Carlton Supporters Club

Social Club => Blah-Blah Bar => Topic started by: LP on January 03, 2020, 12:52:19 pm

Title: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 03, 2020, 12:52:19 pm
This Scomo bloke has lost the plot, he's a deer in the headlights completely incapable of making a decision or actually doing something.

He can't even deal with the very simple little issues like remuneration for volunteers let alone the much much harder big decisions around climate, sustainability and the environment.

God won't save him, in just the same way God won't save many of the bush fire victims.

Scomo has to go, in my opinion his position is now untenable. If the Libs are as pissweak as they seem he might make it to the next election, but the merest reminder of his current fright frozen state makes him repugnant to voters!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: JonHenry on January 03, 2020, 02:25:06 pm
Probably dumbfounded by the left media garbage blaming climate change.
The greens have made it nearly impossible to reduce the fuel load in the forests for 25 years then blame climate change for uncontrollable bush fires.
The media lap it up like it gospel.
Where was Kevin Rudd during black Saturday?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 03, 2020, 03:25:30 pm
Probably dumbfounded by the left media garbage blaming climate change.
The greens have made it nearly impossible to reduce the fuel load in the forests for 25 years then blame climate change for uncontrollable bush fires.
The media lap it up like it gospel.
Where was Kevin Rudd during black Saturday?
While there is no doubt that the decisions and politics of the past have made this situation worse it still doesn't excuse Scomo's current poor showing, there is no blaming others for his immediate pissweak performance.

At least the likes of Howard, Rudd, Hawk, Abbott, and Keating all had the balls to make immediate decisions, even Gillard had more balls to make hard decisions than Scomo!

This bloke Scomo by comparison to other leaders makes a bowl of aeroplane jelly look like rapid set concrete!

I've never seen such a pissweak response, in fact it's disrespectful to pissweak people to use the same label for Scomo! Through the media he is actually trying to sell to the public that it takes balls to do nothing, like Nero trying to explain why he fiddles as Rome burns!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 03, 2020, 03:57:03 pm
The Greens and the Left - yawn. The Greens have had next to zero power virtually their entire existence, and the "Left", whatever the hell that is, is a figment of the imagination of Murdoch hacks. But apparently they're responsible for the world's ills. Lol.

Instead of reading Andrew Dolt, Piers Hackman and Miranda Anything But, check out any Richard Wolff video on Youtube.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 03, 2020, 04:01:15 pm
This issue is beyond politics, it comes down to action and/or the lack of it!

ScoMo is pissweak because of the lack of action, and his willingness to so proudly hang his hat on that lack of action like he's a hero!

Excuse me, excuse me!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 03, 2020, 05:24:12 pm
Well said, Spotted One.

If Morrison were any more shallow he'd evaporate. As you say, the bloke is clearly out of his depth doing anything other than marketing and spin and holidaying. He only holds the office he has due to long enduring kisses to Turnbull's keister and Labor completely stuffing up their campaign with approach and clueless leader.

If Morrison wanted to grow as a person and leader, he should spend some time with Jacinda.

Sorry JH, but the hard right media is so dominant in this country that moderate/objective media might seem to you to be 'leftist'... and as Pauly so very well, said - 'whatever the hell that is!' You should visit a country with an active 'left' and you'll quickly identify the difference to our meek left. However, there is legitimacy in your comment about clearing of undergrowth etc, although, this really has little, if anything, to do with the Greens, but rather slack or under funded local councils. Not clearing this undergrowth does contribute to forrest fires, but not to the extent we are now seeing, and were warned of decades ago by REAL scientists.

And as for Andrew Blot! Nothing more than a phlegm-ball in the sore throat of journalism.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 03, 2020, 05:56:15 pm
Well said, Spotted One.

If Morrison were any more shallow he'd evaporate. As you say, the bloke is clearly out of his depth doing anything other than marketing and spin and holidaying. He only holds the office he has due to long enduring kisses to Turnbull's keister and Labor completely stuffing up their campaign with approach and clueless leader.

If Morrison wanted to grow as a person and leader, he should spend some time with Jacinda.

Sorry JH, but the hard right media is so dominant in this country that moderate/objective media might seem to you to be 'leftist'... and as Pauly so very well, said - 'whatever the hell that is!' You should visit a country with an active 'left' and you'll quickly identify the difference to our meek left. However, there is legitimacy in your comment about clearing of undergrowth etc, although, this really has little, if anything, to do with the Greens, but rather slack or under funded local councils. Not clearing this undergrowth does contribute to forrest fires, but not to the extent we are now seeing, and were warned of decades ago by REAL scientists.

And as for Andrew Blot! Nothing more than a phlegm-ball in the sore throat of journalism.

It's both laughable and embarrassing. We don't have a left. It's got to the point where if you're half a micron to the left of Murdoch, you're a rabid, tree hugging, free-enterprise-hating, commie pinko.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 03, 2020, 07:23:19 pm
It's both laughable and embarrassing. We don't have a left. It's got to the point where if you're half a micron to the left of Murdoch, you're a rabid, tree hugging, free-enterprise-hating, commie pinko, unionist
;D
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 03, 2020, 07:38:25 pm
It's both laughable and embarrassing. We don't have a left. It's got to the point where if you're half a micron to the left of Murdoch, you're a rabid, tree hugging, free-enterprise-hating, commie pinko.


 😂  😂 Well, hard to argue with that! I always laugh when I hear people refer to the ABC as leftist/socialist/communist!

More folks, as you suggested Pauly, should watch and take in what Richard Wolff, has to say. One of the few folks who've taken on Peterson, taken him to task and shown him up.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 03, 2020, 07:57:52 pm

 😂  😂 Well, hard to argue with that! I always laugh when I hear people refer to the ABC as leftist/socialist/communist!

More folks, as you suggested Pauly, should watch and take in what Richard Wolff, has to say. One of the few folks who've taken on Peterson, taken him to task and shown him up.

I've got a love / hate thing with Jordy.  Some of what he says IMO is nonsense, but some I think is really very good.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: madbluboy on January 03, 2020, 08:59:25 pm
This Scomo bloke has lost the plot, he's a deer in the headlights completely incapable of making a decision or actually doing something.

He can't even deal with the very simple little issues like remuneration for volunteers let alone the much much harder big decisions around climate, sustainability and the environment.

God won't save him, in just the same way God won't save many of the bush fire victims.

Scomo has to go, in my opinion his position is now untenable. If the Libs are as pissweak as they seem he might make it to the next election, but the merest reminder of his current fright frozen state makes him repugnant to voters!

Julie Bishop was the leader this country needed.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 03, 2020, 09:17:43 pm
I've got a love / hate thing with Jordy.  Some of what he says IMO is nonsense, but some I think is really very good.


Likewise, but I notice there is an underlying current of anger in some of what he says. I've a hunch he's a closet misogynist but hasn't come to grips with it yet. His academic intelligence is outstanding, but his emotional intelligence maybe not so much  🤔
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 04, 2020, 11:37:40 am
This issue is beyond politics, it comes down to action and/or the lack of it!

ScoMo is pissweak because of the lack of action, and his willingness to so proudly hang his hat on that lack of action like he's a hero!

Excuse me, excuse me!

No question MoSco is pissweak, but what action are you expecting exactly?

I keep hearing this line - it's just lightweight rhetoric.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 04, 2020, 11:38:28 am
This issue is beyond politics, it comes down to action and/or the lack of it!

ScoMo is pissweak because of the lack of action, and his willingness to so proudly hang his hat on that lack of action like he's a hero!

Excuse me, excuse me!

No question MoSco is pissweak, but what action are you expecting exactly?

I keep hearing this line - it's just lightweight rhetoric.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 04, 2020, 11:52:50 am
No question MoSco is pissweak, but what action are you expecting exactly?

I keep hearing this line - it's just lightweight rhetoric.
Firstly, he can immediately stop fudging about and underwrite the wages of volunteer firefighters, that's the bare minimum and something all his predecessors did without hesitation.

This bloke is incapable of pulling the trigger, he wants somebody else to make the decision or to wait to the last moment when there is no decision left to be made. His philosophy seems clear, No decisions = No mistakes!

Secondly, he can stop finger-pointing at the states and spend some money on our national fire fighting resources like the air based fire defence systems. Nobody is arguing against this, but only the Feds have the resources to actually do it!

Then of course, he can stop pandering to marginal interests, quit jumping in front of cameras with a bag of groceries(FFS! :o ) and take some real action on issues like hazard reduction and control. Arguing against it, or that it's a local council or state responsibility, is like claiming China's carbon emissions stop at it's border!

ScoMo exhibits all the worst traits of just about every ineffective manager I've ever come across, to think their parties voted blokes like ScoMo and Trump in is bizarre enough, to leave them in control borders on criminal neglect! One is taking us into a global war while the other burns the farm!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 04, 2020, 12:17:58 pm
Nice post LP.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: JonHenry on January 04, 2020, 12:36:44 pm
Firstly, he can immediately stop fudging about and underwrite the wages of volunteer firefighters, that's the bare minimum and something all his predecessors did without hesitation.

This bloke is incapable of pulling the trigger, he wants somebody else to make the decision or to wait to the last moment when there is no decision left to be made. His philosophy seems clear, No decisions = No mistakes!

Secondly, he can stop finger-pointing at the states and spend some money on our national fire fighting resources like the air based fire defence systems. Nobody is arguing against this, but only the Feds have the resources to actually do it!

Then of course, he can stop pandering to marginal interests, quit jumping in front of cameras with a bag of groceries(FFS! :o ) and take some real action on issues like hazard reduction and control. Arguing against it, or that it's a local council or state responsibility, is like claiming China's carbon emissions stop at it's border!

ScoMo exhibits all the worst traits of just about every ineffective manager I've ever come across, to think their parties voted blokes like ScoMo and Trump in is bizarre enough, to leave them in control borders on criminal neglect! One is taking us into a global war while the other burns the farm!

So he is now responsible for all fires in Australia according to you?
He should simply override state powers.
Imagine if he did that!
Oh and he should also dictate China’s carbon emissions. I can see that working well, telling your biggest customer how to behave.
You might want to think about the ramifications of all those little proposals
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 04, 2020, 01:01:01 pm
So he is now responsible for all fires in Australia according to you?
He should simply override state powers.
Imagine if he did that!
Oh and he should also dictate China’s carbon emissions. I can see that working well, telling your biggest customer how to behave.
You might want to think about the ramifications of all those little proposals
Your Andrew Bolt style fear mongering isn't a defence for ScoMo being a puddle of indifference! He's turned out to be another spud, the hard blue right should admit the mistake and move on! Their efforts are as far from the bullseye as the Greens or Labor!

btw., Unlike what the blue believers think, the term "right" doesn't mean correct!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: JonHenry on January 04, 2020, 02:16:51 pm
Your Andrew Bolt style fear mongering isn't a defence for ScoMo being a puddle of indifference! He's turned out to be another spud, the hard blue right should admit the mistake and move on! Their efforts are as far from the bullseye as the Greens or Labor!

btw., Unlike what the blue believers think, the term "right" doesn't mean correct!

So he should just take over the states powers?

And tell China how to behave.

There are no limits to your knowledge
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 04, 2020, 02:32:21 pm
So he should just take over the states powers?

And tell China how to behave.

There are no limits to your knowledge
And there it is, the right wing shock jock's loop of indifference argument, like a carnival carousel with the brakes broken.

Typical, disputing any idea of actually doing something with a "What could they do?" argument, followed by criticism of all and any who actually try to do something, and then claiming to know all the answers without actually offering any possible solutions! Then, shortly to come, a retrospective complaint about the costs!

Paralysis by indetermination!

ScoMo's bringing in the reserves after the battle is lost and the front line troups are exhausted. What a true bloody British officer he is, scrambling through the ashes and across the dead proclaiming "What hell!"

But not all is wasted, he delivers us a new clear dictionary definition of "Pathetic!"

pathetic
/pəˈθɛtɪk/

adjective

1. See ScoMo


Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: JonHenry on January 04, 2020, 02:43:54 pm
And there it is, the right wing shock jock's loop of indifference argument, like a carnival carousel with the brakes broken.

Typical, disputing any idea of actually doing something with a "What could they do?" argument, followed by criticism of all and any who actually try to do something, and then claiming to know all the answers without actually offering any possible solutions! Then, shortly to come, a retrospective complaint about the costs!

Paralysis by indetermination!

ScoMo's bringing in the reserves after the battle is lost and the front line troups are exhausted. What a true bloody British officer he is, scrambling through the ashes and across the dead proclaiming "What hell!"

But not all is wasted, he delivers us a new clear dictionary definition of "Pathetic!"

pathetic
/pəˈθɛtɪk/

adjective

1. See ScoMo




Any chance you can answer the question
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 04, 2020, 06:01:52 pm
So he is now responsible for all fires in Australia according to you?
He should simply override state powers.
Imagine if he did that!
Oh and he should also dictate China’s carbon emissions. I can see that working well, telling your biggest customer how to behave.
You might want to think about the ramifications of all those little proposals

JH, old son, sorry mate but you are defending the indefensible. Today Morrison has finally admitted he should do something, (from The Age)...'while the Prime Minister has declared he has heard the clear message that firefighters and communities need more federal help.' What a fckn genius this Morrison must be. Only took two months and how many lives? How much acreage? How much animal devastation? How many homes/properties razed?

One of the prerequisites for effective leadership is vision. And the ability, devoid of political or religious bias, to interpret facts, quickly, and act decisively. Morrison has none of that. As the Spotted One pointed out, Morrison has waited until being screamed at by everyone to act, surmising that he can't make a mistake now, and suddenly arrives at fire locations (for the obligatory photo opportunity) only to be met by howls of, 'stop talking and do something!'. Well, a bona fide leader would have acted immediately upon the arrival this bush fire horror, listened to the experts on the ground and done 'whatever-it-took' to support communities and those combatting the flames and those providing for the displaced. And if that meant pushing the states into a co-operative action with the Federal Govt, then so be it.

What matters most in all of this are the lives, the many lives, at stake which a 'real' leader would have held at priority no. 1 from the get go... not hide behind outdated protocols or ideological beliefs molded by political bias or political survival.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: JonHenry on January 04, 2020, 06:04:01 pm
JH, old son, sorry mate but you are defending the indefensible. Today Morrison has finally admitted he should do something, (from The Age)...'while the Prime Minister has declared he has heard the clear message that firefighters and communities need more federal help.' What a fckn genius this Morrison must be. Only took two months and how many lives? How much acreage? How much animal devastation? How many homes/properties razed?

One of the prerequisites for effective leadership is vision. And the ability, devoid of political or religious bias, to interpret facts, quickly, and act decisively. Morrison has none of that. As the Spotted One pointed out, Morrison has waited until being screamed at by everyone to act, surmising that he can't make a mistake now, and suddenly arrives at fire locations (for the obligitory photo opportunity) only to be met by howls of, 'top talking and do something!'. Well, a bona fide leader would have acted immediately upon the arrival this bush fire horror, listened to the experts on the ground and done 'whatever-it-took' to support communities and those combatting the flames and those providing for the displaced. And if that meant pushing the states into a co-operative action with the Federal Govt, then so be it.

What matters most in all of this are the lives, the many lives, at stake which a 'real' leader would have held at priority no. 1 from the get go... not hide behind outdated protocols or ideological beliefs molded by political bias or political survival.

So, what did the premiers do?
What did Andrews do?
Is he not responsible for the state?
It’s a one way argument from you blokes regardless of what happens.

Bush fires happen and will be more prevalent as we continue to let fuel loads increase.

Is the federal government responsible for that too?

It can’t be a one way street.
The state governments have to be held responsible for their actions as do local governments.

It is not one persons fault for bush fires that have spread across millions of hectares of Australia
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 04, 2020, 06:24:01 pm
These fires are of such magnitude that they cross state boundaries and become a national issue. Even SloMo himself has declared it a "national disaster".

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/bystander-morrison-smoked-out-on-bushfire-politics-20191213-p53jnj
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 04, 2020, 06:25:28 pm
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-04/the-bushfires-of-the-future-are-here-black-swan/11559930
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 04, 2020, 06:26:57 pm
Oh what the hell - two more :

http://theconversation.com/australia-needs-a-national-crisis-plan-and-not-just-for-bushfires-128781

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/political-stunt-federal-government-launches-bushfire-inquiry-to-probe-state-policy-20191223-p53mh3.html
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Spanner on January 04, 2020, 06:33:56 pm
Ok Boomer...

It is and his parties issue that they refuse acknowledge and bluntly scoff at scientific evidence of what is going on around the planet. The sheer volume of political bullcrap they peddled when Adelaide had those black outs a few years ago, which by the way had nothing to do with SA power policy, but the fact that the storms had effectively wiped out the infrastructure, was propoganda at it's most disgusting.

He and his right wing cohorts are so far up the arse of the large miners that they are effectively thumbing their noses at the Australian public.

Instead of creating an environment that encourages innovation in the renewables sector they actively peddle propaganda about job losses instead of being world leaders in the upcoming energy revolution.

But you and your mates can keep your head in the sand and pretend it's all just Greenies and the left being extremists.

As I said, Ok Boomer!  ::)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 04, 2020, 07:54:36 pm
The ScoMo boosters will give him credit for being shamed into late action, many will say too late, others better late than never, but then next month or later in the year he'll announce another multi-billion dollar tunnel to nowhere that nobody wants while refusing to expand the National Aerial Fire Service in any meaningful way!

