Mumble reports Newspoll has Labor’s lead dropping from 59-41 to 55-45, with primary votes of 44 per cent for Labor, 39 per cent for Coalition, 10 per cent for Greens and 7 per cent others. More to follow.
Meanwhile, Alexander Downer confirms he will quit parliament to take up a job as United Nations special envoy to Cyprus. Mayo by-election to follow.
UPDATE (2/7/07): Today’s Australian provides further figures on standard of living expectations, which have plunged shockingly – “get worse” being up from 18 per cent to 43 per cent since December. While I’m here, a belated link to yesterday’s graphic.
UPDATE (3/7/07): Newspoll has released its quarterly aggregated poll which provides breakdowns by state, gender and age. It suggests the Rudd honeymoon effect has been especially strong in South Australia and in metropolitan areas, is fading quickest in Victoria, and did not further increase support for Labor in the 18-34 age group. Two of these four are consistent with the result of the Gippsland by-election.
Bob! Bob! Are you up there? Bugger, wrong place.
Given that Barack Obama’s stated ETS policy is very similar to the one proposed by Garnaut.
http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2200768/obama-unveils-plans-carbon-cap
Will Brenda finally back an EST if the US introduces one?
“Instead of idly debating the precise extent of global warming or the precise timeline of global warming, we need to deal with the central facts of rising temperatures, rising waters and all the endless troubles that global warming will bring,” he said.
“We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great. The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge.”
“As never before, the market would reward any person or company that seeks to invent, improve or acquire alternatives to carbon-based energy,” he said.
Who is “he”?
John McCain who also supports an ETS.
Gary,
I just knew I’d get that response.
It’s so quiet in the US election forum.
dovif @ 541 –
Chris Uhlmann works for the ABC and Janet is reporting his view
As an ex seminarian, Uhlmann’s view may be coloured by fears of a return to the old paganistic worship of nature which Christianity has battled so long to destroy.
I am particularly struck by the following in Albrechtsen’s piece:
Uhlmann said that while the Government’s line is that if we start late, it might cost Australia more, the Opposition can say “hang on, Copenhagen is in 2009 – that is when the world will get together [on climate change] – and if the world doesn’t act, this won’t be solved. Why should Australia get too far ahead of the game?”
1) We won’t be ahead of the developed world’s response, but toward the tail of the pack.
2) What difference will it make if we act and the rest of the world doesn’t. As the country with the most to loose from CC it won’t matter a jot if we save our treasure by sticking collective heads up collective arses. What we save on the denialist swing will be lost on reality’s roundabout many times over.
Our only hope is convincing the rest of humanity to act decisively. They are much less likely to do so if we sit on our bums on the sidelines sniggering like little boys as we count our ‘marbles.’
My concern with Albrechtsen’s comment fluff is that she compared Toolman and Barry (Oh Kev – why do you hate me).
Did it enter her head, that as an ABC board member, it is inappropriate to comment in public about ABC staff? Probaly not 🙁
She is an utter disgrace, and walking proof of the previous government’s deliberate efforts and success at moving the ABC well to the right
Albrechtson is one of the last survivors of Howrd’s neocons still in a position of power.
Not for much longer methinks.
As the US election is showing (promise I won’t go there in a big way on this thread), Obama’s rise is a result of the death of the extreme rightwing attitudes that she has so fervently defended. Including denial of climate change.
Good riddance when her time is up, along with Windschuttle.
At least Windschuttle keeps his mouth shut.
557
ruawake Says:
Did it enter her head, that as an ABC board member, it is inappropriate to comment in public about ABC staff? Probaly not
JA is a law unto herself. In JanetWorld she has no conflicts of interest, no obligation to base her views on evidence and logic, and can treat others as she sees fit.
548
Jen Says:
– don’t you just love it when people useteh old -”I, entitled to have a different opinion” line to defend the indefensible. Like “I believe the earth is flat” when it just bloody well isn’t.
