Older Australians say they will vote for climate change

Older Australians say climate change policy will influence their vote.

Older Australians say they will vote for climate change

Older Australians care about climate change and are unhappy with the Government’s stance on global warming, saying responsible environmental policy will count towards their vote at the next Federal Election.

While there is still a portion of climate sceptics among those aged between 55 and 74, the overwhelming majority of respondents in the YourLifeChoices’ Friday Flash Poll: Do older Australians care about climate change? said they believe in man-made climate change and care about what is happening to our planet.

The poll’s results put paid to the misconception that older people don’t care about global warming because they won’t be around to experience its effects.

With 1859 respondents, this poll was one of the most participated-in since the Friday Flash Poll’s inception.

While some say that global warming is a hoax, 74 per cent of voters said they believed in man-made climate change and 81 per cent said they cared about its effects.

When asked ‘Do you understand how climate change works?’ 94 per cent said ‘yes’, but others responded that climate change is a natural phenomenon.

“Climate change is real but not caused by emissions. Our climate is continually changing as a natural science and has been this way since the beginning of time. We will always have droughts, storms, floods, heat and cold as this is Earth’s science. We need to respect and understand the very delicate nature of our precious Earth. Ceasing coal-powered stations will not change our climate. These climatologists are just scaremongers and solar businesses, individuals and countries are making a lot of money out of using these tactics, especially brainwashing our younger generations. Wake up Australia! Read I Love a Sunburnt Country,” said one member.

“The real science shows conclusively that the very small climatic movements are well within historical and statistical movements – so-called climate science is simply misleading and not in context,” said another.

Of those who didn’t care about climate change, 17 per cent nothing they do would make a difference unless the rest of the world gets on board, while two per cent said they don’t believe in science and another two per cent said their efforts wouldn’t make a difference regardless. Only 23 respondents said they didn’t care because they wouldn’t be around to witness the effects.

Last week, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its most dire warning yet on the catastrophic effects the planet faces if global warming is allowed to rise above 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Further to Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack and Environment Minister Melissa Price’s claims that the IPCC report would not sway Coalition policy – even thought they had not read the full report – we asked if politicians should arm themselves with all the facts before making these types of decisions.

A whopping 90 per cent said yes.

We also asked older Australians whether climate change issues would influence their vote at the next Federal Election – 62 per cent said ‘yes’ and 74 per cent said they were unhappy with the current Government’s stance on climate change.

This leaves us with the question of whether politicians are even capable of creating responsible environmental policy. The answer is: older Australians are split. Thirty per cent of respondents said yes, but not the current government while a further 20 per cent said they thought our pollies considered the best interests of the planet. The other half of voters said no, with 26 per cent saying politicians are only interested in economic motives and 24 per cent saying they only look after their donors.

Surprisingly, Labor just pipped the Greens by four votes as the party with the best chance of creating responsible climate change policy, although 33 per cent of respondents were Labor voters compared to 13 per cent Greens.

There was, however, a significant amount of ‘resignation’ among voters. One member’s response was typical of many: “None. I feel they are all looking out for their own interests and that makes me sad, angry and totally fed up with all parties. I don’t like feeling this way, so I hope some great person comes along to change their minds because certainly they are not listening to the public.”

As to how our members work towards reducing emissions, 51 per cent said they limit power use around the house and 20 per cent have solar panels installed.

The survey goes a long way to eliminating the misconception that older Australians don’t care about climate change.

“We care because of our children and grandchildren who will be here long after we are gone. Oldies care very much,” said YourLifeChoices’ member Paddington.

This is the demographic the major parties are trying hard to attract, so environmental policy could be a powerful motivator for voters at the next Federal Election.

Do you care about climate change? Are you surprised by any of these results?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    jackie
    15th Oct 2018
    10:30am
    Climate change is very real. Australian farmers are acknowledging this fact through decades of dealing with it.

    It's pathetic that a Government that was never voted in dictates fossil fuel power and population growth to Australians during a drought that is supposed to be normal. Donates money to Indonesia but not to Australians in crisis.

    If fossil fuels aren't stopped Australia will be flooded by billions of climate change refugees.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    11:16am
    "Climate change is very real. Australian farmers are acknowledging this fact" REALLY????

    Australian farmers have been brainwashed by the sneaky leftist/warmist Bureau of Meteorology who cherrypicked rainfall data to start in 1960 and "prove" that Australia was "drying up"

    However the full rainfall data starting in 1900 shows that Australian rainfall is actually INCREASING!!

    The Bureau obviously has a POLITICAL AGENDA in being so sneaky.
    Objective science seems to be taking a back seat as with most of the recent "climatechange®" "studies" worldwide.!
    Knight Templar
    15th Oct 2018
    11:22am
    Jackie, I suggest you study the facts and history of climate. Regrettably, you like many others have fallen for the climate alarmists propaganda. Perhaps you can name one cataclysmic prediction made over the last 30 to 50 years that has occurred?
    Jim
    15th Oct 2018
    11:25am
    So if this government wasn’t voted in, how did they get there, I think you are trying to say this prime minister wasn’t voted in, the fact is we don’t vote for the prime minister, so I am not sure what you find that’s pathetic. Nevertheless there is no doubt that fossil fuels create Co2, our contribution to worldwide carbon effect on the planet is minimal, countries like China and India are the biggest polluters on the planet, they are not going to stop until they have a viable alternative, wind farms and solar power are not viable options worldwide, more effort needs to be put into viable options like hydrogen and hydro power, the current government are the only ones even considering these alternatives. Labor and the Greens are only interested in stopping coal generated power sources, the only immediate result will be massive job losses and massive losses to our economy, we need a long term plan that can satisfy both our desire to get out of coal and our desire to improve our environment, I am not sure politicians ever consider anything longer term than the next election.
    Knight Templar
    15th Oct 2018
    11:25am
    As for climate refugees ... we were told that by 2012 there would be 50 million climate refugees resulting from rising sea levels. To date there has been one so called climate refugee who's claims were proved to be bogus!
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    11:58am
    I am still waiting for sea levels to rise an inch a year as I was told when I was at school. Sydney should be half under water by now.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    12:24pm
    Read this Knight Templar:

    https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

    Look at what happened after about 1950. NEVER had that in half a million years! Natural variation? Only in your dreams.

    Only the ignorant and coal owned fools claim there is no climate change and write the same rubbish repeatedly. Unfortunately after the last 18 years of which 16 have been the 'hottest ever' there is nowhere to hide. Climate change is real!

    OG - sea levels ARE rising and your ignorance ignores the advances in computing power and the improving accuracy of predictions in the last 50 years. But then I would not expect a rusted on right wing coal stoolie to understand or be capable of informed debate or reasoning.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    12:27pm
    Mick it was far hotter when I was a kid than it is today so temperatures are falling not rising.
    jackie
    15th Oct 2018
    1:08pm
    LUVCO2, Knight Templar, Jim and Old Geezer.

    Yes farmers are admitting they are dealing with global warming. Yes a Prime Minister that never was voted in to be one is Governing this country. He refuses to believe in Global Warming but believes in Noah's Ark.

    Yes China has more emissions than Australia but China is doing something about it with renewable energy unlike Australia. Emissions affect the entire globe.

    Here is the link about farmers saying climate change does exist. I advise you all to all get rid of your fossil fuel shares and start investing in renewables.

    Here is the link about farmers saying climate change does exist. I advise you all to all get rid of your fossil fuel shares and start investing in renewables.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-09/why-farmers-are-forcing-climate-change-into-the/10357408
    Linda
    15th Oct 2018
    1:12pm
    I am heartened by the pole that shows what I believe is true, most everyone except those heavily invested and heavily profiting from dirty fossil fuels. I am so happy that the nay sayers are fewer and the momentum is building, like a train, building speed. We were well on the way when the liberals got elected, and while we are on our third prime minister from this party, some things have not changed. Their money source will dry up as they continue to spout misleading information. The very least that could happen is if we all get on the renewable wagon, our electricity prices might go down, our air will be cleaner, people will be researching and inventing, and we will all be way better off.
    Rosret
    15th Oct 2018
    1:17pm
    Kiribati is the most threatened by rising water. When a representative came to Australia he visited our Randwick racecourse. The comment he made was, "Do you realise we could fit our entire population on this one area."

    I am not sure how many low lying islands there are however most continents have higher land and provision is already being made for rising tide levels across the USA and Europe.

