Tasmanian Times

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche


Double Trouble …

*Pic: Double trouble for planet earth! Image: Ted Mead

First published October 13

When it comes to addressing the planet’s climate change issues, the world is in desperate need of inspiring leadership, techno-innovation and political impetus, but for some inexplicable reason we are experiencing some of the most retrograde theatrics by prominent loons ever. As the earth warms up, these deluded confidantes seem to be in a constant state of denial, and continue to preach that there is no case to answer, stating life may actually be better in some ways.

Just recently Tony Abbott made a provocative speech in London to a climate-sceptic thinktank in which he mocked climate science and likened climate policy to pagan sacrifice, and claimed global warming could be beneficial: http://tonyabbott.com.au/2017/10/transcript-hon-tony-abbott-mp-address-global-warming-policy-foundation-westminster-london/

OK, we know that Tony Abbott is no longer the Prime Minister of this country but his performances of dire negativity sent climate change denial statements around the globe rippling throughout Australia’s Parliament and resonating into the receptive ears of, coal extraction, energy guzzling, high polluting enterprises, and anyone gullible enough who thinks Tony’s ‘head in the sand’ approach is the way Australia should continue.

Abbott in his London speech also said measures to deal with climate change would damage the economy, and were likened to “primitive people once killing goats to appease the volcano gods”.

The London speech – titled Daring to Doubt – was similar in content John Howard’s speech four years ago, where Howard said climate “zealots” had turned the issue into a “substitute religion”.

Abbott, who trained to be a Catholic priest, called climate change a “post-Christian theology” and said the decline of religion in society had left a hole in which other forms of “dogma” could take root.

Most, including many in the Liberal Party, think Tony Abbott has now entered into the loopy class … though alarmingly he still has a very strong support base with the elected Nationals in Australia.

Greens’ climate change and energy spokesperson Adam Bandt called Mr Abbott “a dangerous fool who could be simply ignored were it not for his ability to dictate Malcolm Turnbull’s climate policy”.

Abbott’s objective regarding the abandonment of the Clean Energy Target may yet be fulfilled, but if so, that will probably come at the cost of the Turnbull government as Abbott is probably convinced that Turnbull’s demise at the next Federal Election is probably the only mechanism for him to regain the Liberal Party leadership.

On a positive note, the Trumps and Abbotts of this world are powerless against the surge of renewable energy developments across the globe as other countries and individual US states are being driven by private investment not Dark-Age political policies.

As for Trump, you’ll need a crystal ball to see where his career ends up, though in the meantime it seems America and Australia’s action on climate change will continue to spin in retrograde for some time yet!

*Ted Mead was in disbelief when Tony Abbott was elected as Australia’s prime minister. Believing that rational debate over climate change had hit rock bottom and could only move upwards, until Donald Trumps’ election to the world stage pushed the global climate change debate into a deeper abyss. Ted is optimistic that rest of the world will continue on in addressing the climate issues regardless of the dark and conservative era of the Tweedles’ presence.

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]


  1. Keith Antonysen

    October 22, 2017 at 5:06 pm

    davies …

    What I forgot to mention is that Abbott spoke at a meeting held by climate change deniers.

  2. abs

    October 22, 2017 at 4:39 pm

    I said phd in climate science, davies.

    this person has zero credibility in climate science. She was a paid employee of the IPA. she has previously promoted the ridiculous position that there’s been no warming since 1998 (research statistics 101 fail or deciet). she published a research paper recently in a low grade journal and it has been described (by actual climate scientists with credibility) as ‘junk scince’ by David Karoly, “an absolute pile of rubbish” that “reads like a D-grade high school lab report and is utterly flawed”, by DR Benjamin Henley, ‘worthless’ by Gavin Schmidt (I could go on as there are so many examples of real climate scientists tearing this dodgy peice of work apart),

    here is a starter


    Then there is the IPA association and the little incident where this person saw no conflict in being paid by a rightwing thiink tank, that accepted tens of thousands of dollars from irragation companies, at a time when she played a formal role in a murray river water flow advisory body. She recommended no increase in water back into the system…surprise, surprise, surprise!

    there are bad apples in every bunch, what do you want me to say.

    and to call me out for a spelling error ,Oh NO!!!!!! how do I face the day, I am so ashamed to be shown up like this davies, please show mercy…BTW, I have hidden a spelling error for you to find.

    i think the recap is that Abbott is a dim witted fool, and that’s it folks

  3. Keith Antonysen

    October 22, 2017 at 1:17 pm


    It seems I need to write a third time that scientists have taken Abbott’s comments apart and showed them to be nonsense. My beliefs are created from science … Abbott stated that climate change “might be good”. That comment has been made a number of times by deniers, and shown to be wrong ages ago.

