Is this the mathematical proof that the Global Warming Scare is falsified?
The math used to project the potential warming of the atmosphere by the IPCC is WRONG. The warming at worst will be mild and beneficial.
2.25° increase for a doubling of CO2 will keep our climate in a nice “Goldilocks” temperature range.
Can we now please get back to worrying about real problems instead of fake ones? And, stop wasting billions of $$ on a non problem.
RGB
50% faster than it was???? Apparently not.
Update to the sea level “catastrophe” in Kiribati.
The trend is reducing year by year. There has been essentially no sea level rise since 2001. 16+ years with no increase in sea level in Kiribati.
RGB
“Expecting a different result from doing the same thing over and over is actually a form of insanity.”
Keep supporting political parties that continuously disrupt and damage our electricity sector by lying about the benefits, and they will keep doing the same thing. Their talk is cheap. The outcomes of their actions stand in direct conflict with what they promise.
The promise of cheaper electricity over the years was, and still is, a LIE.
This from South Australian Labor’s 2014-2018 plan.
“Labor deregulated the energy market to increase competition and help to push down prices. As a result, people on a standing contract with AGL and Origin Energy have received an average $180 yearly reduction to their power prices.
Independent modelling has predicted that residential power prices in South Australia will fall during the next three years for households which have switched to a market offer. The Australian Market Energy Commission (AMEC)
analysis shows prices falling by an annual average of 0.9 per cent over three years.South Australia is one of only two states that AMEC predicts will average a decline in electricity prices. Labor will continue to find ways to help people meet the cost of energy.”
I know my electricity bill has only ever gone up from 2004. (except when the kids left home. Halved the bill that year from less usage).
The Labor government’s incompetence with regard to energy policy is astounding. If we had never engaged in the installation of windmills in SA, we would not have the dearest electricity in the developed world. We would have had regular supply of electricity at a more reasonable price.
“The closure of the Northern Power Station, which followed the withdrawal of capacity at the Pelican. Point Power Station in 2015, has created a tighter supply-demand balance in South Australia. While there is sufficient firm capacity to meet peak demand during winter without reliance on the Heywood inter-connector, the inter-connector may need to be relied upon to meet peak demand during summer, should wind-powered generation be unavailable.”
Wind generation has made our electricity more expensive. Wind generation has made our electricity supply less reliable.
“The mix of generation plant in South Australia has also changed markedly in recent years. Wind powered generation has displaced coal-fired generation, making the state more reliant on gas-fired generation to meet base load demand. The wholesale cost of gas has increased significantly, making gas-fired generation more expensive. While wind-powered generation has, in itself, put downward pressure on spot prices, it has driven out less expensive forms of generation and contributed to more volatile spot price outcomes. Wind generation is not firm due to its intermittency and retailers therefore cannot obtain firm hedge products from it. This is contributing to the further reduction in availability of forward contracts, which has been an issue in South Australia since at least 2007-08.”
Wind generation has made the wholesale electricity market more volatile.
“The spot price of electricity in South Australia has increased significantly since the closure of Northern Power Station on 9 May 2016.”
Labor is now going to install diesel generators to supply our electricity over the peak summer demand. What happened to our “oh so green government”. Can you actually believe this?
They even had the opportunity to delay some of these outcomes, by keeping the Northern operational for another 3 years. Whetherill chose not to.
Now we are going to have a solar plant at great cost and with no regular supply. See JoNova Their pride, arrogance, and or incompetence is astounding. Re-newables (along with privatisation) got us into this mess and they think that re-newables will get us out of it?
RGB
Was talking to a friend the other day, and she asked whether I believed in Climate Change. I responded with, “science is not about belief, but about facts”. Then she used the “Denier” term in respect to Climate Change facts. I promised to share some facts with her.
Here ya go Amy.
Fact 1
It is not actually possible to measure the earths temperature. Let alone compare current temperatures to past temperatures to get accurate global trends. There is insufficient weather stations in some key locations, like Africa, the Arctic, the Antarctic, and oh yes, the oceans. The oceans are kinda catered for but the rest are typically “infilled” with data (guestimated?). There has also been changes to the number of, and the locations of measuring stations as well as varying methods of recording. Probably the best method we have to measure the earth’s temperature are the satellites. But these only cover the last 37 years, and have a few minor issues of there own.
Fact 2
Temperature data may not be what you think it is. Station siting in once rural areas and now in growing urban areas are affected by UHI. Homogenised data sets can be quite different from the raw data, creating different trends than were originally indicated.
Records in the US and Australia have had their past temperatures predominantly reduced, producing long term warming trends where there was little or none in the original records. I have seen direct evidence of this in the Adelaide record, and in NOAA data.
Fact 3
Every prediction/projection from Climate Scientists and promoters of CAGW has not been realised. The Arctic has not melted away. The Polar bears are increasing in population. The temperature has not risen as stated by the IPCC. The seas have not risen catastrophically. Storms have not gotten worse. There are no climate refugees. Australia and Texas are no longer in “permanent drought”. Crop yields have increased around the world. The Antarctic has been growing in ice. Standard of living has increased in the vast majority of countries. Children still know what snow is.