    It's important to remember that only ice that melts off the land will raise sea levels. Any ice already in the water (ie the arctic) will not raise sea levels.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    1:20pm
    Jackie so those farmers are now blaming climate change for their poor farming practices. Oh dear me thinks I heard and seen all this before. Ask a real farmer and they will tell a different story.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:34pm
    Well written jackie. Sadly the same right wing rusted ons and trolls keep on keeping on. No amount of 'evidence' is ever enough. he evidence is in. It is not fake, unlike the posts from the normal lot. And we do need to do something about it.
    People can stick their heads in a hole if they like but when push comes to shove those folk will be the first in line demanding to know why governments have not acted.
    I'm doing my bit. Pretty well energy self sufficient and environmentally friendly...apart from getting on a plane and travelling. Time that those who seek to destroy our planet get off their sacrilegious asses and do something for humanity rather than their own worthless selves.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    1:37pm
    Do you buy carbon offsets every time you fly Mick
    If not why not ???
    You pollute more than any of us with your flights and skiing in Colorado
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    2:09pm
    Good to see you are keeping notes Herr olbaid. Or is that Old Geezer as you were not around when I offered that bit of information?
    I completely agree that flying is user unfriendly. Of course you are displaying your jealousy here and your normal rubbish post masks what some of us do to cut down our carbon footprint. You of course will have none of that.
    Jim
    15th Oct 2018
    2:24pm
    So Jackie you discount my entire comment and state that China is doing something about it, China is the biggest polluter on the planet, India is not far behind, if you look at my comment I don’t disagree with the evidence that there is climate change, I do disagree with the way Labor and the Greens want to tackle it, their solution will send the country broke unless we take a responsible approach to how we address the change from fossil fuels to alternative sources of power generation, solar and wind farms are not the answer, but we get the usual response from the died in the wool trolls from the Labor and Greens supporters, Labor have no idea how they are going to achieve reductions of Co2, the current government are looking at viable alternatives, starting with hydro it will be expensive to do it but not as expensive as Labor’s and Green’s solution, which seems to be to build solar powered batteries, wind farms and solar power to our roof’s, which I already have, to solve the problem we need to think outside the box, Labor and Greens policy will shut down our mining industry and send the country broke, but guess what it will reduce our carbon footprint because we won’t have any industry, and the old chestnut that renewables will fill the gap is rubbish, renewables are definitely part of the solution, but putting all of our eggs in the one basket will end in disaster. I don’t have any shares in coal so no agenda on my part.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    2:38pm
    "sea levels ARE rising"...... Hey Mick, FYI:sea levels have been rising STEADILY since the Little Ice Age!
    Absolutely NO ACCELERATION showing up in tide guages.

    Noything to do with manmade "climatechange®"

    What else is new?

    Sea Level Fraud At The Union Of Concerned "Scientists".
    Using sea level junk science in an effort to obtain donations.
    WATCH THE VIDEO ....
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9sw_HfLejg&feature=youtu.be
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    2:53pm
    "
    Only the ignorant and coal owned fools claim there is no climate change" HMMM ...

    Natural climate change is real as it has always been, but manmade "climatechange®" is a junk science hoax perpetrated by the UN as an excuse for an unelected, undemocratic Marxist world govt, the creation of enforced human habitat settlement zones, elimination of private property, and redistribution of your wealth .

    There has been NO GLOBAL WARMING since 1998 according to untampered, free from Urban Heat Island (UHI) Effect satellte data.
    So much for atmospheric carbon dioxide being the "temperature-control-knob"!

    Surface Temperature Records: Policy Driven Deception https://climatechangedispatch.com/deceptive-surface-temperature-records/
    All terrestial surface-temperature databases show signs of urban heat pollution &
    post measurement adjustments that render them unreliable for determining accurate long-term temperature trends.

    EXCELLENT VIDEO ON #globalwarming JUNK SCIENCE
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh-DNNIUjKU&feature=youtu.be
    FAKE TEMPERATURE RECORD EXPOSED

    PEER REVIEWED STUDY: Most, if not all, Global Warming Is Fabricated
    Nearly All Recent "globalwarming®" is FABRICATED
    https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/09/delingpole-nearly-all-recent-global-warming-is-fabricated-study-finds/

    WATCH THE VIDEO....
    2017 - The Fakest Year On Record At NASA & NOAA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1hg-koV1T0

    NOAA/NASA historical temperature Data Tampering Destroying Science
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T86IIKK9FRg&feature=youtu.be
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    3:06pm
    "It is already established that renewable energy is CHEAPER than coal" ROTFLMAO,
    Only after MASSIVE renewables subsidies and MASSIVE taxes on cola-fired power!! This explain skyrocketing electricity prices.

    There is NO country on Earth that has significant renewables together with low electricity rates!

    If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/04/23/if-solar-and-wind-are-so-cheap-why-are-they-making-electricity-more-expensive/#18b58b861dc6
    Electricity prices increased by:
    51 percent in Germany during its expansion of solar and wind energy from 2006 to 2016;
    24 percent in California during its solar energy build-out from 2011 to 2017;
    over 100 percent in Denmark since 1995 when it began deploying renewables (mostly wind) in earnest.
    What gives? If solar panels and wind turbines became so much cheaper, why did the price of electricity rise instead of decline?

    Where Have All The Eagles Gone?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2biK1hdKHo&feature=youtu.be
    Wind farms are the second most environmentally destructive means of producing energy ever invented - after whale oil.

    Solar Panel Toxic Waste 300x That Of Nuclear
    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/06/29/toxic-waste-from-solar-panels-300-times-that-of-nuclear-power/

    “Clean” "Green" Renewable Energy’s Dirty Little Secret
    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449026/solar-panel-waste-environmental-threat-clean-energy?utm_source=social&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=kelly&utm_content=clean-energy


    Wind & Solar Provide Only 1% of 2015 World Energy - $2.5 TRILLION DOWN THE DRAIN!
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/17/shocker-government-mandated-trillions-in-global-renewable-investment-tally/

    Brutal Truth About “Clean”,“Green” Wind Power, Disastrous Pollution!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    3:11pm
    "Yes farmers are admitting they are dealing with global warming"

    Hey jackie just look up the Bureau of Meteorology rainfall charts for Australia.
    They show absolutely NO DECREASING RAINFALL TREND since 1900!

    You've been brainwashed by activist JUNK SCIENCE.

    Here's the link
    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/index.shtml#tabs=Tracker&tracker=timeseries&tQ=graph%3Drain%26area%3Daus%26season%3D0112%26ave_yr%3D0

    Actually Australian rainfall is INCREASING since 1900!
    Look up the BoM rainfall chart if you dare ....

    So much for "globalwarming®"
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    4:14pm
    Old Geezer wrote "Mick it was far hotter when I was a kid than it is today"

    ALSO it was far hotter in Australia circa 1828


    Australian explorers Sturt and Mitchell recorded temperatures of 53.9ºC IN THE SHADE!!

    HERE'S ONE EXCERPT FROM STURTS NOTES ....

    Extreme Heat of the Weather.
    We had started at early dawn; and the heat had become intolerable long ere the sun had gained the meridian. It was rendered still more oppressive from the want of air in the dense bushes through which we occasionally moved. At 2 p.m. the thermometer stood at 129 degrees of Fahrenheit, in the shade; and at 149 degrees in the sun; the difference being exactly 20 degrees. It is not to be wondered at that the cattle suffered, although the journey was so short. The sun’s rays were too powerful even for the natives, who kept as much as possible in the shade. In the evening, when the atmosphere was somewhat cooler, we launched the boat upon the lake, in order to get some wild fowl and fish; but although we were tolerably successful with our guns, we did not take anything with our hooks.
    The natives had, in the course of the afternoon, been joined by the rest of the tribe, and they now numbered about three and twenty. They were rather distant in their manner, and gazed with apparent astonishment at the scene that was passing before them.
    If there had been other proof wanting, of the lamentably parched and exhausted state of the interior, we had on this occasion ample evidence of it, and of the fearful severity of the drought under which the country was suffering. As soon as the sun dipped under the horizon, hundreds of birds came crowding to the border of the lake, to quench the thirst they had been unable to allay in the forest. Some were gasping, others almost too weak to avoid us, and all were indifferent to the reports of our guns.


