Reducing the intensity of bushfires

Australia has been prone to bushfires for thousands of years. The pre-white man landscape was shaped by regular fires. Much of it still is.  Some seeds of native plants actually require the heat of a bushfire to germinate.

So there is nothing new about the 2019 fires, except that they are notable in that so much has been burnt, and yet there have been few deaths, and so many homes that have been saved from the flames. 

Below is a brief account of the 1939 fires.  ('But Sir,' autobiography by Merv McRae) 

'No-one would forget the Black Friday fires of 1939, which almost cooked the whole state. We had dug a cellar by then, and stayed down in that for most of the day. The temperature was so high that the lino was too hot for bare feet. In the kitchen the temperature reached one hundred and twenty degrees Fahrenheit, and it seemed a wonder more people didn’t die. 

Then we heard of all the fires around the state, something which has happened since, and what’s more will always happen in this well-grassed country which gets so dry in the summer.  

All that is needed is a hot, windy day with lightning about, and you have all the ingredients.'  

And these days we have additional ingredients - idiots who think it fun to light fires, and those who consider themselves environmentalists who make it very difficult to reduce fuel load so that the inevitable fires are less likely to rage out of control.

The media and the politicians and the activists keep saying that the 2019 fires are 'unprecedented.' It is a favourite word - 'unprecedented.'

They are not unprecedented.   One can only believe that they are 'unprecedented' if one ignores history.

As well as in 1939,  there have been terrible fires in 2009, 1983, 1851, and many more. Every year, there are fires. It is a part of Australia.

Various things are blamed for the 'unprecedented'  nature of our current fires.

One foolish man says that it is God's punishment because we passed laws allowing abortion and the marriage of people of the same sex.  (A strange idea, but free speech remember?)

Other people,  rather a lot of them, are saying that it is all because of Climate Change,  though they don't mean merely the gradually changing climate that has gone on for millennia, rather they mean  - the notion that humans are powerful enough to influence global climate.

 And some sensible people point out that the way we care for our country can actually make a difference.  There should be fire trails   wherever possible, access should not be closed off, and there should be regular control burns. 

  

New England National Park

For many years, countrymen have been complaining about decisions made by the authorities, authorities usually based in the cities, and made by those who have never lived in the countryside.

Brumbies in the snow

National Parks excluded the cattle that grazed in the high mountains every summer, for instance, brumbies culled, sometimes even shot from the air (the luckier ones shot dead,)  so the grass goes ungrazed except by kangaroos, dies off and makes more fuel for fires.






Fire trails have been closed, and some areas have been designated 'Wilderness' with no public access at all.  National Parks discourage visitors with high fees, some ridiculously high, and often, deliberately terrible roads.  Fewer and fewer control burns have been done.

In the last decades, it has not only been countrymen warning of the potential for serious bushfires, but acknowledged experts.  (Some of the 'experts' know nearly as much as the average countryman.)  In 2010, for instance, fire expert Roger Underwood, pointed out that government environment departments were being taken over by 'Greenies,'  resulting in a lack of fuel reduction measures.

('Greenies' has become a dirty word these days, like 'Feminism'  and 'Veganism.'  This is because once sensible movements have been taken over by extremists, and their actions and words have earned our condemnation.)

From an article by Peter Gleeson,   (Sunday Mail, December 15th, 2019)

'...Mr Underwood has dispensed with the niceties and taken the gloves off when it comes to the current escalating bushfire season.

He has blamed green groups and departmental bureaucracies hijacked by conservationists for the cataclysmic fires that are raging throughout the country.

He says blaming climate change is a hoax, and until Australians started to realise that greenies were making the country a tinderbox, catastrophic fires would continue to happen.

He even told Jane Marwick on Macquarie Radio that brainwashed government authorities would continue to blame climate change for the bushfires, meaning the risk of further loss of life and property will escalate.' 

Chris Dynon

Here is one countryman with the same viewpoint, expressed in a video.  Chris Dynon.  He speaks of restricted access, closed fire trails and the Greenies restricting burnoffs.  

https://www.facebook.com/chris.dynon/videos/10216306351231927/UzpfSTEwMDAwMjU2MzY1NzU0NjoyNDk5MjkxNTE2ODMyOTQ2/

Dynon - "People are saying that (the fires) are so bad now because of Climate Change.  Well, that's bullshit!" 

And Clem Wheatley is another very knowledgeable man. These are his words below. 

Clem Wheatley

'I am a former Ranger with the Forestry, I have lived in the bush for my entire 62 years, I am also a former Group Captain and training officer with the Rural Fire Service, I can attest first hand that as a result of green appeasing laws and policies preventing us from managing and reducing fuel loads, which in turn have resulted in hotter more destructive fires, many of our native species are being negatively impacted.

I have witnessed the transition from when we could manage and reduce fuel loads as we determined necessary, through the gradual imposition of restrictions over the years, up to today where management and reduction of fuel loads is almost impossible, as a result of legislative restrictions and onerous approval processes.

I have likewise witnessed the difference in the intensity and destructive nature of wild fire, when management and reduction of fuel loads were not hindered with excessive bureaucratic processes and restrictive laws, where vegetation was managed, fires were easier to control and less damaging, even in weather that was as hot if not hotter, than during the recent Queensland fires.

This out of touch with reality, farmer hating, greeny appeasing government and their policies have caused these fires to be more severe, damaging and harder to control than they should of been, excessive fuel loads, insufficient fire breaks due to overbearing and onerous laws and mismanagement of public land, all as a result of government interference and inaction.

While the draconian QLD Labor Native Vegetation laws provide for hazard reduction by fire, they prohibit such reduction by other means, having to navigate through the bureaucratic processes involved in obtaining approval to remove vegetation by other means, is almost impossible, as any farmer knows, it is not always possible to burn, wet and or green vegetation, extreme heat or cold, excessive wind, are all mitigating factors.