Economics gone crazy, they are happy for the one off massive spend, but shy away at any sign of recurring expenditure like properly funded fire fighting services or continual ongoing hazard reduction management. It's like one "cheap fix"(cheap meaning only wasting million$ and not requiring ongoing management) that only has a remote and unlikely chance of success is OK, but a real and meaningful ongoing resource commitment that requires annual budgets and management is NBG.

Then they'll pay themselves a 23% rise, "That cannot be reversed because it's now set in law!"!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: DJC on January 04, 2020, 09:18:53 pm
It's so easy to fact check stuff these days but the same old garbage keeps getting regurgitated. 

A former NSW fire and rescue commissioner, Greg Mullins, wrote this week, “Blaming ‘greenies’ for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.”

But what would he know?  He is obviously a pinko-green  ;)

Now, back to Scotty from marketing!

First of all, four years ago, the National Aerial Firefighting Centre asked the Government for a "national large air-tanker" fleet to confront a growing bushfire threat.  The Government, with Scotty at the forefront as Treasurer, rejected the request.

Remember Bill Shorten?  He was promising $101 million to set up a national aerial bushfire fighting fleet of aircraft, with up to six large air water tankers and 12 helicopters, and boost the funding for the existing National Aerial Firefighting Centre.  The new aerial unit was to include a team of "smokejumpers", or firefighters who would rappel from helicopters armed with chainsaws, hoes and other tools to set up containment lines around fires in remote areas.

I wonder if folk would prefer increased firefighting capacity over tax imputation credits now?

Anyway, back to Scotty from marketing:  Of course he deserves a holiday.  After all, I believe that Parliament sat for less days this year than any time since the end of the First World War.  Cramming the year's business into 45 days or whatever it was must have been really tiring and a nice break on the South Coast would have done wonders.  Hang on, the South Coast is on fire so why not p1ss off to Hawaii for a while.  Of course, when you get back, don't apologise for your lack of leadership and appalling judgement.  Instead use weasel words to blame the folk who are upset with you.  That's marketing 101 ... or not.

I could go on but I would be here for ever.  Let's just focus on Scotty forcing handshakes on the young pregnant mother who had just lost everything and the exhausted firefighter who had just lost his house.  Scotty explained it away as people being upset  and that's partly right; they are upset with a government that's in the pocket of Murdoch and the mining industry and with a Prime Minister who couldn't lead ants up a dead dog's arsk!

And don't get me started on his Pentecostalism and its influence on our civil society  >:(
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 04, 2020, 09:43:35 pm
DJC steps up to the plate and BAM, Home Run!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: DJC on January 04, 2020, 10:16:43 pm
Julie Bishop was the leader this country needed.

I’m not a huge fan of Bishop but I suspect that you’re right.  The question is whether she would have been able to stare down the religious right rump.  Either way, she would have been way ahead of Scotty from marketing and Billy from wherever he was from.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 05, 2020, 07:41:15 am
We should have a fleet of sky cranes parked at Essendon airport year round.  I was an airport manager there and got up really close to this beast ...

We wasted 50 billion on outdated frog submarines and one Elvis is a lousy 40 million.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 05, 2020, 09:31:10 am
DJC steps up to the plate and BAM, Home Run!

Yep, as did the SpannerMan.

Some great lines are coming out re Morrison's appalling inability to lead... David, like the 'couldn't lead ants up a dead dog's dot.' Heard a ripper yesterday re Morrison's leadership - 'About as useful as an @rsehole with taste buds!'

But wait, there's more (to keep a familiar marketing theme for Morrison)... the bloke puts out a promotional video today on the great actions and initiatives of his govt in response to the fires. Wow, the shallow and putrid opportunism of this pr1ck is astounding. Even Piers Morgan got into him over that! Morrison is beyond embarrassing.

I'm just waiting for the rains to come and Morrison then claim he prayed for rain - another miracle, no doubt.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: DJC on January 05, 2020, 09:37:27 am
We should have a fleet of sky cranes parked at Essendon airport year round.  I was an airport manager there and got up really close to this beast ...

We wasted 50 billion on outdated frog submarines and one Elvis is a lousy 40 million.

I’d like to see the Government acquire several large fixed wing firefighting aircraft.  With the common use of role-specific modules, it should also be possible to fit firefighting modules to military assets from trucks to aircraft.

Back to Scotty from marketing; what about his advertisement spruiking his response to the fires?  Wanker!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 05, 2020, 10:53:49 am
Well the Ad caps it off for me, this bloke has just reinforced that he exhibits all the very worst traits of every craphouse manager I've encountered in 40 years of business.

They should add in a "ScoMo" entry to clarify the dictionary definitions for Parasite, White-Ant and Fraud.

FMD, and if the Right isn't Right enough already, they are out in the media today in strength taking the opportunity to lambaste the ABC because it's over-budget from providing 24x7 coverage of the bush fires! Apparently the cost of the coverage servicing the community is too high!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 06, 2020, 08:24:21 am
Thank you, Pauly for the article links. All really good reads... especially the Black Swan article.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 06, 2020, 10:03:43 am
Thank you, Pauly for the article links. All really good reads... especially the Black Swan article.

No worries Shano.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 06, 2020, 12:49:53 pm
Thank you, Pauly for the article links. All really good reads... especially the Black Swan article.
It's nice to see some science making a concrete predictions, some irony when ScoMo and other denialists stand up and makes a statement like nobody could see this coming! ------------ I suppose the naysayers will claim it was just a lucky guess! ::)

I heard on radio that the NAFFC(National Aerial Fire Fighting Centre) asked for 30 new aircraft including several very large twin engine jet type water bombers, 4 years ago! Guess who was allegedly in charge of that department when the request was declined, you got it, by Scotty from Marketing!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Tragic on January 06, 2020, 01:05:20 pm
Perception kills.  ScoMo is done and dusted. 

Everyone deserves a holiday.  But not the PM when a national disaster is unfolding.  He should have cancelled beforehand, or got back the moment it turned ugly.

Everyone likes the cricket, but a backyard cricket party when a national disaster is unfolding.  Not a good look.  It does provide a nice backdrop for the fires though!

He should have been front and centre rallying and preparing all available armed forces (national) and then publicly tell the states they can have whatever they need right now.  And stump up to cover the volunteers lost wages from the get go.

These fires are a national disaster.  That's federal.  Regardless of the demarcation lines between state and federal govt.

And trying to force people to shake his hand - what a buffoon.

He missed the boat.  Nothing he can do now.



Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Lods on January 06, 2020, 04:48:05 pm
I’m not going to defend Morrison.
He’s been exactly as the thread title suggests….a ‘deer in the headlights’.
He was knocked off balance by the criticism of his holiday and every time he’s climbed back onto the beam he’s fallen off.
It’s a performance that may well cost him his job.
I do want to make this point though…
The situation we currently face is not like an earthquake, a cyclone, a mass shooting or an unexpected volcano eruption.
In those situations, the critical event happens in a matter of hours, minutes, seconds. Once the major impact of the event is over attention quickly moves to rescue, recovery and rebuild.
This bushfire event is more like a war. It has its major battles, skirmishes then lulls in the fighting but we’re never really sure when the worst is over. It’s been going since around September. There’s a fair chance it will be going for a few months yet…and there’s every chance we may not have seen the worst of it. The ‘generals’ in the various states seem to have been performing well…but they must be feeling the fatigue. Those on the front line certainly are. Like any war it’s a stop start situation with some battles won and others lost…and lines of communication and responses will vary from area to area. That leads to some of the more isolated communities becoming the major casualties and in many cases there is a genuine feeling of abandonment and subsequent anger. Resource allocation is always a matter of ‘where the need’ is felt to be greatest…but the unpredictable nature of a bushfire is such that these decisions can be wrong. Reallocating those resources is made more difficult by road closures.
There was fair warning that this would be a long and hard season…but did any of us sitting in our lounge rooms (or in the seats of power) expect things to reach the level they have.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: kruddler on January 06, 2020, 05:16:05 pm
There was fair warning that this would be a long and hard season…but did any of us sitting in our lounge rooms (or in the seats of power) expect things to reach the level they have.

To answer this question i will post a video i watched earlier today.
It answers that and goes on to say a whole lot more.
I'm not sure there are many in a position to have more insight into the situation than him.
https://youtu.be/hqkjl1__igY
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Thryleon on January 06, 2020, 05:31:30 pm
Irrespective of the current wave of criticism surrounding Scomo, he is on a hiding to nothing.

If he says something he is in trouble.  If he says nothing he is in trouble.  He cannot win at the moment, and he would do well to shrug off the criticism and then state now is the time for action and we can pontificate about what went wrong later.  At the moment we focus on our front line troops and then we can re-assess our priorities later.

He seems incapable of taking the oxygen out of the argument which is exactly what is required. 
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on January 06, 2020, 06:48:26 pm
Maybe if the State/Fed Goverments could ignore and not be hampered by these greens/ tree huggers and were able to conduct proper back burning and being able to control the amount of fuel available we wouldnt be relying on ScoMo to provide hose and bucket solutions.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 06, 2020, 06:56:55 pm
Maybe if the State/Fed Goverments could ignore and not be hampered by these greens/ tree huggers and were able to conduct proper back burning and being able to control the amount of fuel available we wouldnt be relying on ScoMo to provide hose and bucket solutions.

If you don't want bush fires, then don't have bush. Cut it all down. Dead simple.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 06, 2020, 07:21:53 pm
Sweeping reforms were needed and a LOT of investment.  We finally saw that.  It should have happened weeks ago.  Now let slip the dogs of war against arsonists.  And Di Natale
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 06, 2020, 07:46:17 pm
Maybe if the State/Fed Goverments could ignore and not be hampered by these greens/ tree huggers and were able to conduct proper back burning and being able to control the amount of fuel available we wouldnt be relying on ScoMo to provide hose and bucket solutions.

Actually a number of firies said it was corporates who hadn't attended to their land and councils that were more responsible for undergrowth that wasn't cleared and acted as fuel. I think you're giving the Greens/Lefties way more influence than they're actually capable of.

One fire fighter said something about corporates getting carbon points for bush blocks... didn't catch it all.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 06, 2020, 07:48:19 pm
I think you're giving the Greens/Lefties way more influence than they're actually capable of.

..................

Agree. The Greens and the tree huggers have no power. They've never had any power, and they probably never will. I'd suggest any influence they have on back burning quotas in basically nil.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 06, 2020, 07:50:19 pm
Irrespective of the current wave of criticism surrounding Scomo, he is on a hiding to nothing.

If he says something he is in trouble.  If he says nothing he is in trouble.  He cannot win at the moment, and he would do well to shrug off the criticism and then state now is the time for action and we can pontificate about what went wrong later.  At the moment we focus on our front line troops and then we can re-assess our priorities later.

He seems incapable of taking the oxygen out of the argument which is exactly what is required. 

He brought this on himself, especially when a number of scientific, fire-fighting and state govt bodies predicted this and asked for Federal help in buying large scale fire-fighting equipment... dating back to 2016 and on a few occasions this year... and right along the line who was the person refusing to acknowledge the problem or legitimacy of scientific evidence? Morrison. His political and religious ideologies could be very expensive for this nation, on a few levels.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: chalkybill on January 06, 2020, 10:13:44 pm
Living in a small rural community we can see just how much fuel is on the forrest floor.  Gums lose their leaves all year round, nowhere near the same number of people take firewood out of the forrest due to severe restrictions. so that fallen trees and branches build up and the 'cold burns' have not been sighted in our area for almost 2 years.  Fires cannot start nor continue without some sort of fuel, and the greenies have stupidly provided the fuel.  Locals are ready to burn any greenies should they happen to leave their inner suburban houses.  But they wont, not to even help fight the fires they have caused 
No-one who doesn't live in the regional and rural areas should have a say in what happens there.   >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Thryleon on January 06, 2020, 11:08:01 pm
He brought this on himself, especially when a number of scientific, fire-fighting and state govt bodies predicted this and asked for Federal help in buying large scale fire-fighting equipment... dating back to 2016 and on a few occasions this year... and right along the line who was the person refusing to acknowledge the problem or legitimacy of scientific evidence? Morrison. His political and religious ideologies could be very expensive for this nation, on a few levels.

Yes, but he isn't the first nor is he the last.

When push comes to shove there's a lot of state responsibility being passed onto scomo currently and he is wearing a lot of heat that frankly should sit with state government.

The voters would do well to remind themselves you get what you vote for.

I'm no scomo fan, but the vitriol aimed at him from all angles is a bit rich. 

Either way, now isnt the time to look at what happened.  Now is the time to stop things from escalating.   Reactive yes, but required.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Spanner on January 07, 2020, 12:32:45 am
For those of you claiming the Greens and left are at fault for not allowing back burning, consider this as being schooled. Love this guys delivery by the way...

https://youtu.be/17cxH9p-xps

What craps me is how continual fake news and right wing propaganda manipulate the facts and sell it as the truth. Then the myriad of gullible knobs out there lap it up when they hear it on a news snippet or that knobend Alan Jones' radio show, and then regurgitate it adnausium like it's the truth. Welcome to Australia's version of Trump USA.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 07, 2020, 06:58:15 am
Living in a small rural community we can see just how much fuel is on the forrest floor.  Gums lose their leaves all year round, nowhere near the same number of people take firewood out of the forrest due to severe restrictions. so that fallen trees and branches build up and the 'cold burns' have not been sighted in our area for almost 2 years.  Fires cannot start nor continue without some sort of fuel, and the greenies have stupidly provided the fuel.  Locals are ready to burn any greenies should they happen to leave their inner suburban houses.  But they wont, not to even help fight the fires they have caused 
No-one who doesn't live in the regional and rural areas should have a say in what happens there.   >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D  >:D

Exactly how I feel ... now that I live here, even more so.  The sense of community in the bush, city people will never truly understand.  The Greens are absolutely loathed and despised.  With you chalky :)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 07, 2020, 09:39:16 am
Yes, but he isn't the first nor is he the last.

When push comes to shove there's a lot of state responsibility being passed onto scomo currently and he is wearing a lot of heat that frankly should sit with state government.

The voters would do well to remind themselves you get what you vote for.

I'm no scomo fan, but the vitriol aimed at him from all angles is a bit rich. 

Either way, now isnt the time to look at what happened.  Now is the time to stop things from escalating.   Reactive yes, but required.

I suspect much of the vitriol aimed at Morrison is because he has been such a vocal climate change denier and has actively thwarted and prevented actions to increase fire fighting abilities. He's also the boss and represents a number of archaic ideologies.

A piece from this morning's The Age. Some good perspectives:

“…Associate Professor Philip Zylstra, from Wollongong University's Centre for Sustainable Ecosystem Solutions, said fuel loads in forests, and state government management, were not responsible for the catastrophic fire season.

"I think that for the federal government to say there needs to be a focus on hazard-reduction burning at this stage appears to be passing the buck to the states," he said.

"The reality is we are at a peak of prescribed burning by state agencies. More has been done in the past decade than in many, many decades."

NSW Environment Minister Matt Kean said there were 960,000 hectares burnt for hazard reduction last year, while the previous highest yearly total since 2000 was 260,000.

Professor Zylstra said a vast increase to the current hazard reduction effort would blanket cities and towns with smoke over winter and create "huge risks" of accidental property damage and even death.

Philip Gibbons, an associate professor at the Fenner School for Environment and Society at the Australian National University, said recent fires in several regions across the country were not halted by cleared farm paddocks, which showed broadscale land clearing was not an effective management technique.

"Fires have burned through rural land which has a much lower fuel load than a hazard-burn area, but that didn't stop fires."
Professor Gibbons said studies showed hazard-reduction burns weren't effective at halting fires and policy that focused on them could push states to set minimum-hectare-burned targets.

Victoria's fire managers have already shifted from an annual hectare target, which was set after the Black Saturday royal commission, to a more strategic approach.

A 2010 study from Wollongong University, The Effect of Fuel Age on the Spread of Fire in Sclerophyll Forest in the Sydney Region, found there was only a 10 per cent chance a fire would be stopped by a hazard-reduction burn. It said road barriers were most effective at halting fires.

"This summer's fires have burnt though many areas that had hazard-reduction burning. They can help control fires in moderate weather conditions, but in severe conditions it might just help reduce the severity," he said.

Cleared buffer zones in the bush within 40 metres of houses reduced house losses by an average of 43 per cent on Black Saturday, Professor Gibbons' study found. But he said no one technique was a solution.

"If there was a silver bullet on bushfires we'd have found it by now, after the 51 inquiries since 1939."

Associate Professor Trent Penman, from the University of Melbourne bushfire behaviour and management group, said "broader thinking" was needed and "blindly putting money into prescribed burning won't stop the problem".

He said states hadn't "dropped the ball at all" on hazard-reduction burning, and they were "working harder and smarter than they have in the past", particularly since the royal commission into Black Saturday…”
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: chalkybill on January 07, 2020, 09:40:59 am
Well done Spanner'. Promote a slick dumbell who mixes doctored images to promote his case. This at least suggests that his arguments have been doctored as well. 
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 07, 2020, 09:51:59 am
Well done Spanner'. Promote a slick dumbell who mixes doctored images to promote his case. This at least suggests that his arguments have been doctored as well. 


As opposed to Barnaby and the koala killer, I guess.............
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 07, 2020, 09:57:11 am
For those of you claiming the Greens and left are at fault for not allowing back burning, consider this as being schooled. Love this guys delivery by the way...

https://youtu.be/17cxH9p-xps

What craps me is how continual fake news and right wing propaganda manipulate the facts and sell it as the truth. Then the myriad of gullible knobs out there lap it up when they hear it on a news snippet or that knobend Alan Jones' radio show, and then regurgitate it adnausium like it's the truth. Welcome to Australia's version of Trump USA.