    Charles Sturt et al experienced a fiery 129ºF (53.9ºC) IN THE SHADE in 1828! http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/sturt/charles/s93t/complete.html

    Sturt’s time: So hot that thermometers exploded. Australia’s hottest day in 1828? 53.9ºC!
    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/07/charles-sturts-time-so-hot-that-thermometers-exploded-was-australias-hottest-day-in-1828-53-9c/

    Our sneaky Bureau of Meteorology avoids this INCONVENIENT DATA by starting its temperature record in 1910!!

    SO MUCH FOR "globalwarming®"!!!
    jackie
    16th Oct 2018
    9:24am
    Old Geezer.....The reason it was hotter far hotter for you as a kid because you was more active back then with a healthy blood circulation. You are much colder now because you are inactive and have joined the rest of the right wing reptilians.
    maxchugg
    18th Oct 2018
    5:52pm
    Mick’s site https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ is a classic example of what is wrong with the so-called evidence which is used by so-called scientists to support the theory of anthropogenic global warming. However, read in conjunction with another chart which shows both carbon dioxide levels and global temperature, the inescapable fact is that there is no relationship between the two data sets,

    http://www.biocab.org/Geological_Timescale.jpg

    A real “inconvenient truth” is that there is correlation between sunspot activity and global temperatures. This is demonstrated by the fact that recent melting of the polar icecaps on Earth is also happening on Mars and every other planet on our solar system. Further evidence is presented in the following site:

    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/solact.html

    15th Oct 2018
    10:44am
    I suspect that the (fake?) results (at least the "analysis" of ther results) of the poll were determined by the leftist/greenie bias in the questions.
    As a skeptic I found that sometimes none of the alternatives in the poll allowed me to answer the question, so I had to pick the least leftist/Marxist/warmist answer, otherwise I was not allowed to proceed.
    An American poll carried out recently of the top policy issues for voters, the "climatechange®" scam did not even rate a mention, even amomgst Democrats!!
    Smart, not so gullible, voters there!
    QUOTE FROM THE POLL: "Health care and the economy consistently top polls of key issues and social security, immigration and guns usually perform well too.
    "climatechange®", energy, and the environment are almost always counted among the least important issues to voters deciding who to support"

    Which explains why the "climatechange®" scam is NEVER mentioned during ANY election campaign that I'm aware of!

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/03/democrats-shelve-climate-change-as-an-election-talking-point/
    Bridgit
    15th Oct 2018
    11:35am
    Please keep up your posts - I really enjoy seeing the "facts" put out there to read! I am not a subscriber to the existing hysteria perpetrated by an uninformed and uneducated media - as for BOM well I won't go there at this point - There so called radar and predictions are a waste of time! Using an onion to predict rainfall is proving to be more accurate and believable than BOM!
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:38pm
    You crack me up LUVCO2. Your username says it all and you are using the same strategy as the Brexit business people who are demanding another referendum. If the result don't fit lets vote again. And then again, etc.
    You may want to turn on the right wing media if you wish to discuss fake news. There for all to see.
    Knight Templar
    15th Oct 2018
    6:00pm
    Mick, why don't you debate the points raised by LUVCO2 instead of name calling and going off topic.

    Clearly, you are incapable or unwilling to challenge the 'facts' put out there by LUVCO2.
    Rae
    16th Oct 2018
    8:34am
    LUVCO2 can document "weather" events forever and it still has nothing at all to do with measurements of CO2 in oceans and atmosphere.

    My Dad also talked about the time it snowed at Christmas in Orange. Whooppee Doo.

    Humans unfortunately can't use CO2 as we need Oxygen to live. The CO2 might be terrific for plants and forests but unfortunately most of those have been destroyed in our crazy need to fight wars and build mansions and monuments to Gods we create.

    The use of coal and oil is purely financial. It produces CO2 and so does 9 billion humans.

    The least we could do is plant like crazy everywhere we can but even that is argued against.

    When the consequences hit hard it will be far too late.

    If searching for weather events let's LUVCO2 sleep nights that's okay.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    10:59am
    If we generated all our power from coal it would have minimal impact compared the impact of all that coal we export. We are fools in a fools paradise paying through the nose for renewable energy when we continue to export coal.
    KB
    15th Oct 2018
    1:40pm
    Old Geezer Young people do care about climate I care about the environment Wildlife I is becoming extinct. The Great Barrier Reef is in trouble, Is starts with individuals at home .
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:40pm
    Talk to the coal controlled industry about prices. They are setting them.
    It is already established that renewable energy is CHEAPER than coal and we have not even brought in the cost of the generating equipment.
    The only fools are those who post your right wing propaganda which intends to deceive people.
    Rae
    16th Oct 2018
    8:37am
    Yes OG and at some point those exporting that coal will face huge fines just as the asbestos producers did. It will come and I hope they are ready and I do hope we aren't expected to pay up for them as we receive very little in the way of any royalties.

    15th Oct 2018
    11:05am
    Rertired CSIRO scientist Gatyj Paltridge has alos exposed the FAKE SCIENCE used to brainwash Australian farmers that Australia was "drying up"/

    Here's what he wrote about the "science"
    Australian Academy of Science hides model failures, other rainfall predictions, feedbacks evidence

    Climate of cherry-picking

    Garth Paltridge The Australian

    The problem is that, after several decades of refining their story, the international gurus of climate change have become very good at having their cake and eating it too. On the one hand they pay enough lip service to the uncertainties of global warming to justify continued funding for their research. On the other, they peddle a belief — this with religious zeal, and with a sort of subconscious blindness to overstatement and the cherry-picking of data — that the science is settled and the world is well on its way to climatic disaster. The Academy document fits neatly into the pattern. It is a sophisticated production that tells only one side of the story.

    For instance it does not say, or illustrate with a diagram, that all the mainstream climate models have over-estimated the general upward trend of global temperature for the last 30-or-more years by a factor (on average) of at least two. Nothing is said about the distinct possibility that the models include feedback processes which amplify far too much the effect of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide.

    Instead, the document talks about an apparent pause in global warming since 2001. It attributes the pause to some temporary fluctuation in the internal behaviour of the ocean. It does not mention that climate scientists have for many years deliberately played down the contribution of natural oceanic fluctuations to the rise or fall of global temperature. The possibility of naturally induced rises seriously weakens the overall story of human influence.

    The document makes much of the belief that climate models can correctly replicate twentieth century global warming only if they include human influences. It fails to make the point that this says very little for the skill either of the models or the modellers. Recent research on the Roman and Mediaeval warm periods indicates that both had temperatures and temperature changes very similar to those of the present. Both periods came and went without the benefit of significant human emissions of carbon dioxide.

    Cherry picked rainfall projections:

    The document mentions that long-term regional rainfall predictions are uncertain. It doesn’t say that they are probably nonsense. The various model forecasts of the average Australian rainfall for the end of the century range from a doubling to a halving of the present 450mm/year. It smacks of cherry picking to display a map of the output from one particular model that indicates a future reduction in rainfall for most of Australia of the order of 20%.

    There has been a goodly amount of arbitrary selection (of data, of statistical technique and of display) in an illustration of the distribution of the change in observed rainfall over Australia the past 100 years. The southeast and southwest of the continent are shown as a sea of red suggesting there has been a frightening decrease over the period. No mention is made that a more traditional presentation of the data gives an entirely different picture. In the southwest, the recent annual-average rainfall has simply returned to something close to its value for the 15-or-so years before about 1905. In most of the southeast, there has been no statistically significant change at any time.

    Paltridge wishes the Academy of Science would focus on real problems like “group think”, the lack of polite debate, and the failures of bureaucratized “peer review”.

    Maybe the Academy could use the resource of its overall fellowship to identify those situations where scientists have too much skin in a political game. President Eisenhower foresaw that problem many years ago in his retirement speech to the nation: “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present — and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, …… we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite”.

    Garth Paltridge is a former CSIRO Chief Research Scientist and was Director of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre. He wrote The Climate Caper, reviewed here. He’s a Visiting Fellow at the Australian National University and Emeritus Professor at the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Oceans Studies (IASOS), which is now called the Institute of Marine and Antarctic Science (IMAS), University of Tasmania. In his career, he worked as an atmospheric physicist, predominantly with CSIRO and briefly with NOAA , and has published more than 100 books and scientific papers.
    Knight Templar
    15th Oct 2018
    11:36am
    Unfortunately, LUVCO2 climate alarmists are more interested in 'feelings', huge 'financial grants' and a distribution of wealth from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.

