Blunt on Climategate

January 19th, 2010 at 9:08 am by David Farrar

Tags: , , ,

38 Responses to “Blunt on Climategate”

  1. george (398 comments) says:

    The monkey is Nick Smith. New Zealand is the only country in the world to have passed an all-sectors/all-gases ETS which will do untold harm to our economic prospects. No other country will ever follow. Now climategate, the failure of Copenhagen and the new data that is emerging casts doubt on the whole hypothesis on which the ETS is based. When is John Key going to repeal the ETS and sack Nick Smith?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Manolo (13,514 comments) says:

    Another expose of the littany of lies AGW is: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8387737.stm

    Quote: “Mr Cogley says it is astonishing that none of the 10 authors of the 2007 IPCC report could spot the error and “misread 2350 as 2035″.

    By the way, when will the National government repeal the ETS?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Brian Smaller (4,025 comments) says:

    Manolo – I suggest that the IPCC knew all about 2350/2035 and the fact that the date was plucked out of the air by a guy while talking on the phone.

    And when will the National government repeal the ETS?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Chicken Little (793 comments) says:

    If the ETS is not repealed – when can we all expect our 35,000 hectares of public land to play with?

    If the ETS is repealed will the Party of Maoris’ mates still get their 35,000 hectares?

    Time is ripe for a new centre right political party. This current lot appear to be a bunch of complete fu*kwits.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Reg (544 comments) says:

    John Key has a golden opportunity to back out now.
    He can honestly say that he believed what seemingly reputable scientists were saying and felt NZ should act in accord with their advice.
    BUT, the climategate scandal has raised some very serious questions. These need to be resolved before we proceed down a path which would inflict considerable economic cost on our nation.
    The best way to resolve these would to be hold a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the truth or otherwise of AGW.
    The Commission would be headed by a Retired High Court Judge and entitled to call evidence from experts all over the world.
    This would mean that everyone presenting information would be subject to rigourous cross examination and balance would be restored to the debate.
    Surely no fair minded “warmist” could object to this approach!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Pete George (23,257 comments) says:

    What would be involved in at least putting ETS on hold until a decent investigation into the whole climate issue has been done internationally?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. MT_Tinman (3,043 comments) says:

    Reg, there has never been a “fair minded “warmist””

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Reg (544 comments) says:

    True MT, but there must be alot of people out there that are starting to feel they have been totally sucked in.
    We have held Royal Commissions on issues alot less important than the risk of throwing countless billions of tax payers dollars at a non-existant problem.
    The one thing politicians don’t like is looking stupid and you can bet there is alot of them right now, doing their sums and trying to work out how they can extract themselves from this mess with the minimum of “facial egg”.
    A Commission of Inquiry could well be the way that saves their faces and our dollars!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Petey are you not feeling well, “at least putting ETS on hold till a decent investigation”, what did you have a cold new year/ Christmas or is someone with half a brain playing on your computer?

    George, agree completely but think you are being rather kind when you called Nick Smith a Monkey, a retard would be more in line with my thinking.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Chicken Little (793 comments) says:

    Reg – To be blunt – Fu*k their facial egg – this isn’t about politicians bloody egos. The longer they leave it the bigger dicks they become.

    I’ve been a National supporter for 25 years, since I was first able to vote, but my goodwill is fast running out.

    While I’ve been a supporter I have never been actively involved in politics, that is going to change very soon if they don’t start trying to fix this mess. I don’t want my children saddled with with this bullshit because some bunch of politicians wanted to save face.

    Look at the excuses that have been used –

    - We must do something now to save the planet ( feelgood crap )

    - The EU will put trade sanctions in place if we don’t pass an ETS ( as seen at Copenhagen – the EU have been sidelined and now countries like France and Germany are actually starting to back away from extremist positions on CC. Greenmail is not a good look )

    - Everyone else is going to do it ( ah no, I don’t think they will – USA – no, China – no, India – no, Australia – unlikely, EU – already has one in place that is a total mess with huge amounts of fraud, high energy costs, huge compliance costs and massive taxpayer subsides for alternative energy )

    - We want to be a world leader( Yeah well, we are a world leader if you like being a leading laughing stock.)

    National seem to be a little slow on the uptake – things have changed. Maybe they they are just too old school along with the rest of the current political parties. Maybe we need some fresh, untainted, blood leading our country that doesn’t worry about ‘saving face’ and instead worries about what is best for our little part of the world and the people in it.