Where it is not possible to burn, there were always other methods of reducing fuel loads, mechanical means being one such method, the vegetation that causes the most heat and intensity, and which is the hardest to extinguish, is what is called ladder fuel, being that vegetation other than pasture grasses, from the ground to the underside of the canopy of the larger trees, woody weeds and scrub, if this fuel is able to be controlled, the pasture is easier to control if ignited, and the larger trees are not adversely effected.

Burning does not always remove ladder fuel, what is left after a hazard reduction burn is sometimes more flammable due to the fact it is left in a dead and or much dryer state, so that when a fire during the hotter periods is present, it has ready made dry fuel, removing this by mechanical means, prevents it being a fuel in the future and allows pasture grasses to flourish more readily, sometimes it is necessary to employ both methods, in order to render an area free of high intensity fuel.

Until these ridiculous laws are amended, so they do not inhibit land holders from managing and reducing fuel loads, to the degree where doing so, is so onerous and prohibitive, until this and future governments ensure public land is properly managed so as it's condition does not pose a threat to neighbouring properties and communities, nothing will have changed for the better.' 

Clem Wheatley
Queensland State Chairman
Shooters Fishers and Farmers Party.

So many are working so hard,  right now, to control bushfires.  Like some of our towns and farms that are running out of water, it is more to do with mismanagement than the vagaries of climate.

Clem Wheatley   This is what needs to happen.

QUEENSLAND SHOOTERS FISHERS AND FARMERS PARTY

BUSHFIRE MANAGEMENT AND MITIGATION POLICY


This policy is designed to enhance the management and mitigation of bush fires and reduce the negative impact of these fires on the community and the environment.

For many years now there has been a noticeable increase in restrictions by all levels of government, which prevent and hinder private landholders in the removal of vegetation, for the purpose of reducing fuel loads, restrictions that prevent them from adequately protecting their assets.

Authorities in control of many areas of public land have let fuel loads increase to levels that pose a significant threat to public health and safety and the environment, with significant threat to adjoining properties, urban areas and major infrastructure and services.

There are some private properties, where vegetation on those properties, poses a significant threat to public health and safety and adjoining properties, urban areas and major infrastructure and services.

There is significant evidence that shows there are issues with the management style of the Queensland Rural Fire Service, in relation to, the conduct relating to the suppression of rural fires, training and resources, the key to this is the fact that the QLD RFS comes under the management of the Queensland Fire and Emergency Services, who are chiefly urban fire fighters.

POLICY POINTS

1. The QLD SFFP considers that legislation needs to be introduced to allow the controllers of private land, to construct firebreaks, to at least twice the height of trees nearest, or a minimum of 30 metres separating the extremities of the Vegetation canopy.

2. The QLD SFFP considers that, where adjacent vegetation is dense and or in areas greater than 50 hectares, or are adjacent to dwellings or other significant infrastructure, the limits in point 1, can be doubled.

3. The QLD SFFP considers that, controllers of public lands be required to ensure that a fire break be maintained free of obstructions that prevent access and egress by motor vehicles and vegetation greater in height than 200mm, to a minimum width of 30 metres, or twice the height of the nearest trees, around the boundaries of the land, and where this land adjoins roads.

4. The QLD SFFP considers that, where the areas listed in point 3, are adjacent to and within 500 metres of dwellings, farm buildings, residential, industrial areas or any significant utilities, these fire breaks be a minimum of 500 metres.

5. The QLD SFFP considers that, legislation needs to be introduced to allow the controllers of private land, to remove and or reduce vegetation for the purpose of reducing fuel loads, where any vegetation poses a threat to infrastructure, assets, crops or pasture, or neighbouring properties, as a result if fire.

6. The QLD SFFP considers that, controllers of public lands be required to ensure vegetation fuel loads are maintained, so as reasonably not to pose a threat from fire to anything on adjoining properties.

7. The QLD SFFP considers that, the Rural Fire Service, be provided with the authority to require controllers of land to construct firebreaks, and or reduce vegetation, where necessary to reduce a credible threat to infrastructure, assets, crops and pasture on, or access and egress to adjoining land.

8. The QLD SFFP considers that, the Queensland Rural Fire Service be a self managing stand alone department, and that Senior management be required to possess practical rural fire fighting experience and qualifications.

9. The QLD SFFP considers that, decisions regarding control measures at a rural fire, be primarily, the jurisdiction of the senior officer at that particular fire.

10. The QLD SFFP considers that, training of Queensland rural fire personnel, be in line with the requirements of the NSW Rural Fire Service training curriculum.

11. The QLD SFFP considers that, weather permitting, particular preference be given to the indirect, (back burning) method of attack on vegetation fires in areas larger than 400 metres square, where appropriate as determined by the senior officer at that particular fire.

12. The QLD SFFP considers that, any laws made pursuant to this policy, be taken as the paramount authority over other state laws and codes. Note, state law automatically overrides Local government laws, policy and codes.

Clem Wheatley
Queensland State Chairman
Shooters Fishers and Farmers Party.

And that all sounds very sensible.  I think that the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party might easily rise to prominence.  Country people have been poorly represented since the Country Party changed its name to the Nationals, and then largely forgot to represent country people.







Aboriginal Land Management:

There has been a book released just recently,  that purports to tell us how the Aboriginals, pre-1788, managed the land to mitigate bushfire risk.  I suspect a lot of it is purest imagination - and that deliberate planned management was not exactly what it was, but it is true that they frequently lit fires.  I remember reading a book that contained an account of a white man travelling with Aboriginals in the early years. He was struck by the way they carried burning sticks for warmth, (no clothes, remember)  and frequently lit the vegetation as they passed, leaving fires to burn. It has also been said that they used fire to clear vegetation for ease of hunting.

I find it hard to believe that the Australian landscape was ever as idyllic as in the picture left.

But we don't know, and recent books about Aboriginals tend to more wishful thinking with a large dose of fiction.

But it doesn't really matter whether the regular lighting of fires was a carefully planned strategy with a particular result in mind, or a casual attitude mixed with the fun of watching fires, but when white settlers first arrived, the bush was often describes as park-like.


