Australian Bushfires

[Milo]

MMGW denial is all about avoiding the main point of it, IT'S BAD TO POLUTE!

[Doc]

Again all known mass extinction events on earth are due to it getting too cold, not too hot.

Are you sure?...

Yes. There may have been a gamma ray extinction several 100 millions years ago. Meteors played a part but the biggest long term effect was global winter. But since the earth cooled off from its collision with Theia and the great bombardments there is little evidence that the earth got so hot it was unliveable

That view is far too smug for my liking.

Even if the current spate of global warming does not cause mass extinction as you allege: the change in climate and rainfall patterns; the disruption of agriculture, trade etc resulting from it is likely to make it impossible for planet Earth to sustain its present 7.5 billion plus human population resulting in an unprecedented "cull". Accompanying the cull will of course be attempted mass-migrations of desperate refugee populations; widespread international and domestic conflict as peoples battle over dwindling resources.

Global warming means the rain belts on either side of the equator would be pushed closer to the poles. Much of the earth's arable land is currently frozen. Most people don't realize the the holy lands portrayed in biblical moves were not parched semi deserts at the time of Christ. They were filled with lush forests back then. That didn't change due to global warming It changed because the Romans cut them down.

What's more saying my answer is smug is an implicit admission on your part that you do not have anything more than short term evidence that Man made global warming is happening. And that is based on the theory that CO2 does indeed cause global warming. Even though the historical record indicates that CO2 follows, not precedes a rise in warming.

And what is the suggested cure for MMGW? Force the impoverishment of the 99%. IE A new dark age. An end of technological advancement due to extremist regulations and laws to prevent it.

What happened during the middle ages? Technological advancement came to pretty much a complete halt in Europe.

Technological advance is moving forward at an ever increasing pace. If you have a problem all you have to do is wait a little while and it will be solved.

The United States is currently the only developed country to meet the Kyoto accords on CO2 emissions. Largely because of FRACKING natural gas and using it to generate electricity.

The World should enter nothing less than a renewed Dark Ages: the difference being that while the previous Dark Ages were largely confined to Europe in the wake of the collapse of the western Roman Empire (civilization still prospered further east in places like the Byzantine Empire; Persia, India and China); this new Dark Ages is likely to engulf the whole world and last for millennia rather than for just a few centuries.

Already drought prone regions like Australia and Africa's Sahel region are like the global warming equivalent of canaries down the coal mine. But whereas out here in Oz we are presently only battling bushfires, in the Sahel of northern sub-Sahara Africa increasingly unfavourable climatic conditions are already year by year driving out millions of climate change refugees who mainly try to make the desperate trip across the Sahara and the Mediterranean to the promised land of Europe - the most accessible region of the World capable of offering them a livelihood and something of a future. The cull has already begun in one or two regions like that. Try to imagine that multiplied across the face of the Earth.

FACT: The Amazon rain forest is the key element in determining how much rain sub Sahara Africa gets annually. Cut down the Amazon and large portions of Africa go without much rain.

With 7.5 billion and still counting planet Earth has already been perched on that precipice of catastrophe for years. It won't take much more stress to push it over the edge.

I question just how much we can rely on past historical information on this matter to guide us.

"It won't take much stress to push it over the edge" -- Purely an emotional argument.

"just how much we can rely of past historical information on this matter to guide us"

Is that an admission that you choose to make up your own facts to guide the entire human race?

[neverfail]

Global warming means the rain belts on either side of the equator would be pushed closer to the poles.

It means that the earth's tropical deserts expand at the expense of the higher rainfall zones adjacent on either side. Are you aware that before the most recent spate of global warming that came during the millennia corresponding with the melting of the great northern ice sheets that marked the end of the last Ice Age where the Sahara is now was covered by a lush tropical savanna prodigious with wildlife? Among other evidence he paleolithic and early neolithic hunter-gatherers who lived there left behind ample cave paintings of the herds of animals as pictorial evidence.

Most people don't realize the the holy lands portrayed in biblical moves were not parched semi deserts at the time of Christ. They were filled with lush forests back then. That didn't change due to global warming It changed because the Romans cut them down.

In Galilee where the rainfall is a little better (adjacent to Lebanon where cedar forests grew in the high mountains) there was very likely forested country. But in the Negev south of Beersheba it would have been treeless desert country at the time of Christ just as now. Israel from south to north has always been a climactic/environmental zone of transition that way.

What's more saying my answer is smug is an implicit admission on your part that you do not have anything more than short term evidence that Man made global warming is happening.

That looks like tit-for-tat, reactive "shoot the messenger " stuff Doc. Don't take it so personally.

And what is the suggested cure for MMGW? Force the impoverishment of the 99%. IE A new dark age. An end of technological advancement due to extremist regulations and laws to prevent it.