Fact 4
Sea levels around the world vary in their rates of rise (or fall). Long term gauges average 1.5mm rise per year. Global sea levels starting rising 200 to 300 years ago, with yearly trends of 1.35mm and less than 1mm (dependant on which study). The satellite record for sea level indicates about 3mm per year since 1993. There is a disconnect between gauges and satellite results. Satellite data indicates a rate much higher than the average of tide gauges. All stated rates are far below what the IPCC has forecast.
Fact 5
Storms are not increasing in number or severity. No increase trend in accumulated cyclone energy. There has been a decrease in overall cyclones. The number of US tornadoes are not increasing. Cat 3 and above tornadoes have a decreasing trend.
Fact 6
Arctic ice has been reducing in area since 1979, however the satellite record prior to 1979 is never published on line by NASA, and shows ice area peaked in 1979 and had been much less in the years before. Not too dissimilar to the current levels.
Fact 7
Antarctic ice and Greenland snow and ice have been increasing over the satellite record.
Fact 8
The ice cores show that CO2 predominantly increases after the temperature. Mostly after 800 years. The science of ice core analysis is problematic and the CO2 concentrations in the ice core may not be representative of CO2 in the atmosphere, over the noted history.
Fact 9
The current CO2 data from Mauna Loa has been tacked onto CO2 data from the ice cores producing one long record, however, as stated above the ice core gasses may not be directly comparable to real world measurements. There is also a historical gap of 83 years which was erased to connect the two data sets, to form one continuous record. The Keeling curve.
Fact 10
Climate models predicted a “hot spot” in the atmosphere due to CO2 warming. This hot spot has never been observed.
Fact 11.
It is not possible to directly attribute any weather event or warming episode over short or long periods solely or even partially to CO2. There are too many variables influencing weather and climate to make clear connections.
Fact 12.
The projected temperature rise per the IPCC model mean, is currently much higher and diverging from both satellite records.
Fact 13.
The reported rise in global temperature from NOAA since 1880 is about 0.8°C. That is all.
Fact 14.
The reported rise in temperature from NOAA/NCDC from 1960 to 2017(blamed on AGW) is within 0.1°C of being the same as the temperature rise from 1910 to 1941(apparently natural causes)
Fact 15.
The yearly error bars on the NOAA/NCDC global temperature data set prior to 1952 is 0.4°C. Half of the reported total rise.
Fact 16.
The survey purporting to the 97% consensus has been found to be flawed statistically, and in methodology.
Fact 17.
Fact 18.
Cold kills far more people than heat.
Fact 19.
The IPCC is a UN body chartered with the task of gathering evidence to support the theory of AGW, and to recommend policy to governing bodies around the world. It is not chartered to gather any evidence that does not support the theory of AGW.
Fact 20.
CO2 is not listed as a pollutant on the Australian or US government pollutants list. It is however, plant food.
In closing.
This list of facts that bring into question the authenticity of the CAGW theory is by no means complete. There is much more. And more in this video.
But given just this information above, it is difficult to imagine that the science of AGW, CAGW, Climate Change, or Climate Disruption, is so settled. Science by definition is never “settled”, and it is never agreed on by “consensus”. Even if CO2 does have a net warming effect on the earth, it appears that it is not as much as stated by the IPCC, and it appears not to be catastrophic. Any additional warmth appears to have had far more benefits than any of the projected negatives.
There also appears to be some heavy bias in the “climate” community towards the AGW theory. Ommition, mirepresentation, and alteration of information and data which would bring into question the AGW theory is common. Funding and research is popular for any AGW supported area, while any other climate research not supporting AGW is either not funded, or obfuscated, or outright rejected in peer review.
So
Should I believe in Climate Change?
If I did, I might be denying much more than just a scientific theory.
Facts are pesky little buggers, arn’t they.
RGB
Not only are South Australians to put up with the lights going our regularly, but when the lights are on, we are to pay through the nose for it.
Businesses and Industries are shutting down or moving out because costs are too high making them unprofitable. Energy debt is on the rise, and is a contributing factor in homelessness, either from loss of employment and or inability to pay energy bills.
How is South Australia supposed to be be economically viable with energy costs like this?
The private ownership of our electricity operations and the “green dream” of inefficient and unreliable wind mills and solar panels is destroying our industries. Erasing our jobs, and eroding our standard of living. Won’t be long before we are living in the new “Dark Ages”.
Here’s an idea. Why not match our energy production methods with the two biggest industrial countries in the world.
Both nations use more coal, gas and nuclear. The contribution of wind to their grids is less than 10%, while ours is over 30%.
Why not ask your local MP why we have to pay so much for our electricity, contributing to our businesses and industries shutting down.
If you don’t want to be like my friend above living in the dark ages, then maybe you should ask your state MP what they plan to do about it.
RGB
Remember when SA had a water crisis? The drought was never going to end. Global Warming had dried up all of the water. The dams were nearly empty. Even the mighty Murray river was looking a little worse for wear. Supposed learned people like Tim Flannery were sprouting “gloom and doom” re our water resources. “never going to rain again” I think he said.