Conclusion:

Big changes are needed.  Farmers should be freed to look after their land without harassment from bureaucrats, and there should be sensible measures to mitigate the effects of wildfires.

There is another thing that is causing bushfires. It is not human-caused Climate Change, it is not a cranky God, but there are far too many malicious humans who are lighting many of these fires, maybe most of these fires.  I know there has been no lightning where I live, but again last night, a fire started nearby, and again, today, firefighters are battling, and we are breathing smoke.  There needs to be much more severe penalties for those deliberately lighting fires, and maybe even preventative detention for known firebugs when conditions are hot and windy.

Volunteer firemen do such a sterling job. They need more reward. And there needs to be some compensation for those business owners whose staff have gone off to fight fires instead of doing their normal jobs.

We have a rising population, more settlements,  more people living in vulnerable conditions in the middle of bushland. Sometimes old traditions no longer work.  The fires have been severe and numerous now for the last two months.  It is too much to ask of our volunteers.

And that is something else to look at.

Thank you to Chris Dynon and to Clem Wheatley for giving permission to use their words.

Links to evidence of tampering with weather records.

I have mentioned in comments now and then that climate 'scientists' have been caught out tampering with records.  Of course, a true scientist looks at the data and comes up with a hypothesis.  A politically driven pretend scientist makes his data conform to the theory he wants to push. When money and career prospects depend on following a certain line, then there are many scientists, who are only people, after all, willing to compromise.   (To 'compromise' is polite-speak for lying and cheating.) 

So to those who have asked where the evidence is for such tampering, I have provided several links. They are not arranged in any particular order, just added when I come across them.  I expect to come across several more before the whole charade falls down.  The increasing hysteria about a 'Climate Emergency' when there is not the slightest evidence for any emergency seems to me to be an indication that the end is nigh.  (Not the end of the Earth as some are saying, but the ending of a scam.)  

The Australian Bureau of Meterology, tampering with old records.

http://joannenova.com.au/2019/10/who-knew-the-australian-bureau-of-met-just-made-last-summer-hotter-and-history-colder-again/?fbclid=IwAR2T3M9DYXua33rS-RvZFx1fD57lpKYZXhGP-Z7hrpw9ET1wRv1pB9ETtaU
In my own experience, the reported temperatures for our local area seem to bear less resemblance to our experience and our own measurements than they once did. Last winter, there were a few temperatures so wildly out that they made an announcement with an apology, and said they were having issues with the way their instruments worked. 

And that is odd. Surely the measurement of temperature is a simple thing. There is no need for complexities in it that can go wrong - unless they want it to record something other than actual temperature.

Tony Heller:

"NASA temperature records used to show March, 1878 as the hottest month on record around the world. There was a global heatwave and drought which killed fifty million people that year. NASA has since made the heat of 1878 disappear, and removed all of the hot weather prior to 1880. And the Australian Bureau of Meteorology has done even worse."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxQjOasRvGE&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3EdhNN22kLRYNbN_rmt613auudmmW4x9EaRZvIslQhdOjGlCD-q0xzprE





Tony Heller again:

https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7748068049245566450#editor/target=post;postID=7245163833091635543;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=3;src=postname

Tony Heller, Tampering with the satellite records.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOHrYY3yAGE&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0YcpX6BOEsaSKzPkW7GA3Mlgz0CX7SWQGSqxh93I00IUq5lezrI6gVqxM

Jennifer Marohasy, scientist and author.

'The Australian Bureau of Meteorology keeps remodelling the temperature record for Australia – and not just by a little bit. Temperatures are changed through a process known as homogenisation, and then changed again, sometimes by as much as 6.4 degrees Celsius for the one day.'
https://jennifermarohasy.com/2019/02/met-bureau-rewrites-history-again-at-albany/?fbclid=IwAR2504BKlPboORmx0pTowWoxbEmginOKih8vpC6_BJqF972knxMLnsdrpE4

Craig Kelly, Australian MP

This statement by Craig Kelly, July, 2019

THE DEPUTY PM IS CORRECT - OTHERWISE WHY WOULD WOULD THEY CONTINUAL ADJUST THE RECORDED HISTORICAL TEMPERATURE DATA ?

Earlier this year, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology again rewrote Australia’s temperature records, for the second time in six years - and surprise, surprise, the latest adjusted data set again greatly increased the rate of warming since 1910 - this time the increase was a further 25%.

So now, rather than the nation’s temperature having increased by 1C over the past century (as was previously claimed with previously adjusted data) the bureau’s latest updated homogenised data set, known as ACORN-SAT, now shows mean temperatures have risen by 1.23C from the base year of 1910.

And what a lucky co-incidence for the Alarmists that base year of 1910 was a historical cold year - and the record hot temperatures recorded during the Federation drought are sent down the memory hole.

And these continual adjustments to the historical temperature records are not just in Australia.

A recent peer-reviewed study found adjustments made to global surface temperature readings by scientists in recent years “ARE TOTAL INCONSISTENT with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”

“Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published [global average surface temperature (GAST)] data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever – despite current claims of record setting warming,” according to a study published June 27 by two scientists and a veteran statistician.

Basically, “cyclical pattern in the earlier reported data has very nearly been ‘adjusted’ out” of temperature readings taken from weather stations, buoys, ships and other sources.

More recent published versions surface temperature records COOL PAST TEMPERATURES and WARM MORE CURRENT TEMPERATURES, increasing the warming trend, according to the study’s authors. Over time newer versions of the temperature record show more warming than past ones.

“NEARLY ALL OF THE WARMING THEY ARE NOW SHOWING ARE IN THE ADJUSTMENTS,” Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, a study co-author, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an interview. “Each dataset pushed down the 1940s warming and pushed up the current warming.”

“You would think that when you make adjustments you’d sometimes get warming and sometimes get cooling. That’s almost never happened,” said D’Aleo, who co-authored the study with statistician James Wallace and Cato Institute climate scientist Craig Idso.

Their study found measurements “nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history,” which was “nearly always accomplished by SYSTEMATICALLY REMOVING THE PREVIOUSLY EXISTING cyclical temperature pattern.”