Preposterous. Where did I advocate anything of the sort? (See my second last entry to this post for a suggested solution and why the USA is likely to miss out).

What happened during the middle ages? Technological advancement came to pretty much a complete halt in Europe.

You mistake the Dark Ages for the Middle Ages. The Middle ages were the centuries of Europe's rebirth/recovery following on from the Dark Ages hiatus and were a time of renewed innovation.

Technological advance is moving forward at an ever increasing pace. If you have a problem all you have to do is wait a little while and it will be solved.

Technological progress is a characteristic of countries with rising fortunes and are a bi-product of that, not necessarily a root cause. Countries with stagnant or declining fortunes tend to "cling to what they have' and are notably suspicious of novelty and resistant to change. Spengler has written several times of the amounts of money being poured into R & D in the PRC compared with the tardy performance of the USA in recent times.

The United States is currently the only developed country to meet the Kyoto accords on CO2 emissions. Largely because of FRACKING natural gas and using it to generate electricity.

That's for NOW and more by grace of God than American innovation (recalling that fracking was invented in Canada). The USA just happened to have the hydrocarbon rich shale beds in its subsoil located conveniently close to existing networks of gas pipelines to carry the stuff to market. No country, not even Canada, has had such a shale fracking boom since as conditions prevailing elsewhere do not make fracked shale gas a profitable paying proposition.

The apparent blessing of plentiful supplies of shale methane gas to generate electric power may in the long run turn into a curse. It has lowered the cost of energy in North America to the point where it has made green energy such as solar and wind sub-economic - so no investment there. By contrast here in natural gas rich Australia where our governments state and Federal between them have made a muddle of this country's energy policy (creating shortfalls for the domestic market) electric energy prices are very high - so there is an investment boom taking place in solar power and wind turbines to replace fossil fuels which now defines where our future electrical energy supplies are coming from.

Significantly, the low-cost solar panels we are installing in our solar-electric farms are being imported from the PRC; where they have been developed and are now being manufactured; not from the USA. Also a sign of the times and a pointer to the future. When the US exhausts its supply of fracked shale gas in about 20 to 30 years time it is likely to find itself such with an enormous energy crisis having failed to invest in renewables and also a technological backwater having failed to match the PRC and others in the innovation of renewables technology.

Is that an admission that you choose to make up your own facts to guide the entire human race?

No, I do not make up facts. I publish an OPINION based on the facts at my disposal.

I may add more later.

[cassowary]

Nerfail,

I think the “boom” in renewables in Australia is the result of Mandatory Renewable Energy Targets. This forces energy retailers to source renewable energy. 20% renewables by 2020.

I don’t know if renewables are competitive if there is a free market. No subsidies for anybody. Consumers are free to choose between fossil fuels and renewables.

I suspect renewables are not competitive or there will be NO need for a mandatory target.

Australia has a central electric grid controlled by the government and that means politics will come in. The result is the usual tussle between greenies and the fossil fuel industry.

[cassowary]

https://www.euractiv.com/section/climat ... udy-finds/

There is a reason why. Green energy is expensive. That’s why you got the Yellow Jacket Protest in Paris.

If green energy is cheap, everybody will go for it.

[Jim the Moron]

". . . fracking was invented in Canada . . ." (neverfail) ??

By whom? When? Or is this just another of your made-up "facts?"

[Doc]

Global warming means the rain belts on either side of the equator would be pushed closer to the poles.

It means that the earth's tropical deserts expand at the expense of the higher rainfall zones adjacent on either side. Are you aware that before the most recent spate of global warming that came during the millennia corresponding with the melting of the great northern ice sheets that marked the end of the last Ice Age where the Sahara is now was covered by a lush tropical savanna prodigious with wildlife? Among other evidence he paleolithic and early neolithic hunter-gatherers who lived there left behind ample cave paintings of the herds of animals as pictorial evidence.

Most people don't realize the the holy lands portrayed in biblical moves were not parched semi deserts at the time of Christ. They were filled with lush forests back then. That didn't change due to global warming It changed because the Romans cut them down.

In Galilee where the rainfall is a little better (adjacent to Lebanon where cedar forests grew in the high mountains) there was very likely forested country. But in the Negev south of Beersheba it would have been treeless desert country at the time of Christ just as now. Israel from south to north has always been a climactic/environmental zone of transition that way.

What's more saying my answer is smug is an implicit admission on your part that you do not have anything more than short term evidence that Man made global warming is happening.

That looks like tit-for-tat, reactive "shoot the messenger " stuff Doc. Don't take it so personally.

And what is the suggested cure for MMGW? Force the impoverishment of the 99%. IE A new dark age. An end of technological advancement due to extremist regulations and laws to prevent it.

