Monday, February 28, 2011

Bob Carter about Australian carbon tax

Julia Gillard, a sickly five-year-old girl (chronic pneumonia) whose life was probably saved when her parents relocated from the cold, cloudy, windy, and rainy Wales to Australia where she became a prime minister 8 months ago, announced her plans to introduce a carbon [sic] tax from July 1st, 2012, in order to fictitiously fight against the global warming.

Bob Carter, a well-known professor or geology and one of the most well-informed experts in the field of climate change on their compact continent, wrote the following recommendation to Gillard and other politicians who were caught into the whirlpool of postmodern unscientific superstitions and distortions:
Doomed planet: shhsshh ... don’t talk about the science (Quadrant Online)

By the way, the annual mean temperature in Adelaide where her family settled is about 17 Celsius degrees. Nice. The same figure is about 10 Celsius degrees in Barry, Wales where the family began their journey. Note that 7 °C of temperature difference was needed to make some difference in the girl's life: and it was a positive temperature change that was needed for a positive change.

A few months ago, when I was returning from Belgrade, Serbia, I was sitting next to a Serbian architect who had de facto moved to the Czech Republic. He said that his new homeland was great: the only thing that sucked were the cooler temperatures. And this pattern - that people prefer warmer temperatures if they're offered two places - is almost universal.

A decade ago, my then advisor Tom Banks half-moved from Piscataway, New Jersey (Rutgers) to Santa Cruz, California (UCSC). Guess what was the reason.

Concerning CO2 as a pollutant, it's clearly so crazy but so many people - including some otherwise sophisticated and sensible friends of mine - have been brainwashed by this meme. Do you know what's the CO2 concentration in the air we breath out? It's about 4% i.e. 40,000 ppm, one hundred times higher than it is in the atmosphere. All of us are literally chimneys. :-)


  1. To get an idea of how dire things are, here in Australia, here's a representative sample of the type of articles being published by our national broadcaster:

    Check out the qualifications of the authors: humanities student, (ageing, left wing) political commentator, freelance journalist, cartoonist and, particularly ominously, a raft of pieces from a spin doctor whose company openly proclaims their specialty in promoting left-wing and 'progressive' causes (and whose website boasts that their campaign brought down the conservative Howard government).

    (I'm the commentator known as Clownfish, btw)

  2. Hi, wow, if your selection of articles were representative, there would really be a consensus in Australia that people have to act and think as irrational kamikaze monkeys.

    At least the Catholic boss of Australia, Rev Poll, remains the last bastion of non-believing skepticism against the bigotry. ;-)

    Judy Horáček surely sounds as a Czech name (the cartoonist). Horáček is a "small Horák" or "small man from the hills", a rather frequent last name here.

    Please don't panic. A few articles can't destroy countries by themselves...

    All the best

  3. Skepticism has been on the rise in Australia, despite a series of weather events that alarmists have exploited to the hilt (drought - global warming! Bushfires - global warming Floods - global warming! Cyclones - global warming! In spite of the fact that we have had all those in Australia for as long as anyone can remember).

    Now we have a government who have whored themselves out to the Greens, who have strongarmed a carbon tax on to the agenda, and for the last few months we have been subjected to a tide of blatantly alarmist hysteria from the national broadcaster.

    Only a cynic would call it a propaganda campaign ;)

    Even the once-great research organisation, the CSIRO, has become little more than a pulpit for alarmists, as has the Bureau of Meteorology. Possibly the worst offender at CSIRO would be David Karoly.

    Still, at least Australia can lay claim to people like Prof. Garth Paltridge, whose 'The Climate Caper' is perhaps the most succinct, yet devastating, criticisms of the 'consensus' available (even James Lovelock raved about it).

  4. Prof. Carter makes a comment about picking white elephant “winners”.

    I recently had reason to look up this analogy in the context of “white elephant” parties. Here’s part of what I found:

    . . . its name, appears to be related to a custom from Southeast Asia. The term derives from the sacred white elephants kept by monarchs in Burma, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia. To possess a white elephant was regarded as a sign that the monarch reigned with justice and power, and that the kingdom was blessed with peace and prosperity. Because the animals were considered sacred and laws protected them from labor, receiving a gift of a white elephant from a monarch was simultaneously both a blessing and a curse: a blessing because the animal was sacred and a sign of the monarch's favor, and a curse because the animal had to be retained and could not be put to much practical use.

    Fits well with Dr. Bob’s “uneconomic eco-bling like windmills and solar farms.”

  5. By "Rev Poll" I assume you meant Cardinal Pell. I have met this holy son a of a Publican (owner/manager of a pub) - even shock his hand. Did so only because he was (still is) a brother of a former colleague of mine.
    (Not joking. But it is a bit odd - and I tend to smile about it. :>)