Droughts May Lead to Droughts!

In “We’re likely to be a land of increasingly severe droughts and floods”, the mendacious lackey of the Australian Government’s Office of the Propagation of Awarmist Faith, Prof. Will Steffen, asserts (with the supporting evidence, as always, of axioms and appeals to authority):

Extended dry periods are expected to increase in southwest and southeast Australia by the end of this century, increasing the risk of drought.

So, to be clear, extended dry periods, or droughts, will increase the risk of extended dry periods, or droughts.  No!  Clearly, we need a new, ruinous tax on the air we breathe, instanter.

The magnitude of these risks [of Climate Change!] ultimately depends on the effectiveness of global emission reduction efforts, including by Australia.  The transition to a clean energy economy, which is gathering speed in many parts of the world, gives us great hope that we can minimise these potential risks.

So, to be clear, the world must reduce the emissions of gases, which have not been proven to warm the world dangerously or to cause more floods and droughts, lest the world warm dangerously bringing more floods and droughts; and the enforced use of more expensive forms of energy production by corrupt, incompetent governments should make us more optimistic that we can avert the risks which are not real risks.

UPDATE:  see also “A Land of Severer Severities”.

Climate Commission “Conversation”

On Wednesday, 22 February, a “conversation” on climate change was held in Hobart to discuss the associated impacts and opportunities for Tasmania.  Well, we were told we’d have a conversation; instead, a high school lecture was given on how we are corrupting the planet and how we need a magical tax on “carbon” to save us (even though without carbon dioxide we wouldn’t breathe) and that the planet would thank us therefor.

The four main speakers who were spouting this pseudo-scientific bullshit were Prof. Tim Flannery, Prof. Will Steffen, Prof. Lesley Hughes and some slow, boring economist, Mr. Roger Beale.

After the presenter, Kim Millar, had finished licking everyone’s arse clean, Tim Flannery started by pointing out that they were completely independent and were not under any political influence.  He then went on to say just how bad it would be if the temperature rose half a degree over the next decade.

When Flannery had had his fill he introduced Will Steffen, who continued the scare story, saying that the polar caps will melt and cause the sea-level around Tasmania to rise 3mm each year; he seemed to think that the rise would continue at a rate of 3mm a year, for a century, with no fluctuation at all.

After Steffen, the egg-looking man, Beale, presented a school-level power-point display which, like the other offerings, depicted nasty buildings letting out steam from their chimneys, and went on to claim—incorrectly—that CO₂ is the leading, most important greenhouse gas, and that “the planet knows how to release heat” and that it has been doing it since the beginning and seems to know what it is doing.

The last contribution of the introductory speeches was given by Lesley Hughes who said that, as the temperature increases, we will have less salmon; as she said this, she referred to the movie “Finding Nemo”, and claimed that the salmon would be unable to live in 1% warmer water.  She then displayed another, cute card, saying that the broad-toothed mouse (a species which survived previous warm periods and the last Ice Age, and is still around today) would be unable to cope with another 0.5% increase in temperature, and die out.  She added that more extreme weather would occur, and that people wouldn’t be able to survive a 45ºC maximum temperature nearly every day; in effect, she was saying that cities of Arabia are already uninhabitable.

The presenter then announced question time and joked about killing people by way of ejector seats if they did not comply with the rules that questions be brief and non-political; nonetheless, all the questions, except two, were either long, about politics, or just complete Dorothy Dixers about how Greens are such great people, that we must save the planet, and that we would all be happy to pay a high “carbon” tax.
The presenter failed to call on me to ask a question, though I raised my arm for over half a weary hour, but I managed to approach Prof. Flannery after the forum had concluded.  I asked, “What if you’re wrong about AGW?”
Flannery responded, “What’s AGW?”
I said, “Anthropogenic global warming; you know, man-made.”
He replied, “Oh, yeah.  If we’re wrong, at the very least, we’ll have cleaner air because carbon dioxide and burning coal is bad, and we’ll have better energy.  If we’re right we’ll have all the other benefits.”
I asked when Brisbane would run out of water and Flannery stated, “Within the next couple of years.”
A conversation (coming from the Latin for “back and forth”), refers to an exchange of ideas, but the Climate Commission’s “conversation” consisted of our listening to lectures and lengthy, unnecessary answers and grandstanding questions from pious believers.

On Wednesday, 22 February, I survived an hour and a half of complete pseudo-scientific bullshit with only a few decent biscuits at the end as a slight compensation.

(Also posted on Alfred’s Review.)

An Inevitable Outcome

At the Climate Commision’s Hobart public propaganda session—misnamed a “conversation”—, one of the commissioners, and demonstrated liar, Prof. Will Steffen, asserted that the sea-level around Tasmania will rise 3.2 mm a year for every year over the next century, creating a scary scenario of a total rise of 30 cm by the end of the century—that’s one foot!—leading to higher tides, increased flooding and the ruination of infrastructure.  Steffen, of course, contrary to the evidence, assumes that the rate of any rise of sea-level will continue at the exact rate which awarmists claim is occurring now.

So, since Commissioner Steffen claims that the seas around Tasmania will rise consistently by over 30 cm a century, and since he ignores inconvenient data such as the undoubted fact that there is a finite amount of terrestrial ice which might melt, what will happen after a millennium?  Obviously, the seas will assuredly rise 30,000 cm, or three hundred metres; after ten millennia, therefore, with the waters’ having risen three kilometres, Tasmania will be completely flooded!

If the rise of sea-level continue at the same rate over a million years then the seas around Tasmania will most certainly rise 300 km!  If the rise of sea-level continue at the same rate over ten thousand million years then the Tasmanian seas will surely rise 3,000,000 km!

If the rise of sea-level continue at the same rate over 500,000,000,000 years then the seas around Tasmania will rise 150,000,000 km, which will snuff out THE SUN!  So, unless we reduce carbon emissions by imposing a ruinous tax on some important industries, and if the rate of seal-level rise remain constant, then within five hundred thousand million years the seas around Tasmania will annihilate the sun—and then we’ll really be doomed!

(The Climate Commission’s own specious report, The Critical Decade: Tasmanian Impacts and Opportunities, has the claim that, by the end of the century, “global sea levels are projected to increase by at least 0.5 m and perhaps by as much as 1.1 m.”  So, maybe, the earth’s waters might extinguish the sun within only 150,000,000,000 years or so.)