Climate change is unfortunately as real as you can get, and the naysayers are arrogant fools of the highest order.
But do you think they will
a) ever admit they were wrong in any way, or
b) believe that hence they personally should pay any sort of price for their irrational obstructionist ideology?
Nope. They will be blaming the government for not acting sooner and more forcefully, and demanding some sort of assistance from them.
I was amazed to see Tony Burke spruike a climate theory as fact. How stupid is that. As some of you know I am a AGW skeptic (denialist if you want, it is only a self serving label). However even true believers know that IPCC reports paint AGW in a range from mild to wild. This model that Tony was touting obviously was at the more alarming end of the scale.
With any climate model we have a range of assumptions that are inputed into it. These can be tropospheric temps, surface temps, SST’s etc. Burke seems happy to push the most extreme circumstances yet will play down any minimalist possibilities.
He also never mentioned the limitations of this model, and presented the thing as fact. This alarmist claptrap should be seen for what it is, spin. What is more, modelling two years out is so unreliable no reputable meterologist would hang their reputation on it. Must be why I have scoured the net trying to find a copy of this report and learning who the authors are. I rang up the local met office to see if they knew and was told it was something the BoM would not normally release, The furthest out they deal with is seasonal outlooks with probabilities.
zedder, I would think that the BoM would be more likely to study short term weather than long term, as that is their core role.
BB-
Windschuttle wrote a whole book denying that there was violence against aborigines during white settlement.
Should have kept his hand still too.
It was presented as a joint BoM – CSIRO report, hence my phone call to the BoM.
Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO – now why would they tell Fibs? Of course its all a plot.
Why has every review comissioned by western govts. come up with “oops – things are crook in tullarook” ’cause its all a plot.
Why is Tony spending $46 million on finding ways to improve agricultural practises? ‘Cause its all a plot? 😛
No tin hats here Ruawake. Just identifying spin when I see it.
OK zedder,
Lets get rid of the “experts” and get the Govt. to Google it. I’m sure Andrew Robb would agree. 🙂
Here is a little secret, 18 months is too short a time frame to physically build the government’s infrastructure to put into place the emission trading scheme. It will take the 2 year window where there is no trading to actually get the system ready.
zedder @ 563 –
What is more, modelling two years out is so unreliable no reputable meterologist would hang their reputation on it. Must be why I have scoured the net trying to find a copy of this report and learning who the authors are. I rang up the local met office to see if they knew and was told it was something the BoM would not normally release, The furthest out they deal with is seasonal outlooks with probabilities.
Climate and weather are two separate animals, zedder.
I think you are referring to the CSIRO Climate report which you’ll find on their website.
hehe ruwake!
zedder –
I wish you were right, but I fear you are not. And so does by far the majority of scientific opinion around te world from all quarters and countries involved in scientific evaluation.
Let’s hope they are all alarmists and we can all drive Hummers to our heart’s content.
sigh. zedder. go back a couple of pages to where charles posted a link to a series posted by Brian at Larvatus Prodeo. It’s not original research in itself, but the series draws together a range of research on topics related to the issue of global climate change or warming, whatever you want to call it. The B of M does not do this type of research. They collect data which others, such as the CSIRO, use to do research, i.e., the B of M wont be able to provide you with the information you’re after. Go to the links via charles, or alternatively go to Larvatus Prodeo and track back to Brian’s posts.
I think I’m going to scream if I hear another “senior political” whatever, unable to tell the difference between the climate and the weather. Tools, all of them, and serve the Australian public ill.
Harry-
don’t scream. Most people are getting it. And those that don’t have the Liberals to vote for.
Let us get this definition clear.
Climate
The atmospheric conditions over a long period of time. Generally refers to the normal or mean course of the weather. Climate includes the future expectation of long-term weather in the order of weeks, months or years in advance.