    Science and factual data are taboo for these alarmists.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:53pm
    So you are posting something from the Murdoch Australian as factual? Worse than that about coal? Ha ha ha. You crack me up.

    This should be of interest to you:

    https://www.skepticalscience.com/peerreviewedskeptics.php?s=104

    The page says:

    "This page lists any peer-reviewed papers by Garth Paltridge that take a negative or explicitly doubtful position on human-caused global warming.
    There are no peer-reviewed climate papers by Garth Paltridge that meet this definition".


    You are a coal troll LUVCO2 as evidenced by your appearance EVERY TIME there is a coal debate. The nonsense you put up as evidence is exactly that and your superhero is a sole crier who is not supported by any other in the science community. A fake. Add to that this man was speaking out a decade ago and computer modelling has moved a long way down the track since then.

    Back into your coal mine LUVCO2. Don't consume the canary!
    jackie
    15th Oct 2018
    11:27pm
    Your scientists are just like the scientists that lied for the tobacco industries about cigarettes and cancer. Coal caused much pollution and problems during Britain’s Industial Revolution. That proves your scientific evidence is a lie. https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/air-pollution-in-victorian-era-britain-its-effects-on-health-now-revealed-87208
    Rae
    16th Oct 2018
    8:43am
    Yes jackie and it wasn't needed. It was always about the money and the power and allowing rampant population growth of "consumers".

    Tesla's energy towers were never given a chance because free, clean energy from the magnetic field did not add up to lots of money or power.

    Whatever happens will be a consequence of all we do and we should keep in mind there are always consequences.

    15th Oct 2018
    11:36am
    The historical temperature record supposedly "supporting" the "globalwarming" scam has been so massively tampered with that it has become totally useless, unless you're a leftist/warmist trying to push a Marxist/global governance/wealth redistribution agenda, as this German scientist discovered .....

    Retired Prof (geologist&data computation expert)...NASA GISS Have Tampered The RAW Data So Extensively That They Effectively 'Invented globalwarming®'

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/german-scientist-accuses-nasa-massive-alteration-temperature

    http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/uploads/media/EIKE_NASA-GISS_Anl__22.11.15.pdf

    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/23/trump-nasa-hasta-la-vista-climate-fraud-muslim-outreach/
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:54pm
    The only thing "tampered with" is you presentation of the truth. Ask uncle Rupert for a payrise.
    Rae
    16th Oct 2018
    8:47am
    What happens when the last guy finally owns everything and CO2 levels are out of control. Is there a prize for the winner?
    Rightist/fascists never seem to be able to answer the question about what will happen when the 42 who own 80% own everything. Maybe they don't actually have a plan and it's just a game for seriously rich dudes to give them something to do?
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    12:09pm
    Of course climate has been changing through the decades but you can't tell me that with the no of cars, trucks, bikes etc on the roads, planes etc spewing toxins into the atmosphere, factories belching out all their poison's, forests being decimated, population increasing ,that this is not affecting our climate enormously.

    15th Oct 2018
    12:09pm
    “Control Of Atmospheric CO2”: Climate scientist professor Salby, author of “Fundamentals of Atmospheric Physics”, shows that mother nature is the dominant CO2 emitter.
    Natural CO2 emissions are driven by natural factors such as warming oceans outgassing and rotting vegetation
    Relatively miniscule human emissions don’t count.

    WATCH THE VIDEO ...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCya4LilBZ8&feature=youtu.be

    CO2 emissions from MOTHER NATURE = 227 Gigatons per year
    RELATIVELY TINY Human CO2 emissions = 5.5 Gigatons per year.

    In other words, humanity's CO2 emissions are an INSIGNIFICANT 2.4% of total emissions.
    Any attenpt at "curbing" tiny human CO2 emissions to reduce atmospheric CO2 levels is fundamentally FUTILE!
    Rae
    15th Oct 2018
    1:12pm
    Yes Mother Nature and Father Sky have had enough of our ruining this Planet with uncontrolled breeding and creating rubbish piles all over. They'll sort us out and nothing we can do about that.

    So we may as well just keep on having a great time until we die?

    Besides thinking about it doesn't feel good and we no longer allow those bad feelings. They aren't nice.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:55pm
    Agreed Rae.
    As for this poster LUVCO2 is clearly a paid contributor as the many posts are cut and paste. Highly likely a cash for comment troll.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    3:43pm
    Hey Rae & Mick ...

    40yrs after 1st Earth Day: Air Quality Has Never Been Better
    http://mjperry.blogspot.com.au/2010/03/40-years-later-air-quality-has-never.html


    9 Graphs That Prove Carbon Dioxide Is Our Best Friend
    https://climatism.wordpress.com/2016/12/28/9-graphs-that-prove-carbon-dioxide-is-our-best-friend/

    EXCELLENT VIDEO
    Trace gas, plant food Carbon dioxide in action! Seeing is believing!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2qVNK6zFgE

    "globalwarming®" HAVOC!
    Record harvets put pressure on storage facilities!!

    CSIRO: Deserts “Greening” From Rising Carbon dioxide
    https://csiropedia.csiro.au/deserts-greening-from-rising-co2/

    THE SOCIAL “COST” OF CARBON "pollution" IS POSITIVE!
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/22/the-social-cost-of-carbon-is-positive/

    5 Reasons 2013 Was The Best Year In Human History! Bad luck doomster warmies! http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/12/11/3036671/2013-certainly-year-human-history/

    BENEFIT of carbon “pollution”: $3.5TRILLION in Agricultural Productivity! http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/10/the-social-benefit-of-carbon-3-5-trillion-in-agricultural-productivity/

    NEW SCIENTIST: THE GREAT GLOBAL GREENING: Our new lush Earth THANK YOU CO2! http://ow.ly/H0AU7

    Welcome to the CO2 “disaster”, 4BILLION tons more plants, more greenery http://joannenova.com.au/2015/04/welcome-to-the-co2-disaster-4-billion-tons-more-plants-more-greenery/#more-41794

    Another benefit of more CO2 “pollution”:Trees use water More Efficiently http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/news/release/trees-water-atmospheric-co2
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    12:10pm
    Obviously a lot commenting on here today did not take part in Friday's poll.
    KSS
    15th Oct 2018
    12:52pm
    Or as LUVCO2 says, there was no option to answer honestly given the choices were skewed to the answers the survey developer wanted!
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:57pm
    Yeah. Get this guy below. Straight from coal HQ. None of it worth reading as a load of propaganda BS.

    15th Oct 2018
    12:15pm
    Retired CSIRO chief scientist, who no longer relies on "climatechange®" alarmism to earn a living, becomes skeptical.... "Climate Scientists Are Giving Science a Bad Name"
    Prof Paltridge former chief scientist with Aust’s CSIRO, Atmospheric Research, says the behavior of certain members of the climate science community “seriously threatening public’s perception of the professionalism of scientists in general”

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/05/14/physicist-climate-scientists-are-giving-science-a-bad-name/

    Many climate scientists are much less sure about man-made global warming than they will admit in public, he says. But rather than reach out to skeptics in order to open up the debate and explore the uncertainties, they have instead closed ranks and rubbished anyone who disagrees with them:
    Some of the more vocal of the establishment climate researchers have fallen into a mode of open denigration of climate sceptics (“deniers” is the offensive popular terminology of the day). They insist that only researchers directly within the climate-change community are capable of giving authoritative advice. They insist that one can find true and reputable science only in peer-reviewed climate literature. But most significantly, they seem to have evolved a policy of deliberately excluding sceptics from climate-change forums of one sort or another, and indeed of refusing to take part in any forum where sceptics may share the podium.

    Their high-handedness, Paltridge says, is redolent of “medieval religion”:

    The priests of that time opposed translation of the written scriptures from Latin into the local languages. They believed that only people fully trained in the theology of the time were capable of interpreting the scriptures correctly. They believed it would be highly dangerous to allow non-trained people to have direct access to the word of God because the chances were high that they would get it wrong. They were not backward in applying their peculiarly nasty forms of denigration on those who thought otherwise about the matter.

    But the medieval priests eventually lost the battle. As will the climate alarmists because the public simply do not trust them:

    The modern equivalent with regard to AGW is that, despite the claim that 95% or more of climate scientists support the AGW establishment position, support for the position among the general public (of the western nations anyway) is only of the order of 50%. The reputation of climate science, and as a consequence the reputation of science in general, seems to have lost a good deal of its public gloss.