Water restrictions were put in place, but that was never going to be enough for such a “serious and permanent crisis”. That’s what we were told.
A desalination plant was the only answer for “water security”. WA had one. Queensland and NSW were building them, and Victoria was about to start one as well. (the Taswegians were too busy playing with their hydro power to worry about such things. Our leaders love a crisis to “fix”. So in grand style they decided to spend all of our money to fix it. Not to worry about the fact that droughts have always happened, and they also happen to always end too. So how much did all this cost? Not that much.
So, how much drought is there in SA, or Australia for that matter?
Here is the state of drought in Australia for the 12 months ending March 2017.
The last 12 months has seen the end of drought in the entire continent of Australia. So much for those “never going to rain again” predictions. Tim Flannery has a lot to answer for. Should send him the bill for the current ongoing cost of the Desal plant.
Now, apparently we have another crisis in SA in which we need,
“Energy Security” .
I kid you not. This time however our leaders have created the crisis themselves, by subsidising unreliable solar and wind, and at the same time helping to make reliable (and cheap) energy production less viable.
Would you trust this government to fix a problem they created?
Would you trust this government to fix the energy crisis in a similar way to the water crisis?
Because effectively, this is exactly what they are proposing to do. Implementing a fix based on green propaganda, unproven technology and unproven scientific theory.
$550 million is the initial cost for another power station and a “big battery”. The cost of which will no doubt be passed on to us via electricity price hikes or taxes, or even council rates. Guess who will also pay for the ongoing costs too! Soon we will all be in financial crisis!
Here is just one more example of the ludicrous nature of the system we have been given. Just the other day our wonderful wind turbines were producing so much “free” electricity, that Aemo instructed one of the gas fired generators to stay on line for “grid stability”. So we get cheap electricity from the wind mills, but still have to pay for the gas fired generator!!!!! What is the point of having the wind mills if we still have to run the other generators?????? Tom Koutsantonis must have been proud that he helped avoid another crisis”!
Call or write your SA representative now to voice your opposition to this pointless and expensive initiative. Help save SA from energy poverty. We need an economically viable and pragmatic fix to our energy needs. Not another “green fantasy” crisis fix.
RGB
See what happens when the mind of a liberal suddenly realises the truth.
RGB
Former Greenpeace founder speaks about his journey through life and the corruption of the environmental movement and climate change. He explains why C02 is good for the earth and good for us.
RGB
Old wives tale #2. (I love this one!)
Wearing glasses makes your eyes worse?
If I had a dollar for every time some one asked me this question, I would have retired 20 years ago and would have lived in every tropical paradise in the world.
But, before I get carried away with the drama and the rhetoric, lets just take a deep breath and establish a few facts first. The key to finding out the truth, is to ask the right questions. Ask the right questions, and you will get to the information to establish some truth(most of the time).
Question 1. (This one to ask yourself) Did my eyes get worse first, or did I wear glasses first?
Answer : 99% of the time, it is yes “my eyes got worse before I got spectacles”, as logic would ordinarily dictate.
Question 2. (This one also for yourself) If I don’t wear my glasses for a week or two, do my eyes get better?
Answer : Mostly, “my eyes do get a little better, but I still have to wear my specs to see clearly.” The reason this happens is that the muscles go back to “straining” to see more clearly, so you do see a bit better, but it is not ideal to be stressing your eyes for any length of time. It is not their natural state.
Question 3. (The real question) Why is it that my eyesight gets worse as I get older?
Answer : Hmmm. A bit complicated. But here it goes.
As we age our muscles deteriorate, including the muscles in our eyes. This means they are less able to cope with correcting any pre-existing (usually minor) focusing errors in the eye, as well as not being able to flex enough to focus our eyes for near vision. For anyone to see clearly up close, the eye muscles have to do some work. So, just as it gets harder to “run” a marathon or lift heavy weights as we get older, so it is also harder to be able to focus up close as we age.
Also, the crystalline lens inside our eye tends to get harder and less flexible as we age, so is less able to “flex up” to focus at a close distance.
Question 4. Will I eventually go blind? Haha. The short answer is …..NO. This is a near focussing issue with the eye muscles and the slight hardening of the crystalline lens, not to do with any major deterioration of the critical parts of the eye.
Here is the clincher that should put any doubts to rest. If, as you think, your specs have made your eyesight worse, then that would mean that it would be possible to change your eyesight with glasses.
Spectacles designed to make your eyesight better?
Clearly, that is just not possible (pun intended).
Ps. I am able to write this blog because I use spectacles to see clearly, in spite of my age.
Pps. The information is true for the vast majority of people, however, all is not known about how the eyes develop and change as we grow and age. Research is ongoing. There are some individual cases and some weird effects that do happen. If anyone has examples, please share in the comments.
RGB
Disclaimer: This information is of a general nature and not intended to be specific advice for any one individual. As always, if you have a issue with your vision, consult a qualified Optometrist/Optician.