I'm no fan of that University Revue-style presentation, but there's no denying the facts. Those are pretty bad figures, and at some point folks might realise that being "good economic managers" is about a lot more than slashing and burning budgets for all manner of services and needs. If you want "small government" you better be careful what you wish for. There's a tipping point beyond which any further cuts simply erode the quality of service that can be provided, exactly what we are seeing with these fires.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: chalkybill on January 07, 2020, 10:16:16 am
I suspect much of the vitriol aimed at Morrison is because he has been such a vocal climate change denier and has actively thwarted and prevented actions to increase fire fighting abilities. He's also the boss and represents a number of archaic ideologies.

A piece from this morning's The Age. Some good perspectives:

“…Associate Professor Philip Zylstra, from Wollongong University's Centre for Sustainable Ecosystem Solutions, said fuel loads in forests, and state government management, were not responsible for the catastrophic fire season.

"I think that for the federal government to say there needs to be a focus on hazard-reduction burning at this stage appears to be passing the buck to the states," he said.

"The reality is we are at a peak of prescribed burning by state agencies. More has been done in the past decade than in many, many decades."

NSW Environment Minister Matt Kean said there were 960,000 hectares burnt for hazard reduction last year, while the previous highest yearly total since 2000 was 260,000.

Professor Zylstra said a vast increase to the current hazard reduction effort would blanket cities and towns with smoke over winter and create "huge risks" of accidental property damage and even death.

Philip Gibbons, an associate professor at the Fenner School for Environment and Society at the Australian National University, said recent fires in several regions across the country were not halted by cleared farm paddocks, which showed broadscale land clearing was not an effective management technique.

"Fires have burned through rural land which has a much lower fuel load than a hazard-burn area, but that didn't stop fires."
Professor Gibbons said studies showed hazard-reduction burns weren't effective at halting fires and policy that focused on them could push states to set minimum-hectare-burned targets.

Victoria's fire managers have already shifted from an annual hectare target, which was set after the Black Saturday royal commission, to a more strategic approach.

A 2010 study from Wollongong University, The Effect of Fuel Age on the Spread of Fire in Sclerophyll Forest in the Sydney Region, found there was only a 10 per cent chance a fire would be stopped by a hazard-reduction burn. It said road barriers were most effective at halting fires.

"This summer's fires have burnt though many areas that had hazard-reduction burning. They can help control fires in moderate weather conditions, but in severe conditions it might just help reduce the severity," he said.

Cleared buffer zones in the bush within 40 metres of houses reduced house losses by an average of 43 per cent on Black Saturday, Professor Gibbons' study found. But he said no one technique was a solution.

"If there was a silver bullet on bushfires we'd have found it by now, after the 51 inquiries since 1939."

Associate Professor Trent Penman, from the University of Melbourne bushfire behaviour and management group, said "broader thinking" was needed and "blindly putting money into prescribed burning won't stop the problem".

He said states hadn't "dropped the ball at all" on hazard-reduction burning, and they were "working harder and smarter than they have in the past", particularly since the royal commission into Black Saturday…”


Can this 'professor' tell me how fires can burn without fuel?  There has to be fuel.  And where has this fuel come from?  The dead trees, branches and leaves that have fallen over the years.  Has this 'professor' ever ventured into the real bush and not just driven past?  If so he would have to see what fuel has accumulated.  As for 'global warming' being a cause, is that a new brand of match that arsonists use or does it describe a type of lightning strike?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: chalkybill on January 07, 2020, 10:18:24 am

As opposed to Barnaby and the koala killer, I guess.............

Well we can all look forward to you running for parliament and taking the place of one of these.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 07, 2020, 10:44:40 am
Well we can all look forward to you running for parliament and taking the place of one of these.

Can this 'professor' tell me how fires can burn without fuel?  There has to be fuel.  And where has this fuel come from?  The dead trees, branches and leaves that have fallen over the years.  Has this 'professor' ever ventured into the real bush and not just driven past?  If so he would have to see what fuel has accumulated.  As for 'global warming' being a cause, is that a new brand of match that arsonists use or does it describe a type of lightning strike?


Both of these are just dumb arguments, a very typical Beverly Hillbillies style, small town, small minded, provincial attack on (grievous yawn) Inner City Elites and leftist academics. I guess we can dismiss everything Einstein ever said because he never traveled around the universe to see it for himself.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: madbluboy on January 07, 2020, 10:57:42 am
Perhaps fuel loads AND climate change were factors?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 07, 2020, 11:02:47 am
Perhaps fuel loads AND climate change were factors?

There's that and a few other factors as well IMO, some of which may be unfortunate coincidence, and others, like savage cuts to funding, which are completely within our control.  Hopefully this will be a massive wake up call.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: kruddler on January 07, 2020, 11:17:11 am
I'm confused.

All these people saying climate change has nothing to do with the fires.....are you saying there is no such thing as climate change?

Cimate change didn't start the fires, but it certainly helps create an environment which allows them to flourish.
As does minimising the preventative burning off measures required.
As does minimising the spending on being able to prevent and fight them.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Lods on January 07, 2020, 11:18:06 am
Of course it's a multifactor issue.
Perhaps a Royal Commission isn't such a bad idea.
They usually result in recommendations that carry a bit of weight for change.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 07, 2020, 11:19:18 am
Of course it's a multifactor issue.
Perhaps a Royal Commission isn't such a bad idea.
They usually result in recommendations that carry a bit of weight for change.


Agree Lods.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Thryleon on January 07, 2020, 12:16:38 pm
I suspect much of the vitriol aimed at Morrison is because he has been such a vocal climate change denier and has actively thwarted and prevented actions to increase fire fighting abilities. He's also the boss and represents a number of archaic ideologies.

A piece from this morning's The Age. Some good perspectives:

“…Associate Professor Philip Zylstra, from Wollongong University's Centre for Sustainable Ecosystem Solutions, said fuel loads in forests, and state government management, were not responsible for the catastrophic fire season.

"I think that for the federal government to say there needs to be a focus on hazard-reduction burning at this stage appears to be passing the buck to the states," he said.

"The reality is we are at a peak of prescribed burning by state agencies. More has been done in the past decade than in many, many decades."

NSW Environment Minister Matt Kean said there were 960,000 hectares burnt for hazard reduction last year, while the previous highest yearly total since 2000 was 260,000.

Professor Zylstra said a vast increase to the current hazard reduction effort would blanket cities and towns with smoke over winter and create "huge risks" of accidental property damage and even death.

Philip Gibbons, an associate professor at the Fenner School for Environment and Society at the Australian National University, said recent fires in several regions across the country were not halted by cleared farm paddocks, which showed broadscale land clearing was not an effective management technique.

"Fires have burned through rural land which has a much lower fuel load than a hazard-burn area, but that didn't stop fires."
Professor Gibbons said studies showed hazard-reduction burns weren't effective at halting fires and policy that focused on them could push states to set minimum-hectare-burned targets.

Victoria's fire managers have already shifted from an annual hectare target, which was set after the Black Saturday royal commission, to a more strategic approach.

A 2010 study from Wollongong University, The Effect of Fuel Age on the Spread of Fire in Sclerophyll Forest in the Sydney Region, found there was only a 10 per cent chance a fire would be stopped by a hazard-reduction burn. It said road barriers were most effective at halting fires.

"This summer's fires have burnt though many areas that had hazard-reduction burning. They can help control fires in moderate weather conditions, but in severe conditions it might just help reduce the severity," he said.

Cleared buffer zones in the bush within 40 metres of houses reduced house losses by an average of 43 per cent on Black Saturday, Professor Gibbons' study found. But he said no one technique was a solution.

"If there was a silver bullet on bushfires we'd have found it by now, after the 51 inquiries since 1939."

Associate Professor Trent Penman, from the University of Melbourne bushfire behaviour and management group, said "broader thinking" was needed and "blindly putting money into prescribed burning won't stop the problem".

He said states hadn't "dropped the ball at all" on hazard-reduction burning, and they were "working harder and smarter than they have in the past", particularly since the royal commission into Black Saturday…”


Again, being a climate change denier has little to do with policy regarding fighting bushfires.

Lets let this sink in.  Scott Morrison has been prime minister of Australia since August of 2018.  What that suggests to me is that the issues we are seeing today, are the result as much of PREVIOUS government, as they are today.

We have not had stable leadership since John Howard (whom I was no real fan of by the way).  We (Australians) have pontificated about various different issues at state and federal level, and now we are reaping the benefit by having a real problem to worry about and are simply reaping what we sow.  How much did it cost us not to build a road?  Everyone along the way has this on their hands. 


Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 07, 2020, 12:42:47 pm
Of course it's a multifactor issue.
Perhaps a Royal Commission isn't such a bad idea.
They usually result in recommendations that carry a bit of weight for change.

Trouble is they don't ... had one after black Saturday with recommendations to cut back undergrowth.

What happened?  Nothing
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: madbluboy on January 07, 2020, 12:43:01 pm
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENoWuRlU8AE8nA4?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: madbluboy on January 07, 2020, 12:48:17 pm

https://twitter.com/Lauratobin1/status/1214315498567061506
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: madbluboy on January 07, 2020, 12:49:52 pm
Trouble is they don't ... had one after black Saturday with recommendations to cut back undergrowth.

What happened?  Nothing

Undergrowth deniers are worse than climate change deniers.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 07, 2020, 01:20:30 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/dec/15/climate-change-rainfall

What Kelly states may be correct, but his focus solely on rainfall in that tweet is both disturbing and a tell.  And the fact that Australia is spending big in the last 2 years is pleasing, but in no way compensates for head-in-the-sand policies and for doing stuff all before those 2 years.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 07, 2020, 02:23:43 pm
Trouble is they don't ... had one after black Saturday with recommendations to cut back undergrowth.

What happened?  Nothing

Seriously, the guy is a dill.

The science has been clear since the 1950s - Byram's Fire Equation!

Fuel load is the one thing man can control - yet we rarely do it.

Saying the (non) fire seasons are now much longer and there isn't 'enough time' is BS.

Whether it's green policy, lack of funding or lack of intelligence we have caused the problem ourselves.

Dr Andy Ptman, one of the alrmist cheer leaders on drought and climate change:

Quote
“…this may not be what you expect to hear. but as far as the climate scientists know there is no link between climate change and drought.

That may not be what you read in the newspapers and sometimes hear commented, but there is no reason a priori why climate change should made the landscape more arid.

If you look at the Bureau of Meteorology data over the whole of the last one hundred years there’s no trend in data. There is no drying trend.  There’s been a trend in the last twenty years, but there’s been no trend in the last hundred years, and that’s an expression on how variable Australian rainfall climate is.

There are in some regions but not in other regions.

So the fundamental problem we have is that we don’t understand what causes droughts.

Much more interesting, We don’t know what stops a drought. We know it’s rain, but we don’t know what lines up to create drought breaking rains.”

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 07, 2020, 03:03:46 pm
I am not always clear on what is supporting the various opinions being quoted and bandied around in the media, eg statistical correlation or proven cause and effect or what, so jumping to solutions can be futile at times.  However, urgency sometimes plays its part and a gamble on a solution or an educated guess may be the only action available at particular times.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 07, 2020, 03:35:34 pm
Human Induced Climate Change and rising temps are not geared to global drought or flood, that's a crap assumption blokes like Kelly make to stir up crap for News Ltd and Newcastle Coal shipping mates. They try to assert it's Venus or Mars for the Earth.

Human Induced Climate Changes causes wild swings and extreme peaks and troughs, lots more so called Black Swan events and I think links in this thread have already discussed some relating to the current fires. Extreme rain, extreme drought, extreme blizzards and extreme firestorms.

The averages might be very deceptive if looked at in isolation.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Thryleon on January 07, 2020, 04:13:37 pm
To state that climate change isnt happening is stupid. 

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalWarming/page3.php

https://www.livescience.com/65927-has-earth-been-this-hot-before.html

the one part I dont know (nor do I think anyone knows) is how much of it is to do with our impact.

https://www.australiangeographic.com.au/topics/science-environment/2017/01/the-worlds-10-most-devastating-volcanic-eruptions/

Somehow, these events have all occurred in the past.  They have resulted in cooling, and warming, and perhaps we are simply seeing an increased amount of volcanic activity which might be to do with human impact.  Or it might be solar, and lunar impact.  We simply dont understand enough to really concretely state what is down to us, and factually speaking, I think its the height of arrogance to assume we are causing it all.

The only thing I know for sure, is that we have logged more forests, and are putting more co2 into the atmosphere that would normally occur naturally.  This may play a part, but I suspect its only a small part.  I imagine our historic data is flawed, and that is infinitely more likely given we have never been as technologically advanced as we are today.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 07, 2020, 05:40:28 pm
Even if we entertain the idea that Climate Change is not real (for the sake of the argument), who doesn't seriously believe that we would all benefit from better and cleaner ways of doing things ? We should change because the new ways are better - that's reason enough.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 07, 2020, 06:12:26 pm
Even if we entertain the idea that Climate Change is not real (for the sake of the argument), who doesn't seriously believe that we would all benefit from better and cleaner ways of doing things ? We should change because the new ways are better - that's reason enough.

You're a cheeky one, Pauly, bringing common sense and logic into the whole argument!

If you consistently and persistently spew toxins into the atmosphere and water is it possible after doing enough of that for long enough there might just be some adverse effects for the living creatures?

And if your beautiful little niece was feeling unwell and 96% of doctors diagnosed a problem then suggested xyz treatment, yet 4% of doctors disagreed with the 96% and said there's nothing wrong with her - do nothing... whose advice would you take? Simplistic? Yes, but the same principle applies.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: kruddler on January 07, 2020, 06:43:48 pm
You're a cheeky one, Pauly, bringing common sense and logic into the whole argument!

If you consistently and persistently spew toxins into the atmosphere and water is it possible after doing enough of that for long enough there might just be some adverse effects for the living creatures?

And if your beautiful little niece was feeling unwell and 96% of doctors diagnosed a problem then suggested xyz treatment, yet 4% of doctors disagreed with the 96% and said there's nothing wrong with her - do nothing... whose advice would you take? Simplistic? Yes, but the same principle applies.

Depends if that 4% contains House. ;) He's always right.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 07, 2020, 11:54:20 pm
If an expert has some significant insight into the cause or solution to a problem they quickly become part of the majority. They do not need to defend there position because the majority are in consensus with them.

This is the opposite of the human induced climate change sceptics, who are continually and increasingly aggressively defending their position because they are in the minority. They try to compensate for this by shouting which seems to influence the weak minded!

Even if we entertain the idea that Climate Change is not real (for the sake of the argument), who doesn't seriously believe that we would all benefit from better and cleaner ways of doing things ? We should change because the new ways are better - that's reason enough.
This is the only rational position to take.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 08, 2020, 08:29:19 am
One factor we don't hear much about is how many of these fires are the result of firebug actions. I have read that many have been deliberately lit? This would be a problem of our society and its collective mental health?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 08, 2020, 09:09:39 am
Looting's another ... that's close to shoot on sight in my book.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 08, 2020, 10:00:06 am
One factor we don't hear much about is how many of these fires are the result of firebug actions. I have read that many have been deliberately lit? This would be a problem of our society and its collective mental health?

There's been a couple of those, Fluffy One, but most common is lightning strikes. Fortunately firies are better screened these days as in the past the CFA (esp volunteers) becomes a place that pyromaniacs just loved to hang out... and secretly give everyone work to do! And you get the odd c0ckhead kids who light fires but with better drone technology and more of them these fires are usually spotted early.

As CC mentioned, what is really infuriating is the scam artists arriving on the scene to take advantage of the vulnerable. I probably shouldn't write this but I wouldn't be against publicly identifying and shaming these appalling creatures.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: tonyo on January 08, 2020, 10:10:33 am
Perhaps this thread's title could be changed to 'Deer in the Firelight'...?

I think so much of this is about Government policy, both Federal and State - they spend less and less on vital services so they can provide more tax cuts, with the net effect that it allows us to watch the outcome of the bushfires on the 65" TV in the spare room. 

I am well aware of the Federal-State impasse that occurs when it comes to funding public services (I work in Health), which just gives them both an excuse to blame each other.  But in the end, the politicians are too busy buying votes and building monuments to use OUR money wisely.

The old saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure - if we have effective and well-provisioned emergency workforces including volunteers, providing proactive as well as reactive services, we are less likely to end up wondering how so many of these events go so wrong.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 08, 2020, 10:11:28 am
There's been a couple of those, Fluffy One, but most common is lightning strikes. Fortunately firies are better screened these days as in the past the CFA (esp volunteers) becomes a place that pyromaniacs just loved to hang out... and secretly give everyone work to do! And you get the odd c0ckhead kids who light fires but with better drone technology and more of them these fires are usually spotted early.

As CC mentioned, what is really infuriating is the scam artists arriving on the scene to take advantage of the vulnerable. I probably shouldn't write this but I wouldn't be against publicly identifying and shaming these appalling creatures.

I think that may be somewhat of an underestimation Baggers.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/bushfires-firebugs-fuelling-crisis-asarson-arresttollhits183/news-story/52536dc9ca9bb87b7c76d36ed1acf53f

Some cases could be called accidental/careless but the "deliberate" category is significant.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 08, 2020, 10:12:44 am
As CC mentioned, what is really infuriating is the scam artists arriving on the scene to take advantage of the vulnerable. I probably shouldn't write this but I wouldn't be against publicly identifying and shaming these appalling creatures.

