upsets the balance of the environment, won’t that bring that species demise even faster? Or have I missed something?

  22. Jexpat

    “Isn’t it just obvious if a species continues to increase somewhat unchecked then it will sow the seeds of its own demise?”

    It should be to anyone with an appreciation of how a fine shiraz comes into being.

  23. Michael Taylor

    I don’t think you’ve missed anything, brustep. Others have though. Namely Abbott et al and Murdoch et al.

  24. stephentardrew

    The science has been clear for over twenty years for those who are old enough to have followed scientific trends.

    It amazes me that so little is known about the history of the science as if we have discovered something new over the last few years.

    It’s more like let’s just ignore it until it actually reaches a critical point which we are at now. The warnings have been out there for several decades.

    Conservatism must be challenged and defeated if we are to survive. Yes it is that serious. Not only global warming but endemic poverty, hardship and inequality for the masses.

  25. guest

    Bolt has no coherent science about Climate Change. His main tactic is to cast doubt on some details and completely denying larger aspects. He is confounded by facts.

    Tony Eggleton in his book on Climate Change (p. i33) tells us:” At present the world is warming at the rate of 1 degree C in 60 years; that is, 20 times faster than any previous sustained rate of temperature change.” .

    This denier obsession with a “pausing” is merely a distraction to try to prove that the IPCC is wrong because its modelling did not predict a “pausing”. The IPCC has given possible explanations. The basic thing to ask is, if the sun is still shining on the Earth, where is the heat going? The deniers themselves have no explanation except by some strange claims, such as newly discovered volcano vents, or Milankovic cycle, or a cool section of space in the orbit…Perhaps they should ask where the heat goes when water boils at 100 degrees and the temperature does not rise. Or about latent heat and the melting of ice….

    Never mind that 10 of the hottest years have been amongst the past 15 years

    With regard to CO2 as “plant food”, Eggleton says (p. 198): “…Andrew Leakey and colleague at the University of Illinois in the United States concluded that under enhanced CO2 levels crop yield increase was small, of the order of 15%….the enhanced growth was somewhat negated by increased attack by beetles.”
    As well, “CO2-enhanced growth results in plants having lower nutritional value than normal plants.”

    We already have CO2 levels unprecedented in the past 24 million years (p. 177).

    He goes on to say that: “It is often suggested that northern Australia could support a magnificent rice industry. The CSIRO report specifically addressed this suggestion and classified almost the whole area as ‘marginal or unsuitable’ for rice growing.”

    We see the Ord River region has its problems already. So much for Abbott’s food basket in the north. No wonder he does not like the CSIRO.

  26. Kaye Lee

    Ah yes, the food bowl of the north.

    The argument goes that the north gets plenty of rain, is a stone’s throw from Asia, and there’s bugger-all up there anyway, so let’s build dams, dig irrigation channels and feed the world.

    The idea has been around since the 1920s, but the reasons why it has never happened haven’t changed. Cost-effective farming in the north means irrigation, yet areas suitable for that are limited. Rivers that pump out fresh water into the sea in the wet season are only a trickle in the dry. Dam sites are few and, with evaporation in the order of two metres a year, they have to be deep.

    Two irrigated areas in the north – the Katherine region in the Northern Territory and the Ord Valley in Western Australia – have tested many different crops over the years: peanuts, sorghum, rice and cotton . They have all failed. Cotton failed because the amount of pesticide needed in the north was too great, rice because magpie geese decided to feast on the ungerminated grains, and peanuts, the last major venture in the Katherine region, partly because the cost of freight to southern markets is simply too great.

    Even if produce grown in the north was mostly exported to Asia, it’s unlikely the developing economies of the region could afford to pay the prices producers would need. Add in the cost of developing irrigated farmland and the numbers simply don’t add up.

  27. Kaye Lee

    Bolt, of course wrote a piece on developing the north as all good little members of the IPA/ANDEV/GINA crowd do.

    “Of course, the Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce has since stopped even pretending that science drives its hatred of a dam.

    Taskforce member Stuart Blanch is co-ordinator of the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory and – surprise! – a former activist with the World Wildlife Fund and Australian Conservation Foundation.

    But even the make-up of the taskforce suggests the bias, right from the start. It includes pro-business people, of course, but most of the 14 members are either from Aboriginal land rights and “development” groups, or have ties to green and pro-warming bodies such as the CSIRO.

    There’s not only Blanch, but Dr Rosemary Hill, an “active conservationist” who is vice-president of the Australian Conservation Foundation as well as senior scientist at CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.

    Add to them Dr Andrew Johnson, from the CSIRO’s environment branch, and global warming campaigner Prof Bob Wasson, an expert in “environmental studies”.

    He really is scared of scientists and Aboriginal people isn’t he.

  28. Keith

    An interesting quote from your reference Kaye Lee, where Bolt writes “God save us from our own stupidity.”