    I took abs’ comment about a PhD to relate specifically to climate science. You do not go to a dentist when you are suffering from gout or a Political Scientist if you are having heart problems such as angina.

    As stated before, the environment displays whether warming is going on, eg the waters off the East Coast of Tasmania.

    You might be happy to base your opinion on one speech, but Abbott has made many speeches ranging from ‘climate science is crap’ to it might be good. Abbott can’t be taken seriously.

  4. davies

    October 22, 2017 at 11:31 am

    So a quick recap …

    We have one person bagging Abbott’s speech without actually having read it !! When called out on it he doubles down and says he doesn’t need to. Sorry, but you cannot be taken seriously.

    The other person basically says you need to do 7 plus years at Uni with PhDs etc if you’re going to be taken seriously – but then in the same comments disparages someone who has 7 plus years at Uni including a PhD.

    As for the BoM. They ‘average’ over 1 second. The UK average over one minute. The US thought one minute was too short so it averages over 5 minutes. The International Standard is one minute.

    Your general ‘scintific’ consensus. Is that any relation to scientific consensus?

  5. abs

    October 20, 2017 at 11:42 am

    no davies, it’s hokum. made-uppy stuff . Keith is absolutely correct, scientists have pulled his speach apart. Abbott’s point is that higher temps will be good for humanity. the general scientific position is that higher temps lead to more extreme weather events. when abbott does the pretendy thing of inplying climate change will be good its hokum.

    as i have said to you previously, if you want to have some credibility with making arguement that go against the general scintific consensus (e.g. in #39 the” less sensitive mercury thermometers” issue you raise), then go to Uni for 7.5 years minimum, get you phd in climate science, put your position in research journal format and submit for publication. btw

    if other’s here want a chuckle then google “less sensitive mercury thermometers BoM”, to see where davies derives his info. the results –

    rupert murdochs propaganda rag
    Joanne Nova website
    jennifer marohassy websites

    says it all doesn’t it?

  6. Keith Antonysen

    October 19, 2017 at 8:11 pm

    davies, did you read the reference that I have given twice about scientists pulling apart Abbott’s speech? We are interested in science; not nonsense. I think goats can relax.
    Scientists pulled apart his speech in the reference I provided.

    I asked the question of how many people die from fossil fuel emissions but you have not answered. Far more than from cold. The issue of people dying from cold is really a diversion; it only relates very remotely to climate change, if at all.

    davies, the environment displays temperature … ocean warming, crop failure, strength of storms, permafrost thawing, glaciers regressing, ice sheets breaking up, wildfires, coral bleaching, rain bombs etc. The Clausius-Clapeyron equation shows how for each degree of temperature increase there is a 7% increase in water vapour (see film). We have seen that happen time and time again.

    Professor Kerry Emanuel provides a very comprehensive view on hurricanes. The film was put together just as Maria hit Puerto Rico. A fascinating point he made was that the expectation is that hurricanes will venture further from the Equator in the future. Another point Professor Emanuel made was that the reliability of information in relation to hurricanes has only been a fairly recent phenomenon arising since satellite data became available.


  7. davies

    October 19, 2017 at 3:09 pm

    So #37 you didn’t read his speech …you obviously do not think it is important to make up your own mind.

    #36 I got on this thread because people were attacking the speaker rather than addressing his arguments. As we have seen, people who have not even read his speech have attacked him!

    In your case we get ‘Abbott is using lots of moron level hokum to infer that the established understandings of climate change, and related effects, are wrong.’ Again no substance.

    Do I agree with his speech? The general sentiment that the person is attacked rather than the argument discussed etc. Well you lot just proved that!

    On specific points…I agree more people die of cold than heat. Lancet article has it running at 17:1.

    On the un-adjusted temps in Australia up only 0.3 degree. Maybe a bit low. I could certainly agree with 0.5 degree but it is hard to know the extent and magnitude of the ‘adjusting’.