Yes, low life types posing as charity collectors.

But we don't want vigilantism because more often than not it is some innocent who accidentally gets lynched while the crook gets away!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: chalkybill on January 08, 2020, 04:30:28 pm
Both of these are just dumb arguments, a very typical Beverly Hillbillies style, small town, small minded, provincial attack on (grievous yawn) Inner City Elites and leftist academics. I guess we can dismiss everything Einstein ever said because he never traveled around the universe to see it for himself.




An a typical 'green townie' response.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: chalkybill on January 08, 2020, 04:34:18 pm
There's been a couple of those, Fluffy One, but most common is lightning strikes. Fortunately firies are better screened these days as in the past the CFA (esp volunteers) becomes a place that pyromaniacs just loved to hang out... and secretly give everyone work to do! And you get the odd c0ckhead kids who light fires but with better drone technology and more of them these fires are usually spotted early.

As CC mentioned, what is really infuriating is the scam artists arriving on the scene to take advantage of the vulnerable. I probably shouldn't write this but I wouldn't be against publicly identifying and shaming these appalling creatures.

Unfortunately Baggers. there have been many more than a couple started by arsonists. 


Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 08, 2020, 04:47:22 pm
The fuel reduction debate is complex, but again the main problem is people, not animals be they domesticated or indigenous types.

I read an article proposing drones for fuel reduction, solar powered no doubt. I know perfect fuel reduction drones, they are called cows or kangaroos and you can feed them to the starving when they are "retired" from service!

In some areas the bureaucracy have given large swaths of land over to forestry, then put restrictions on how much of it can be processed each year. So the commercial interests do what commercial interests do and minimize costs in areas they can't make profitable, so they stop maintaining those areas and the fuel load grows. But they want to reap the eventual harvest, so they ask government to ban forest dwellers from collecting fallen timber before the company can get to it! So the bureaucracy bans people entering the area, including farmers and their herds. Can someone explain to me what native vegetation or critters are being destroyed by cattle browsing under kilometers of soon to be felled hardwood or pine plantation?

In the meantime, animal rights activists lobby to stop shooters shooting deer in the same area, so the government bans that as well, do you get the irony of this fuel load issue?

The smart money was always to target strategic burning of areas to slow or reduce risk to certain communities, but it seems none of the money spent so far was very smart!

I heard another interesting point made today, I haven't found the article yet to back this up but it seems to make sense. The carbon emissions released from this catastrophic event in just two weeks are equal to the last 30 years of fuel reduction burning. Several endangered species that almost certainly would have survived localised cold weather fuel reduction burns are now most likely extinct from wildfire.

Yet we can't reduce the fuel by burning or livestock grazing because it's bad for the environment, have I missed something?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 08, 2020, 04:50:57 pm
I think that may be somewhat of an underestimation Baggers.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/bushfires-firebugs-fuelling-crisis-asarson-arresttollhits183/news-story/52536dc9ca9bb87b7c76d36ed1acf53f

Some cases could be called accidental/careless but the "deliberate" category is significant.


It's a curly one, Fluffy One... depends on which media outlet you frequent sometimes as to the news you get. I tend not to give much credence to News Ltd stories as there is a definite bias with their interpretation of stories. The info I read said that though real and a deep concern -- deliberate fires -- what really terrified firies was 'dry' storms etc.

Anyway and either way, I guess the real issue is how fires can now develop from what we're used to or have known for more than a century, to what has recently been described by firies as types of fires they've not seen before and being increasingly difficult to combat, and starting earlier in the 'fire season', and lasting longer.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 08, 2020, 05:00:00 pm
To me the whole debate is a cake and eat it issue. The politicians want the green vote, but they don't want to spend the money needed to make the green vote viable for the environment we live in. So they fudge things and this last few weeks is what happens.

In the meantime, we'll build some more billion dollar tunnels or elevated rail lines to save one or two lives a year from the millions of humans that infest the joint, ironically many of them inner city green voters who can now travel from their retro-converted Italian slate filled suede curtain kombucha leather carpet bamboo framed warehouse on a fully imported carbon fibre titanium hybrid Chinese rare earth solar cell powered lithium battery boosted not manufactured in my backyard bicycle or scooter, unimpeded by the need to stop at level crossings or for a passing electric car which is by chance also full of the good stuff, leaving the rest of the joint to burn while we suburban plebs sip on our Beaujolais ironically flown in from Beaujolais(In the nuclear powered state of France) and sold to us radiation free at record low prices by Aldi!

All with the very best of intentions! ::)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 08, 2020, 05:00:54 pm
It's a curly one, Fluffy One... depends on which media outlet you frequent sometimes as to the news you get. I tend not to give much credence to News Ltd stories as there is a definite bias with their interpretation of stories. The info I read said that though real and a deep concern -- deliberate fires -- what really terrified firies was 'dry' storms etc.

Anyway and either way, I guess the real issue is how fires can now develop from what we're used to or have known for more than a century, to what has recently been described by firies as types of fires they've not seen before and being increasingly difficult to combat, and starting earlier in the 'fire season', and lasting longer.

I guess it is a human trait to believe what you want to believe Baggers. True for people from all walks of life and shades of political opinion. Unfortunately few of us are blessed with the gift of absolute impartiality.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 08, 2020, 05:19:41 pm
Unfortunately Baggers. there have been many more than a couple started by arsonists. 




I should have been clearer... posting on the run, silly me. Apologies to the Fluffy One and Chalky old son. The 'couple' of fires referred to in my post related to a recent spate of a dozen or so but I didn't clarify that - my bad! (Two of those were confirmed, deliberate... but I failed to give the necessary details/specifics ...doh!).

Yes, over, for example an entire fire season you'll find anything up to 50% caused by deliberate or suspicious circumstances. As mentioned previously, and in the greater scheme of things, there will always be those sick individuals who will deliberately or carelessly cause a bush fire so we have to be even better at locating and combatting fires, especially as now bush fires have the potential to cause so much more devastation.

As TONYO said, "The old saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure - if we have effective and well-provisioned emergency workforces including volunteers, providing proactive as well as reactive services, we are less likely to end up wondering how so many of these events go so wrong."

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 08, 2020, 05:22:30 pm
I guess it is a human trait to believe what you want to believe Baggers. True for people from all walks of life and shades of political opinion. Unfortunately few of us are blessed with the gift of absolute impartiality.
Unfortunately in the area where I live all the News Ltd promoted fire bug paranoia has results in vigilantly types patrolling the streets harassing groups of kids and teenagers who are obviously "the fire lighters."

The net result is that everyone is now driving their kids around the area trivial distances instead of them just walking and playing outdoors!

Get that in your carbon sink irony!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Mav on January 08, 2020, 05:28:15 pm
One factor we don't hear much about is how many of these fires are the result of firebug actions. I have read that many have been deliberately lit? This would be a problem of our society and its collective mental health?
Fires misinformation being spread through social media (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-08/fires-misinformation-being-spread-through-social-media/11846434) , ABC News.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 08, 2020, 05:29:52 pm
Unfortunately in the area where I live all the News Ltd promoted fire bug paranoia has results in vigilantly types patrolling the streets harassing groups of kids and teenagers who are obviously "the fire lighters."

The net result is that everyone is now driving their kids around the area trivial distances instead of them just walking and playing outdoors!

Get that in your carbon sink irony!

Another case of jumping to conclusions by the sound of it. So the fact that firebugs are active should be supressed?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 08, 2020, 05:30:31 pm
I guess it is a human trait to believe what you want to believe Baggers. True for people from all walks of life and shades of political opinion. Unfortunately few of us are blessed with the gift of absolute impartiality.

Yes, I guess I'm biased against News Ltd/Fox News!  🥴

The people we trust to be the most impartial are scientists, because they test and retest their results. I wonder if they've had anything to say about the horrors of our recent fires  🤓  😉
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 08, 2020, 05:33:57 pm
Fires misinformation being spread through social media (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-08/fires-misinformation-being-spread-through-social-media/11846434) , ABC News.
Thanks but the only social media I read is this site.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 08, 2020, 05:35:06 pm
Fires misinformation being spread through social media (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-08/fires-misinformation-being-spread-through-social-media/11846434) , ABC News.

Wow. Important information (won't get objective, fact based stuff like this on Fox / News Ltd  😈 )
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 08, 2020, 05:41:45 pm
Do these scientists have access to the crime reports? If so I would love to listen to them on the subject of firebugs and how their activities may impact the overall picture wrt the bush fires.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 08, 2020, 06:24:28 pm
Fires misinformation being spread through social media (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-08/fires-misinformation-being-spread-through-social-media/11846434) , ABC News.

You've been very quiet lately Mav. Nice to see a post from you after such a long time.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 08, 2020, 06:28:42 pm
For those still blaming 'pinko, lefty, greenie' whatevers for the fires, check out these and other interesting facts:
https://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/92262/NSW-RFS-Annual-Report-2017-18-web.pdf#page=118
https://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/129892/NSW-RFS-Annual-Report-2018-19-web.pdf#page=117
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 08, 2020, 07:57:52 pm
What was I saying the other day about the divide between city and country?  Never been more obvious and all it needs is a good read of posts here.  Try this .. I had to release a possum after getting it out of my roof in Kew.  Effin' nuts.  After moving here?  See a brown snake, ring a mate, 2 minutes later, shotgun and a beer.  Eye opening.  And so much better
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 08, 2020, 11:34:48 pm
What was I saying the other day about the divide between city and country?  Never been more obvious and all it needs is a good read of posts here.  Try this .. I had to release a possum after getting it out of my roof in Kew.  Effin' nuts.  After moving here?  See a brown snake, ring a mate, 2 minutes later, shotgun and a beer.  Eye opening.  And so much better
It's laughable that the people actually living in the bush are told what to do frequently by people who regardless of where they were born or grew up now choose to rarely get further away from the CBD than Prahran or Brighton.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 09, 2020, 12:03:48 am
Human Induced Climate Change and rising temps are not geared to global drought or flood, that's a crap assumption blokes like Kelly make to stir up crap for News Ltd and Newcastle Coal shipping mates. They try to assert it's Venus or Mars for the Earth.

Human Induced Climate Changes causes wild swings and extreme peaks and troughs, lots more so called Black Swan events and I think links in this thread have already discussed some relating to the current fires. Extreme rain, extreme drought, extreme blizzards and extreme firestorms.

The averages might be very deceptive if looked at in isolation.

The data shows your assertions are total BS.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 09, 2020, 08:23:42 am
The data shows your assertions are total BS.
The first most reliable bullcrap detector you can have is when you hear or read someone claim rising temperatures will lead to widespread global drought, try and sell that drought claim to the people in Bangladesh or Jakarata, or the Pacific Island nations! (For example parts of tropical Thailand are in an extreme drought, while further down the peninsula parts of Malaysia and Indonesia are flooded. Regions most would generalize as having similar climates all year round!)

What the data tells scientists is that the two primary effects will be rising average sea levels and weather regions shifting, some areas becoming dryer while other areas will become wetter. This is coupled to more extreme weather events, driven by larger differentials between high and low pressure regions. From what I've read this is likely being driven by a shift in the latitude of the circumpolar flows.

Of course these are all theories but the early signs are the scientists have got it right, as North America sees blizzard and tornado events in locations they are not previously recorded, and we may even find increasing frequency of tornado type events in parts of SE Australia. Other natural changes need to be considered, for example Victoria is currently inundated with Portuguese Man-O-War, and local fishermen are catching species that to quote them "We don't have down South!", as sure of a sign as you will find that there is a shift in ocean temps and currents.

Is it permanent or just temporary? Who knows because it takes more than a human lifetime to determine that! A reality right wing nutters like Andrew Bolt and Craig Kelly cling to as they make global assertions from cherry-picked data, they sit waiting for small localised contradictions to appear in the exposed data so they can crow about it, a tactic they learned from Christopher Mockton and the Tobacco industry designed to cast doubt on the science and data.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 09, 2020, 09:08:31 am
What was I saying the other day about the divide between city and country?  Never been more obvious and all it needs is a good read of posts here.  Try this .. I had to release a possum after getting it out of my roof in Kew.  Effin' nuts.  After moving here?  See a brown snake, ring a mate, 2 minutes later, shotgun and a beer.  Eye opening.  And so much better

I think you can find plenty of examples that go the other way, completely. I've certainly sent snakes, possums and rats to 'a better place' when they posed a threat to the wellbeing of my family or attempting to destroy my veggie patch -- yes, living in a bayside suburb then and also when we lived in Tyabb.

One of my dear friends (city dweller - outer suburb) grows the best tomatoes you will ever taste... mostly beefheart for all his pastes (tradition Italian pasta sauces). Suffice to say he has no issues with possoms. As some vanish and new ones arrive, they mysteriously vanish as well... no-one messes with his tomatoes! Kiwis have the right idea for possoms. Conversely, I can tell you about friends in Gippy who would be horrified by my mates attitudes and actions to protect his tomatoes/veggie garden!

I've lived in both city and country since leaving the Navy in 1976 and although there are some definite cultural differences, the divide is not as great as some might believe. We live 2 hours from Melbourne now and the mix of folks here is pretty diverse... there is the 'less rush' of the country here, which I like. I don't miss the smell of pollution in the air of the city, that's for sure. The smell of eucalypt in the morning... aahhhh, magnificent.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 09, 2020, 09:24:59 am
I think you can find plenty of examples that go the other way, completely. I've certainly sent snakes, possums and rats to 'a better place' when they posed a threat to the wellbeing of my family or attempting to destroy my veggie patch -- yes, living in a bayside suburb then and also when we lived in Tyabb.

One of my dear friends (city dweller - outer suburb) grows the best tomatoes you will ever taste... mostly beefheart for all his pastes (tradition Italian pasta sauces). Suffice to say he has no issues with possoms. As some vanish and new ones arrive, they mysteriously vanish as well... no-one messes with his tomatoes! Kiwis have the right idea for possoms. Conversely, I can tell you about friends in Gippy who would be horrified by my mates attitudes and actions to protect his tomatoes/veggie garden!

I've lived in both city and country since leaving the Navy in 1976 and although there are some definite cultural differences, the divide is not as great as some might believe. We live 2 hours from Melbourne now and the mix of folks here is pretty diverse... there is the 'less rush' of the country here, which I like. I don't miss the smell of pollution in the air of the city, that's for sure. The smell of eucalypt in the morning... aahhhh, magnificent.

And as for possums when people were screaming at bracks to do something about them destroying the Botanic Gardens?  The effwit said "they were here first".

Should be a state wide cull on them, bats and mynahs.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 09, 2020, 10:51:38 am
I've lived in both city and country since leaving the Navy in 1976 and although there are some definite cultural differences, the divide is not as great as some might believe.
I think the primary issue is that the impression is crafted by the loudest voices which are generally at the extremes of the debate.

In my job I get exposed to a lot of scientists, some of them actual climate and environment scientists and not just opinionated biologists or physicists. The scientists almost never use words like "will" or "is", and always use terms like "could" or "might". It's that "Imposter Syndrome" kicking in, the more you know the less definitive and confident you become.

It's the idiots, morons and extremists who declare things in the definitive, the Dunning-Kruger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect) effect in full swing!

Back on the Hazard Management / Fuel Reduction debate, the rules are the same for all fires, The Fire Triangle applies no matter if it's a wildfire in the bush or the family barbecue.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Fire_triangle.svg/1200px-Fire_triangle.svg.png)

Finally if fuel reduction isn't effective, why are they back-burning in the Corryong yesterday and again later this week?

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/residents-urged-to-flee-as-high-country-fire-danger-heads-to-extreme-20200108-p53pwa.html

The reported and published words don't mean much when the actions don't match.

Finally, why do some(people or business) want the fires to be declared an act of arson? It can be for as simple of a reason as the fine print in the insurance policy that they signed!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 09, 2020, 12:23:37 pm
And as for possums when people were screaming at bracks to do something about them destroying the Botanic Gardens?  The effwit said "they were here first".
Should be a state wide cull on them, bats and mynahs.

I wonder if Bracks applied the same logic to Indigenous Aussies?  😕

The Kiwis have the right idea for possums... they make good purses, etc. And this is from a country way more 'environmental' than us. Nothing but over grown rats those possums.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 09, 2020, 12:26:17 pm
I think the primary issue is that the impression is crafted by the loudest voices which are generally at the extremes of the debate.

In my job I get exposed to a lot of scientists, some of them actual climate and environment scientists and not just opinionated biologists or physicists. The scientists almost never use words like "will" or "is", and always use terms like "could" or "might". It's that "Imposter Syndrome" kicking in, the more you know the less definitive and confident you become.

It's the idiots, morons and extremists who declare things in the definitive, the Dunning-Kruger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect) effect in full swing!

Back on the Hazard Management / Fuel Reduction debate, the rules are the same for all fires, The Fire Triangle applies no matter if it's a wildfire in the bush or the family barbecue.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Fire_triangle.svg/1200px-Fire_triangle.svg.png)

Finally if fuel reduction isn't effective, why are they back-burning in the Corryong yesterday and again later this week?

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/residents-urged-to-flee-as-high-country-fire-danger-heads-to-extreme-20200108-p53pwa.html

The reported and published words don't mean much when the actions don't match.

Finally, why do some(people or business) want the fires to be declared an act of arson? It can be for as simple of a reason as the fine print in the insurance policy that they signed!

Good post, Spotted One.

Spot on re Dunning Kruger Effect.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 09, 2020, 12:28:15 pm
I think the primary issue is that the impression is crafted by the loudest voices which are generally at the extremes of the debate.

