Tim Flannery

[Father Jack]

You obviously don't read the posts in the first place...I said "he denies this" Yet you will find plenty of evidence to the contrary. Of course the Climate Changes, ( the mad activisits just use the extreme events to further their mad cause) but as that old poem written in 1903 and published in 1908 goes, by a homesick young woman aged 19 with no aid of "google maps" " I love a sunburnt country, a land of sweeping plains, of rugged mountain ranges, of droughts and FLOODING rains!" Do they teach anything in schools these days? I guess this has happened before? Tim goofed as most of these climate warriors do and sometimes the scaremongering falls flat with the predictions. The Greta worshippers can't stand it. The world has a lot more pressing issues in 2021 an The "mammologist" just craves attention.

So now we're using 100 year old poems to debunk climate change? **** me

 

[JackFlash]

So now we're using 100 year old poems to debunk climate change? fu** me

You really are a dumbarse aren't you? I refuse to be brainwashed by Left-wing ideology and utter absurdity. She lays down a perfect description of Australia with no Aero view, no internet maps, just her own eyes...but of course in your mad mind this means nothing. We really are lost.

 

[CD Xbow]

You really are a dumbarse aren't you? I refuse to be brainwashed by Left-wing ideology and utter absurdity. She lays down a perfect description of Australia with no Aero view, no internet maps, just her own eyes...but of course in your mad mind this means nothing. We really are lost.

So climate change is left wing ideology and utter absurdity?
Are you Andrew Bolt?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

You obviously don't read the posts in the first place...I said "he denies this" Yet you will find plenty of evidence to the contrary. Of course the Climate Changes, ( the mad activisits just use the extreme events to further their mad cause) but as that old poem written in 1903 and published in 1908 goes, by a homesick young woman aged 19 with no aid of "google maps" " I love a sunburnt country, a land of sweeping plains, of rugged mountain ranges, of droughts and FLOODING rains!" Do they teach anything in schools these days? I guess this has happened before? Tim goofed as most of these climate warriors do and sometimes the scaremongering falls flat with the predictions. The Greta worshippers can't stand it. The world has a lot more pressing issues in 2021 an The "mammologist" just craves attention.

I suppose that rambling, incoherent response might have made sense in your mind. You can cite Dorothea Mackellar all you want, but a poet is no match for tens of thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies.

 

[Caesar]

I do love the simplicity of a Liberal Party mind. It rains, a dam or two fills, global warming is over

It’s stupid, but no more stupid than the idiots who were bleating about last summer’s bushfires being evidence in the opposite direction

Weather isn’t climate and the dialogue would improve substantially if people on both sides would focus on long term trends rather than individual weather events

 

[Father Jack]

It’s stupid, but no more stupid than the idiots who were bleating about last summer’s bushfires being evidence in the opposite direction

Weather isn’t climate and the dialogue would improve substantially if people on both sides would focus on long term trends rather than individual weather events

Hang on, are you suggesting that last year's bushfires were an isolated event?

 

[JackFlash]

Of course nothing has ever happened before the year 2000 according to the alarmists...

 

[Father Jack]

You really are a dumbarse aren't you? I refuse to be brainwashed by Left-wing ideology and utter absurdity. She lays down a perfect description of Australia with no Aero view, no internet maps, just her own eyes...but of course in your mad mind this means nothing. We really are lost.

So you think that left wing ideology has it that there were no floods a hundred years ago? If not, then I suggest you look into the science of climate change a little more deeply so that you can understand it better before calling it out as brainwashing.

 

[Caesar]

Hang on, are you suggesting that last year's bushfires were an isolated event?

Any specific weather event is by definition isolated from a climate perspective

Last season’s bushfires were primarily due an unusual confluence of a number of weather factors including a positive Indian Ocean dipole, a negative southern annular mode, and the tail end of an El Niño event in the southern oscillation

In and of itself it is not evidence for climate change, any more than the current wet and cool weather is evidence to the contrary. Weather is not climate.

The evidence for climate change is the change in our climate - unsure why so many have trouble getting their heads around this

 

[Father Jack]

Any specific weather event is by definition isolated from a climate perspective

Last season’s bushfires were primarily due an unusual confluence of a number of weather factors including a positive Indian Ocean dipole, a negative southern annular mode, and the tail end of an El Niño event in the southern oscillation

In and of itself it is not evidence for climate change, any more than the current wet and cool weather is evidence to the contrary. Weather is not climate.

The evidence for climate change is the change in our climate - unsure why so many have trouble getting their heads around this

And more frequent and intense bushfires are part of that, of which last years fires were an example, along with the fires in the US and other areas. So the fires can be used as an example. Using cooler and wet weather as proof that there is no climate change merely demonstrates a misunderstanding of the issue, which is why I don't think you can really conflate the two.

 

[Caesar]

And more frequent and intense bushfires are part of that, of which last years fires were an example, along with the fires in the US and other areas. So the fires can be used as an example. Using cooler and wet weather as proof that there is no climate change merely demonstrates a misunderstanding of the issue, which is why I don't think you can really conflate the two.

