"It is basic. The sun warms the earth's surface. The surface, by contact, warms the moving, circulating atmosphere. That means the atmosphere cools the surface. How then can the atmosphere warm it? It cannot. That is why their computer models are wrong."
"It's not uncommon for super funds to take a position which isn't just about returns," he told 2GB's Ray Hadley. "Some industry funds, for example, won't allow their funds to be invested in coal shares. Now that's got nothing to do with returns necessarily, that's got to do with politics, and their view about those particular issues."
Malcolm Turnbull might yet come good. Perhaps he can pull off a reverse John Howard, and steer a divisive gay marriage plebiscite through to a yes vote. Or give Gillian Triggs a hearing, and come up with a human rights-based solution that gets us out of the hideously expensive moral quagmire that is Manus and Nauru. Perhaps he can grasp the opportunity of bipartisanship on climate change, and turn the rubbish Direct Action policy into something fit for purpose.But having scraped over the line at the July election, with barely a mandate, a divided party room, a slim majority and a hostile senate, it is hard to see how Turnbull can or will do anything big. Strange to say, but becoming prime minister may turn out to be the low point in his remarkable life.
"[T]he more I start to think about it, I think it will change what we do a lot...Now, all of a sudden, we're forced to become much more quantitative...I think that's going to force a paradigm shift in how we think about our research."
"We want to help the academic community to respond to this request from the UNFCCC...And we're going to keep reminding people that just pontificating about 1.5C is not enough. They've got to get their thought down in published papers in short order."
Hah! You call those jokers fuckwits that might challenge the preeminence of the US? One word and the word is Trump. All by hisself he out-fuckwits all of youse put together.
Climate of the Nation 2016 finds that the majority of people who believe climate change is occurring continues to grow.In 2016, 77 per cent hold this view, up from 70 per cent last year, 66 per cent in 2013 and 64 per cent in 2012. Of these people, 90per cent believe human activity is at least partly the cause, with a large 39 per cent now saying human activity is the main cause. Only 9 per cent blame natural cycles.
Though 50 per cent of people are aware that the 2015 UN Conference on Climate Change in Paris took place, knowledge of the outcomes and objectives of the international agreement appear limited.However, when the Paris agreement is explained, there is also strong agreement (67 per cent agree) that Australia should enact a serious policy plan to deliver the commitment made in Paris to achieving net zero emissions.Further, 57 per cent do not agree with the idea that Australia should wait for other countries before we strengthen our post-2020 emissions reduction targets, and 59 per cent do not agree that we should wait for other major emitting countries such as China and the US before we move.Seventy-three per cent hold the clear view that economic benefits, such as new jobs and investment in clean energy, will flow fromleadership on climate action and energy policy.In fact, 65 per cent feel Australia should be a world leader in finding solutions to climate change. And 71 per cent think Australia should implement policies to protect vulnerable people and natural systems from unavoidable climate change, with only 6 per cent in disagreement.Fifty-five per cent hold the view that Australia needs to help developing countries decrease their carbon emissions and adapt for the impacts of climate change.
Fifty-five per cent hold the view that Australia needs to help developing countries decrease their carbon emissions and adapt for the impacts of climate change.
All of which is great and makes perfect sense, but is in total contradiction to the current government's position. Which a lot of them just voted for.
Real-world observations of temperature spikes, pasture growth and grape harvests across southern Australia reveal that the landscape is heating up at rates experts did not expect to see until 2030.In some instances the rates of warming are tracking at 2050 scenarios.Scientists concerned that climate change is biting harder and faster than models anticipated are campaigning for more research investment to protect Australia's $58 billion agriculture industry from extreme weather.Background Briefing has learned that their concerns about the capability of Australian research to address climate change will be validated in an independent review by the prestigious Australian Academy of Science.The review, due for release in the next few weeks, has identified a substantial shortfall in the nation's climate research firepower.It's understood that the review will recommend that the number of scientists working for CSIRO and its partners on climate science needs to increase by about 90. That is almost double the current number of full time positions.
I think Illinois has Arizona beat in the "shenanigans in office" department.It's even got its own Wiki page .... Political corruption in Illinois
Quote from: MikeS on September 27, 2016, 12:04:30 PMI think Illinois has Arizona beat in the "shenanigans in office" department.It's even got its own Wiki page .... Political corruption in IllinoisGood grief, that is quite a lineup! Any other states compare?
A senior Defence Department official has told the ABC the ongoing mystery over which minister is responsible for certain duties is causing confusion and unnecessary duplication of bureaucratic work."It's a crazy situation -- we prepare ministerial briefs but we're not sure which minister to send them to," the senior official told the ABC on the condition of anonymity."In some cases crucial decisions are unnecessarily delayed because there's confusion over which minister needs to sign off on simple requests."Similarly, defence companies who are regularly in contact with the Australian Defence Force and Government have privately expressed frustration.
The amendments are a significant increase on current labour market testing for such projects. As the Guardian's Paul Karp has reported, the amendment means that the required advertising must be done "in such a way that a significant proportion of suitably qualified and experienced Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents would be likely to be informed about the position" and applies to all jobs regardless of how small they are.But that isn't the biggest issue.The way the amendment is actually worded makes it essentially impossible to hire anyone and also adhere to the code.The amendment states that "the Building Code must include provisions ensuring that no person is employed to undertake building work unless" there is that targeted advertising, and "the employer demonstrates that no Australian citizen or Australian permanent resident is suitable for the job".So no person can be employed unless the employer demonstrates that no Australian is suitable for the job.That literally means that if employers can demonstrate that an Australian citizen is suitable for the job, they can't employ them because they have failed to demonstrate that no Australian citizen is suitable for the job!It's a lovely catch-22 (or catch-23, subclause 2A (d))Clearly it is meant to be no foreign person can be employed unless the employer demonstrates that no Australian citizen is suitable (note - suitable, not "available") for the job.But that is not what has ended up in the act.Haste makes waste.This government wanted to end the year with a win and was willing to do anything to achieve it - including not bothering to closely check the legislation that it was attempting to enact.