In my job I get exposed to a lot of scientists, some of them actual climate and environment scientists and not just opinionated biologists or physicists. The scientists almost never use words like "will" or "is", and always use terms like "could" or "might". It's that "Imposter Syndrome" kicking in, the more you know the less definitive and confident you become.

It's the idiots, morons and extremists who declare things in the definitive, the Dunning-Kruger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect) effect in full swing!

Back on the Hazard Management / Fuel Reduction debate, the rules are the same for all fires, The Fire Triangle applies no matter if it's a wildfire in the bush or the family barbecue.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Fire_triangle.svg/1200px-Fire_triangle.svg.png)

Finally if fuel reduction isn't effective, why are they back-burning in the Corryong yesterday and again later this week?

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/residents-urged-to-flee-as-high-country-fire-danger-heads-to-extreme-20200108-p53pwa.html

The reported and published words don't mean much when the actions don't match.

Finally, why do some(people or business) want the fires to be declared an act of arson? It can be for as simple of a reason as the fine print in the insurance policy that they signed!

https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/bfab/bfab059

It's a real problem.

Harsher penalties a must.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: spf on January 09, 2020, 01:08:48 pm
https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/bfab/bfab059

It's a real problem.

Harsher penalties a must.

Thanks for the link. I am not sure about the 'harsher penalties' argument as I seriously doubt the people who do this think much before they act. If you are wanting to lock them up for longer, then yes that may be effective - but how do we identify these people, and then how do we find out the motivation? We must stop the cause which is mental in nature.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 09, 2020, 01:19:28 pm
https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/bfab/bfab059

It's a real problem.

Harsher penalties a must.
What is the general public's perceived definition of arson, and what is the official definition of arson?

When News Ltd report arson, I bet the bulk of readers think somebody sneaking around setting fires, when the greens report arson I suspect their definition probably includes some poor bastard who's tractor or lawnmower catches fire fringing a state forest, in other words those they see as environmental vandals and want to label as criminals.

When reading an emotive term like "arson" it's best to qualify that thought before jumping to conclusions.

50% of fire are deliberate or suspicious, what does suspicious cover, everything from a mower, grinder, electric fence or welder to a cigarette butt I presume?

I remember years ago the authorities refused to accept a link between dumping rubbish on roadsides and fires, but then the CSIRO proved that discarded glass(intact or smashed) could start a fire unassisted. So is a rubbish dumper an arsonist?

This is so reminiscent of the discussion we had in another thread about football statistics.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 09, 2020, 01:25:31 pm
Good post, Spotted One.

Spot on re Dunning Kruger Effect.

People who "don't know what they don't know" or are "unconsciously incompetent"??
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 09, 2020, 01:29:12 pm
People who "don't know what they don't know" or are "unconsciously incompetent"??
Very true Cookie2, the devil is always in the detail, and it's clear it's not always a conscious act to behave irresponsibly.

I suppose that is why the legal term Manslaughter exists!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 09, 2020, 01:31:24 pm
Thanks for the link. I am not sure about the 'harsher penalties' argument as I seriously doubt the people who do this think much before they act. If you are wanting to lock them up for longer, then yes that may be effective - but how do we identify these people, and then how do we find out the motivation? We must stop the cause which is mental in nature.

I think it stated somewhere that some of the fires were started not by deliberately being lit but by carelessness e.g. dropped cigarette, or by a small fire or bbq getting out of control. That would be different, imo anyway, to someone lighting a fire with deliberate intent to cause major damage but the outcome is often the same. Both of these circumstances were included in the figures I understand.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: kruddler on January 09, 2020, 03:45:18 pm
I think it stated somewhere that some of the fires were started not by deliberately being lit but by carelessness e.g. dropped cigarette, or by a small fire or bbq getting out of control. That would be different, imo anyway, to someone lighting a fire with deliberate intent to cause major damage but the outcome is often the same. Both of these circumstances were included in the figures I understand.

Correct.

My boss lives in a Kangaroo ground on a few acres. They have big blokes there considering its proximity to the city and plenty of bush.

Both this fire season, and black friday he had to deal with fires on his street.
Both times the cause of the fires was the neighbour across the road.
Both times he did the wrong thing.
1. Black Friday.....He burnt off too late and tried to cover his tracks by burrying the fires/embers. It burned underground for kms before popping up and starting a huge bush fire.
2. More recently, mid-december of last year, he burned off later than he should have....again. This time he didn't bury it but left it to smulder. A few days later those huge winds we had reignited the remains and it created another decent sized fire.

Both times it was his fault, but not deliberate.
First time he got a slap on the wrist.
Not sure what will happen this time. But the neighbourhood are furious with him.....and rightly so.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: chalkybill on January 09, 2020, 08:18:50 pm
24 arrested for 'alleged' arson. 

By the way I suggest that people google 'Victorian '39 fires' to find that this horrendous fire is nowhere near as large nor, thankfully, as deadly.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 10, 2020, 08:10:03 am
I'm full of admiration for those who stay and fight the fires defending their property, I suspect it's the right thing to do and eases the burden on the already stretched CFA, as long as those who stay are properly prepared to do so.

Having said that I probably wouldn't stay and would ask my family to leave, and clear out the pets(horses, dogs, cats, etc, etc..). Primarily I'd leave because we might be more of a burden than assistance, so staying is the wrong thing to do.

But then it's horses for courses, a slow moving ground fire in calm conditions is relatively dependable and ember attack is your property's main problem, but if the fire is crowning or if the winds are high you can't be out fighting the fire front, you have to shelter until it passes then do your work in pretty hazardous conditions to minimise damage if you can. So you need to be fundamentally in good health, a few too many people survive fire fronts then have strokes or heart-attacks in the aftermath.

Governments spend millions and billions fighting fires and rebuilding, but you can't get a grant to build a fire shelter/bunker or add a sprinkler system to your house! Yet they'll fund your solar cells or lithium(explosive in fires) battery retrofit. It's a very odd situation in a country like Australia, we a carbon blip on the global scale, not even a fart on China or India emissions! Our priorities are all wrong, and our carbon emissions critics won't differentiate between regular per-capita consumption of resources and the continual rebuilding from fires, they do not want to acknowledge that they'd rather slight us as wasteful!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Lods on January 16, 2020, 06:51:59 pm
Funny old country this one.... ;)

Said Hanrahan
P.J. Hartigan ("John O’Brien")  (100 years ago)
"We’ll all be rooned," said Hanrahan
In accents most forlorn
Outside the church ere Mass began
One frosty Sunday morn.
The congregation stood about,
Coat-collars to the ears,
And talked of stock and crops and drought
As it had done for years.
"It’s lookin’ crook," said Daniel Croke;
"Bedad, it’s cruke, me lad
For never since the banks went broke
Has seasons been so bad."
"It’s dry, all right," said young O’Neil,
With which astute remark
He squatted down upon his heel
And chewed a piece of bark.
And so around the chorus ran
"It’s keepin’ dry, no doubt."
"We’ll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"Before the year is out.
"The crops are done; ye’ll have your work
To save one bag of grain;
From here way out to Back-O’-Bourke
They’re singin’ out for rain.
"They’re singin’ out for rain," he said,
"And all the tanks are dry."
The congregation scratched its head,
And gazed around the sky.
"There won’t be grass, in any case,
Enough to feed an ass;
There’s not a blade on Casey’s place
As I came down to Mass."
"If rain don’t come this month," said Dan,
And cleared his throat to speak –
"We’ll all be rooned," said Hanrahan, "
If rain don’t come this week."
A heavy silence seemed to steal
On all at this remark;
And each man squatted on his heel,
And chewed a piece of bark.
"We want an inch of rain, we do,"
O’Neil observed at last;
But Croke "maintained" we wanted two
To put the danger past.
"If we don’t get three inches, man,
Or four to break this drought,
We’ll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"Before the year is out."
In God’s good time down came the rain;
And all the afternoon
On iron roof and window-pane
It drummed a homely tune.
And through the night it pattered still,
And lightsome, gladsome elves
On dripping spout and window-sill
Kept talking to themselves.
It pelted, pelted all day long,
A-singing at its work,
Till every heart took up the song
Way out to Back-O’-Bourke.
And every creek a banker ran,
And dams filled overtop;
"We’ll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"If this rain doesn’t stop."
And stop it did, in God’s good time:
And spring came in to fold
A mantle o’er the hills sublime
Of green and pink and gold.
And days went by on dancing feet,
With harvest-hopes immense,
And laughing eyes beheld the wheat
Nid-nodding o’er the fence.
And, oh, the smiles on every face,
As happy lad and lass
Through grass knee-deep on Casey’s place
Went riding down to Mass.
While round the church in clothes genteel
Discoursed the men of mark,
And each man squatted on his heel,
And chewed his piece of bark.
"There’ll be bush-fires for sure, me man,
There will, without a doubt;
We’ll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"Before the year is out."
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: DJC on January 16, 2020, 11:53:54 pm
24 arrested for 'alleged' arson. 

By the way I suggest that people google 'Victorian '39 fires' to find that this horrendous fire is nowhere near as large nor, thankfully, as deadly.

Sorry Chalky but you’re way off the mark there. We’ve never experienced anything like the intensity, extent and duration of the current bushfires ... and we’re still not in the peak bushfire season.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 17, 2020, 09:51:42 am
Look it up David - Byram's Fire intensity Equation. The gold standard and undisputed for 70+ years.

Fuel load is the one thing we can control and we don't - whether that's a function of funding, green policy or bureaucratic ineptitude or a combo i don't know.

The 2010 RC into the 2009 fires received multiple recommendations that 8% be burnt annually on a rolling basis to maintain low load The RC finally settled on 5%.

Both Victorian and NSW State Governments burn about 2% a year. Both Premiers should be sacked as far as I am concerned.

There's your problem right there. Noting drought doesn't help. Yet our greatest drought - the Federation Drought that went from 1891 to 1903 was well before the mania of carbon dioxide reared its ugly head.

And agree, the 1939 fires dwarfed the current (Victorian fires) every which way - area, property and human life loss.

To attribute this to 'climate change' is facile. Extremely facile and not supported by any verifiable data globally.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 17, 2020, 10:13:43 am
My Country (written in 1904)

The love of field and coppice
Of green and shaded lanes,
Of ordered woods and gardens
Is running in your veins.
Strong love of grey-blue distance,
Brown streams and soft, dim skies
I know, but cannot share it,
My love is otherwise.

I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,
Of droughts and flooding rains.
I love her far horizons,
I love her jewel-sea,
Her beauty and her terror
The wide brown land for me!

The stark white ring-barked forests,
All tragic to the moon,
The sapphire-misted mountains,
The hot gold hush of noon,
Green tangle of the brushes
Where lithe lianas coil,
And orchids deck the tree-tops,
And ferns the warm dark soil.

Core of my heart, my country!
Her pitiless blue sky,
When, sick at heart, around us
We see the cattle die
But then the grey clouds gather,
And we can bless again
The drumming of an army,
The steady soaking rain.

Core of my heart, my country!
Land of the rainbow gold,
For flood and fire and famine
She pays us back threefold.
Over the thirsty paddocks,
Watch, after many days,
The filmy veil of greenness
That thickens as we gaze ...

An opal-hearted country,
A wilful, lavish land
All you who have not loved her,
You will not understand
though Earth holds many splendours,
Wherever I may die,
I know to what brown country
My homing thoughts will fly.

**
Dorothea Mackeller
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 17, 2020, 10:33:49 am
The first most reliable bullcrap detector you can have is when you hear or read someone claim rising temperatures will lead to widespread global drought, try and sell that drought claim to the people in Bangladesh or Jakarata, or the Pacific Island nations! (For example parts of tropical Thailand are in an extreme drought, while further down the peninsula parts of Malaysia and Indonesia are flooded. Regions most would generalize as having similar climates all year round!)

What the data tells scientists is that the two primary effects will be rising average sea levels and weather regions shifting, some areas becoming dryer while other areas will become wetter. This is coupled to more extreme weather events, driven by larger differentials between high and low pressure regions. From what I've read this is likely being driven by a shift in the latitude of the circumpolar flows.

Of course these are all theories but the early signs are the scientists have got it right, as North America sees blizzard and tornado events in locations they are not previously recorded, and we may even find increasing frequency of tornado type events in parts of SE Australia. Other natural changes need to be considered, for example Victoria is currently inundated with Portuguese Man-O-War, and local fishermen are catching species that to quote them "We don't have down South!", as sure of a sign as you will find that there is a shift in ocean temps and currents.

Is it permanent or just temporary? Who knows because it takes more than a human lifetime to determine that! A reality right wing nutters like Andrew Bolt and Craig Kelly cling to as they make global assertions from cherry-picked data, they sit waiting for small localised contradictions to appear in the exposed data so they can crow about it, a tactic they learned from Christopher Mockton and the Tobacco industry designed to cast doubt on the science and data.

LP, I gather you're some sort of scientist. You should be more sceptical.

Most climate scientists (who rule the roost) are climate modellers eg Schmidt at GISS, Mikey Mann etc.

Sea level rise - the rate of rise has not increased one iota (and the satellite data is crap on SLR - the error far exceeds any change measured).

ps the Pacific Island spin - what qa crock. We have very reliable data (and a recent study said many of t he islands are in fact getting bigger) - http://www.bom.gov.au/oceanography/projects/spslcmp/data/monthly.shtml

After all, we're in an interglacial, temps should be rising as should sea level.

Noting we emerged from the Little Ice Age in the late 1800s - of course we should warm after that...and thank f... too.

Is this warming unprecedented? No. The Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period (once called Optimums for a reason) were all significantly warmer, nor is the rate of warming unprecedented.

This is irrefutable.

The 1910- 40s warmed just as fast. With no rise in CO2. Then when CO2 was really cranking up, the planet cooled from the mid 40s to the late 70s. The world was crapting itself about another ice age right through the 70s. Fact.

if anything the high resolution ice core data suggests CO2 lags temperature (800yr+ lag) which is a far more scientifically sound proposition.

The AGW theory is a poor theory, has not been empirically proven - EVER - and the observed data (remember the scientific method?) simply debunks the theory. QED as they say.

The models are crap - the climate sensitivity attributed  is simply way overstated.

It's all about politics, money and control of the populace.

F..., we can't predict weather a few weeks out, how can we believe anything the muppets say about 2100?

Nor does data suggest storms or other natural disasters are more prevalent. Quite the reverse in fact.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Jack Burton on January 17, 2020, 10:36:26 am
According to fireys, there hasn't been enough hazard reduction burning done in the past 12 months or so because they haven't had favourable conditions in which to do the burns. This is mostly because everything is too dry. There are strict conditions that have to be met before they can do a hazard reduction burn, and they just haven't had enough opportunities to do what they want and need to do
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 17, 2020, 10:57:00 am
LP, I gather you're some sort of scientist. You should be more sceptical.

Most climate scientists (who rule the roost) are climate modellers eg Schmidt at GISS, Mikey Mann etc.

Sea level rise - the rate of rise has not increased one iota (and the satellite data is crap on SLR - the error far exceeds any change measured).

ps the Pacific Island spin - what qa crock. We have very reliable data (and a recent study said many of t he islands are in fact getting bigger) - http://www.bom.gov.au/oceanography/projects/spslcmp/data/monthly.shtml

After all, we're in an interglacial, temps should be rising as should sea level.

Noting we emerged from the Little Ice Age in the late 1800s - of course we should warm after that...and thank f... too.

Is this warming unprecedented? No. The Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period (once called Optimums for a reason) were all significantly warmer, nor is the rate of warming unprecedented.

This is irrefutable.

The 1910- 40s warmed just as fast. With no rise in CO2. Then when CO2 was really cranking up, the planet cooled from the mid 40s to the late 70s. The world was crapting itself about another ice age right through the 70s. Fact.

if anything the high resolution ice core data suggests CO2 lags temperature (800yr+ lag) which is a far more scientifically sound proposition.

The AGW theory is a poor theory, has not been empirically proven - EVER - and the observed data (remember the scientific method?) simply debunks the theory. QED as they say.

The models are crap - the climate sensitivity attributed  is simply way overstated.

It's all about politics, money and control of the populace.

F..., we can't predict weather a few weeks out, how can we believe anything the muppets say about 2100?

Nor does data suggest storms or other natural disasters are more prevalent. Quite the reverse in fact.

When I'm "told" to believe the science, I know it's BS.  People are so 'effin gullible, they now hold it to be the absolute truth.  It's not.






Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 17, 2020, 11:14:45 am
Jack,

They haven't done enough in the past decade!!

If it's about resources, give them the resources.

20 men can do in 1 day, what 1 man can do in 20?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 17, 2020, 11:28:37 am
Firstly Flyboy77, relax nobody is blaming you personally for climate change, you are not the isolated cause so there is no need to be so defensive. Certainly though you and everybody contributes to climate change, and it's the result of a very complex set of circumstances which all of humanity and nature drives.

Most climate scientists (who rule the roost) are climate modellers eg Schmidt at GISS, Mikey Mann etc.
All scientists are modellers, that is how science works, you try to find a way to model a process(with algorithms or math) and see if your hypothesis(model) fits reality before deciding if your model is any good and worth persisting with, which means trying to defending and destroying your own work.

Skeptics use the term "modeler" to try and cast a derogatory perception of scientists like the scientists are some nerd sitting in a basement making a model out of icy-pole sticks or airfix kits, when you hear or read that modeler argument you know the person making that claim is the ignorant one!