Further reading:

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/…/30c0bc68e582feb2828915e1…
https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com/…/ef-gast-data-rese…
https://dailycaller.com/…/exclusive-study-finds-temperatur…/



Tony Heller: Making 1921 disappear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPYRFIs5bpY&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR2i_l2vKn0Yl_CmHCK8-RmEOlPkYaz0LQOFsy5GlSiDs6IhUlbg1V3Jfu8


A farmer in Bourke whose records date back a very long way:

This portion is repeated from a blog post I wrote in 2014.

Heat that 'didn't happen.'   The Weekend Australian, August 30-31, 2014. Article by Graham Lloyd, Environment Editor.

Find it online -

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/weathermans-records-detail-heat-that-didnt-happen/story-e6frg6xf-1227041833824?nk=d292919b6d9f4798f95dad35fb9775b1#

The source is Ian Cole, who's a farmer in Bourke, inland NSW. Bourke is well known for its extreme temperatures. His father kept detailed temperature records for most of his life. It is fortunate that they were not simply lost, as they do not support the current religion of Global Warming. (called Climate Change more recently, since the temperature has obstinately refused to rise as predicted.)

-----------


Tony Heller: 'The world started in 1960.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOx39lW-gv4&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1ZUL2ASgicU_t1p7krzOq5zajN-TCuHvPKQDysvv1I5iD8inQ1G9tqkPI

Dr. Mototaka Nakamura

Dr. Mototaka Nakamura

'Top Climate Scientist Goes Rogue.' The essay includes reference to climate records being changed to support the claims that the climate is warming.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/toplevel_climate_modeler_goes_rogue_criticizes_nonsense_of_global_warming_crisis.html?fbclid=IwAR0H_xqzqMDvyxmS5t7cJXrlrzwp0Q2EiEP7-6Uu9r70YbAes9oOl6IYojw#.XYoUiwHxORc.facebook

https://notrickszone.com/2019/09/14/scientists-confession-climate-models-have-serious-flaws-confident-others-will-speak-up-on-fraudulent-claims/

The IPCC  (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 

A report that omitted the Medieval Warm Period. 

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=3148684425201853&set=a.295729793830678&type=3&theater


Craig Kelly:  changing numbers of 'very hot days.'

https://www.facebook.com/CraigKellyMP/posts/1314822922045672:0?__tn__=K-R


Added 20th November, 2011

Another link that shows tampering, so when the weather man on TV talks of record high temperatures, take it with a grain of salt.

http://joannenova.com.au/2019/11/raw-data-bombshell-no-change-in-very-hot-days-in-australia-since-world-war-i/?fbclid=IwAR1DVSP-ZZF3x4UYlt4xfGdEi0rMXJbJc90xBg2eYHOxEGa3gi3NQJnXdis


Added 11th December:  Rising Sea Levels?  

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2017/12/06/tidalgate-climate-alarmists-caught-faking-sea-level-rise/?fbclid=IwAR0kZieq_2A7rkGi9rv9CEYinPYbm1GWMZO7kG__IsppHbKqa25hAp7tD9s

And here are some more general links that are also relevant, but not speaking of altering historical records. 

500 scientists send message to UN, stating there is NO Climate Emergency.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpVBH-HY5Ow&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1xhL1hWN8hbQmemCJcUrj1ZTed4h1Hey5DQcIFdn1r9PKbBmGRt26egQA


Dr. Willie Soon demolishes the extreme weather panic and other hysterical arguments.

Dr, Willie Soon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=4JJ3yeiNjf4&fbclid=IwAR3zDHPI4fiGtZhf0NTaPxRRfBmql5p4dbiPaxEYAIl5U_EGl7mdLr6e_f8&app=desktop

October, 2019

There are widespread protests from those who claim that they want us to do more about climate change.  Their actual demands are ludicrous, and there is speculation that the puppet-masters' actual agenda is purely Marxist - the end of capitalism, the end of democracy, and the rise of Globalism. 

But as no-one really knows, let alone the protesters, the messages are confusing and contradictory.  

October, 2019

Right - For such a dismal message, this young woman seems quite happy about it!  

Craig Kelly, Australian MP,
13th October, 2019


CLIMATE ALARMISM : As Dangerous in a Man as Rabies in a Dog.

If you know any young and gullible children at risk of falling prey to this death cult, the best way to protect them is with the facts;

* The 97% consensus claim is a fraud. Over 500 scientists and experts have recently signed a petition declaring there is no climate emergency.


* Today, we have never been safer from extreme weather or famines than at any time in human history.

* Over the past few decades the globe has enjoyed global greening - afforestation exceeds deforestation.

* Global wildfires have declined 25% over the past two decades

* The fires this year in the Amazon are below average.

* Antarctic sea ice has been increasing since 1979 and is currently at average levels

* The Arctic Sea Ice has been stable for the last decade, and where Henry Larson sailed through the Northwest passage in 1944 is year impassable, blocked with thick sea ice.

* According to the BOM Australia had the most number of very hot days in the year 1952.

* In the USA, only 2 of 50 states recorded their hottest ever temperatures this century, most occurred in the 1930’s.

* Crop yields across the world continue to break records, the world has never produced more food.

* There is no link between drought and climate change.

* Cyclones are decreasing in trend in Australia - and show no increase worldwide

* Tornadoes are decreasing.

* Polar Bears are increasing in number

* The great whales are increasing in population. And so are the number of tigers in the wild.

* Cold weather kills 20 times more people than hot weather.

* And if you are panicking about sea level rise, get some old pictures of Fort Denison, and then catch a ferry and go have look for yourself and see what ‘’change’’ has occurred.

The greatest concern that any child today should have, is that the extreme left wing politicians that encourage climate alarmism and feed it with their lies, ever get their hands on power.

ADDED 15TH NOVEMBER, 2019.   'Climategate.' 