    Viva la revolution

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. mjanderson (39 comments) says:

    @Chicken Little

    “massive taxpayer subsides for alternative energy”
    - This is a bad thing? What happens when oil runs out?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (858 comments) says:

    this is a fair point that people are making. What on earth is NZ going to do now that noone else has followed our courageous “leadership” of implementing an ETS.

    Gosh, wonder if taxing all of our productive industries, and increasing the cost of power to everyone has any kind of economic or social downside?

    Does that position change now that we know that the people screaming about “its for the planet” and “denialist!” and “dont you care about the children” were basically making shit up to cover their real agenda, which was about social control and wealth redistribution?

    Interesting questions. I guess when Nick Smith is released from his rubber room for the start of the next Parliamentary session he had best have some pretty fancy footwork lined up. ‘cos I am not sure how much more of that sort of “leadership” NZ can really cope with.

    I’m guessing Cabinet reshuffle in February, and the underperformers like Smith (or differently abled, or deferred achievers depending on which NCEA term we have to use this week) will be offered stimulating new challenges on the back benches.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (858 comments) says:

    mjanderson. :What happens when oil runs out?”

    we’ll adapt. D’oh.

    Hows the whale oil lamp business going in your particular hermitage?

    Tell you what, you wean yourself off the evil oil economy, and we’ll just keep on as we are. That way you can be all righteous, and we won’t hear from you because your computer is made of oillllllll! and the energy you are running it on contains carbon.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. ecowho (2 comments) says:

    Hi, If you are looking for blow by blow coverage on ClimateGate have a look at http://www.ecowho.com/articles/42/Climategate,_what_is_going_on?.html

    Also includes an explanation on how a small number of climate scientists can impact a whole research sector, which is the real issue here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Sonny Blount (1,847 comments) says:

    “massive taxpayer subsides for alternative energy”
    - This is a bad thing? What happens when oil runs out?

    Stuff like this: http://www.ls9.com/

    And no, it doesn’t exist merely because of signs being waved around by Greenpeace.

    How about getting informed before repeating the ‘people are bad, down with capitalism mantra’

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Pete George (23,257 comments) says:

    we’ll adapt. D’oh.

    What if we can’t? Eventually technology won’t keep feeding our habit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (858 comments) says:

    Yeah Pete.

    The sky will fall in, and then we’ll all die horribly, and you’ll feel ever so sanctimonious. Happy now?

    Remember when IBM thought that 6 computers was going to be total global demand?

    Remember when going more than 12 miles an hour was going to cause brains to explode and women to expire?

    Remember when heavier than air flight was a fantasy?

    But Pete George knows that eventually technology won’t “keep feeding our habit” whatever that is supposed to mean.

    I guess its that dreadful habit of wanting to survive, of wanting our families to be warm, safe and well fed? All those dreadful things that technology has given the human race.

    But of course in the perfectly balanced with nature time that Pete harks back to, life expectancy was about 36, but while life may have been nasty, brutish and short, at least we weren’t “feeding our habit”.

    Jeez, where does DPF get these clowns?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Manolo (13,514 comments) says:

    “Jeez, where does DPF get these clowns?”

    There is an endless source of National and Green Party members. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Pete George (23,257 comments) says:

    What happened to the lifeforms formerly known as dinosaurs?
    People formerly known as Phoenicians? Easter Islanders? Incans? Jews of Europe? Rwandans? Cambodians? Moriori? Haitians?

    One of the laws of nature goes something like: if you don’t eat you don’t shit, and if you don’t shit you die.
    Shit happens. To many people and many peoples. Major shit will hit one day. No point worrying about it. But pretending it will never happen?

    BTW, DPF doesn’t “get clowns”, he allows clowns. And even self described deities.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Pita (372 comments) says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Labour questions the government in the House on their climate science position…The speed with which “political Anmesia” kicks in, anything is possible.

    Reg: “The one thing politicians don’t like is looking stupid and you can bet there is alot of them right now, doing their sums and trying to work out how they can extract themselves from this mess with the minimum of “facial egg”.”

    It hasn’t bothered them before, they can count on the short memories of the electorate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. PaulL (5,977 comments) says:

    I’m not sure dinosaurs had any control over their environment.