I would hardly think that a place like Larvatus Prodeo is the most instructive place to find out about weather. In a previous post I invited this group to come over to weatherzone where you can debate this subject alongside amateurs and professionals who have been observing the climate and weather over a long period of time. I haven’t seen anyone over there 🙁 I have been posting there for about 7 years and as you can take out of this it is an area of great interest to me.
You will find me over there with the handle seaweed BTW
Sorry ruawake; the CSIRO and BoM are in on it – up to their necks. They’ve been forced into this position by NASA.
It’s all because everyone was starting to cotton on to the fact that the moon landings were staged in a BoM outpost centre in central SA on CSIRO land.
The only way to stop the secret getting out was to think up an even bigger lie, and thus GISS was born. (And we all know that Al Gore’s father was a Democrat Senator at the same time as Lyndon Johnson, who was instrumental in getting NASA stared… ah!! the pieces start to fall into place now).
And is it just me or does James Hansen’s last name sound suspiciously like Bill Henson’s!!! Hansen, Henson, Hansen, Henson – if you say them repeatedly they start to seem like they are in fact the same and wow we know what that means!!! (I’m telling you, these are facts people!!!)
They’ll stop at nothing!!!
Praise be those brave sould like Andrew Bolt and Janet A for seeing the truth. Hold firm, you mighty warriors!
I have been posting there for about 7 years and as you can take out of this it is an area of great interest to me.
And you still don’t understand the difference in predicting short term weather and long term climate?
570 – yes I do understand the difference. Your worthless point?
That should of been 579. My apologies to B S Fairman
Oh, hi there!
I forgot to give William my sick certificate. Hope I am still employed.
Things have been a bit crummy, lately, in my world.
I read you, always.
zedder – perhaps what causes the confusion is statements like this:
What is more, modelling two years out is so unreliable no reputable meterologist would hang their reputation on it.
when talking about a report on climate that predicts we’re are going to have droughts more often than in the past.
A meteorologist is unlikely to predict the weather 2 years ahead – IME they often have trouble predicting it 2 hours ahead – but a climatologist’s modelling may well suggest that droughts may become much more frequent as a result of actual or foreseeable changes in parameters that affect climate. So it is prudent that a Minister of Agriculture would plan ahead for the likelihood of having to cough up more dollars in drought relief.
The fact that the Southern Oscillation Index is, once again, swinging back into El Nino mode after only a very short respite indicates that the climatologists are, unfortunately, probably right. 🙁
This forum is not designed for this type of debate. In deference to BillBowe I will not argue the nittygritty of climate theory. I do ask however that some of you review the following documentary on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr5O1HsTVgA&feature=rec-fresh
I urge you to watch all 5 parts.
What I am trying to convey is that there is not a concensus in science. There are very intelligent people who have a straight forward evidence that contradicts the IPCC. The IPCC is not the sole beholder of the truth.
Bringinging this discussion back to the polical side, to belittle those politicians that seek to be cautious on this issue shows a lack of wisdom and maturity. We are making big decisions about where the focus of our resources should be. Personally I believe that habitat destruction, deforestation and species extinction is the biggest threat to the planet. If we decided to put our money into this area Australia would be better off. Pay the owners of Cubbie station $100 million dollars to P off and give the Murray a good flush would be a good start. Protect the Kimberley and limit Australia’s population growth would be another good idea. To jump at shadows, to spend billions on a non existent problem is plain daft.
zedder, quite frankly IMO being ‘cautious’ is a cop out. The risk of doing nothing is just too great to contemplate.
I see action on climate change as a similar thing to buying an insurance policy for your home. Sure, you might not get your house broken into or burnt down, but if you don’t own home & contents insurance these days you are an idiot. Yes, it costs money, but the risk of not having it is just too high.
Garnaut’s estimate for the cost of acting now… about 1% of GDP. As a prosperous nation how can we honestly say that is too much to outlay when we look at what could be at risk for our children?
Sorry about the name and other typing getting a bit skew if. The newly 3 legged cat just keeos intruding on the message. There you go it’s supposed to be “keeps intruding”, etc.. Puts cat on couch, says stay there, hopefully.