Sea level rise - the rate of rise has not increased one iota (and the satellite data is crap on SLR - the error far exceeds any change measured).
Firstly, the median is a statistical analysis, the error bars are an indication of the confidence in data and a trend can still be clearly exposed. If the rate of rise was continuous or had remained the same for hundreds of years most of the land we are located on would not exist, the sea level rise figures quoted are averages across the globe and like the wind speed in a weather report the peaks and troughs will be much higher than the average, and it's the peaks and troughs that do damage to the way we live!

No scientist claims that nothing changes, the claim nothing changes is the realm of uninformed skeptics.

ps the Pacific Island spin - what qa crock. We have very reliable data (and a recent study said many of t he islands are in fact getting bigger) - http://www.bom.gov.au/oceanography/projects/spslcmp/data/monthly.shtml
There is no scientist generally claiming islands are shrinking or getting bigger.

Sea level rise and total land area are not necessarily connected, primarily because historically changes in land from tectonic or erosion processes happens faster than historical changes in sea level, and when ice melts the underlying land might rise increasing the total area.(See your next point!)

After all, we're in an interglacial, temps should be rising as should sea level.
Isolation(cherry-picking) of facts doesn't make a point valid, scientists look at the big picture which includes sea level, CO2 levels, methane levels, atmospheric temperatures, wind speed(at sea level and high in the atmosphere), ocean flows, ocean temps, ocean acidity, creature behavior/migration, vegetation changes, etc., etc..

Noting we emerged from the Little Ice Age in the late 1800s - of course we should warm after that...and thank f... too.
There are any other number of effects such as CO2 levels or ocean acidity levels that are now changing that didn't change in previous ice-ages, the scientists who are not climate scientists (geologists, archaeologists and paleontologists can confirm this by study dozens of such historical events including the most recent ice age as well as any of the others which happen on 100000 year cycles on average). btw., Recently Ice Age is the normal state of the planet, the Interglacial Periods are just a few percent of history over the last few million years!

Is this warming unprecedented? No. The Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period (once called Optimums for a reason) were all significantly warmer, nor is the rate of warming unprecedented.
Again, warming and cooling are cyclic, in isolation they mean nothing but that doesn't mean now is the same as before. Skeptics can cherry-pick thousands of such events and listing them by the hundreds or thousands just makes hundreds or thousands of the same wrong point.

This is irrefutable.
But you see it's not, and the skeptic offers it in isolation and then claims now is the same and before when it clearly isn't.

The 1910- 40s warmed just as fast. With no rise in CO2. Then when CO2 was really cranking up, the planet cooled from the mid 40s to the late 70s. The world was crapting itself about another ice age right through the 70s. Fact.
As mentioned Ice Age is normal in the most recent history, a history that long surpasses human history and won't end when humanity disappears. Change is normal, no scientist is claiming that things don't change, what scientists are generally claiming is that we should not do things that contribute to the problem and that we should do things to minimize potential harm and not just ignore consequence for short term benefits.

if anything the high resolution ice core data suggests CO2 lags temperature (800yr+ lag) which is a far more scientifically sound proposition.
Ice forms out of phase with changes in CO2, warming and cooling events, it's a lack of understanding about the measurement tolerances and resolution(time frame +/-) that skeptics use to twist that data.

The AGW theory is a poor theory, has not been empirically proven - EVER - and the observed data (remember the scientific method?) simply debunks the theory. QED as they say.
There is nothing in the data that debunks any hypothesis of global warming or cooling, the concept of "absolute proof" is a term used by skeptics, scientists only talk in probabilities. Maybe the ozone hole never happened like the moon landing!

The models are crap - the climate sensitivity attributed  is simply way overstated.
You claimed above the climate scientists are only "modelers", now you feel you have to disparage the models like they are an important antidote to the skeptical argument!

It's all about politics, money and control of the populace.

F..., we can't predict weather a few weeks out, how can we believe anything the muppets say about 2100?

Nor does data suggest storms or other natural disasters are more prevalent. Quite the reverse in fact.
All of this last bit exposes more about yourself and your personal view of the world than anything about climate science. You confuse short term accuracy and variation with long term trends, and in this skeptical debate is hidden the ideology effectively take up the mantle that we need not act because we'll be long dead! It's a piece of crap argument that effectively puts the burden on ancestors so we now can just keep crapping wherever we like!

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 17, 2020, 12:43:52 pm
No I don't. You want me to put up the data I will.

All you've done is hit me with rhetoric. Pick a sub set and take a crack with specifics not rubbery words...like isolation.

UAH's most recent satellite data? 0.55C rise in temperature in 41 years. And even NASA admits we're on the cusp of a big GSM.

Ocean acidification (not acidity) - the ocean is basic (alkaline) - always has been and will always be alkaline (even under the impossible RCP 8.5). Acidification is a fear mongering term - a misnomer. They've measured a drop of 0.1 to date (how they measure that on a global scale is moot given day to day and episodal movements in any one location can dwarf that drop).

You want a lesson on the scientific method?

1. Make an observation or observations.
2. Ask questions about the observations and gather information.
3. Form a hypothesis — a tentative description of what's been observed, and make predictions based on that hypothesis.
4. Test the hypothesis and predictions in an experiment that can be reproduced.
5. Analyze the data and draw conclusions; accept or reject the hypothesis or modify the hypothesis if necessary.
6. Reproduce the experiment until there are no discrepancies between observations and theory. "

AGW has failed, consistently at step 5. Fact. Or even at 4 in reality as all the fear is a function of the modelling and sfa else.

End of the day it's the alarmists, in fact, who deny and it's the alarmists who cherry pick.

Clearly your back ground includes little or no knowledge of the geologic timescale - I suggest you brush up on that  ;)

And yes, as a matter of fact, if the models have no ability to predict - they are all but useless - and a massive waste of taxpayers' money.

You should listen to Freeman Dyson, one of the great thinkers of the modern era. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hswLwqRIW8&fbclid=IwAR3xR7DD83u_Uj3xVvJnM-RffjWIYdKPdtN7MtsY4RmS5Ds60YhtHBVuYZc
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Jack Burton on January 17, 2020, 01:09:17 pm
Jack,

They haven't done enough in the past decade!!

If it's about resources, give them the resources.

20 men can do in 1 day, what 1 man can do in 20?
As I understand it's not a lack of resources, rather that the conditions are not compatible with hazard reduction burning (the fuel is too dry, the winds are too strong, temperatures are too high etc.). There just haven't been enough suitable days to do the work required
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 17, 2020, 02:21:18 pm
You should listen to Freeman Dyson, one of the great thinkers of the modern era.
Don't be scared Flyboy77, change is OK even if it's change from the old ways of burning coal and oil or driving combustion engine cars, Hyundai will still sponsor us!

If your heart surgeon states you need an operation to survive you wouldn't ask a quantum physicist like Dyson Freeman for his second opinion, just like we can't have climate scientists telling us about the safety or validity of a Freeman Dyson quantum physics experiments at CERN! Even if Dyson believes Human Induced Climate change exists, and argues that global warming doesn't or can't be derived from the data, or is exaggerated, it's just an opinion or another interested but non-specialist person. Even Dyson used specialist mathematicians and experimentalists to assist him with aspects of his work, just like scientists use engineers and engineers use tradespeople!

As you well know the intricate details are way beyond the scope of this forum, when you offer trivial bits of cherry-picked data you do a disservice to forum members in offering them a mostly vitriolic response worthless in anything other than exposing an ignorance or fear whether it be willful or naive. When I debate this topic I debate the issue, not you or any other individual. It's obvious "economic growth" is an unsustainable concept which ultimately leads to economic collapse and the global environment being trashed. Several major municipalities around the globe have realized this and are dropping GDP as a measure of performance as a result.

I've spent enough time today wasted describing to how the science and scientists do not make broad assumptions or conclusions, and your retort reverts to broad labels and generalised conclusions which clearly fall outside a rational realm. When most rational scientists discuss global warming or human induced global warming they are very careful not to discuss the course of action in terms of blame.

Scientists discuss global warming in terms of risk not absolutes, and there is no reasonable or sensible argument that can be made to not act in the mitigation of that risk. If there is a chance we contribute to that risk, then we should do whatever we reasonably can to reduce our contribution, it's that simple!

It's truly ironic that supporters of the capitalistic system, those embedded in never ending growth, arguing against the concept of being thrifty or frugal with resources! They live in empires where profit is partially defined by reduction of waste and improved efficiency, they even publish Kanban charts, provide 6-sigma training and publish triple baseline financial reports. Yet they rally against sensible global changes that will potentially minimise or mitigate human induced climate change while improving overall efficiency. Do you see the irony?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 17, 2020, 02:43:11 pm
Ocean acidification (not acidity) - the ocean is basic (alkaline) - always has been and will always be alkaline (even under the impossible RCP 8.5). Acidification is a fear mongering term - a misnomer. They've measured a drop of 0.1 to date (how they measure that on a global scale is moot given day to day and episodal movements in any one location can dwarf that drop).
We should probably applaud the ocean, it's doing it's best to absorb as much CO2 as possible, if the situation changes things would be very dire!

That 0.1 is a nice way to trivialize the process required to make that level of change, billions or trillions of tonnes of CO2 absorbed or emitted. It is a foible of human perception to judge these events as a percentage change on a global atmospheric scale. Our entire existence occurs inside a thin film volume bounded by less than 1% of the atmosphere and oceans. We could trivialize changes using averages that are accounted for over the full volumes, but that might bear no resemblance to what happens in our thin atmospheric surface film of existence!

Offering the 0.1 average as an argument for minimal human induced change is making the same trivial mistake as the average weather report wind-speed example I discussed earlier, the serious climate effects are experienced in the peaks and troughs. You even indirectly debunk your own point in the sentence highlight, you are not being logically consistent, I think the problem is referred to as self-referential inconsistency!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 17, 2020, 03:08:09 pm
UAH's most recent satellite data? 0.55C rise in temperature in 41 years. And even NASA admits we're on the cusp of a big GSM.
Do you know what a GSM is, the time span it occurs over, and it's global effects?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 17, 2020, 03:14:09 pm
Ocean acidification (not acidity)
.
.
.
Clearly your back ground includes little or no knowledge of the geologic timescale - I suggest you brush up on that  ;)
If you wish to get persnickety, that would be background wouldn't it?

Can you sell me a brush? ;D

Unlike some skeptical commentators I know enough about deep time not to confuse CO2 or global temperatures from the Hadean or Achean(FFS, lunatics quoting relative Hadean temperatures as proof the earth isn't warning!) with the post-Proterozoic Cenozoic or as it may now become cynically known the Pyrozoic! And probably I know just enough not to equate effects that happen over tens or hundreds of years like recent CO2 rise and a Grand Solar Minimum(GSM), with geologic processes that occur over thousands or millions of years like an ice age! ::)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 17, 2020, 03:53:49 pm
UAH's most recent satellite data? 0.55C rise in temperature in 41 years. And even NASA admits we're on the cusp of a big GSM.
Do you know what a GSM is, the time span it occurs over, and it's global effects?
Come on don't leave me hanging, the anticipation is killing me, I yearn to learn!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 17, 2020, 05:40:19 pm
Sorry Chalky but you’re way off the mark there. We’ve never experienced anything like the intensity, extent and duration of the current bushfires ... and we’re still not in the peak bushfire season.

Sorry, Chalky Old Son, but DJC is spot on. And those on the ground, facing these fires, who've faced and studied firefighting for decades, say the same thing.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 18, 2020, 08:04:59 am
Seriously LP. you're projecting.

Look that up.

I used the issue of ocean alkalinity as it is but one example of the laughable scare mongering rolled out by alarmists. And your commentary suggests you don't even get a log scale....no wonder your comments were facile and rhetorical.

No doubt you missed this during the week. eight studies out of JCU could not be replicated. Hmmmm.

https://phys.org/news/2020-01-double-checking-science-ocean-acidification-impair.html

When scientists fudge/adjust/manipulate data there's an agenda. And in the climate change field, there's been mountains of dodgy stuff going on - Mann, Marcott, Climategate, the JCU stuff....

I gave you the opportunity to hone in a particular topic and get to the nitty-gritty - you chose the ad hominem attack.

Says it all really.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 18, 2020, 04:19:14 pm
Seriously LP. you're projecting.

Look that up.

I used the issue of ocean alkalinity as it is but one example of the laughable scare mongering rolled out by alarmists. And your commentary suggests you don't even get a log scale....no wonder your comments were facile and rhetorical.

No doubt you missed this during the week. eight studies out of JCU could not be replicated. Hmmmm.

https://phys.org/news/2020-01-double-checking-science-ocean-acidification-impair.html

When scientists fudge/adjust/manipulate data there's an agenda. And in the climate change field, there's been mountains of dodgy stuff going on - Mann, Marcott, Climategate, the JCU stuff....

I gave you the opportunity to hone in a particular topic and get to the nitty-gritty - you chose the ad hominem attack.

Says it all really.
That and personal attacks would be your modus operandi, I'm not here to assist you in correcting that behaviour. It is a matter for you!

So ignoring the diversion back to the debate, after all a bit of learning and we might be able to send Scotty from Marketing some useful advice for his new clean green persona, Scotty too Hotty!

So I'm still waiting for anything from you on the pending GSM and global warming, even a rough general summary is fine. It's not a bogus fact you picked up somewhere and repeated is it?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 11:32:29 am
I guess you forgot to look up the meaning of projection LP?

It was you who suggested I couldn't distinguish between a median and an average.

But of course, that's ok, as you have the moral high ground right?

GSM?

https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2910/what-is-the-suns-role-in-climate-change/

(noting NASA of course will down play the implications and keep on with the AGW narrative)

Zharkova's work is good too.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 12:27:17 pm
https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2910/what-is-the-suns-role-in-climate-change/

(noting NASA of course will down play the implications and keep on with the AGW narrative)

NASA doesn't have to downplay anything, because GSM isn't a measure of fluence(the total solar flux over time). GSM(Grand Solar Minimum) is primarily a measure of general solar/sunspot activity, a longer term version of the Suns regular 11 year cycle.

Even Wikipedia gets GSM (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_minimum#Grand_solar_minima_and_maxima) right, I don't think NASA has anything to worry about being proven wrong by skeptics! ;D

It's uniformed skeptics who attached a significant effect to the GSM in an effort to explain climate change. Confusing and erroneously referencing things like the GSM and Maunder Minimum to "explain" why the Earth was cooler then and hotter now. I gather they erroneously think "Grand Solar Minimum" means something significant in regards to fluence.

(https://climate.nasa.gov/internal_resources/1897/)

Of course basic analysis of the data shows the total fluence varies by less than 0.1%, about +/- 1W around an average fluence of 1360W/m² (1/1360 x 100 = 0.07%). You know the mysterious yellow scale on the left of the graph above, which I think some crazy people call the Y-Axis, it's a scale apparently!

While Earth's aphelion(furthest from Sun) and perihelion(closest to Sun) position contributes a +/- 3% change in total fluence yearly, you know more scales and logarithms! ;D

Assuming skeptics accept that the Earth does travel around the Sun in a ellipse and that it's not flat.

Of course if Earth is flat then forget everything I said! :o

So is the skeptics failure to accept primary school math deliberate wilful ignorance, pure stupidity, or perhaps Dunning-Kruger at work again?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 01:27:06 pm
Now you're just making stuff up.

No more from me. Like every other alarmist, totally incapable of having a rational debate/discussion.

ps if you're playing the facile D-K card, projection looks a certainty.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 01:52:09 pm
Now you're just making stuff up.

No more from me. Like every other alarmist, totally incapable of having a rational debate/discussion.

ps if you're playing the facile D-K card, projection looks a certainty.
A typical skeptic's reaction to any uncomfortable truth, you can try to walk away but you can't escape reality.

As I wrote earlier, there is no need to feel guilty or act defensively because Global Warming is not your fault!

Flyboy77,  you would be much better off if you put as much effort into understanding the facts as you do dredging up fakes! But I realise the fakes are the downhill path, the easier way out of understanding a sometimes difficult problem! Just deny, deny, deny and it will all be good!

Rational scientists do not lay blame for this, they just explain the data and the risks, then usually recommend some sensible actions like harm minimisation!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 06:32:08 pm
Rational scientists? I'll take Will Happer, Richard Lindzen, Peter Ridd and Freeman Dyson over your 'spin' any day of the week (noting again, you're the one failing to debate any of the issues).

And my knowledge of the facts - and understanding most of the relevant science - I'd suggest at least equals yours.

This sums up the scam nicely. Perhaps you're part of the game?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGe9JO58Uc8

You've been surprisingly lightweight.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 09:10:48 pm
No physicist or another other person with rudimentary algebra skills will claim a GSM, whether it is a Minimum or Maximum event, has any significant impact on temperature, global warming, human induced global warming or cooling!

Firstly, given the term GSM describes sun spots and other solar activity like CME(Coronal Mass Ejection) primarily exposed by techniques from the field of Helioseismology.

Secondly, even if it had some detectable influence on changes in fluence(irradiation over time), the math shows it's effect would only be about 1/90th of the effect that the Earth experiences from the elliptical orbit it completes year after year!

The Earth temperature rising by 1°C on average is roughly a 6.7% change in temperature, because the average Earth temperature is about 15.0°C. You know stats, scales, ratios and averages which might be important given some parts of Earth are frozen and others are desert! ;)

The total solar irradiance(TSI) level changing from the average due to a GSMaximum might be 1360W/m² to 1361W/m² which is only a 0.07% change!

But don't let facts like math get in the way of your imagination, just stick fat with the crazy ideas of "Scotty from Marketing" and "The Donald"! ;D
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 09:31:05 pm
Perhaps you looked up 'projection' and decided moved onto obfuscation.