    Some of the others you mention had a culture that definitely killed itself. But I’m not convinced that we have a good analogy with building massive statues that had no purpose, and thereby exhausting our resources. I also note that the Easter Islanders didn’t really have a culture that was technologically advancing – certainly not at the rate we are today.

    The only thing that could knock our civilisation off it’s perch today is a global catastrophe. I see a meteorite strike or similar as far more likely than global warming killing us off, but certainly warming is a risk. I don’t see resource depletion as a real problem in the next 10 years, nor 20. If nuclear or solar go well, I don’t see it for at least 100. And I don’t worry about things more than 100 years in the future.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Sonny Blount (1,847 comments) says:

    People formerly known as Phoenicians? Easter Islanders? Incans? Jews of Europe? Rwandans? Cambodians? Moriori? Haitians?

    One of the laws of nature goes something like: if you don’t eat you don’t shit, and if you don’t shit you die.
    Shit happens. To many people and many peoples. Major shit will hit one day. No point worrying about it. But pretending it will never happen?

    You’re quite right Pete. Cultures can disappear.

    Greenies and progressives are the shit that we have to watch out for. I can’t believe your gall, it was environmentalism that has just had a go at destroying our culture with AGW, not our use of natural resources.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (858 comments) says:

    getting even more incoherent there Pete.

    So dinosaurs died out because they employed technology? Thats a pretty fried analogy, even by your rather depressingly low standards ( you aren’t a schoolteacher are you?).

    The only one of your example that has even the slightest bearing on the technology depletion causing catastrophe argument (that was your argument wasnt it, its so hard to tell with you yo-yoing around out there) was Easter Island. And surely it was misinformed religious belief that caused them to destroy most of their natural resources rather than technology.

    So anyway, I am sure there might have been a point you were trying to make, but its pretty hard to tell some days. Guess it must be that “feeding the habit” thing again?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. jackp (668 comments) says:

    It is pretty clear that the government is not interested in public input considering how fast the ETS was put through. Also, the anti-smacking referendum had been totally ignored. They are more interested with doing deals with the minor parties which is why mmp debate will be a joke. Key wants mmp to stay and he will keep it that way. While in opposition he was totally different. Don’t expect any change from National, exactly the way it was with Labour. They might throw a few bones to their core supporters but those few bones won’t mean much only “fuzzie feel good” policies. . Key has been a big disappointment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Pete George (23,257 comments) says:

    Advancing technology or not, everything is stuffed eventually. Technology may help overcome some resource depletions, and some natural disasters, and climate changes, but it won’t rescue humans forever. It could even be what stuffs us, probably came close to that fifty years ago and the capability is still there.

    Some say the next ice age is overdue, when that happens there may be too many mouths for a drastically reduced food supply.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Manolo (13,514 comments) says:

    “One of the laws of nature goes something like: if you don’t eat you don’t shit, and if you don’t shit you die. Shit happens..”

    Lucidity, clarity, and eloquence at its best. Neither Newton nor Einstein could have said this any better.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. PaulL (5,977 comments) says:

    So you’re worrying about the next ice age killing us all, and simultaneously worrying about global warming changing our lives? Won’t global warming postpone the next ice age? Which then leads to – surely we now have the ability to alter the climate enough to stop the next ice age? At least, if the global warming people are right.

    For my 5c – put some big solar shades in space. Fixes global warming, and we can turn them off again if we start getting worried about that ice age. Done right, they could generate power in the mean-time. It would cost way less than the changes currently being suggested, although it doesn’t have the benefit of making us all wear sackcloth and ashes and repent our sins against the great god gaia.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. martin english (40 comments) says:

    Stop picking on the Dinosaurs. They lasted longer than we have so far.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Pete George (23,257 comments) says:

    …..without technology (as far as we know).

    AGW, if it has been happening, may have effectively delayed the onset of another ice age. Or not.
    Reducing particulate pollution may have made enough difference in counterbalancing AGW, hence the flattening of the temperature over the last decade. Or not.

    It seems to be hard enough measuring global temperatures now, with all the technology available, let alone determining with any degree of confidence what the climate changes have been over a long enough period to be confident of any trends. We are not smart enough to do this – yet you think we will manage to replace oil in time, with increasing populations, demands, and competing land use (energy and food)?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (858 comments) says:

    condensed Pete George: Global warming is happening, or not. Technology leads to inevitable societal collapse, maybe. Look at the dinosaurs – there’s your proof. Using oil is bad, humanity can’t adapt (see dinosaurs again), or not.