Tony Thomas Quadrant,  Online,  14th November 2019

Climate Science Proves Scams Don’t Die of Exposure

I would have liked to reproduce the whole thing, but that could be breach of copyright.  I suggest people go to the website.  All of it is worth reading.  

 https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2019/11/ten-years-after-climategate/?fbclid=IwAR1N7MWHFZAvP64jtXx8ZXtXozBWvojrifRURiho-5yW23Lug0zGADW5c9U 


 Thomas's opening paragraph:      

"It’s the tenth anniversary next week of the 2009 Climategate email dump that exposed top climate scientists’ chicanery and subversion of science – and did so in their own words and out of their own mouths, or keyboards. I’ll list a few emails-of-infamy shortly, but first some background. For the three years before Climategate, the climate crowd was ascendant with its pseudo-narrative of “settled science”. Al Gore’s error-riddled propaganda movie Inconvenient Truth of 2006 had swept the Western world and its readily-traduced schoolkids. In 2007 Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shared the Nobel Peace Prize." 


Some quotes from the 'Climate Scientists.'

There are many quotes that shows just how unprincipled they became when adjusting records, eliminating data that did not support their narrative, and even making things up.

  "I feel that at this point there are very little rules and almost anything goes." 

So anything went, and one chap that appears to have been trying to make sense of the data from the 

 Australian Bureau of Meteorology,   noted:

What a bloody mess. Now looking at the dates… something bad has happened, hasn’t it. COBAR AIRPORT AWS [data from an Australian weather station] cannot start in 1962, it didn’t open until 1993! … getting seriously fed up with the state of the Australian data. So many new stations have been introduced, so many false references … so many changes that aren’t documented … I am very sorry to report that the rest of the databases seem to be in nearly as poor a state as Australia was…Aarrggghhh! There truly is no end in sight…!

  And laughably - 

I do hope all these emails are just staying within UEA because it really makes us – UEA as a whole – look like a bunch of amateurs.

Not really amateurs, but rather, incompetent and unprofessional political activists masquerading as scientists.  That is my opinion, M. A. McRae, not the words of the author of this powerful and informative article. That is Tony Thomas.  You should read it all.

In his conclusion, Tony Thomas says: 

[1] “The inquiries were largely unable to deal with the issue of the issue of blocking publication of papers, or intimidating journals. But academics reading the emails could see quite clearly the tribalism at work, and in comparison to other fields, climatology comes off looking juvenile, corrupt and in the grip of a handful of self-appointed gatekeepers and bullies.”

[2] The still-unidentified Climategate “hacker” said his motive was to help divert useless trillions for renewables towards doing genuine good for the world’s poor.

[3] Warmist scientist Steve Schneider perceptively said: “A mega heat wave this summer is worth 3 orders of magnitude more in the PR wars – too bad we have to wait for random events since evidence doesn’t seem to cut it anymore with the MSM [mainstream media].”

https://quadrant.org.au/…/2…/11/ten-years-after-climategate/

And that was 'Climategate.'   The author was right when he said that it should have had far more influence than it did. 

 How much money has been wasted on projects seeking to ameliorate the perceived crisis that is based on lies? 

********

The new push for nuclear energy

Nuclear energy.

Early June, 2019

The Global Warming theory became widely known around 15 - 20 years ago. The rising of sea levels was the problem most emphasized then. And I was dubious from the start, as I could perfectly well see that homes close to the beach were still much in demand, and still cost a fortune. There was also that I never believed that humans were sufficiently powerful to influence the climate.

Those who have always lived in cities seem to forget that most of the country is not composed of dense city with its air hazy with pollution, but is instead covered in farmland and forest, mountains and lakes and plains and ocean. It is only a tiny percentage that is covered in city. (And thank goodness for that!)

 I wondered then whether it was a ploy from wealthy industrialists wanting to make themselves more
wealthy by investing in nuclear energy.








But if the promotion of nuclear energy was the purpose of the scare, then progress has been slow. The same ones who are most eager to embrace the idea of human-caused Global Warming are also those most adamantly opposed nuclear energy.

Evacuation areas, 2011

And then there was Fukushima, 2011. This was a disaster caused by an earthquake and the consequent tsunami. Hundreds of thousands of people were evacuated, though there were no deaths directly related to it.

http://fukushimaontheglobe.com/the-earthquake-and-the-nuclear-accident/whats-happened

This was a nuclear disaster. There have been other nuclear disasters

Chernobyl

.

   Left:  Chernobyl, USSR, 1986. 

Three Mile Island

Right:  Three Mile Island  The well known accident was in 1979, Pennsylvania, USA.

One reactor is still working at Three Mile Island, though it is due to be shut down by the end of September, 2019.






There have been other accidents, less well known,, even when those very first reactors came with the assurances to the public that were absolutely and totally 100% safe. There are good reasons why the populace is wary of nuclear energy, especially when we have abundant coal in Australia.

Al Gore, preaching.
This man uses far more energy
than any of we normal folk. 

2019, Climate change protesters
London

It is 2019. The climate has not warmed, and the sea has not risen, but the alarmist cries have only become more shrill. 'Global Warming' has become 'Climate Change' and now it is spoken of as a 'Climate Emergency.'



 Children are taught it as fact, and to say that it is all nonsense is absolutely not politically correct.



But now, it appears, the time has come to start pushing. From several different sources, but almost in unison, suddenly the cry has come. They are not saying we have to have nuclear energy - yet, rather they are saying 'we have to have the debate,' and 'we are mature enough to talk about it.' Craig Kelly, Liberal MP, for instance, that it 'must be on the drawing board' and the fear of nuclear energy 'must be overcome by an education process.' (Bolt Report, 6/6/19) And Peta Credlin, 'We are a grownup country and we have to have a grownup debate about it.'

The message is that we must go to nuclear energy because it is 'nil emissions' (so they say) and because the price of electricity has sky-rocketed. 

Wind farm in South Australia

But the price of electricity has sky-rocketed because the subsidies for inefficient renewables are very high and the provision of coal and gas energy has been actively sabotaged. Look at the fight against the proposed Adani coal mine, and Al Gore's nonsense that 'India will not want coal anyway.'