    For example, the latest ‘controversy’ from the BoM is the electronic sensors that have replaced the less sensitive mercury thermometers. They started replacing the thermometers 20 years ago and it is well known they can capture rapid and very short-term temp movements.

    To ensure consistency with measurements from mercury thermometers there are international standards that specify how electronic spot-readings need to be averaged. For example, in UK they take 60 x 1-second samples each minute from its electronic sensors and then average these. The US decided that was too short a period and they average over a five minute period.

    In Australia? Not over 5 minutes, nor even 1 minute averages. The BoM just take one-second averages! The daily maximum is the highest one-second reading for the previous 24-hour period. This is in direct contravention of every international standard.

    Now knowing that, can you post your utter confidence in BoM temp readings over the last 20 years?

  8. Philip Lowe

    October 19, 2017 at 5:02 am

    re US Politic:

    You can’t polish a turd, but you can sprinkle glitter on it. The US has proved once again that bullshit baffles brain. Can Oz avoid this slippery slope? Rule by Redneck default. Is there such a thing as a Green Redneck?

  9. Keith Antonysen

    October 17, 2017 at 7:43 pm

    davies, Abbott has stated that climate change is crap, what Abbott says at one time is not the same as he says at another. The view that climate change has a very minor effect is the current view of climate change deniers. Turnbull has stated that Abbott has taken every conceivable view on climate change.

    Above I gave a reference which pulled apart Abbott’s climate change denial:



    “In his speech, Abbott repeated common climate change contrarian talking points that are either incorrect, fallacious, unsupported, misleading or cherry-picked. Read below for detailed reactions from scientists.”

    Abbott made the comments of a denier.

    Huffpost says:

    “Before being downgraded to a post-tropical cyclone, Ophelia was a Category 3 hurricane on Saturday and Sunday. It went farther east than any other previously recorded Category 3 hurricane in the Atlantic Basin and broke a record set in 1980. ”


    Thanks davies, you have provided what appears possibly to be the beginning of a trend; 1986, 2011, 2014, and now 2017. That fits in with a warming globe, but not enough evidence yet.

  10. abs

    October 17, 2017 at 5:14 pm

    well done Davies, your right!

    maybe Keith should correct it by saying that Abbott is using lots of moron level hokum to infer that the established understandings of climate change ,and related effects, are wrong.

    BTW, do you agree with what Abbott has written?

  11. davies

    October 17, 2017 at 2:19 pm

    #22 et al You state that Abbott said climate change is not happening. No where in his speech does he say that. In fact he states the opposite. “After two decades experience of the very modest reality of climate change’ and ‘the growing evidence that records have been adjusted, that the impact of urban heat islands has been downplayed, and that the data sets have been slanted in order to fit the theory of dangerous anthropogenic global warming does not make it false; but it should produce much caution about basing drastic action upon it.’

    So, are you deliberately lying when you state Abbot said climate change is not happening? Or, giving you the benefit of the doubt which I am happy to do, you haven’t actually read his speech…

    As for Ophelia only occurring because of human-induced climate change, you may have forgotten several other severe weather events (including hurricanes) to have hit Ireland.

    The strongest hurricane hit Ireland in 1961 (Debbie) though the one in 1839 may well have been stronger. 300 died in the 1839 hurricane.

    You also have 1947 with up to 600 dead and severe cold and wind over the winter of 1963 killing 500. There was also Charley in 1986, Kaitia in 2011 and Darwin in 2014 (similar speed to Ophelia).

  12. John Wade

    October 17, 2017 at 1:54 pm

    We are going about, there you go, we are on a different tack now.

  13. Wining Pom

    October 17, 2017 at 9:36 am

    Indeed, #32.

    ‘When you look up in the sky and see a con trail you may be wrong, it may be a chemtrail. Don’t worry, it’s nothing, it’s just some guys spraying you with Aluminum, Arsenic, Barium, Boron, and yes Fluoride. Why? Because you ask too much. Now shut up and keep doing what “They” tell you.’

    ‘There is absolutely no need for fluoride in tap water, well for us, but for the ones who want to control the world and make sure no one rises above them, fluoride in tap water is essential element. Why? Let me explain a little bit.’
    Fluoridation was recommended by Edward Bernays, nephew of Sigmund Freud. Mind manipulation is written all over their foreheads.’