    The science proves global warming, or maybe it doesnt. Whatever.

    But he really, REALLY cares, about something or other, and we have to CHANGE or the planet dies, or maybe not…

    Getting well beyond the ability to be satirised now young Mr George.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Pete George (23,257 comments) says:

    Um, there are a lot of unknowns and maybes in the world. Fact of life. The best we can do is to try and live within our means, not just financially but also ecologically, with as much sustainability of resources as possible.

    Or we could not give a shit. And as I said before, if that happens for too long you die. And maybe your great grandkids will never live. I’d rather try and improve their odds.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. PaulL (5,977 comments) says:

    Measuring global temperatures in the past is a lot harder than working out what energy sources we will have in the future, at least it is without a time machine. And definitely is a lot less pressing – I can imagine humans devoting considerable ingenuity to finding new energy sources, but I’m not sure that our best and brightest are really engaged in working out what the temperature was 500 years ago.

    There is plenty of evidence that we already can replace oil, and at an economic price. Just not an economic price whilst oil is below $100 a barrel. The technology is there today to run concentrating solar, and to transmit that power over long distances using high voltage DC, for example from north Africa into Europe, or from mid-west US to the coasts, or from central Australia up into Asia. The need isn’t there yet, but you can be damn sure that as soon as someone can turn a dollar from it, it will happen. The price of that solar, and the HVDC cables, is dropping. The price of oil is rising. At some point it will become economic and people will start doing it, once people start doing it then economies of scale kick in.

    And that’s without going near nuclear, particularly the thorium cycle. The French get a large proportion of their power from nuclear, everyone else not so much. For the simple reason that the French have few natural power sources – not enough wind, little sun, not enough rivers, not so much coal. They deliberately went nuclear. The rest of the world could too if the greenies let them. At the moment the greenies want lower carbon economies, but they want it through sackcloth and ashes, not through substitution with another power source that would let us continue our evil capitalist ways.

    I’m not at all convinced that the world is going to hell in a handbasket. On most environmental measures the world, or at least the developed world, is getting a much better place. Life expectancies are also up, and people work less than ever before. Our society is getting more tolerant – the current culture wars we are having are about things that were never even remotely considered acceptable 100 years ago – when we get knee jerk radicals complaining about homosexual rights you see the world falling apart and becoming intolerant, I see a few throwbacks fighting a last stand against the march of social liberalisation. So, again, I say that I appear to be much more optimistic than you about the prospects for our society.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (858 comments) says:

    not giving a shit is of course fatal – from verbal constipation to the very real side-effects.

    Get a grip man! Life is too short to be as paranoid as you are. Humans will be around a while yet, and so will the planet.

    For me, I am an optimist. I am unashamedly pro-human, and pro-technology. I understand what life without technology would be like, and I aint going there.

    Even if it means burning the last environmentalist for fuel. I expect Mr George will volunteer.

    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 (858 comments) says:

    Anyway, I have a life. i am going outside now to fire up the BBQ (charcoal of course) and carbonise a nice butterflied leg of mammal that has been marinading in olive oil, rosemary and secret herbs before I roast its poor tender little body till its smoky on the outside and pink and succulent in the middle….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Pete George (23,257 comments) says:

    I’m not paranoid. I’m mostly optimistic. Humans will probably be around for quite a while yet. Some will enjoy good lives, especially places like NZ. Many still endure great hardship. I’d like to think most of us are humane enough to consider the whole caboodle.

    I choose to live with technology but could survive if I had to without it.
    I have too high a moisture content to be any good for fuel.

    BBQ steak for me tonight.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. hj (6,671 comments) says:

    Actually this climate change stuff is a Big Crock: I know that because a friend got an email from a chap who works in a bakery. The email shows how the climate data is faulty: YOU CAN SEE THE TREND is NOT THERE!!!
    We’ll done the Kiwi blog chaps for not being sucked in by this monster scam!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Sonny Blount (1,847 comments) says:

    How dare a baker question our elite superiors! He must be one of those red-neck homophobe racists.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Sonny Blount (1,847 comments) says:

    Pete,

    http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html

    I’ve posted this link many times before. The idea of first and third world is almost gone if you have a closer look.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.