Again, you ignored all the issues raised (again) and hit the rhetoric button. Ho hum.

And I love your use of all these numbers to two decimal places. You've clearly been to the same 'learn to ride a bike' school that Al Gore went to back in his day.

By the by, did you look up the meaning of 'acidification'? Get a handle on what it actually means....?

Perhaps we should talk about polar bears now - they've long been the poster animal of your cult.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 09:58:24 pm
Again, you ignored all the issues raised (again) and hit the rhetoric button. Ho hum.
I can't debate fake facts because they are fake, including the old Tony Heller "fake faked graphs routine!"

You may as well start your claims by writing something like "After Carlton won the 2018 premiership things got colder!" Because your weather theories and facts are just as inaccurate as the imagined AFL result!

Tony Heller you offer above was caught out altering the graphs! The very graphs he provides in his video as proof of NOAA and NASA altering graphs! The unaltered graphs are still available to this day on the NOAA and NASA websites, here are some unaltered officially published data sets;

(https://climatefeedback.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/nasa_gistemp_versions.jpg)
(https://climatefeedback.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/figure1_1-1200_ed-1024x757.png)
(https://climatefeedback.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/dT_from_1880s-1024x597.png)

Of course we won't worry about the fact that NOAA and other scientific organisations actually calibrate data by cross referencing multiple methods of measurement to improve it's accuracy, which actually reduced temperature rise from the last centuries raw data! They don't fake a graph like Heller then offer it in isolation as proof of anything!

Another uncomfortable truth for the sceptics to deal with, it's so easy to disprove the climate sceptics fraud that children can do it! ;D
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 10:10:06 pm
Don't have time to look into your claim (now) but I get the feeling you're awfully smug (think certitude). Heller is a geo, an IT geek and an engineer. A very, very smart hombre with an impeccable CV. I've looked at enough of his core data to know he's on the up and up.

But again, you endeavour to attack the man rather than the information presented - says it ALL.

And again, you avoid the real issues - sea level rise (or lack thereof), ocean 'acidification' (or lack thereof), unprecedented temperature rise (or lack thereof), ice cap melting (or lack thereof).

I know a few folk who are religious - I gather when one buys in, its wholly (yes, pun intended). No questions asked.

That's where you appear to sit.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 10:33:15 pm
But again, you endeavour to attack the man rather than the information presented - says it ALL.
So exposing someone's alleged fraudulent behaviour is an unsuitable topic of discussion and I'm smug, yet the accused fraud and the former Australian Senator that partly funds his activities are somehow nice blokes! :D

Isn't offering an alleged frauds fraudulent report as supporting evidence an issue? :o

I've already pointed out that scientists do not make claims of certainty, so you post assertions of certitude, obfuscation and avoidance. Publication tactics perfectly copied by climate sceptics from the Tobacco Lobby!

All the presented data represents trends and risks, and it will change over time with improvements in measurement and calibration techniques, it's people like Heller that try to assert that it's immutable and that any hint of change is conspiracy!

There is no subject you can drag into this debate to divert from the real facts, whether it's making false claims about peak science organisations, dragging various religions into the debate or implying that the presented basic math and charted data is merely obfuscation to avoid debating the issues!

Debunk the basic math if you feel it's wrong.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 10:48:22 pm
Again, you avoid discussion of the issues that support (lamely granted) your need to 'fix' the world...

That's ok, it's standard fare. Just spruik the 'trust the scientists' mantra (even if largely the bad, conflicted scientists' BS)

You want to talk about data manipulation do you?

BOM and their ACORN datasets - nothing more needs to be said.

Climategate never happened right? All innocent grade school banter?

New Zealand? https://truebluenz.com/new-zealand-climate-scientist-dr-david-kear-debunks-climate-crisis/?fbclid=IwAR0KlhXK46-TKqfnAURDezGSgID-oHvAUvLwruGBsL-yscAENP243Ud4-qo

RIP. These old timers are the real deal. They don't hide behind the mega $$$ of GCMs and the like.

And you never did comment on the MWP or the RWP etc. Funny that.

Bit beyond your pay grade I guess.

ps I'll email Heller - see how he responds.



Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 10:56:26 pm
ps I'll email Heller - see how he responds.
Ask him about the Sandy Hook Massacre conspiracy theories he has promoted, his other publishing pseudonym Stephen Goddard, and his connection with the Institute of Public Affairs and other conspiratorial organisations! ;)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 11:01:22 pm
BOM and their ACORN datasets - nothing more needs to be said.
Except there is, the assertion of some conspiracy was more fake news based around claims of the BoM changing data.

Data that is actually re-calibrated and standardised as the global organisations set new international standards for data homogenisation so that the world speaks the same units of measure relative to global standards. Like the NOAA graph a few posts ago! ;D

That BoM / ACORN conspiracy was debunked more than half a decade ago!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 11:01:42 pm
You think this is new news?

Again, you reveal your facile nature by playing the man.

Piss weak LP. I would have thought a CFC man would have a better spine.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 11:04:15 pm
Except there is, the assertion of some conspiracy was more fake news based around claims of the BoM changing data.

Data that is actually re-calibrated and standardised as the global organisations set new international standards for data homogenisation so that the world speaks the same units of measure relative to global standards. Like the NOAA graph a few posts ago! ;D

That BoM / ACORN conspiracy was debunked more than half a decade ago!

Too easy,

You'got all the answers - without any detail. As usual.

This as usual is pointless.


Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 11:13:25 pm
Too easy,

You'got all the answers - without any detail. As usual.

This as usual is pointless.
So the truth is uncomfortable, that seems your default response!

I'll offer this link for those interested, it's a nice record and explanation of the events.
https://theconversation.com/no-the-bureau-of-meteorology-is-not-fiddling-its-weather-data-31009
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 11:21:43 pm
New Zealand? https://truebluenz.com/new-zealand-climate-scientist-dr-david-kear-debunks-climate-crisis/?fbclid=IwAR0KlhXK46-TKqfnAURDezGSgID-oHvAUvLwruGBsL-yscAENP243Ud4-qo
So the link opens with;
Quote from: TrueBlueNZ
The following is reproduced from a 2013 self published article by Dr David Kear. Dr Kear has impeccable credentials as a climate scientist, and to his advantage, was educated when universities schooled students in how to think, and didn’t tell them what to think. He died in 2019 aged 95.
Except Kear allegedly wasn't a climate scientist but a geologist!

He was another like Freeman Dyson (Physicist) who took issue with Human Induced Climate change in his later years, and his self-published articles have been somewhat corrupted to support radical climate denialists. Kear had a right to an opinion as any do, but like Dyson not all opinions are equal and a geologist's opinion is not equal to a genuine climate researcher's opinion. btw., Kear's alleged primary problem with the science was in the language used to describe minimums and maximum measurements, he didn't have much of an issue with most of the actual numbers or measurements presented, and he mostly debates whether warming was human induced or natural occuring, not if it was real!

Is anything you've found to support your opinion going to be accurate?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 11:32:32 pm
At the facile level, multiple issues:

1. ACORN 1 came into being when? 2008 odd? Touted as the gold standard, impeccable, best data EVA.

And "3.    What is homogenisation?
Homogenisation refers to the method of adjusting
temperature records to remove artificial biases,
such as the impact of a weather station moving
from one location to another.

Cry me a river. I'm sniffing Windy Hill off site tweaks?

2. But wait - more needed!

A new adjusted dataset, ACORN 2, was then was 'necessary" a few years later - even more 'adjustments'. The justification is little more than embarrassing - http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/acorn-sat/documents/BRR-032.pdf

https://jennifermarohasy.com/2019/12/new-record-temperatures-need-justification/

This in a country with an unquestioned record of keeping impeccable statistics dating back to the 1800s.

Suddenly the data is questionable....

3. The BoM has chosen to ignore all data pre 1910. Hmmm.

This is not conspiracy LP, this is fact.

Yep, if people want to witness the smoke and mirrors, pretty easy...
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 11:36:07 pm
Climategate never happened right? All innocent grade school banter?
You mean Professor Phil Jones, the guy that Climate Change Denialist's had dragged before the UK Parliament only to see fully exonerated. A case they initiated and then labelled a conspiracy when it didn't go their way!

Then the same fringe groups tried to disparage Professor Jones' team in an an investigation chaired by the former head of Shell UK(Yes chaired by the former head of an oil company.) Which also cleared Professor Jones' staff and stated they acted with rigour, honesty and integrity.

Unlike their accusers it seems! ;D
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 11:36:17 pm
So the link opens with;Except Kear allegedly wasn't a climate scientist but a geologist!

He was another like Freeman Dyson (Physicist) who took issue with Human Induced Climate change in his later years, and his self-published articles have been somewhat corrupted to support radical climate denialists. Kear had a right to an opinion as any do, but like Dyson not all opinions are equal and a geologist's opinion is not equal to a genuine climate researcher's opinion. btw., Kear's alleged primary problem with the science was in the language used to describe minimums and maximum measurements, he didn't have much of an issue with most of the actual numbers or measurements presented, and he mostly debates whether warming was human induced or natural occurring, not if it was real!

Is anything you've found to support your opinion going to be accurate?

So tell me LP, who is a climate scientist? What qualifications are required?

Mikey Mann (modeller), Schmidt (god knows), you?

Pray tell?

And again, you play the man. Not the ball.

Didn't you play footy?

Both Dyson and Happer are forces in science, world leading CO2 experts - and you just diss them.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 11:38:38 pm

 
You mean Professor Phil Jones, the guy that Climate Change Denialist's had dragged before the UK Parliament only to be fully exonerated.

Then the same fringe groups tried to disparage Professor Jones' team in an an investigation chaired by the former head of Shell UK(Yes chaired by the former head of an oil company.) Which also cleared Professor Jones' staff and stated they acted with rigour, honesty and integrity.

Unlike their accusers it seems! ;D

Either you're ignorant or being disingenuous. There was no exoneration.

https://judithcurry.com/2019/11/12/legacy-of-climategate-10-years-later/

I guess if you're in, or close to the game, spin is an important skill as any.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 19, 2020, 11:43:25 pm
PJ copping a beating.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 11:45:24 pm
There was no exoneration.
The exoneration was official and came from the UK Parliament's Science and Technology Committee, the committee which conducted the enquiry for the UK Parliament.

The links you provide are not official, they are opinions! ;)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 19, 2020, 11:53:46 pm
Both Dyson and Happer are forces in science, world leading CO2 experts - and you just diss them.
Nope that's a straight out lie.

In their fields of nuclear physics and maths Freeman Dyson and William Happer were leading scientists, but on CO2 Emissions and Climate Research they are just offering unqualified opinions like everybody else! Some of Happer's alleged claims actually fail the basic math tests discussed earlier, I've no idea why because he was more than capable to doing the math which makes some of his assertions false! Maybe they aren't really his claims at all like those earlier examples offered as statements by Kear.

For example Happer's alleged claim that the Sun is responsible for the measured Climate Change not Humans is just physically impossible and we know nothing has changed to alter that in thousands of years!

Maybe Happer is just taking the piss sometimes and winding up the conspiracy theorists to expose the nutters!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 20, 2020, 12:02:18 am
Mikey Mann (modeller), Schmidt (god knows), you?
Why do you do this to yourself, you do know Professor Michael Mann was also exonerated, in fact his critics tried multiple avenues to get him removed and his work discredited and they lost every time!

Pretty much every conspiratorial xxxxxxxGate associated with the intial IPCC report, at least those investigated that were not so crazy as to be immediately disregarded, including ClimateGate, AmazonGate and HimalayaGate have been dismissed.

I don't mind you offering genuine counterpoints to the claims of Human Induced Climate Change, Climate Change or Global Warming in general, because debating and defending such assertions is how science works. But not when you are offering the conspiracy theories of the lunatic fringe which you seem to have nothing but credulity for, and worse use of allegedly fraudulent sources to assert fraud by genuine climate scientists!

Why do I say allegedly fraudulent sources, because nobody knows where or who corrupted the data they quote in their weird erroneous articles, they may in fact be victims of a fraud and genuinely believe it to be the case that the world is out to fool them.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 20, 2020, 08:58:28 am
I love the way you diss the recently deceased NZ scientist as not a climate scientist yet fail to answer my question as to what (you think) is required to be so badged?

If you had bothered to read the article it details his long running role as a global leader through the whole IPCC early years.

Clearly others, much better placed than you or me, though he was very much qualified. But again, you revert to the ad hominen. Yawn.

As for Mann being exonerated, that is laughable. He even lost a defamation case in Canada (he instigated) last year after failing to produce his data.....maybe I'm naive but I recall a time when a government funded scientist was obligated to produce his/her data/stats - you know the principle of replication - see K. Popper.  ;)

And I note his rubbish 'hockey stick' charts have now been erased from IPCC reports - any credible scientist knows his stuff was (and is) very suspect. Biffra's efforts were little better.

Happer and CO2 - the bloke made CO2 lasers ffs. 200 peer reviewed papers - lauded by numerous US administrations (before Trump). Here's a few of his research papers - http://physics.princeton.edu/atomic/happer/Publications.html

Dyson? Very much an expert in the field. Was one of the leaders in CC research dating back to the early 70 at the Institute for Energy Analysis at Oak Ridge. Guess you didn't know that. I would refer you to his famous 'Paper 105'.

The simple fact that you endeavour to dismiss these guys as 'not experts' or 'not climate scientists' says everything. And is also a serious indictment on your credibility.

I'm sure you appreciate the science behind global warming is pretty straight forward, yet you reckon these blokes have no clue but a modeller does. ROFL.

Very lightweight again LP - i expected more given your certitude (but you know the game is being lost....). And feel free to drop the rhetoric at any time and converse on an actual issue related to the science.

Go Blues.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 20, 2020, 09:03:55 am
The exoneration was official and came from the UK Parliament's Science and Technology Committee, the committee which conducted the enquiry for the UK Parliament.

The links you provide are not official, they are opinions! ;)

 Concerns about Mann’s research included:

Mann’s undisclosed use in a 1998 paper (“MBH98”) of an algorithm which mined data for hockey-stick shaped series. The algorithm was so powerful that it could produce hockey-stick shaped “reconstructions” from auto-correlated red noise. Mann’s failure to disclose the algorithm continued even in a 2004 corrigendum.
Mann’s failure to disclose adverse verification statistics in MBH98. Mann also did not archive results that would permit calculation of the adverse statistics. Climategate emails later revealed that Mann regarded this information as his “dirty laundry” and required an associate at the Climatic Research Unit (“CRU”) to withhold the information from potential critics.
Mann’s misleading claims about the “robustness” of his reconstruction to the presence/absence of tree ring chronologies, including failing to fully disclose calculations excluding questionable data from strip bark bristlecone pine trees.
Mann’s deletion of the late 20th century portion of the Briffa temperature reconstruction in Figure 2.21 in the IPCC Third Assessment Report (2001) to conceal its sharp decline, in apparent response to concerns that showing the data would “dilute the message” and give “fodder to the skeptics.” Mann’s insistence in 2004 that “no researchers in this field have ever, to our knowledge, ‘grafted the thermometer record onto’ any reconstruction. But it was later revealed that in one figure for the cover of the 1999 World Meteorological Organization (WMO) annual report, the temperature record had not only been grafted onto the various reconstructions—and in the case of the Briffa reconstruction, had been substituted for the actual proxy
Mann’s undisclosed grafting of temperature data for “Mike’s Nature trick,” a manipulation of data which involved: (1) grafting the temperature record after 1980 onto the proxy reconstruction up to 1980; (2) “smoothing” the data; and (3) truncating the smooth back to 1980. ”

I'll stick to footy hereonin. You're in the cult. No facts, or even reality, will sway you.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 20, 2020, 10:02:47 am
Concerns about Mann’s research included:
.
.
.
I'll stick to footy hereonin. You're in the cult. No facts, or even reality, will sway you.
Reality does sway me fiction doesn't!

Your Mann accusations are old news, dredged up and re-played ad infinitum in the remote hope it influences some general public. It's pointless raising them in this debate because the accusations have long been disproved by multiple investigations, some even chaired or sponsored by climate change skeptics. In some cases the skeptical protagonists were even forced to publish very public apologies!

Repeating false accusations won't make them suddenly become true, it's not Kansas, you're not Dorothy, no matter how often you speak or write the fantasy it will remain fake, fiction will not become reality, even News Ltd accepts that now! ;D
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 20, 2020, 10:08:30 am
If other folk here have any interest in this topic, I'll let them be the judge of the respective quality of the commentary.

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 20, 2020, 11:09:55 am
Like many topics on this forum, it starts in earnest and descend quickly into ego based point scoring. Much like some of the characters in Bob Dylan's Desolation Row (Einstein and Robin Hood, Ezra Pound and TS Eliot), too much focus on minor points and details and losing sight of the bigger picture. We all want cleaner air, water and soil. We all want a host of other environmental improvements. Time to stop f@#%ing around and move away from old technologies. Climate change or no climate change. Other countries have shown the way.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 20, 2020, 11:50:51 am
Time to stop f@#%ing around and move away from old technologies. Climate change or no climate change. Other countries have shown the way.
Yes, sensible actions in the face of a potential risk. The key words being "action", which means do something, and "potential risk", which means something bad might happen!

The trouble is in Australia we have ScoMo in charge, who seems credulous regarding climate change denialism. ScoMo "Wants to Believe" the conspiracies, the real question is perhaps why?

Other Liberals like Turnbull and Abbott had motives that were relatively clear, be they hard right economics or the Small "L" conservatism.