    Humans are Free website.

  14. John Wade

    October 17, 2017 at 8:34 am

    That’s the ploy, is it not #30? “If you believe crap like that …”.
    Anything and everything other than the golden word is crap, ay!
    But what you really mean to say is there is no hope for those who swallow propaganda.

  15. Wining Pom

    October 17, 2017 at 8:32 am

    I really do find it difficult to understand how people believe some of the crap put up on the internet, but we are a weird mob.
    You see, it’s not the Jews, it’s the Piano Players who have got the world sewn up. Really. Just look at the keyboard, it’s all there to be interpreted.

  16. Wining Pom

    October 16, 2017 at 9:03 pm

    #27, ‘Humans Are Free’ Say no more. If you believe crap like that, well, there’s no hope for you.

  17. Simon Warriner

    October 16, 2017 at 8:44 pm


    You see Whinger, the propaganda only works for a while, eventually the truth starts to seep through the cracks, and you get articles like this
    http://thesaker.is/a-crash-course-on-the-true-causes-of-antisemitism/, or this http://www.unz.com/author/philip-giraldi/ , who has several pertinent articles recently about the subject and whose credentials are far better than most.

    Is is a coincidence that Harvey Weinstein’s victims have suddenly found the courage to stand up against his rapacious exploits which have been common knowledge in Hollywood circles for so long? I don’t think so. I think we will see more outing of the narcissism that comes with the cult, and with it will come some of the biggest hissyfits the world has ever seen.

    And no, Whinger, I am not agin “the Jews”. What I am trenchantly opposed to is the small percentage of them that actually believe they are better than the rest of us and who have engaged in a narcissistic endeavor to assert more control than is due to them at enormous human cost in suffering and torment through the ages. But you need to do a lot of reading to see that, and it takes an open mind. I actually started out being quite the Israeli fan boy back in my early twenties and it was not until about twenty years ago I started to question the narratives being spun. The more I looked the more dodgy the whole scam became, and here I am.

    If you care to look around, you will learn that there are indeed elements of the Jewish faith who believe that settling in Israel was a huge mistake. You might also learn of links between Turkish Jews and the founders of Wahabism which is the philosophical root of ISIS, that feared terrorism bogeyman that has been so useful to Israel and the US in Syria, but I doubt you are up to that much cognitive dissonance in one sitting.

  18. Simon Warriner

    October 16, 2017 at 8:44 pm

    Whinging Pom, I did not say anything about the size of the banks so your #24 is an irrelevance.

    I suggest you start your education by reading Gilad Atzmon’s “The Wandering Who” and stop the silly “antisemite” name calling.

    Here is a bit of an intro, in case finding it yourself proves too difficult:

    And to further your education, which is so clearly lacking, or entirely via an “approved” source, you might go have a look at Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s later work about the Jewish influence within the Bolsheviks. Quite enlightening indeed.


  19. John Wade

    October 16, 2017 at 8:10 pm

  20. Keith Antonysen

    October 16, 2017 at 4:25 pm

    Davies, did your reference relate to the number of people dying from coal dust and emissions from fossil fuels?

    But you did not understand what I wrote. My suggestion was that death by cold had nothing or little to do with climate change. Death by cold has other causes such as lack of adequate shelter, lack of food, lack of money and suchlike having political and domestic causes. Death by cold has little to do with climate change, so making a comment about death by cold does not debunk climate change.

    Abbott’s underlying logic goes along the lines of more people die from heart attacks than road accidents, and so let’s not worry about road accidents.

    It is a fallacious argument to try and associate one with the other as they are separate issues.

    We can hope that the silly goat Abbott gets sacrificed at the next election through a substantial loss of votes.

  21. davies

    October 16, 2017 at 3:02 pm


    A study published in The Lancet from London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine analysed data from 74 million deaths in 13 countries from 1985 to 2012.

    From those 74 million deaths 5.4 million related to cold and just 311,000 related to heat.

    Debunk and cherry pick away …

  22. Wining Pom

    October 16, 2017 at 2:04 pm

    Well, here’s a fact #23 …

    Biggest banks in the world. Note the US doesn’t come in ’til no.6
    Industrial & Commercial Bank of China.
    China Construction Bank Corp. …
    Agricultural Bank of China …
    Bank of China. …
    HSBC Holdings (HSBC. …
    JPMorgan Chase & Co. ( …
    BNP Paribas. …
    Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group.

    Not many Jews in that line up.

  23. John Wade

    October 16, 2017 at 10:58 am

    @ 21 – a fact is a fact, not an emotion, not a belief system, not an anti-semitic verbalising.

    It could be seen that the Land of Milk and Honey is the World and all its Money!, no matter the origin of the species.

    Control seems to be an inherent human condition.

  24. Keith Antonysen

    October 16, 2017 at 10:46 am

    According to Abbott climate change is not happening.

    Current hurricane Ophelia is some distance from where hurricanes can be expected … Ireland … being at latitude 53.4129° N, 8.2439°W. Hurricanes are normally formed in Tropical warm waters. Hurricane Ophelia is a clear indication that surface sea temperature is high off Ireland. Hurricanes dissipate as waters become cooler.

    Problem with comment? If so, please provide details of named hurricanes experienced off Ireland/Northern Europe and their strength (Category).

  25. Wining Pom

    October 16, 2017 at 9:27 am

    Goodness me Simon, your antisemitism is ridiculous. Israel more powerful than Russia? A high proportion of Jewish bankers? No doubt you would agree with that story that no Jews were in the Twin Towers on 9/11. And they must have caused those floods here last year too.

  26. Simon Warriner

    October 16, 2017 at 7:05 am

    re 18, and yet, apparently inexplicably, the USA moves in the desired direction every single time that Israel twitches its little finger. How is that, Leonard? Nothing to do with AIPAC and the many millions of US$ it pours down the necks of willing Congress critters and Senators willing to sell out the interests of their citizens and take direction from outside interests? Or the millions of US$ donated by Wall Street Bankers, whose Jewishness is out of all proportion with the jewish representation in the general population?
    Nah, didn’t think so.
    Dismiss Russian influence, the Israelis have been puppeteers for far, far longer and with far more evidence to support the argument. As for 12’s “gracious in defeat”, yeah right. That evil old bitch has never explained her email security breaches that would have got lesser mortals a life sentence in Levenworth.

    It beggars belief that someone so good at teasing out the details of history could have missed something so in your face obvious. Why is that?

  27. Barry

    October 16, 2017 at 3:50 am

    Shouldn’t the caption for the pic be Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber?

  28. Leonard Colquhoun

    October 15, 2017 at 11:46 am

    About Comment 12’s “the (shonky) mess of the USA political system”: in words based on a widely known Thatcherism there is no such thing as a ‘US political system, there are 50 States, 3,031 counties, 19,519 municipalities, 38,266 special districts and 12,880 school districts (2,012 census figures)’. Each of these has administrative powers and degrees of self government that our LGAs can only drool over.

    Call that a “USA political system”?

    Charles de Gaulle was supposed to have asked how to govern a country with 365 types of cheese? How about a country with 90,056 LGAs?

    For posters who see themselves as (happily) pragmatic realists rather than (misery guts) fantasising theoreticians: https://www2.census.gov/govs/cog/2012/2012_cog_map.pdf

    (BTW, in constitutional terms, any Westminster PM, even one as big a dud as our Malcolm II the Unready, has oodles more political power than The Donald has. Just look at how his R-majority Congress has rejected so many of his proposals.)

  29. Keith Antonysen

    October 15, 2017 at 11:07 am

    In Abbott’s climate change speech he presented views that have been debunked or have been cherry picked. While temperatures are going up; ironically, extreme cold weather events are being experienced. Hence it is more accurate to use the term “climate change” than “global warming”.
    Oceans are taking up much warmth with the result being that storms that can be expected under normal circumstances are intensified through a climate change influence. Several quotes from climate scientists make such a point in relation to Harvey, Irma and Maria.

    While the media concentrate on particular storms; the aftermath of storms gets little comment. Mould on walls being a huge health problem and lack of uncontaminated water being another, particularly in Puerto Rico.

    Over the last few years several hundred Indian farmers committed suicide as their crops failed due to drought. Extreme warmth or flooding is also unhealthy for crops which leads to starvation. Catalyst, an ABC Science program, highlighted the tens of thousands of people who died from heat stress earlier this century in one particularly bad season with Spain and Russia particularly badly hit.

    By equating cold with more deaths than warming does not take into account homelessness; political/economic/ideological/domestic matters; rather than a climate change one.

    The comment Abbott made about more people die from cold than heat does not stand up very well when taking other underlying features into account. Abbott’s other comments about climate change can be pulled apart in a similar manner.

  30. Kelvin Jones

    October 14, 2017 at 10:00 pm

    #15 Wiming Pom….. I presume you mean “NUCLEAR” energy?

    Nuclear was the obvious way to rapidly move away from coal. It would have given time to sort the problem out over the next fifty years. One problem is short term politics would use it to sweep the problem under the carpet.

    People also forget the 800 million tons of coal used per annum to make coke for iron production. There is no known substitute.

    Just remember that the amount of coal Australia uses per annum is under 2% of world consumption. It is the coal we export that does the damage. Of course that with iron ore brings in the ” four wheel drives”, and consumer goods, clothes and all the other goodies of our consumptive lifestyle.

    Ever thought we may be in a catch 22 situation?

  31. Wining Pom

    October 14, 2017 at 4:45 pm

    Um, #14, we did actually change course once when we went to energy. The Luddites didn’t want it then and the Luddites don’t want to change to it now.

  32. Kelvin Jones

    October 14, 2017 at 4:10 pm

    #11 TGC… Got it in one!!!!

    To go renewable is a change of a fundamental direction of life style and structure.

    Energy does not respect political beliefs or monetary systems.

    Our decision makers one and all are taking a long time to come to terms with this physical reality. They are too in tune with how the masses would react at the ballot box.

  33. john hayward

    October 14, 2017 at 12:00 pm

    Thank you # 11 TGC, for reminding us that it’s not the tatty old planet but that plutocratic 1% that deserves our ever-increasing sacrifice.

    John Hayward

  34. Philip Lowe

    October 13, 2017 at 8:50 pm

    Hillary Clinton was on a 7.30 pm popular BBC1 program last night. She told us that even though she got three million more popular votes than Trump, she lost to the electoral college system in the USA.Who put the mock in demockracy?

    I had problems getting my head round the Hare Clarke system but it is easy compared to the shonky mess of the USA political system. Knock first past the post as hard as you like, but it does have a ‘clear’ advantage. Hillary came across well, open and gracious but scathing in defeat. Let’s hope that the ‘open and honest’? BBC will give Bernie Saunders a space next week.

    Like Chris said no 5, we can’t wait for Donald Trump to visit London. Normaly he just visits his failing golf course enterprises and then gets the hell out of it.

  35. TGC

    October 13, 2017 at 1:44 pm

    “When it comes to addressing the planet’s climate change issues, the world is in desperate need of inspiring leadership…”
    Not so! the “desperate need” is for us- you and me- to make do with less, sacrifice much more and endure ‘discomfort’ more readily.
    Are we up to it? At a rough guess- probably not!

  36. philll Parsons

    October 13, 2017 at 9:24 am

    Power corrupts.

    Trump is kept on by the Republicans although there is a lot of concern about Trumps stability and mental health. However they don’t want to give up power.

    Abbott is now a liability the Lieberals don’t know how to dump and who thinks he is a Lazarus in waiting ala Howard. The Coalition has a majority of 1, the number by which Abbott beat Turdbull. They don’t want to give up power.

    Both are unpopular with many and popular with others.

    However their neo-liberal agenda has been found to be a false god and that time is ending. Growing economies have rejected it whilst failing ones embrace it.

    Brexit is one example that will see Britain flail and perhaps not fail.

    Australia will end the Coalition government, because it is costing in the hip pocket nerve, will end. You can see the early signs in the fall in retail spending and that industry is concerned about and wants a place at the table to decide energy policy.

    The US because of it’s scale will appear to continue normally but it’s economy is also broken.

    On top of this will come the costs of climate instability enhanced disasters.

  37. Tony Stone

    October 12, 2017 at 10:11 pm

    Fervent ideologues, which is who we are dealing with here, always implode when their fantasy-land delusions are falling apart around them.

    The number of deranged and deluded leaders is growing worldwide, so it’s not unusual to see it repeated here in various guises. Abbot is displaying his, as is Turnbull, Trump, shorten Putin, the Korean nutter and whoever you want to name that’s leading a country or state.