It seems to me that it may be more accurate to speak about climate change as it relates to both domestic and international policy.
Tony Burke announced today a big increase to the farming sector to adapt to climate change, and it was a big increase. Clearly, the production of food is of interest to the gov’t. Cute move on the National Party heartland
Clearly, the cabinet, goes on making decisions in the absence of Rudd.
Righto, Brendon (I’m a doctor) says well, nooo, we shouldn’t do anything ahead of the rest of the world in relation to adaptation to climate change/warming. Hasn’t noticed the EU already has.
Gawd almighty, I’m just an amateur, but Horatio is supposed to be a professional.
Zedder, I’m willing to watch all five bits of the doco you have nominated and report back in terms of impact on domestic policy, if you’re prepared to watch and review Brian’s work on Larvatus Prodeo and report back on impact on domestic policy. A compare and contrast, if you like, and it must be related to domestic and global ploicy. Bugger, the cat had a say again.
Harry, have you and Brian got a thing going?
Deal Harry. Truly I am agnostic about the issue. I am always ready to say sorry I was wrong. Let the facts speak. 25 years trading futures has made me like that. Every day I am proven wrong (hopefully not that much!) I laughed when one of the posters above tried to tell me what a trend is… ha
zedder
If all that comes out of this is cleaner cities, less acid rain in Europe and reduce demand on non renewable resource, does it really matter?
Hey Crikey!
Nice to see you back.
Oh Dear, more drama and tantrums from the Queensland Liberals as the Big Pineapple looms into view:
“AN agreement to merge the Nationals and Liberal Party in Queensland is in danger of collapsing after the Nationals rejected a deal offered by the Liberals to end a stalemate over the new party’s presidency.
The future of the agreement was thrown into doubt as Liberal powerbroker Santo Santoro called for the new party to be headed by former state Liberal president Gary Spence.
The Liberal National Party of Queensland was set to be established after Nationals and Liberal members voted in postal ballots in favour of merging the two parties.
A three-way tussle for the presidency of the new party has emerged between Mr Spence, former Howard government minister Mal Brough and Queensland Nationals president Bruce McIver. Mr Spence’s Liberal Right faction, headed by Mr Santoro, favours the merger but many Liberals are concerned that under an agreement negotiated by Mr Spence their party would be swallowed up by the Nationals.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23979349-5006786,00.html
I would have thought that Mr. Santoro by now would be as popular in the Liberal Party as Brian Burke in a cabinet minister’s office.
Glad to see I’m wrong.
I’ve said it once and i’ll say it again without China, India and Brazil our efforts are worthless.Nelson is right to say wait and see.
Zedder, I agree with you when you say, “What I am trying to convey is that there is not a concensus in science. There are very intelligent people who have a straight forward evidence that contradicts the IPCC. The IPCC is not the sole beholder of the truth.”
So we do nothing and if they are wrong we are rat sh.t. Yeah, that sounds like a logical way of working.
Gary the point is we should not lead on this as what ever we do won’t amount to much.
Take this analogy if the world needed to buy something for a dollar and Australia’s contribution was only 1 cent how much closer do you think we’ll be to that dollar?
“Gary the point is we should not lead on this as what ever we do won’t amount to much.”
John you are basing your argument on an incorrect premise. We won’t be leading the world. As Garnaut said we in fact will be about middle of the pile. Many countries have started already.
So, if we were Chinese John, would you be advocating we wait for India to do something before we (China) did anything?
[Take this analogy if the world needed to buy something for a dollar and Australia’s contribution was only 1 cent how much closer do you think we’ll be to that dollar?]
So you don’t believe we should pay our fair share?
Gary, don’t you wish the Liberals and their claque would remember a few simple proverbs.
“The journey of a thousand league commences with one small step”.
“Count the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves”.
“Rome wasn’t built in a day”.
And in Nelson’s case, given his foolish utterances of the day,
An empty vessel makes the most noise”.