    The stupidity is manifest in not taking note of what scientists are saying. Pretty well every week last year there were new scientific papers published in relation to climate change. A number of papers have already been published this year.
    Jason Box, a Glaciologist who has been involved with studying Greenland was in trouble for being too candid in relation to his thoughts on the methane blowouts in Siberia.
    Professor Box took photos of the sheet ice in Greenland last year and you do not need to be particularly knowledgeable to know things are not right in the Arctic generally upon viewing those photos. Bolt might try and suggest the photos have been photoshopped; though Professor Box would soon be caught out if that was the case. It comes down to those who are denying climate change do not associate with people of integrity in my opinion.

  29. Barry Riley

    Bolt, Jones, etc. are not as stupid as they seem. They don’t actually believe what they’re saying. They’re just paid a lot of money to stir up comment and make profits.

  30. Zathras

    Bolt is the self-appointed spokesman for the extreme right.

    It’s a position he has created for himself and it’s unlikely he would ever back down from his views because it would show him to be fallible and vulnerable to alternative views.

    His overall aim is self-promotion and needs to feed his acolytes with a continuous supply of “evidence” to justify their doubt..

    Remember his most significant financial patron is from the Mining Industry whose very deep pockets are running this interference strategy and playing for as much time as possible.

    99.6% scientific consensus is just not enough to promote doubt among those who don’t like to see their view of reality challenged. Even 100% wouldn’t be enough for some.

    There are still those who insist the Moon Landing was a hoax and that Elvis is still alive so ther’s simply no point in arguing with them.

    Bolt is just an embarrassment to honest journalism but a champion of punditry.

  31. helvityni

    Andrew who, dog poo…

    Why do so many people in Australia still take ‘ ranters’ like Bolt, Jones and the other shock jocks seriously. I have to confess, I couldn’t even remember any more names…Hadley?

  32. Pudd'nhead

    Bolt and Abbott are from the same genre that believes that the unthinking will not test even poorly constructed lies if they are repeated as often as can be managed and delivered always with a serious demeanour. Abbott’s attachment to confusing two word slogans and Bolt’s hang-up with scientific study results are “price signals” that should alert all and sundry to dig behind the spoken or written offerings from this pair of delusioners.

  33. Harquebus

    Just in case there is any doubt and yes, I have read all of these. Not that we can do anything about global warming anyway, it is already too late.

    Scientists discover vast methane plumes escaping from Arctic seafloor

    "Peak Water," Methane Blow Holes, And Ice-Free Arctic Cruises: The Climate Crisis Deepens, By Dahr Jamail

    Melting Antarctic Ice Is Causing an Actual Shift in Gravity

    I just thought I would throw this one in. By “destroyer of worlds”, you can guess who the author is referring to. We were born for it.


  34. Mic

    I’m not in the category of “denial” but I do fall into the category of “some doubt”. There is no doubt that significant changes are occurring on the planet yet there are some very strange inconsistencies in the evidence. The Netherlands went ahead and increased the height of all of the dykes because they measured a significant rise in ocean level. In stark contrast, records of the ocean levels from Cockatoo Island for the last 100 years show NO rise in water levels. Does that mean that the Dutch are sinking?

    I noticed references to Methane. I’m happy to ignore it. Termites produce 800 times the amount of methane to that which can be attributed to humans (including food animals), although I certainly agree that we should be capturing methane from land fills and sewerage treatment plants for use as fuel.

    I also remain “unsure” about carbon dioxide. That doesn’t mean I’m doing nothing about it. It makes sense to move away from coal-power generation for far more reasons that CO2. The sheer volume of toxins to be found in spent coal means we need to clean up our act. That a Wind Turbine is finally well and truly more cost effective in the production of electricity than coal begs the question of why the Electricity Giants themselves aren’t heavily investing in this technology. In Canada, a new turbine goes online every 10 hours!

    We also need to re-gear industry to erase “planned obsolescence”. I had to discard multiple kitchen appliances because, although they had been designed to last, the parts that copped the most wear (the motor brushes) had no available replacements. After a good 30-year life span, they would have lasted another 30 years if that simple component had still been available.

  35. corvus boreus

    I suggest you look up the methane hydrate release from melting permafrost(there are some reasonable links in the post above yours) and consider the implications (feedback loops).
    Also think about the vegetative influence on gaseous cycles and weather(and climate by wider implication) and the ongoing trends of deforestation and desertification on land and the increasing poly-carbonisation of our oceans.
    This represents a decline/breakdown in the bio-systems that regulate the cycles of the liquids and gases which keep our planet amenable for our existence.
    The problems are real and the obvious need for urgent implementation of remedial solutions should be beyond doubt.

  36. Harquebus

    I hope you are young. You will see the devastating results of your ignorance.

  37. DC

    Mic is engaging in an open discussion about his thoughts, impressions & ideas and offereing some practical soloutions. You could learn a lot from him Harquebus, whatever age he is. The only thing I would say is that I do believe CO2 & global warming are very urgent, but at least he is being honest about his doubts & he didn’t rule out the possibility of anything

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
%d bloggers like this: