Comments on: Climate change issue comes alive – almost!

By: Brian

Brian — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 12:45:51 +0000

Snorky, the story about Turnbull taking the proposal is almost certainly true. Taylor said today that the AFR would not have run it without confirming it with several cabinet sources.

Whether Turnbull leaked it or someone else hardly matters, I think. The main thing is that they are squabbling over it.

By: Brian

Brian — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 01:55:29 +0000

habby, that’s exactly right. Guy Pearse, the former Liberal insider, reckons the penetration of the Greenhouse Mafia into the organs of government is such that even a Rudd government is going to find it difficult to shake them off.

The strategy, according to him, is do all the superficial stuff, but to do nothing that would threaten the role of coal in particular in the world energy production system.

By: habby

habby — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 23:33:38 +0000

Anyone in any doubt what has driven Coalition policy on greenhouse and climate change and the critical role of Howard in particular should read Clive Hamilton’s “Scorcher: The dirty politics of climate change”. For a short version you can see a speech Hamilton delivered several years at –

http://www.tai.org.au/documents/downloads/WP84.pdf

If it’s half true it’s a damming indictment and highlights the energy industry has had them by the short and curlys for many years.

And we should be fearing undue influence from the unions with a potentail Labour government!

By: Aidan

Aidan — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 23:08:31 +0000

But cabinet decided such a backflip would not look credible to voters given the vehemence with which Prime Minister Howard had argued against Kyoto for a decade, even though it was looking for ways to redefine the coalition’s image in the electorate.

Yet again Howard’s non-retirement has bitten them. Under new leadership they could have ditched the belligerent anti-Kyoto rhetoric. Sweet.

By: Sam Clifford

Sam Clifford — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:15:41 +0000

CK, did the twitch make another appearance?

By: CK

CK — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:39:11 +0000

Yes, he would have been crucified. But wasn’t it lovely watching him squirm as that naughty (presumably ABC) journalist repeatedly asked him if it was true Cabinet had knocked back Malcolm’s submission to ratify Kyoto.

Yes, it was delightful. The classic Howard “No, look behind you! No, not that way, THAT way” refrain.

I can’t bear this for another four weeks. It’s death by comedy.

By: Snorky

Snorky — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 07:00:55 +0000

Seems pretty clear to me. Turnbull leaked the story, with Howard’s connivance, on the basis that it might persuade a few prevaricators in Wentworth to return to the Liberal fold on the strength of Turnbull’s environmental credentials.

Whether it’s actually true is debatable. There’d be plenty of public servants who would know.

By: Michael D

Michael D — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 05:29:03 +0000

re: Sam – someone knows his japanese history…

By: Bill O'Slatter

Bill O'Slatter — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 02:18:00 +0000

The most likely culprit in a leaking is the biggest beneficiary. There’s little benefit in this for Ratty or the liberal Party ;iti just emphasizes how stuck in the past they are. Good strategy from Turnbull however positioning himself for leadership ( if he survives in his own seat) . After the pulp mill debacle and failure of nerve he had to do something.

By: philiptravers

philiptravers — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 02:06:21 +0000

And I am a complete bore I suppose,if, I think the leading experts that always get the publicity are staking too much on election outcomes,because whatever science they are undoubtedly agreeing on is not the languid humanity that continues to claim some invariable self-condition of real motivation,intent and outcome! So other parts of the matters of the development and continuation of the attempts to scientifically derive the future with great purpose and certitude are all rendered down to the majority of politicians, who arent as a whole, conversant with climatology as a second language, geology as a practice in historic assessment,or even concentrating long enough to wonder,if cloud seeding of the tourist mountains isnt adding to the woes in the Australian landscape,instead preferring the belief, accuracy in knowing the result is the same as the fundamental process of regular patterns of behaviour operating specifically for a particular industry. Accuracy of outcome as benevolence maybe in fact,a malevolence in the short and longer patterns,and these people dont bloody well know they are all trying to claim expertise,and the longitudinal assessment hasnt even been familiarised in how to look at these weather patterns that can predictably assess the non need for again going down the weather modification path! now, I know how I am expressing this viewpoint has a sort of redundancy of economic efficiency about it,but it is clear to me.I was a member ,a lay member of a UNO affiliated group in the Year of water.Within the magazine they were presenting evidences from the U.S.A. as to the potential for long term weather change of a detrimental type by the use of the present system of doing it and now more refined. Its like a comparison with shattering in a car window a hole,that is cloud seeding, can lead over time by virtue of the glass stresses already present,after the hole is complete extending further across the window as the car travels under various conditions and speeds.Certainly this may not be a useful analogy to suggest the weather related pressures of stress and shearing immediately and into the future because of new and incomplete pathways of weather travel across the landscape.Reiterated in presentation,the hole,cloud seeding, has set up a pathway of whole windscreen collapse,more so maybe because of other forces on the windscreen.Laminar realities unfortunately as a selection of phenomena present in weather conditions and windscreens does create some momentary confusion.The knowledge meteorologist deal with, are patterns not necessarily continually referenced to geological strata and points within the geology.The C.S.I.R.O. have definitely concluded how tree lines pull the weather in,but the mass of trees still on the strata in the conditions of weather modification can affect by their own needs as bio-strata, irregular and unexpected outcomes.The recent fires locally in that area and national,are already sources of weather change.Come on wake up, this isnt getting even a mention.The scientists are confounded by the knowledge and legitimate theory is bedeviled by how more than one result can be attained by modelling.