    It is not even certain that climate science qualifies as an actual science. Being driven by a political agenda rather than by experimentation and evidence, it is more akin to post-modernism:

    Post-modern science is a counterpart of the relativist world of post-modern art and design. It is a much more dangerous beast, where results are valid only in the context of society’s beliefs, and where the very existence of scientific truth can be denied. Post-modern science envisages a sort of political nirvana in which scientific theory and results can be consciously and legitimately manipulated to suit either the dictates of political correctness or the policies of the government of the day. At a more mundane level, there is little doubt that some players in the climate research establishment – not many, but enough to have severely damaged the reputation of climate scientists in general – have stepped across the boundary of what is generally regarded as acceptable scientific behaviour.

    Scientists — even climate scientists, Paltridge generously argues — are not generally “wicked, idiotic or easily suborned.” But they do have to eat, and almost all the research money right now is available for scientists pushing the alarmist side of the argument, not the skeptical one. Also, the whole field is mired in such uncertainty that is quite impossible for anyone — whether skeptic or alarmist — to prove their position.

    Climate research has to rely on spectacularly inaccurate data for information on Earth’s climate of more than a century or two ago; it has to rely on proxy information from tree rings and ice cores and corals and so on, and abstracting a coherent story from it all is something of a statistical nightmare. Even for the most recent century, the huge data sets of directly measured surface temperatures have their problems, and the stories that these data tell are revised in one way or another as new ideas about the correct method of analyzing the data appear on the scene. Such revisions make for tremendous arguments and competing claims about whether cherry picking of data has been used to support the predictions of the AGW theoretical models.

    Climate science is an example of what Funtowicz and Ravetz call ‘post-normal science’ in which ‘the facts are uncertain, values are in dispute, stakes are high and decisions are urgent’. In such circumstances it is virtually impossible to avoid sub-conscious cherrypicking of data to suit the popular theory of the time. Even Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were not immune from the problem.

    It is nonetheless the case that once freed of the burden of having to earn a living or retain their tenure in an academe in thrall to the man-made global warming narrative, scientists do seem much more ready to take a skeptical position:

    There are many examples where the transition from paid employment in climate research to retirement has been accompanied by a significant change of heart away from acknowledging the seriousness of global warming. It seems that scientists too are conscious of the need to eat, and like everyone else must consider the consequences of public dissent from the views of the powers-that-be. One example was Dr Brian Tucker. He was the Director of the Australian Numerical Meteorology Research Centre, and subsequently became Chief of the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research. He was heavily involved in the development of the IPCC. During his time with CSIRO he was the ‘go to’ man for journalists and radio programmers seeking stories on matters to do with climate change. On retirement he became a writer and speaker for the Institute of Public Affairs, and greatly surprised his former colleagues with his very public change to an openly sceptical view on the subject.
    Oldie84
    15th Oct 2018
    12:24pm
    All I want is for the Government to put the case to us i.e. what costs are involved. How will our Life style be affected. What will we pay for Electricity ( if it is available ), what will our Economy be, no growth/will it contract? There are so many questions and NO ONE will tell you the real story. I still have books warning of Global Cooling. Not one of the predictions has eventuated so far. Australia is only a tiny dot compared to China, India, the US et al. Germany imports its Electricity from France, generated by 80% Nuclear. What are the Subsidies we pay for our clean power. Are you prepared to give up driving your car or going on Holidays and Cruises. So many Questions and no answers.
    Rae
    15th Oct 2018
    1:14pm
    Yes Oldie. A decent energy policy that includes prices, reliability of supply and emissions seems beyond the ability of any of our Governments.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    1:34pm
    Just one international flight would produce more rubbish than we do here in a year.

    15th Oct 2018
    12:27pm
    INTERESTING THAT MANY CLIMATE SCIENTISTS, ONCE THEY NO LONGER RELY ON “TOEING THE PARTY LINE” ON CLIMATE SUDDENLY BECOME SKEPTICS!!
    Interesting that, once freed of the burden of having to earn a living or retain their tenure in an academe in thrall to the man-made global warming narrative, scientists do seem much more ready to take a skeptical position:

    There are many examples where the transition from paid employment in climate research to retirement has been accompanied by a significant change of heart away from acknowledging the seriousness of global warming.

    It seems that scientists too are conscious of the need to eat, and like everyone else must consider the consequences of public dissent from the views of the powers-that-be.

    One example was Dr Brian Tucker.

    He was the Director of the Australian Numerical Meteorology Research Centre, and subsequently became Chief of the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research.

    He was heavily involved in the development of the IPCC.

    During his time with CSIRO he was the “go to” man for journalists and radio programmers seeking stories on matters to do with “climatechange®”.

    On retirement he became a writer and speaker for the Institute of Public Affairs, and GREATLY SURPRISED HIS FORMER COLLEAGUES WITH HIS VERY PUBLIC CHANGE TO AN OPENLY SKEPTICAL VIEW ON THE SUBJECT!
    Lookfar
    15th Oct 2018
    12:44pm
    Jim, America is still the number one emitter of CO2, China is number two but is making strenuous efforts to reduce and claw back their emissions, so I don't think your' not admitting America is and has been for decades the number one CO2 villain is something your sources don't know about, more likely they are lying to you, as they have also lied to you about the political situation and the capability of Renewables.
    You have been a long time contributor to YLC, but though you have always been of the right wing Liberal persuasion, this latest post of yours puts you into la-la land, imho.
    The only thing you said that makes sense is that Politicians don't think beyond the next election.
    Please open your eyes and ears and look at what is happening all over the world, - sure there are extremists on the Climate change side, Global Warming directly threatens our grand children, some react very strongly to that, but the IPCC has always been very conservative, possibly a bit too conservative it seems now, but they are the accepted authority, so only quote them, the ratbags don't quote them, as it is too easy to be proved wrong if they do.
    As for Economics, Renewables generate jobs where there were none, on a massive scale, just get on the Internet and do some research :)
    Cheers, Geoff
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    1:59pm
    Whilst Australia is a low polluter we need to not only set an example but also set a standard. The rest will follow.
    Jim
    15th Oct 2018
    2:54pm
    So know the insults come from people that don’t look at others comments, so I will try and answer some of your criticisms, firstly I am not a right wing voter, right wingers follow the hard right of the LNP and the national party, but as a left wing troll you will put your own interpretation on any of my comments, I suggest you re read my comments, I do believe we have climate change and nothing I have said suggests in the slightest that I don’t believe in climate change, as for your comment on the US being the largest polluter I would suggest that China’s figures would be doctored, how would anyone know how much pollution the Chinese are putting into the atmosphere they are not exactly open with the rest of the world with their communication, you say my sources are lying to me, how would you know what my sources are, as for me being in La La land I think that’s a bit of calling the kettle black, my comments if you care to at them have put forward alternatives that are responsible, I agree with using renewables and we should be moving towards them as quickly as possible but not to the detriment of industry, yes give assistance to companies that are moving towards manufacture of renewables including supporting the hydro scheme if it proves achievable, amazingly the biggest producer of solar panels is China, so I am not sure how we are going to compete with them, lastly I don’t need to open my eyes and ears they are fully open, it’s people like you who are narrow minded and can’t look outside of the loony left and the crazy greens policy of destroying our industries with unachieveable solutions.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    3:55pm
    Hey mick, lookfar

    FYI: Colourless, odourless trace gas, plant food Carbon dioxide is NOT pollution!

    Don’t Ask Alarmist “Scientists” & activists. Why Trees Are Growing Much Faster
    http://tinyurl.com/bhjkh7w
    http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=5516

    STUDY: No access to Fossil Fuels causes millions of Premature Deaths Amongst Poorest http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/lack-of-access-to-fossil-fuels-causing.html?m=1

    BEWARE: MISANTHROPIC UN Aims To Ban Private Property & Create “Human Habitat Settlement Zones” thru #globalwarming FRAUD http://wp.me/p3Bc8A-Iw

    UN OFFICIAL ADMITS: We Redistribute World Wealth By Climate Policy http://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/shock-news-un-wants-to-ban-private-property-and-create-human-habitat-settlement-zones/

    IPCC’s Wild 1990 Predictions Started The globalwarming Scare
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/07/when-will-the-pause-in-global-temperature-return/
    KSS
    15th Oct 2018
    12:45pm
    "74 per cent said they were unhappy with the current Government’s stance on climate change"

    I would have thought this figure would have been higher considering the usual left wing bias and anti current government sentiment so prevalent on this site.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    12:47pm
    I am more than happy with the current government stance on climate change as I think it is just the current fad of which no one really knows what they are talking about. We are fools in a fools paradise relying on renewables for our power.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    12:56pm
    There are a lot of people commenting here today who I suspect have shares in the Fossil Fuel Industry.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    1:00pm
    Well get ready for a shock people, they next wave of young voters wholly believe in Climate Change, so governments of all persuasions had better get ready for them.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    1:03pm
    Yes Misty I fill my car up with a smile on my face these days with rising fuel prices.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    1:04pm
    Misty most young people don't give a rats about climate change.
    Rosret
    15th Oct 2018
    1:25pm
    Misty the younger generation waste like there is no tomorrow. They think saving the world is using a plastic bottle, made in a place far away, filled with water collected 2000km away and shipped to their local supermarket so they can then get 10c back by driving their car 10km to a deposit station.
    Its words and fads - but if it teaches them something about the world they will inherit that is great.
    Gosh, our scout's motto since the movement began was to leave the countryside as we found it - clean and safe.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    1:44pm
    Not true OG go to any university and ask the young future voters what they believe when it comes to Climate Change and you will see who is right, so fill up as much and as quickly as you can because your shares will be worth less in the future.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    2:00pm
    Misty you obviously have no idea about uni students at all. their latest fad happens to be climate change but what it will be next week is anyone's guess.

    I see lots of those electric charge stations and they people using them seem to be vandals. I haven't as yet actually seen an electric car on the road either.

    Guess what best performing shares at moment as oil shares too.

    So I'll just keep smiling.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    2:00pm
    KSS, Rosret - agreed
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    4:01pm
    "they next wave of young voters wholly believe in Climate Change"
    YEP they are being BRAINWASHED with "climatechange®" (aka "globalwarming®") junk science in our schools as we speak. Just look at the crazy curricula

    They won't be so happy once an undemocratic, unelected leftist/Marxist global govt is installed and they're stripped of all rights, private property, wealth etc and forced into human habitat settlement zones.

    But then it'll be too late.

    I'm glad I won't be around .....
    Rae
    16th Oct 2018
    8:59am
    The fear of Project 21 existed at the point the joys of globalisation were being done to death on school campus and in Unis. It hasn't worked out so well though. We are just too tribal and nationalistic to let the UN dictate. Even the EU is falling apart as it's economic policy fails it.

    Individual governments won't give up fiscal control to the group and without that the grand schemes of those bent on fascist control of the planet don't hold much sway.

    The coming debt crisis will slow things down a tad and increase nationalism which might be a saving grace in all this.

    15th Oct 2018
    1:00pm
    Mostly lefties on this site , so the poll results are unsurprising
    Rosret
    15th Oct 2018
    1:09pm
    What has been left or right got to do with climate issues?
    Everyone is concerned that our global population has reached a tipping point.
    All sides of politics are taking a sensible response to the issues as they emerge. Some are just OT and would bring the country to its knees before making logical decisions.

    We are a small nation and we can only be part of a global team. If anything we are guilty of outsourcing all our industry and therefore turning a blind eye to pollution the products we buy produce at the factory level.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    1:15pm
    The lefties are gullible - Greens and Labor have been dishing out the climate change fraud for decades to win votes
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    1:47pm
    Get in the real world olbaid, you and others with the same ideology are in the minority, THANK GOODNESS.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    1:49pm
    I am in the real world
    Then climate change warriors are the lemmings who blindly follow those pushing this agenda for political and economic gain

    Wake up Misty
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    1:59pm
    I live in the real world olbaid, I see how the climate has changed in my 81 years on this earth, how long have you been here?.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    2:01pm
    Hey guys.............olbaid is a fake. His posts are worthless and likely paid for.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    2:02pm
    Long enough Misty and I see no difference in temperatures since I was born
    You are gullible and swallow the crap the greenies and labor throw at you
    Wake up
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    2:07pm
    It is cooler today then when I was a kid. Oldies used to drop like flies in the heat in those days.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    2:11pm
    The only crap is what you post.
    Labor and Greens go off scientific evidence and research. You go off coal industry directives. There is a difference.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    3:29pm
    No I go off what I see.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    3:30pm
    "What has been left or right got to do with climate issues?"
    Hey Rosret ....

    EVERTHING!!

    The UN's "climatechange®" (aka "globalwarming®") is essentioally a leftist/warmist hoax, not because they "care for the environment" but because they love the "solutions" such as an unelected, undemocratic Marxist global govt, enforced human habitat settlement zones, abolition of private propery, wealth redistribution etc!!

    I'm not worried about a little global warming BUT I'm terrified of a world govt!
    Rosret
    15th Oct 2018
    1:01pm
    LOVCO2 has gone DOS again.
    The government must take care of the economy first and foremost. However there are initiatives to reduce CO2 emissions and if you look around it's happening everywhere.
    From your electric light bulb, the car, the thickness of plastic bottles, to smoke carcinogen emission.
    The one thing all intelligent adults, no matter what age, know is you can't throw the baby out with the bath water.
    It takes planning and government financial incentives for businesses to make better products.
    I don't think a lot of people realise how much more energy we use now than we did two to three decades ago.
    Schools are air conditioned and heated, shops have no windows, buildings are full of computers.
    Homes are automated and have giant TVs and fridges. The number of cars per household has more than doubled.
    Our clothing is made of fibres that are either to hot in summer or cold in winter and are disposable.
    We rarely drank from disposable bottles. We rarely used disposable nappies or ate takeaway.
    Sport was played in the daylight. Work started and finished for most in daylight hours.
    How many phones have you thrown out this decade? How many cameras or computers? Toys - billions of plastic battery run toys and the list goes on and on.

    So before people say - "they should" what really should be said is, - "we should".
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    1:06pm
    I have a reusable coffee cup and refillable bottle and have had for years now.
    KB
    15th Oct 2018
    1:44pm
    Well said Rosret We use a lot more plastic and technical gadgets. I live my life simply, Yes we all need take responsibility of what we use which means recycling thoughtfully and appropriately.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    1:53pm
    We only used disposable nappies - no need washing so I guess it balanced out

    I drink water from straight from the tap or via the fridge water dispenser

    Reuse the Voss glass bottles for water when I’m traveling
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    2:01pm
    Disposable nappies are terrible they take many years to break down in the garbage.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    2:03pm
    Yes Misty..........but olbaid is not the real McCoy. More like somebody on crack at Liberal Party HQ.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    2:23pm
    There was no way I was going to wash nappies or pay for someone to wash my kids nappies along with hundreds of other kids soiled nappies
    Disgusting and unhygienic
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    2:34pm
    Silliest excuse I have heard for not washing your children's nappies, NOT WANTING TO WASH YOUR OWN CHILD'S NAPPIES says a lot about you olbaid, so what do you do if they vomit on their clothing and bedding, as babies and young children do, put them in the rubbish?., the clothing not the children.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    2:37pm
    There are 2 new environmentally friendly products being developed, one is a vitamin enriched edible wrap, the other is edible rings on the top of 6 pack cans, that cannot cause harm to sea life.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    3:20pm
    Show how judgemnental and easily fooled you are with your greenie nonsense Misty

    I worked a full time job and had to bring up my kid on my own. Leave home at 7 and return at 6 driving through traffic

    Pick up the baby from childcare and look after him till the next morning. You try doing that and washing nappies etc.

    WHat a dumb nasty response from you
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    4:08pm
    Not dumb or nasty olbaid, I worked 9-3 at school and did 4-11PM in an aged care facility, shopped cooked and washed for my 4 children, nappies and dirty clothes too with no outside help so don't talk to me about how badly done you were, my friend brought up 10 children, they lived on a farm and did it rough, not much money, but she never complained, looked after all the children although one little girl died when she was 3, and helped on the property too with the help of her husband.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    4:14pm
    It's Ok if you chnose to live that lifestyle Misty, but I have better things to do with my time , and washing nappies aint one of them

    I had to study for my Masters Degree at night after feeding and bathing the baby.

    BTW your 4 kids and your friends 10 kids - you chose that lifestyle and ypu had help from your partner . I didnt
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    5:45pm
    You could say the same about you olbaidwe are not responsible for your lifestyle., we all have to live with the hand life deals us.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    5:49pm
    But I’m not the one posting nonsense about not using disposable diapers and climate change b/s
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    7:19pm
    You are posting b/s about Climate Change olbaid and disposable nappies are part of the problem, it is a fact that they take years to break down.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    7:24pm
    Nope - youre wrong . End of discussion
    Misty
    16th Oct 2018
    5:46pm
    You are the one that is wrong, olbaid, it takes between 200-500 years for disposable nappies to break down in landfill, polluting waterways in the process.
    Anonymous
    16th Oct 2018
    5:48pm
    Thats ok . My kid's nappies only has 170 - 470 years to go then

    It's like crop rotation, the older landfill from 200 years ago has come good, no need to worry with your greenie nonsense
    Linda
    15th Oct 2018
    1:06pm
    When the farmers who are often members of the National Party get on board, because they can see the benefits then the change will happen. I hope it is the one big issue that people will get behind and a good serious plan is put forward. I think Australia is more than ready to get into renewables. We can unleash a powerful innovation and it will give us all something we can do, that will really help.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    1:12pm
    Renewables have already failed us.
    Rae
    15th Oct 2018
    1:23pm
    Farmers are increasingly using solar now on farm buildings for power and especially solar pumps.

    I noticed quite a few new wind turbines just outside Wellington NSW recently. Great area for it and also there is a huge dam there as well.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    1:26pm
    Rae - these are probably subsidized at enormous cost to taxpayer
    Farmers just taking advantage of idiotic labor policies
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    1:29pm
    Farmers are using solar now for their own needs and extra revenue.

    Yes I know about that dam at Wellington which was built about 50 years ago now. It killed all the fish in the Macquarie River for decades and is now full of carp. It has been empty at least 3 times maybe more since it was built so it is no good during droughts at all. It is currently only about 20% so there is not much water available if any for irrigation with all the towns down stream relying on it for their town water.
    Rosret
    15th Oct 2018
    1:34pm
    Rae - wind turbines are horrible. The sooner they find another "green" alternative the better. The road from Sydney to Canberra makes me want to cry. It is a terrible blight on the landscape and who knows what damage the huge wing spans are doing to the prevailing winds and migratory birds. The poor people living close to them say they feel they are going crazy from the reverberation they cause.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    1:55pm
    There are 2 new products out now, one is an edible wrap with vitamins the other one is edible rings on 6 pack cans that will not harm the sea creatures, with inventions like this surely scientists can come up with other plastic alternatives.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    1:57pm
    They might have failed you OG but they haven't failed everyone.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    2:04pm
    I actually bought some bin liners that are biodegradable the other day only because they were the only ones that fitted my bin.

    I'll admit to having solar panels but batteries have a long way to go with the pay back on batteries that last 10 years at 37.5 years.
    MICK
    15th Oct 2018
    2:05pm
    Good post Linda. Quite correct.
    Perhaps the National Party will break ranks and throw in lots with Labor or the Greens when its members have years like the last 12 months. Personally what goes around comes around and the addiction to coal fired power may have come back to bite farmers and their party. I hope so.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    3:23pm
    " I think Australia is more than ready to get into renewables" Hey Linda FYI:

    Brutal Truth About“Clean”,“Green”Wind Power, Disastrous Pollution!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html

    Half-Truths, Lies & "climatechange®"
    http://www.thegwpf.com/doug-hoffman-half-truths-lies-climate-change/

    Attractiveness to leftists/warmists of any source of energy is inversely proportional to its readiness for cost-effective deployment at industrial scale

    Let’sCopy Germany: 23,000wind towers make 7%of its electricity to stop 0º Of Warming! http://joannenova.com.au/2013/08/lets-copy-germany-23000-wind-towers-make-7-of-its-electricity-to-stop-0-degrees-of-warming/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+JoNova+%28JoNova%29

    Germany’s Energy Poverty: How Electricity Became a Luxury Thanks to EXPENSIVE UNRELIABLE RENEWABLES.
    http://spon.de/ad1zw

    Warmists LIE about the reason for SOARING ELECTRICITY BILLS in the US as well http://junkscience.com/2014/12/14/utility-bills-skyrocket-to-support-wind-and-solar/

    Warmists LIE about reason for SOARING ELECTRICITY BILLS in the UK as well! pic.twitter.com/NaqhxHzp5g

    “Every 10 units of wind power installed has to be backed up with 8 units of Fossil Fuel Capacity”
    http://www.globalwarming.org/2014/12/02/eu-climate-policy-boomerangs-subsidizes-coal-gas/

    “carbon-free energy” dream creating an ecological catastrophe! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11718550/Why-are-greens-so-keen-to-destroy-the-worlds-wildlife.html
    Rae
    16th Oct 2018
    9:11am
    Thanks OG I didn't know that. I wondered why Wellington was a dying town. Thought it to do with the Prisons there. I remember it as a child being a vibrant centre and the dam fun for fishing and camping trips.
    Knight Templar
    15th Oct 2018
    2:54pm
    Jackie, Mick and Rosret. The IPCC's fears of climate change are even more overblown than their estimates of the sensitivity of the Earth's atmosphere to additional concentrations of greenhouse gases. Based on actual measured temperatures in relation to the past century's increase in greenhouse gas concentrations, it is evident that climate models grossly overestimate the impact of carbon dioxide and other hothouse chemicals on temperature.

    Additionally, claims of increasingly extreme weather or other catastrophes supposedly related to anthropogenic climate change are verifiably false as neither the amount or duration of extreme rainfall or drought events, nor the speed or amount of sea level rise, nor the number or power of hurricanes have demonstrably increased due to climate change over the past half century. What we do see is natural climate variability.

    There is no argument that the world is slightly warming - after all, we are still emerging from an ice-age.

    Marine Lieutenant Watkin Tench, who arrived with the First Fleet, maintained a daily journal between 1788 and 1793 when he departed for England. He recorded several occasions when the temperature exceeded 40 degrees Celsius notwithstanding the population of Port Jackson was about 1,200 Europeans and several hundred Aboriginals living around Sydney Harbour. No bitumen roads, few basic structures, no vehicles, a few farm animals, minimal development etc.

    It is beyond dispute that fossil fuels deliver affordable, plentiful, and reliable energy. Fossil fuels are closely associated with key measures of human development, human welfare and economic prosperity.

    Sea level rises have been imperceptible. Tuvalu and the Maldives were supposed to be under the waves by 2012 - they are not. The Himalaya's have not melted. The Arctic is still ice bound and not navigable in Summer ... despite predictions that it would be ice free by the Summer of 2012. Tim Flannery's predictions in 2007 that Australia's East coast would never again receive worthwhile rainfall - certainly insufficient to fill large dams, has been proven false. Britain continues to see snow in Winter time despite predictions made 18 years ago that snow would be an extremely rare event. There are many other examples of false predictions.

    Rather than your ad hominem attacks and non specific responses, I would suggest you address the points that I have raised.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    4:13pm
    How can it be natural or normal?, 50 years ago there were more forests, less people, less cattle, less cars,aeroplanes, boats, ships, factories spewing toxins into the air, less chemicals used in every day life, things are different now.
    Knight Templar
    15th Oct 2018
    5:01pm
    Misty ... There were even fewer people, fewer cattle, no cars, no aeroplanes, no fossil fuelled ships, factories, chemicals etc during the 1790's in Australia - yet we have documented evidence that 238 years ago temperatures up to the mid-40's Celsius and droughts were recorded in the vicinity of Sydney Harbour and a few kilometres inland towards Parramatta. How do you explain that?

    No one wants a polluted earth, but attempting to frighten people with false claims of climate Armageddon for political and propaganda purposes, needs to be called out!
    Greg
    15th Oct 2018
    7:47pm
    Knight Templar - I'll explain your temperature comment, obviously there were high temps years ago, just the same as there's very low temps now, however on average the temperatures have been rising. It's not just the temp, there's also the more erratic weather patterns, more intense storms, etc.
    pb tom
    15th Oct 2018
    3:40pm
    I see that August,
    September and October so far have been the coolest for many years.
    The "global warmers" have forgotten to mention that. Did the hole in the ozone level seal over or something ??
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    4:16pm
    Yep and scientists say, that in the next 100 years, the deserts will start to reforest again, as more rain falls on it.
    It's a natural cycle
    Greg
    15th Oct 2018
    7:59pm
    Keep up pb tom, it's not called 'global warming", it's "climate change".

    You bring up the same old comment about "it's the coolest for years" or "I remember it being hotter in 1972" and the like. Yes it was cold winter, was also a hot summer before, the point is though on average the temp has been rising over the years, have a look at a graph, it's just like the stock market, up,down,sideways but overall the trend is up.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    11:03pm
    Jeffrey Sachs on Q & A tonight with his story on Climate Change and a good discussion with the panel and audience.

    15th Oct 2018
    4:17pm
    Well, cut my legs off and call me Shorty. 1,859 people fill in a survey on a left leaning website, the results are cherry picked to suit the editors and we have the headline, "OLDER AUSTRALIANS SAY THEY WILL VOTE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE! Give me a break.
    roy
    15th Oct 2018
    6:46pm
    Hear hear.
    Misty
    16th Oct 2018
    12:22am
    You can have a break any time you like Old Man, we don't mind.
    travelman
    15th Oct 2018
    4:27pm
    Climate change, Our climate is changing and anyone who thinks it isn't should take a good look around. Read what is happening around our world particularly North and South Poles. The big question is, WHAT IS CAUSING IT? Well I believe there are two things - the first is the natural process of evolution, (I am not talking Darwinism here) this slow process is normal and no one should be concerned by it. The other, however, we should be concerned about for it is us, what we have doing and continue to do -that is the real destruction of the world as our habitat. As a species of this planet we are more destructive than nature. We have damaged this planet more than all the earthquakes, volcanic eruptions put together. Our planet recovers quickly from those events but not so quickly with what we do.
    Let us consider that for a moment - If you have seen that documentary, 'The World Viewed from outside', you will see how beautifully complex our planet is. Everything of nature interacts in an incredible way. An example is the jungle of the Amazon and the Sahara desert, both on opposite sides of the planet. Yet, the Sahara, is nothing but sand (which is not true) it is really very fine fragments of sea creatures that lived in the Sahara when it was an ocean. Those fine fragments are scooped up, at a certain time of the year, the same time every year, by strong atmospheric currents and carried around the world to the Amazon jungle and deposited like fine silt. It is this that causes the jungle to grow and grow prolifically. Because of this the trees produce vast amounts of the 'stuff' we breath, oxygen, and the same time absorbing our carbon. But we are blatantly silly and ignorant, we are frantically chopping the trees down denuding the jungle. But we don't stop there, we are frantically doing it around the world. We need air to live and need more and more of it as population growth continues to increase. Not clever, we destroy the facility of trees that provide us with air to breath.
    But our stupidity doesn't stop there. Since the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century we have been successful in other ways destroy ourselves, the rest of creation and the very planet we walk on. From the first we produced gunpower and made guns of metal that with the aid of gunpowder were able to launch other pieces of mental at high speed to kill one another. We did not stop there - we improve and yet improved more so that we, gleefully, could kill larger numbers of people in an instant. Now, we are so obsessed with killing we can kill thousands and a whole city in a matter of minute. I could not hazard a guess at the amount of bombs that have been dropped on our planet and the amount of unexploded bombs that are hidden in our earth just waiting for one foot of a child to cause it to explode or one depth charge or one mine that sits on the floor of the ocean just waiting....
    We are so clever, that we have many, many more delights we can use to damage our world and destroy all the other creatures that inhabit it. Do we or our government have and moral conscience left to stop what we are doing? Our great Barrier Reef is very close to disappearing for ever and our government does almost nothing about it, we even less. The management of our waste has now become critical - still nothing done. The use of coal or the sale of coal to another nation to help us to pollute our atmosphere with poison, will take years to get rid if we can do it at all. When I was child in England, everyone was burning coal at home or in industry. There were many times 'smog' the smoke that we sent into our atmosphere, came down and covered our land. Our eyes were red and sore, our lungs were choked by this poison smog and we could hardly along our roads for fear of collisions. This was not a once rare occasion but may time times in a year. I am not surprised that England and Europe, 28 nations have pledged to remove all uses of coal forever.
    Last, a warning, a very real and unchangeable warning. Whether you believe in climate change or not, does not matter. If we destroy our world, making it unable to support life, we are doomed. WE HAVE NO WAY OF LEAVING THIS PLANET TO GO TO ANOTHER. THERE IS NOT ONE HUMAN BEING WHO CAN LEAVE THIS PLANET TO GO TO ANOTHER PROBALLY NOT FOR AT LEAST 100 YEARS. We just don't have the scientific knowledge or the ability to put it into practice or a planet to live on
    McGroger
    15th Oct 2018
    4:38pm
    And then there’s the attitude taken by the leaders of NZ, whose contribution to greenhouse gases is about one eighth of Australia’s…

    James Shaw, climate change minister:
    “Tally up the 90-odd nations contributing less than 1 per cent of emissions and you reach almost a third of the global total – larger than China or the US.”

    And Todd Muller, Shaw’s opposition number:
    “An issue like this is something the whole world has to grapple with.”

    [https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/jaw-dropping-new-zealand-offers-lessons-in-tackling-climate-change-20181012-p509di.html]
    Jason
    15th Oct 2018
    6:25pm
    I am heartened by the good common sense of YLC's subscribers. We need politicians to know their topic and take their advice from trained professionals, not following an ideology and being subservient to fossil fuel industries. Similarly, not to be silly enough to take advice and opinion from those spouting with no credible science support in the world. Even for one who has no science training, the evidence is apparent now just looking out the window, and regrettably the changes that are coming to our environment will not be linear. There is a real danger now, since action should have commenced decades ago, that we will struggle to limit the damage and suffering. It is highly probable that the IPCC special report is conservative. It's assessments certainly have been in the past.
    There is an election coming. Use it wisely, and vote for those politicians who will develop a credible climate and energy policy that will protect ourselves and safeguard our children's and their children's future.
    The little bit of rising carbon dioxide levels may not seem like much, but it has the effect of throwing an extra blanket over the planet. The warmer air holds more water vapour and energy ( basic high school physics) and we will see more intense storms and floods but also longer periods of drought and higher temperatures. Higher rainfall totals will be useless to farmers when rain becomes more unpredictable and spasmodic. Our farmers on the land are seeing the effects up front and personal.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    6:47pm
    Try telling that to the disbelievers commenting here, they don't care as they will be long gone from this world when reality hits, as long as their shares in the Fossil Fuel Industry are doing ok that is all they care about.
    Old Geezer
    15th Oct 2018
    7:31pm
    I'm doing my bit for CO2 levels by having nice warm wood fires in the winter. So much cheaper than any other heating and so much nicer too.
    arbee
    15th Oct 2018
    6:25pm
    Nothing is surprising about your poll. 85% of the people responding to your articles are left wing, so 74% is not as good as you would have liked to have got for this poll.
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    6:52pm
    Maybe 85% of the Australian population are left wingers as you like to call them arbee, did you ever think of that?, the Wentworth election next Saturday is going to be interesting and anyway judging from the comments at the beginning of this topic the majority of them commentating must be right wingers I would say.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    6:56pm
    i bet an I.Q test of the members would show a similar percentage of lower IQ to those with above average - *5 % v 15 % I should think
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    7:25pm
    And where would you place yourself olbaid?, from the nonsense you comment here and other posts I could say where but I am too polite to do that and I don't presume to judge people I don't personally know.
    Anonymous
    15th Oct 2018
    7:28pm
    How rude !!!. My I.Q is 148
    Misty
    15th Oct 2018
    9:40pm
    How can we believe you?, anyone can say their I.Q is whatever they want, how can anyone know for sure?.
    ardnher
    18th Apr 2019
    4:38pm
    Alberta Canada has just kicked out the mob who brought in carbon taxes...people could not afford the high costs and voted them out. "take note before you vote"

    "Alberta will become the fifth out of Canada's 10 provinces to oppose a carbon tax, indicating the scale of the challenge for Trudeau's Liberals ahead of the October general election. Three provinces are suing the federal government over the levy. “The carbon tax is all economic pain and no environmental gain.14 hours ago"

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-politics-alberta-carbon/new-leader-of-canadas-alberta-province-chips-away-at-trudeaus-green-plan-idUSKCN1RT214?il=0