Maybe there are other reasons for this Climate Change scare. I assume some of the powerful might believe in it, though there never was a 97% Consensus of Scientists. There is also the fact that it has given more power to the Globalists of the UN.  A theory is that it is all about the redistribution of wealth from richer countries to poorer countries.

So maybe soon, we will see the first nuclear power stations in Australia. There was a headline (WIN TV, 13/6/19) that 'the government is more than willing to consider nuclear energy if it is economically viable.'

 And 14/6/19, a headline 'the NSW treasure is 'open' to nuclear energy, and 'there is no doubt that it is a cleaner form of energy.'

Nuclear Power Station, maybe coming soon to Australia

Coal is dirty, and always will be dirty. But the dirt is visible and can be reduced.

Nuclear energy is dirty as well, but the 'dirt' is invisible and lasts thousands of years. Look at the way that nuclear waste has to be managed. It is a problem that has no solution that will last as long as it needs to last.

Think of the children

They say that we should think of our children and reduce emissions in order to reduce the human-caused warming of the climate. But I consider the risks of nuclear energy as a far bigger threat to our descendants. Radiation does not just go away. It lasts - for a very, very long time. And damage to genes can result in a deformed child in the tenth or twentieth generation as much as it can in the first or second generation. While there is a viable alternative, it would be foolish to go down the nuclear path.

*

25th June, 2019:

And the fight back against the prospect of more nuclear energy has begun. Not this blog (which has zero influence) but there was a news report yesterday about someone who collected a large dose of radiation when something went wrong at the Lucas Heights reactor in Sydney, and then today, a story about people 'risking their health' by visiting the site of the Chernobyl disaster.

So how will it go now? A few more stories of people being harmed by radiation maybe? And then the promoters of nuclear energy again speaking of how the technology is vastly improved and the dangers have been grossly exaggerated? The number of fatalities from Chernobyl has been estimated at under a hundred to 93,000. It was 1986, the time of the Cold War, and the Soviet Union was secretive. I have read (years ago) that anyone who worked on bringing the fires under control and sealing off the reactor were deliberately dispersed and no records kept.

And there is a film about Chernobyl just released, that 'gives a strong sense of the catastrophic effects' of nuclear accidents.

I have also seen an expert, Robert Gale, bone marrow expert, who treated the victims for burns in the immediate aftermath, knew about subsequent instances of cancer, especially thyroid cancer attributed to the radiation, and asserts there were nearly as many cases as alleged. He is an advocate of nuclear energy. ('The Bolt Report',  June, 2019)

As usual, 'facts' are contradicted by 'facts' on the other side of the argument.

But there is no denying that a large area around Chernobyl is still empty, the same as a large area around Fukushima, too much polluted by radiation. They will be radioactive for more generations to come.


I guess we will see in the next few years how it will turn out.  Nuclear energy with its inherent risks, or a return to coal, which is relatively cheap and plentiful?  A whole generation has been convinced that climate disaster is just around the corner.  Will they shun electricity, cars, aeroplanes, and all the other conveniences of modern living?  Will they opt for 'zero-emissions' nuclear?  Or will they look at the evidence of no actual 'climate emergency' at all, and accept more traditional forms of energy?

Stop scaring the children

As more and more of the Global Warming claims are disputed with firm evidence, the hysteria only become more shrill.  'We are all doomed,' they say.  'Doomed!' 

In school and universities, the theory is taught as fact,  scientists are likely to lose their jobs if they point out that the theory has flaws, and it is most certainly NOT a 97% consensus of scientists.

An American senator, Cory Booker, made the claim that America has just 12 years to do something to prevent disaster, and another American politician,  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,  came up with the absurd 'Green New Deal,' which, if taken seriously, would have quite quickly ruined America.

Film stars are chiming in.  (When don't they?)   Robert Redford spoke of a 'tipping point' that we are rapidly approaching. There was a good answer for him - Dear Robert Redford:
If you are truly worried about global warming, tell your rich Hollywood pals to stop flying on private jets and driving cars. Also, film production is a carbon-spewing, pollution-creating endeavor. So please, for the sake of human civilization, stop making movies. Oh...and while you're at it, tell them to downsize their carbon footprints by giving up their massive mansions and many homes and live like the rest of us. Signed, We the People. (Brietbart News on f/b, 26th April, 2019)


But still, a lot of us are too sceptical for the liking of some,  and the BBC produced a show narrated by David Attenborough.  We have grown up listening to nature shows narrated by the soothing voice of David Attenborough - Sir David Attenborough, and are much inclined to believe what he says.
https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-04-25/climate-change-the-facts-bbc-david-attenborough-global-warming-threats-dangers-ways-to-fight-climate-change/

But this time, people are panicking because of what he says, even when many of his 'facts' are quite untrue.

Paul Homewood has been through its various claims, and found many to be misleading and inaccurate - not facts, in fact.  These are some of his criticisms, condensed and sometimes paraphrased.

Attenborough shows a surface temperature chart of dramatically rising temperatures but a) fails to mention that the more accurate satellite temperature data shows no increase since 1998; b) fails to explain why temperatures rose sharply in the early 20th century, long before CO2 emissions began to rise significantly; c) fails to mention that since the 19th century, Earth has been emerging from the Little Ice Age — probably the coldest period since the end of the Ice Age.

It was forecast in the programme that there would be more rainfall, more superstorms and worse flooding.
But there is no increase in cyclones or 'superstorms.'
Attenborough says that islands are drowning.
But they are not.  Some of the 'vulnerable' areas,  like the island of Tuvalu, has gained in area.
The vanishing polar ice caps: But according to NASA, the Antarctic is actually gaining ice.

Greenland:  The temperatures in Greenland are no higher now than they were in the 1930s.

“It may sound frightening," says Attenborough, "But the scientific evidence is that if we have not taken dramatic action in the next decade we could face irreversible damage to the natural world — and the collapse of our societies.” 

It is no wonder that people, especially children, are frightened by that prospect.  But it is not true.