Scotty from Marketing is a weather-vane, and not a very good one it seems because he can't definitively find his way-point! His lack of commitment perhaps presents the highest risk to Australia of all political positions, because we could lose on both fronts, the economy and the environment!

Some countries have chosen Filthy Rich while others choose Clean Broke, Scotty from Marketing seems to have found the secret 3rd path Filthy Broke!

Observers now probably suspect with Scotty from Marketing it's all about Scotty from Marketing, no wonder he idolizes Trump!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 20, 2020, 11:54:57 am
Like many topics on this forum, it starts in earnest and descend quickly into ego based point scoring. Much like some of the characters in Bob Dylan's Desolation Row (Einstein and Robin Hood, Ezra Pound and TS Eliot), too much focus on minor points and details and losing sight of the bigger picture. We all want cleaner air, water and soil. We all want a host of other environmental improvements. Time to stop f@#%ing around and move away from old technologies. Climate change or no climate change. Other countries have shown the way.

Can't move away from fossil fuels until there is a viable baseload alternative.

Here in Australia, we're so vacuous and self absorbed, we can't even have a reasonable, rational debate on nuclear.

Wind and solar are a waste of space.

Ask South Australians how happy they are with the 'new' energy mantra there.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 20, 2020, 12:03:38 pm
Can't move away from fossil fuels until there is a viable baseload alternative.

Here in Australia, we're so vacuous and self absorbed, we can't even have a reasonable, rational debate on nuclear.

Wind and solar are a waste of space.

Ask South Australians how happy they are with the 'new' energy mantra there.

I'd bet London to a brick that it's doable. Between the various forms of clean(er) energy, we can do way better than the current situation.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 20, 2020, 12:10:38 pm
I'd bet London to a brick that it's doable. Between the various forms of clean(er) energy, we can do way better than the current situation.
That is surely correct, once the political leverage from the old world is broken, in this regard the energy debate is very reminiscent of the electric car debate.

I do take issue with alarmist calls banning modern nuclear energy, it's clearly Australia's cleanest greenest fastest solution to both greenhouse emissions and base-load energy. Musk's batteries are probably filthy, just that they are manufactured NIMBY, and manufacturing wind turbines and solar cells full of rare earth elements is not that much better, but again they are made NIMBY. All three industries hang their hat on being cleaner and sustainable in the future without having a ready-made solution!

Lucky for us China's and India's pollution hasn't yet applied for a travel visa so it's stuck inside their borders, so we can keep importing our solar cells, wind turbines and storage batteries. All we have to do is dig everything up and ship it to them first to be converted and returned in a convenient to use package. Scotty from Marketing calls that "a trade deal", we can even have the stuff shipped in tightly packed parts to save on freight called "good economic management", then assemble the lot here called "Creating jobs!"

Nuclear is an almost perfect fit with desalination plants whose salty emissions, somewhat ironically for the protesters, now seem to be doing localized good for the oceans. Given it's highly likely pure fresh water will become, if it is not already, one of the world's most precious commodities, we better quickly get good at making it!

There is some irony when the coal industry claim nuclear pollutes the globe with a few kilograms of waste, but deny that billions or trillions of tonnes of greenhouse emissions have a discernible effect. Of course we now suspect that in micro-doses those old world coal fired power stations issue more radiation in total than many of the major events of the past, allegedly even far exceeding atmospheric nuclear testing.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 20, 2020, 12:38:26 pm
I have a question, which may have been answered in previous posts - leaving aside cost, dubious manufacturing practices etc., and just thinking solely about energy requirements, if we built a ridiculously huge bank of solar panels in the outback (half the size of Victoria, for example), would that reliably provide our country's full energy needs ?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 20, 2020, 12:51:22 pm
Can't move away from fossil fuels until there is a viable baseload alternative.

Here in Australia, we're so vacuous and self absorbed, we can't even have a reasonable, rational debate on nuclear.

Wind and solar are a waste of space.

Ask South Australians how happy they are with the 'new' energy mantra there.

Totally stupid to bankrupt the country on new technologies that simply DO NOT work.

We should have had nuclear 40 years ago.  Why in the hell should we impoverish ourselves when we are so rich in resources and then end up paying more for power than any other country.  Because we are dead dumb.  No other country would tolerate it.  1.3 % of the world's emissions.  BFD !!!



Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on January 20, 2020, 01:08:56 pm
I have a question, which may have been answered in previous posts - leaving aside cost, dubious manufacturing practices etc., and just thinking solely about energy requirements, if we built a ridiculously huge bank of solar panels in the outback (half the size of Victoria, for example), would that reliably provide our country's full energy needs ?
Need battery storage, typically Lithium Iron variety, highly expensive to begin with and batteries dont last.
One of the States in the USA is trying a mass solar storage experiment(forget which one), maybe Elon Musk and his fanboys can come up with some new technology. He is spending money on battery technology and wants to go to parts unknown with his SpaceX program so will need some inventive power systems.
Wind farms dont work and are not green either given the cost/resources to build, total waste of money and generate nothing.
Both Solar and Wind also have trouble integrating into the grid due to regulation creating quality issues with frequency.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 20, 2020, 01:10:53 pm
Totally stupid to bankrupt the country on new technologies that simply DO NOT work.

We should have had nuclear 40 years ago.  Why in the hell should we impoverish ourselves when we are so rich in resources and then end up paying more for power than any other country.  Because we are dead dumb.  No other country would tolerate it.  1.3 % of the world's emissions.  BFD !!!
Yes, the whole per capita vs total emissions debate bends to political will and is primarily bogus. Per capita doesn't mean much if you are a postage stamp economy with a with low density population like Australia, so it's really just used by extremists to name and shame.

The real unequivocal issue is total emissions. Everybody knows the major polluters in this regard, having a massive under-resourced low economic status population gets all your per capita emissions average down across the board.

But those realities cannot be used as an excuse for a lack of action by any country.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 20, 2020, 01:17:39 pm
Need battery storage, typically Lithium Iron variety, highly expensive to begin with and batteries dont last.
One of the States in the USA is trying a mass solar storage experiment(forget which one), maybe Elon Musk and his fanboys can come up with some new technology. He is spending money on battery technology and wants to go to parts unknown with his SpaceX program so will need some inventive power systems.
Wind farms dont work and are not green either given the cost/resources to build, total waste of money and generate nothing.
Both Solar and Wind also have trouble integrating into the grid due to regulation creating quality issues with frequency.
All good points.

The other major issue with large centralized systems is energy transmission, at the moment moving power around the grid is very inefficient and there are no real world viable solutions to this problem at the moment. I read somewhere that using current technologies if we had to transmit power from Perth to Sydney we might lose as much as 40% in heat due to the resistance of the transmission lines and losses at joins. Some countries including Australia are experimenting with Ultra High Voltage(UHV) or Energy(UHE) transmission lines, but it looks to be both very expensive and very unreliable.

With current transmission systems the more energy you have to move the more inefficient they become.

With UHV it's the reverse, the higher the voltage you use the more efficient it becomes. Just don't go anywhere near the transmission lines as the current systems fails with lightning like results! :o

This is a real problem, because all major economies are invested in long term in fusion energy research, and fusion is a process that improves in efficiency with increasing size. So you need a large centralised system to be very efficient at generating fusion energy, but then you have to distribute it a long way to make use of the massive facility!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 20, 2020, 01:22:48 pm
Thanks LP and EB.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: PaulP on January 20, 2020, 01:28:45 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/captain-sunshine-says-australia-is-not-living-up-to-its-solar-potential-20180426-p4zbr0.html
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 20, 2020, 01:47:55 pm
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/captain-sunshine-says-australia-is-not-living-up-to-its-solar-potential-20180426-p4zbr0.html
This is partly true, in that micro-grids are a potential solution, but it's unlikely they are any cleaner and greener than bulk energy generation. Also as EB1 points out, the longevity of such systems is questionable with some now finding they didn't last the warranty period and the supplier / manufacturer is long gone!

Abramowitz partly ignores the transmission issue, he fails to mention it when discussing the Northern Territory.

In relation to large scale solar there are also questions to be answered as huge solar farms also have localised and global environmental effects. Something that is now being discovered and studied on the Victorian border around Kerang, Echuca and Swan Hill.

The rule seems to be as always, there is no free lunch!
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 20, 2020, 03:04:10 pm


Yes, the whole per capita vs total emissions debate bends to political will and is primarily bogus. Per capita doesn't mean much if you are a postage stamp economy with a with low density population like Australia, so it's really just used by extremists to name and shame.

The real unequivocal issue is total emissions. Everybody knows the major polluters in this regard, having a massive under-resourced low economic status population gets all your per capita emissions average down across the board.

But those realities cannot be used as an excuse for a lack of action by any country.

Hear you LP.  To push home that point, if we shut down down ALL power tomorrow for an entire year, China would obliterate the savings in a week.  They are the REAL culprits as they're treated as a developing country that is treated far more favourably than one that is obviously developed

We're not anybody's whipping boy
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 20, 2020, 05:06:55 pm
Not sure they're culprits.

They're just doing what they have to do to make their country and people more prosperous.

Can't blame them for that. After all, we in the west did it for centuries to get where we've got today?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: capcom on January 20, 2020, 06:32:01 pm
Not sure they're culprits.

They're just doing what they have to do to make their country and people more prosperous.

Can't blame them for that. After all, we in the west did it for centuries to get where we've got today?

Fly .. they're an economic and military super power.  They're being treated leniently when they are by far the biggest polluter on Earth (double the U.S.) and that is insane on any level. To kick us on a per capita basis is BS when the country simply can't sustain a bigger population so China is afforded emissions leniency.  Last time I looked China wasn't 35% desert but we are. 
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: flyboy77 on January 20, 2020, 07:42:23 pm
Sure, and no one is going to get them to change their ways in our lifetimes!

Which only goes to support the idea that's it's bloody stupid for us here to do anything (even if you believe the climate change stuff)....
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Thryleon on January 20, 2020, 11:49:02 pm
I heard a story about the Netherlands.

Apparently they turned off their nuclear plants to go green and focus on solar and wind.

Apparently they had to have coal powered backup to cover the shortfall in green technology.

On a side note building a giant solar farm comes with it's own environmental drawbacks.  Bird populations suffer due to radiation and reflection of said panels.

Nuclear appears to be the most environmentally friendly of all the options available provided there's no meltdown...
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 21, 2020, 07:42:07 am
Nuclear appears to be the most environmentally friendly of all the options available provided there's no meltdown...
Not to mention Japan which is now building modern coal to supplement remaining nuclear, and it's turning nuclear plants back on slowly as are some of the European states as you mention. Two reasons seem to be primary concerns, reliability of energy supply and the unsubsidised ongoing cost of green energy. Green activists make claims that countries like Japan are addicted to nuclear, but that claim doesn't stack up as many of the same countries are actually providing the green energy innovation as well.

In fairness I don't think we can compare Three Mile Island or Chernobyl to a modern plant, and as much as screwushima(Cop this autocorrect mods, some activist is taking the piss!) Daiichi now presents some problems there may have been the odd external influence. Those old plants, the design, construction and location, are relics compared to modern plants. It's like comparing a Model-T Ford to a Tesla. But in fairness, even the situation with coal plants is pretty much the same, we talk about our Latrobe Valley facilities but these are dinosaurs compared to modern plants, the main difference being the old plants lack of ability to ramp production to meet demand, they are too slow to react so they leave them running wasting far too much resource. It's like leaving your car running overnight so it can ready to go at breakfast! In fairness nuclear plants are similar, they leave them idling 24x7, but they don't consume much resource or produce greenhouse gas in that state.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Thryleon on January 21, 2020, 08:40:37 am
^^

Don't get me wrong, mother nature can and will cause a variety of unforseen circumstances, but screwushima is literally a freak act of nature that caused their problems.  If we dont do things because of the threat of mother nature, then realistically we may as well have remained in caves keeping the power off altogether.

The big question that I have that I have literally seen not one person talking about 13 pages about the environment is as follows:

Given what we understand about nature, and the fact that it is a well known fact that cloud seeding technology exists (yes we create the conditions which cause rain artificially read more here: http://www.cmar.csiro.au/e-print/open/cloud.htm) what piques my interest is whether or not this is a bigger factor towards climate change than anything else we can conceive.

What is the ongoing effect of seeding our own clouds on the overall environment?

Im led to believe that the world is a delicate eco system (studies show this is true of every environment that occurs naturally) so modifying one part of a natural cycle would only naturally lead to modifications that are both foreseen and unforseen wouldnt it?
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Baggers on January 22, 2020, 12:53:13 pm
Whist reading loads of stuff here and elsewhere re climate change v deniers I stumbled across this article/science (?) re climate change being a huge hoax. They actually gave us a satellite photo of how CO2 is greening the planet! The author of the article, Mike Adams, is widely quoted by deniers.

Anyway, here's the link to his shattering discoveries... the satellite photo (?) is great news for Namibia, our Gibson Desert, Nullabor... and how Alice Springs has changed... just to name a few who've benefitted from CO2 greening!!

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-07-12-climate-change-hoax-collapses-new-science-cloud-cover.html?fbclid=IwAR0qX_RvvgYn9yG-UQhRFuhoztDWtY6GRb7ZEY1QNxPQXtk2RArQsqIbfAY
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: LP on January 22, 2020, 01:46:09 pm
Anyway, here's the link to his shattering discoveries... the satellite photo (?) is great news for Namibia, our Gibson Desert, Nullabor... and how Alice Springs has changed... just to name a few who've benefitted from CO2 greening!!

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-07-12-climate-change-hoax-collapses-new-science-cloud-cover.html?fbclid=IwAR0qX_RvvgYn9yG-UQhRFuhoztDWtY6GRb7ZEY1QNxPQXtk2RArQsqIbfAY
Yeah, I've read so many of these and they all follow the same pattern.

Most common is flipping cause and effect which breaks causality, the laws of thermodynamics or the flow of time. Generalisations of land based effects to global conditions, ignoring that land, ice and ocean behave differently and that the critical effects and influences of climate change on weather patterns is more than 90% contained in the sea and ocean.

They confuse or correlate broad scientific findings from astronomy(in this case the effects of low altitude cloud cover and albedo over land) and localised physics(land observations) with "climate science" which is land(~10%) and sea or ocean(~90%).

Finally, they cherry-pick data often from already disproved and/or non-peer reviewed papers often by non-climate specialists. Quite a good plain language critique of the linked Jyrki Kauppinen(A Finnish Physicist not a Climate Scientist) paper used as evidence in this article is contained here at the website Climate Feedback (https://climatefeedback.org/claimreview/non-peer-reviewed-manuscript-falsely-claims-natural-cloud-changes-can-explain-global-warming/), there are lots of others floating around.

For the uninitiated, one of the biggest warning signs of a dodgy scientific paper is not being peer reviewed or published before peer review, a lack of declare sources of data and generalised starting conclusions that are unsupported by data or reference sources. The Kauppinen paper is loaded with them, for example Richard Betts found;
Quote from: Richard Betts
This document only cites 6 references, 4 of which are the authors’ own, and of these 2 are not actually published.
That self referencing is Kauppinen basically claiming it's that way because I said so, without providing any data or evidence! ::)
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: dodge on January 22, 2020, 02:27:52 pm
I thought this topic was going to be ab out Paul Bowers or Simon Tregenza
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: cookie2 on January 22, 2020, 04:52:50 pm
I thought this topic was going to be ab out Paul Bowers or Simon Tregenza

 ^-^
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: shawny on January 23, 2020, 10:34:17 am
hi guys,

I know this is in the wrong thread but I am lost with the navigating side of the new site and don't know how or where to put it. 

I'm not the best computer wise and Im really struggling with the new layout and navigating side of things.  I've read the original posts regarding the update but just still find it too complicated for a dummy like me!

I could follow the old one as it had the rolling latest top 10 or so threads running on the right side so I just had to use that part and could get my forum fix quickly and easily without having to use the rest of the site but this new site doesn't seem to offer this.

Can anyway help me in real basic terms.....as im in fear I wont be able to use this one !!   

Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: Lods on January 23, 2020, 11:02:44 am
Shawny
Probably the best way to get the 'quick fix' is to just click the "New posts" button at the top of the page.
It will display all the topics posted in since your last visit.
Click on the topic for instant access.
Once you get used to it it's much quicker than waiting for the scrolling thread to roll around to topics of interest.
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: shawny on January 23, 2020, 07:24:38 pm
Shawny
Probably the best way to get the 'quick fix' is to just click the "New posts" button at the top of the page.
It will display all the topics posted in since your last visit.
Click on the topic for instant access.
Once you get used to it it's much quicker than waiting for the scrolling thread to roll around to topics of interest.

Many thanks Lods.  Will give it a go 
Title: Re: Deer in the Headlights
Post by: dodge on January 23, 2020, 09:47:55 pm
I heard a story about the Netherlands.

Apparently they turned off their nuclear plants to go green and focus on solar and wind.

Apparently they had to have coal powered backup to cover the shortfall in green technology.

On a side note building a giant solar farm comes with it's own environmental drawbacks.  Bird populations suffer due to radiation and reflection of said panels.

Nuclear appears to be the most environmentally friendly of all the options available provided there's no meltdown...

Hi Thry. 

The story is familiar, but I don't think it was the Netherlands (although they do have blackouts and need additional energy)
My quick research says that they built a few new coal plants ~2015, with some to be phased out by 2029.  They also have one nuclear plant, which was supposed to have the plug pulled, but it wasn't (commissioned to be operational to 2033).  There are possible plans to build another.  Their actual renewables is quite small.