Preposterous. Where did I advocate anything of the sort? (See my second last entry to this post for a suggested solution and why the USA is likely to miss out).

It is inherent in your claims of impeding doom, and insistence of immediate action, based on dubious facts, without offering any constructive solutions.

What happened during the middle ages? Technological advancement came to pretty much a complete halt in Europe.

You mistake the Dark Ages for the Middle Ages. The Middle ages were the centuries of Europe's rebirth/recovery following on from the Dark Ages hiatus and were a time of renewed innovation.

Technological advance is moving forward at an ever increasing pace. If you have a problem all you have to do is wait a little while and it will be solved.

Technological progress is a characteristic of countries with rising fortunes and are a bi-product of that, not necessarily a root cause. Countries with stagnant or declining fortunes tend to "cling to what they have' and are notably suspicious of novelty and resistant to change. Spengler has written several times of the amounts of money being poured into R & D in the PRC compared with the tardy performance of the USA in recent times.

And insisting that what powers technological advance be greatly reduced IE Electric power gets us what exactly other than a retreat into a new "dark Age"?

As far as China is concerned the CCP is giving lip service to "Global Warming" While at the same time building coal fired power plants at a rapid pace that has never been seen before.

The United States is currently the only developed country to meet the Kyoto accords on CO2 emissions. Largely because of FRACKING natural gas and using it to generate electricity.

That's for NOW and more by grace of God than American innovation (recalling that fracking was invented in Canada). The USA just happened to have the hydrocarbon rich shale beds in its subsoil located conveniently close to existing networks of gas pipelines to carry the stuff to market. No country, not even Canada, has had such a shale fracking boom since as conditions prevailing elsewhere do not make fracked shale gas a profitable paying proposition.

Much of Europe has underlaying reserves of frackable Natural Gas. West Europe has for the most part made it illegal to tap into it.

The apparent blessing of plentiful supplies of shale methane gas to generate electric power may in the long run turn into a curse. It has lowered the cost of energy in North America to the point where it has made green energy such as solar and wind sub-economic - so no investment there. By contrast here in natural gas rich Australia where our governments state and Federal between them have made a muddle of this country's energy policy (creating shortfalls for the domestic market) electric energy prices are very high - so there is an investment boom taking place in solar power and wind turbines to replace fossil fuels which now defines where our future electrical energy supplies are coming from.

Significantly, the low-cost solar panels we are installing in our solar-electric farms are being imported from the PRC; where they have been developed and are now being manufactured; not from the USA. Also a sign of the times and a pointer to the future. When the US exhausts its supply of fracked shale gas in about 20 to 30 years time it is likely to find itself such with an enormous energy crisis having failed to invest in renewables and also a technological backwater having failed to match the PRC and others in the innovation of renewables technology.

Is that an admission that you choose to make up your own facts to guide the entire human race?

No, I do not make up facts. I publish an OPINION based on the facts at my disposal.

I may add more later.

Please cite facts supporting ignoring the historical record over disputed research.

[neverfail]

Nerfail,

I think the “boom” in renewables in Australia is the result of Mandatory Renewable Energy Targets.

Absolutely wrong, Cass!

I don’t know if renewables are competitive if there is a free market. No subsidies for anybody.

The present government several years ago removed subsidies formerly provided to renewables and has intentionally made things easy for coal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_po ... _Australia

Despite that our electrical energy supply companies see no future in fossil fuels and are putting their money into renewables.

https://arena.gov.au/blog/australian-re ... ord-rates/

Consumers are free to choose between fossil fuels and renewables.

No we are not! Regardless of whether produced from burning fossil fuel or from renewables our supply of electric power originates from the same grid.

I suspect renewables are not competitive or there will be NO need for a mandatory target.

Suspect all you want to Cass it will still not make those suspicions right.

Australia has a central electric grid controlled by the government and that means politics will come in.

Australia has a number of STATE grids linked together for mutual support but NOT centrally controlled and the "politics" lay in moving our block head of a government (with a cabal of MP's within beholden to the coal industry) to adopt a national energy policy that actually works.

[cassowary]

Exactly. You don’t have a choice. Renewables and fossil fuel generated electricity goes into the grid and the quantum of renewables is mandated by a target. You don’t have a free market. If you did renewables won’t be competitive.

[neverfail]

Exactly. You don’t have a choice. Renewables and fossil fuel generated electricity goes into the grid and the quantum of renewables is mandated by a target. You don’t have a free market. If you did renewables won’t be competitive.

The "target" is only an international one agreed to between governments : not one that our government can impose on the energy companies compelling them to invest in renewable. Any more than it can compel motorists not to drive petrol powered autos.

Considering that we have been over this ground several times before, I have concluded that you must be pulling my leg to see what you can get out of me. Surely, nobody could possibly be so block headed stupid that he could not have figured that out for himself.