For the full story. go to the link below: 

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/04/18/more-outrageous-green-lies-from-attenborough-and-the-bbc/?fbclid=IwAR35s9DybJWMSnWKXWQiCk2TjJTbLNTOJBP402hSOrfXBbW61kRg0NvPtAA

To the right is a picture of 16 year old Greta Thunberg, who has become fixated on the need for world change in order to avoid world extinction due to human-caused Global Warming.   She is being treated almost as the Messiah of the new religion of Global Warming, welcomed as a speaker at some very important meetings.

A part of one of her speeches:
"Either we limit the warming to 1.5 degrees C over pre industrial levels, or we don’t. Either we reach a tipping point where we start a chain reaction with events way beyond human control, or we don’t. Either we go on as a civilization, or we don’t. There are no gray areas when it comes to survival.
And when I say that I want you to panic I mean that we need to treat the crisis as a crisis. When your house is on fire you don’t sit down and talk about how nice you can rebuild it once you put out the fire. If your house is on fire you run outside and make sure that everyone is out while you call the fire department. That requires some level of panic."

This child wants us to panic.  And she wants other children to panic.

She is just 16.   What does she know, aside from what has been fed to her?

But people are taking notice of these dire predictions.

April, 2019.  A very big protest in London

A ten day long protest has taken place in central London.  The protesters took over places like Piccadilly Circus, Waterloo Bridge, and planned to take over the airport, but did not succeed.  They staged what they called called a 'die-in.'  The idea was to draw attention to the absolute urgency of reducing 'emissions' to zero.  What they achieved was to scare a lot of children and cause a great deal of inconvenience, and some damage, even though it was theoretically a 'peaceful' protest.
Hundreds of people were arrested.      (Sydney Morning Herald, April 24th, 2019.)

More and more people are becoming alarmed. On facebook, a lady called Joanna Martin has this to say about it.

"This girl. Greta. And David Attenborough's Climate Facts. I’ve spent the night feeling the panic. I will go to sleep panicking. We have 10 years people. 10 years to reduce carbon emissions by 50%. That's an astronomically challenging goal. That we most likely will fail at if not for revolutionary leadership." 

If an adult is panicking, what about the children?  

At London's demonstrations, there was a banner displayed by young people - 'Are we to be the last generation?' 

Well, if they are, I don't think that Climate Change will have anything to do with it.  Remember that the sea levels were supposed to rise and beach suburbs would be under water?  They told us that years ago.  (That was after the 70s when there was to be new Ice Age, and also after the hole in the Ozone Layer was about to wipe us out.) 

I became sceptical then, 20 years ago, when it all first started, and yet houses close to the water still sold for millions. 

I have known Queenscliff since I was a child. The water level has not risen.  In fact, there is more land there than when I was a child, as beaches have silted up, been revegetated, and in some places, there are now buildings where once there was only sea. 

The pier pictured above is now three quarters on land, not sea. 

Another place I knew as a child, is Warrnambool, Victoria.  It is the same there, more land, not less.

Fudging the facts:

There have been so many scandals about temperature records being changed to give support to the idea that the world is getting warmer. Here is one that I came across the other day.

Dennis Althouse, 7 April at 03:26

The CBC JUST PUT OUT A LEAKED REPORT SAYING THE NORTH IS WARMING AT TEMPERATURES 2.5 TIMES GREATER THAN THE REST OF THE WORLD.... THIS IS WHAT I PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS IN THE ARCTIC...The air quality monitoring stations that were installed after 2000 are a point of faulty data collection. The person who installed them (i helped them find locations for the ones in Inuvik and Yellowknife) were placed in locations to to get 'hits' ... when I asked the person in charge why he wanted them in locations where it would obvious give high readings he told me they want 'hits' so they can get more funding. I thought that was bad science so I would only approve a site that was average air quality for the town of Inuvik by a soccer pitch and no buildings or traffic near it... since they are going to use that single point to represent the surrounding 500 km I felt that was best... the person complained to the SAO and Mayor ... but I held firm on my assertion that the location away from direct sources of pollution was a better location to collect a representative sample. Since I moved away they moved the air quality station next to the boiler end on one of the larger buildings in Inuvik (Midnight Sun Rec Center) obviously to get 'hits' ... the air quality monitoring station in Yellowknife (see pictures) is next to one of the larger sewage lift stations (think pig barn) in the city... I would get calls a couple times a year from environment Canada asking about a high numbers...LOL! so the data from any of these sources are suspect... not because I don't believe data... quite the opposite ... I collect and analyze data professionally... there are serious problems when the data is collected to get 'hits'... the report 'leaked' by CBC has been fixed with 20 years of manipulated data... we are being miss-lead.

Below is a link to something as important, about Corruption of the US Temperature Record.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kUAtt2pXlc&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0w25zrzF5Fso52gpABsp_3CEiqRU1o17Zi3TfLsSs0ppdqf088vn16CkA

And in Australia:
An article by Jennifer Marohasy, The Spectator Australia, 10 March 2019

"The Hottest Summer On Record Except for the Ones We've Changed."
 In essence, she says: "It is actually now near impossible to know which summer was the hottest ever summer – because of the extensive remodelling of our temperature history."

The link to the full article is below.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10156312768489370&set=pcb.10156312773324370&type=3&theater

Andrew Bolt  is well known for doing his research:  Here is some of what he says, summarised and sometimes paraphrased.  The link to the full article is below.)

"Here are other popular falsehoods that warmists fervently claim as true, only to get cross when I quote back “the science” they claim to “believe” in.
—Global warming is happening as predicted.
In fact, warming has slowed dramatically since last century, giving us lower temperatures than predicted by the vast majority of warming models. (Source: Dr Roy Spencer.)
— Global warming is causing more and worse cyclones.
In fact, Australia has had fewer cyclones, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change this year admitted “numerous studies … have reported a decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy”.
— Global warming is causing more drought.
In fact, rainfall in Australia has increased over the past century. The IPCC now admits it has “low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at global scale”.
— Polar bears are becoming extinct.
In fact, adjunct professor Susan Crockford estimates numbers jumped from 22,500 to 28,500 over a decade.
— Global warming means less food.
In fact, grain crops in Australia and the world have set several records over the past decade."