    #8, Simon, excellent viewpoint you’ve linked to, will ring, nights are tied up at the moment.

    My plan is to avoid what is represented in that blog by taking action now and moving to renewable, environmentally friendly alternatives as fast as possible.

    Change like this has an excellent outcome in all ways, including economically. It would create more business and rural industry, plus protect us from the collapse.

  38. Simon Warriner

    October 12, 2017 at 8:36 pm

    re 7, or try this, for those on a more modest budget.


  39. Mike Bolan

    October 12, 2017 at 3:48 pm

    Check “seasteading” which is the very wealthy’s version of “homesteading” except they buy big boats, access to private docking, fuel deliveries and so forth so that no matter the sea levels, or the chaos on land, they will be OK, thankyou.

    Trump is surrounded by that class of person, and Abbott is trying to appeal to them. The idea seems to be that the rest of us are inconvenient and far too numerous for their health, hence their policies are to accelerate the chaos then profit through privatisation of public assets, and repeat until they have to get out and can then control us from positions of strength offshore and with controllable military forces. (Klein N. No is not enough) Forget ‘woe is me’; the planet’s plutocrats are out to deliver woe!

  40. john hayward

    October 12, 2017 at 3:43 pm

    Trumpy and Tony are simply point men for the conservative crusade to hand it all back to the private sector.

    Greg Hunt has just mounted a diversion from the Coalition’s long campaign to hand back public health funds to the private health plutocrats by stampeding the young back into their grasp while promising to encourage the funds to ease off on relentless extortion.

    Davies at #2 is a bit more blatant in tempting us to argue with the Aussie Trump.

    John Hayward

  41. Chris

    October 12, 2017 at 1:25 pm

    Glad that C Hunt is favouring Mental Health in the near future or later on, whatever. Like the Barrier reef he will do a great whitewash on it.

    Speaking of Mental Health the two above should have their IQ tested and if they surface at all then we can feel compassion for them as they rave on in their barking fashion.

    Did Tony pay for his London Lecture, did we, or was he paid? If he was then there are many Trumps in the world.

    London looks forward to Trump’s visit….


    Why the SUDDEN condemnation by a Hamburger, a black tinted starer and many more to Abbott’s ravings. They all had thousands of opportunities in the past to rebut. No, their silence is a telling stance.

  42. Russell

    October 12, 2017 at 12:51 pm

    “Abbott, who trained to be a Catholic priest, called climate change a “post-Christian theology” and said the decline of religion in society had left a hole in which other forms of “dogma” could take root.”

    Well Big Ears, Christianity has been proved fake without argument. Pretty much everything in the New Testament, which is everything from the supposed ‘Jesus Christ’ (hence Christians) onwards was concocted by Saul (Paul) and his capitalist mates.

    Even the Jews shun the New Testament because they know it is rubbish.

    If you believed so much in Christ, why didn’t you go through with your priesthood?

    Hopefully you’ve got a seaside home, Big Ears.

  43. Keith Antonysen

    October 12, 2017 at 12:11 pm


    You might like to rebut what scientists are saying in relation to Abbott’s speech.


    Turnbull stated that Abbott had taken every possible position on climate change after Abbott became Opposition Leader. That statement maintains its truth since Abbott became PM.

    In relation to your step 3, you need to take your own advice, in relation to comments you have made about a particular scientist.

  44. davies

    October 12, 2017 at 11:11 am

    Weakest rebuttal I have seen in a while.

    Step One: List the major points of Abbott’s speech.

    Step Two: Rebut against each point.

    Or skip straight to Step Three: Attack the person, not the argument.

  45. Keith Antonysen

    October 12, 2017 at 11:03 am

    It is apparently fine to squander billions of dollars through the Direct Action Policy, a policy which was meant to encourage major companies to reduce greenhouse gases. The Direct Action Policy was brought in when Abbott was PM.

    Greenhouse gas emissions are going up despite comments from Hunt and Frydenberg saying otherwise. The reason being there had been a nifty change of the datum point; that is, gross manipulation of the agreed-upon starting point.

    Abbott has held a number of positions on climate change; his last comments are possibly the most accurate view he has expressed on his opinion.

    In relation to Abbott’s commentary about sacrificing pigs, I’m not able to capture one, as they are all in flight. Abbott is able to spread bs very thickly, in other words.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top