The degree to which climate change contributed to last years bushfires is speculative at best, because its impact is indirect and there are so many factors at play

Certainly the factors I mentioned above would have given us an unusually bad bushfire season irrespective of any climate change so it muddies the issue to point to it as evidence

The discussion needs to be about long term trends, where the evidence is clear - not multifactorial weather events that invite a multitude of interpretations

 

[HairyO]

This thread is the equivalent of the bloke who in the middle of a cold winter's day says "how about that global warming?" To the amusement of nobody but himself.

When someone in a position of authority claims definitively that cities will run dry and governments in response spend billions on desal plants its a little more than rando guy commenting on weather.

It also led to Brisbane being underwater when Wivenhoe was repurposed from flood prevention to water storage.

But apparently being wrong over decades is sometimes okay.

 

[Kwality]

You don't understand Climate Change do you?

Flannery is one of those making excessive claims & effectively reducing any hope of rational discussion of climate change.
Like most things the nutters on either side do more harm than good.

 

[Father Jack]

Again, much commenting on what Flannery said, with absolutely nothing to back it up.

 

[CD Xbow]

Flannery is one of those making excessive claims & effectively reducing any hope of rational discussion of climate change.
Like most things the nutters on either side do more harm than good.

Which claims are excessive?
The 'rational discussion of climate change' can't occur because people deny it, especially on the right. I think you need to look to the Deniers as the real danger. Lies are dangerous and climate change denial is a lie. Covid 19 showed the danger of lies (eg mask don't work, lockdowns don't work, vaccines are too dangerous, it's only the flu etc) The climate change deniers are mainly the same folks who peddled Covid lies and they are just as dangerous.

 

[Kwality]

Which claims are excessive?
The 'rational discussion of climate change' can't occur because people deny it, especially on the right. I think you need to look to the Deniers as the real danger. Lies are dangerous and climate change denial is a lie. Covid 19 showed the danger of lies (eg mask don't work, lockdowns don't work, vaccines are too dangerous, it's only the flu etc) The climate change deniers are mainly the same folks who peddled Covid lies and they are just as dangerous.

His comments about rain.
The idea that you are a climate denier if you question any claim/reasoning/solution is every bit as negative to rational discussion. I note your quick jump to 'people deny it'.

 

[Mofra]

I do love the simplicity of a Liberal Party mind. It rains, a dam or two fills, global warming is over

I just had a hamburger so global hunger is now solved

 

[HairyO]

And more frequent and intense bushfires are part of that, of which last years fires were an example, along with the fires in the US and other areas. So the fires can be used as an example. Using cooler and wet weather as proof that there is no climate change merely demonstrates a misunderstanding of the issue, which is why I don't think you can really conflate the two.

The 1950s, 1960s and 1970s all had spring bushfires which burned for months.

The difference is there are now hundreds of thousands of people living where there used to be none.

Bushfires now have a far greater impact because we are closer to them both physically and with technology.

In August last year scientists were warning of a terrible bushfire season coming not because of climate change but fuel levels.

Fuel levels which were at the level of the 2009 bushfire season which a Royal Commission found fuel levels to be a major contributor to.

Do you have a list of things which are proof of climate change and a list of things which arent?

It feels like you are cherry picking.

 

[HairyO]

Again, much commenting on what Flannery said, with absolutely nothing to back it up.

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

Has links to quotes of his from 2004 and 2007.

Next you will say "zero links to anything I like" ?

 

[Father Jack]

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

Has links to quotes of his from 2004 and 2007.

Next you will say "zero links to anything I like" ?

If an Andrew Bolt blog is the best you can do then everything you've said about Flannery can be safely discounted.

 

[Father Jack]

The 1950s, 1960s and 1970s all had spring bushfires which burned for months.

The difference is there are now hundreds of thousands of people living where there used to be none.

Bushfires now have a far greater impact because we are closer to them both physically and with technology.

In August last year scientists were warning of a terrible bushfire season coming not because of climate change but fuel levels.

Fuel levels which were at the level of the 2009 bushfire season which a Royal Commission found fuel levels to be a major contributor to.

Do you have a list of things which are proof of climate change and a list of things which arent?

It feels like you are cherry picking.

Lol, you accuse me of cherry picking after posting cherry picked shit like this?

 

[HairyO]

If an Andrew Bolt blog is the best you can do then everything you've said about Flannery can be safely discounted.

The blog links to the articles from 2004 and 2007.

 

[Father Jack]

The blog links to the articles from 2004 and 2007.

I don't want links to links.

 

[HairyO]

Lol, you accuse me of cherry picking after posting cherry picked sh*t like this?

I cherry picked 1950s, 60s and 70s having spring bushfires?

Or cherrypicked a reference to the 2010 Royal Commission which found fuel levels were a significant factor and recommended much greater effort to reduce fuel loads - and by August 2019 fuel loads were back at 2009 levels.

 

[HairyO]

I don't want links to links.

And I dont like paying tax.

You asked for something. It was provided.

Now you want to pretend Flannery never made outrageous claims which were taken seriously and cost billions of dollars.