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10156151669814370&set=a.10150149146444370&type=3&theater

A scientist has said: "Thinking the world’s temperature was driven primarily by man’s tiny emissions “borders on magical thinking."

In 2014,  I made a blog post about the matter.  In it, I spoke of old records being changed, sometimes deleted.  So if anyone has any old records, make quite sure that they are kept safe, preferably on paper as well as on computer.  They are more precious than ever now that we cannot trust 'scientists' to respect the data.

 http://mamcrae-author.blogspot.com/2014/09/global-warming-science-is-settled.html

Oddly, it was difficult to find this post when I checked on Google, though with the exact same search terms, it was first in the results for another search engine, 'Duckduckgo.' Google is frequently being  accused of fiddling with results of searches. Nearly all the results that were there were heavily in favour of the theory that human 'emissions' was causing the Earth to become warmer.

This was this interesting one I came across, though:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/18/dark-green-money-reveals-vast-self-dealing-network-in-canadas-climate-change-leadership-like-green-new-deal-proposal-says-friends-of-science/


It includes this paragraph:  “Dark Green Money” is a new report by Ottawa energy policy consultant, Robert Lyman, that takes the mask off the big green funding machine behind Canada’s Climate Change “Leadership”, issued by Friends of Science on Jan. 15, 2019. According to Friends of Science, what is in play in Canada sounds like the proposed US Green New Deal, as outlined by Vox, Jan. 7, 2019. Contrary to Al Gore’s claims of industry money funding climate dissenters, as reported Dec. 21, 2018 in National Geographic, “Dark Green Money” shows that billionaire foundations with vested interests in renewables and carbon trading, along with government policies are the big money pushing the climate narrative." 

I have heard similar allegations before, that the whole thing is a hoax perpetrated in order to make money.  Certainly Al Gore made a huge amount out of his alarmist film 'An Inconvenient Truth.'

But maybe it is not about money at all.  Religions have always been used to control the people, from the despicable practice of corrupt popes and the selling of 'Indulgences' to the spread of Communism by imposing atheism, one religion being replaced by another - the religion of Party.

And now, the theory of human-caused Global Warming has become a religion. The accusation of 'Denier,' is akin to the shrieks of 'blasphemy'  of olden times.

 Is it to impose more central control?  Bodies like the EU and the UN push it strongly, but for their own purposes.  Some, of course, might believe it, the same as some Middle Ages popes might have believed in the religion that gave them power.

But these are allegations, and how much truth there are in them, I have little idea.


I do know this:

Random kids not to scare

It is NOT FAIR to scare the children into believing they have no future.

Let them play and learn.  Don't make them worry.

I can't say it better than Joy Holbrook said it when she was incensed at school children 'striking' for more action on climate change. They called it a 'strike,' but it was supervised by teachers, and some children were bused to the demonstrations. The media coverage was overwhelmingly approving.

 

Joy writes:

This entire agenda is a disgrace! As a former teacher, I'm happy I can sleep at night, knowing I didn't terrify children into believing that they have no future. My grandchildren are being brainwashed at school with this insidious rubbish but fortunately for them, they have parents and grandparents who tell them the truth.

As professional information disseminators, it's incumbent on you to provide children with facts, not hysterical rubbish. For example, are schools teaching that the polar ice caps are growing in size? Check NASA's website for the photographic proof. Are schools teaching that the planet has been through this cycle many times over the millennia? Read Ian Plimer for geological proof. Are schools teaching that the islands of Tuvalu and Kiribati, which Al Gore predicted would be submerged by 2015, have grown in size since that prediction? I could go on but I know it's probably futile because those in the cosy left wing bubble don't care to step outside that bubble. And for the record, I voted Labor for over 50 years and, until three years ago, I believed in anthropogenic climate change. I believed that what I now know to be a rabidly left wing media, was telling me the truth. Then I retired and found myself with time to research.

In case you're not aware, I'll tell you what's REALLY going on. Climate change is being driven by two factors: the UN and our ubiquitous old friend, money. I've just read an article quoting the head of the UN climate body who admitted that the IPCC rounded up temperature data in their report last year. She also admitted that the alleged concern for global warming has nothing to do with the environment. It's about gaining control of energy worldwide, thus giving them control of industry and, by extension, the world's population. The goal of the UN is a One World Government. As to the money, the wealthy have billions invested in the renewables industry. The Turnbull family is a case in point. The Labor Party has investments, the unions, including your very own Teachers' Federation. Of course they're going to push the warming agenda. You're their puppets, dancing to their string pulling and you don't even realise it.

In conclusion, I'd ask you to go back to your classrooms and show your students video footage of vast solar farms in the US, covered with a good 30 cm of snow, thus rendering them useless. The sun hadn't shone there for over a week anyway. Or maybe you could entertain them with the video footage of the helicopter dropping hundreds of litres of fuel onto a wind turbine to de-ice it. Brilliant for the environment! Stop frightening the kids and get back to what the teachers' charter tells you to do. Arm kids with facts that will give them a basis for a successful life, not over emotional claptrap that scares them. And while you're at it, ask them to give up their phones, game consoles, electricity and transport to and from school. That'll tell you how serious they are about saving the world.

Regards, Joy Holbrook. Wallsend.

A few years ago, Australia's Prime Minister was going to have an Enquiry into the way that data was handled by the Bureau of Meteorology after doubts were raised about the 'homogenisation' of data. The PM was ousted, and the prospective enquiry dropped.  Tony Abbott was thought not to be a 'Believer,' though he apparently thought it too politically risky to ever actually say that.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-24/government-discussed-bom-investigation-over-climate-change/6799628

As part of the recent London demonstrations, some young people unfurled a banner that read:
"Are we the last generation?"

No, you are not going to be  'the last generation.'  The world is NOT going to end,  and if we do suffer catastrophe, it is far more likely to be from over-population or maybe from flu pandemics.

So stop scaring the children.  It is not fair on them.