• Recent form suggests Roy Morgan has moved from weekly to fortnightly, and it seems the West Australian either didn’t conduct or didn’t publish its normal monthly Westpoll survey of state voting intention.
• George Megalogenis of The Australian wrote yesterday of “special analysis” of Newspoll showing that since the May budget the Prime Minister has suffered “double-digit falls in his popularity among higher-income earners, full-time workers and people aged 35-49”. We are also told the PM “didn’t do as badly among households with children – they trimmed his rating by 7.7 percentage points to 60.9 per cent, while those without children cut it by 10.7 points to 56.8 per cent”; and also that his approval rating among Coalition voters dropped from 40.9 per cent to 28.5 per cent.
• A survey conducted last month by Essential Research shows “93 per cent had either not heard of the emissions trading scheme, had heard about it but didn’t know what it was or knew just a little about it”. However, Chris Johnson of The West Australian reports that “once the concept was explained, respondents overwhelmingly thought it was a good idea. Seventy-two per cent strongly supported the introduction of an ETS and 78 per cent thought transport and petrol should be included.” I see the principals behind Essential Media (the company behind Essential Research) include Ben Oquist, former adviser to Bob Brown and one-time Greens Senate candidate.
• Labor continues to dither over whether to contest the Mayo by-election. No doubt their decision will be soundly based on research, but if I were them I’d go for it: the electorate that almost put John Schumann in parliament seems an unlikely candidate for an emissions trading scheme backlash, and a relatively good result would help shake the Gippsland monkey off the government’s back.
• In the absence of Westpoll we will have to make do with more “unpublished Newspoll figures” provided by Joe Spagnolo of the Sunday Times, showing “41.9 per cent of 418 Liberals polled preferred Mr Carpenter as Premier, instead of their own man (33.5 per cent)”.
• Tasmanian Greens leader Peg Putt will resign from parliament and has handed the leadership baton to Franklin MP Nick McKim. A recount for Putt’s Denison seat will almost certainly deliver it to Cassy O’Connor, who once worked as an adviser to local federal Labor MP Duncan Kerr. This outcome was anticipated at the time of the March 2006 state election by Greg Barns.
• Antony Green and Possum Comitatus have been blogging prolifically of late. Do go and look.
• In the interests of promoting Aussie talent, the Poll Bludger presents a 1993 Rock Classic from the Cruel Sea.
HA I’m the first!
When will Alan Carpenter call the election in WA? Surely he’s a certainty to win it?
The last I heard was that the Western Australian election will be a year before the Queensland election.
Gary (628 on the old thread),
Calling John a “CC denier” is a bit much. I assure you and him that I am real.
If you haven’t already done so take a look at how Nelson responded to journalist’s questions about his change of heart on the timing of an ETS for Aus. Unbelievable.
http://blairboltwatch.wordpress.com/
William great choice in music; Nick Cave is cool!
CC good to see that your real 🙂
No Gary I am not a climate change denier I am a climate realist; throughout the Earth’s history the climate has changed and will continue to change.
I wish the Libs would get their act together in WA and promote a leader who is able to challenge Carpenter. Benny Cousins for Premier!
601 John of Melbourne (old thread): “Dario, I do not believe in AGW.”
Chris (3) I could have misinterpreted this sentence so I maybe doing John a disservice.
I’m unsure what you mean by “I assure you and him that I am real.” I have never questioned your “reality”.
A fair portion of Mayo isn’t so much pro-Liberal as anti-Labor (and Green for that matter). That, and the ALP playing dead to get their preferences distributed, was why Schumann almost got up – an independent with a decent profile would always be in with a chance if they manage to get some of the anti-Labor vote and can outpoll the ALP. The ALP’s primary at the last election was way too high for that to happen, and the Libs won it on primaries anyway. Given the national swing and stuff like AWB around Downer, the fact that the Libs won more than 50% of the primaries says that the ALP will never win the seat as it currently exists. Their only hope is to play dead and hope a decent independent puts their hand up.
“No Gary I am not a climate change denier I am a climate realist.” John, let’s cut to the chase,does Gatnaut have a point or is he like the barber’s cat, all p1ss and wind?
Gary he’s all p!ss and wind.
So we don’t have a problem at all? Isn’t that a climate change denier Chris?
Gary just watch all these Liberals flip back into being Climate Change supporters after the next Newspoll gives them a flogging.
It wasn’t that long ago the MSM were crying over those poor hard worked public servants who were being over worked by that mean Kevin Rudd. Now they are being compensated too much by that mean Kevin Rudd. LOL
9 – John of Melbourne
Your posts here were pretty reasonable until a few weeks ago. What went wrong? I tell you, accepting the opinions of Andrew Bolt without question will turn your mind to mush.
Steve K, l’m yet to be convinced in the science of climate change.
I want more robust debate. Befroer it was cooling now its warming…
Gary,
CC=Chris Curtis. CC denier = Chris Curtis denier. My little joke was obviously very little. In my last school my timetable initial changed to CUR, which produced comments about “Kerr’s cur”, something I cannot make jokes, even little ones, about.
John,
The advantage of using my real name on blogs is that if I ever contradict myself, someone will know.
I can assure you John that science isn’t based on debating points.
Charles yes it is. All ideas are published peer reviewed etc… If there were no debates then we’d still be learning about the four elements: wind, fire water and earth.
Remember to always ask why?
Befroer it was cooling now its warming…
That is a complete myth. Unlike for global warming, there was never any serious, widespread belief in the climate science community that we were heading for global cooling, a new ‘ice age’.
l’m yet to be convinced in the science of climate change.
Well, you are in an increasingly small and isolated minority.
Problem is that requiring the kind of proof that ‘sceptics’ like you demand before we act, would mean waiting until it is too late to do anything about it. As somebody said before, do you wait until your house has burned down before taking out fire insurance? Of course not.
This is all about risk assessment and management, not absolute certainty.
Remember to always ask why?
If only the AGW sceptics would equally apply that to their own position.
Just Me if it’s so absolute then why do India and China want no part in it?
Why is there so much scepticism within the scientific community?
John
I will accept, for the sake of argument, that your hypothesis on CC is correct. (which it is not 😛 )
So we are running out of fossil fuels – it may be 10 years or 500 but they are on the way out.
So we need to find alternatives – surely it makes sense to wean ourselves off?
So given the fact that coal has tripled in value and oil has doubled surely they can pay to help us?
Or do we just keep paying more and more for coal and oil? Power and electricity? Then let xstrata and rio and billiton make squillions?
Gary Bruce @ 12 –
It wasn’t that long ago the MSM were crying over those poor hard worked public servants who were being over worked by that mean Kevin Rudd. Now they are being compensated too much by that mean Kevin Rudd. LOL
Yes, exc ept that they are not actually getting more. Now they just don’t have to be obedient little lapdogs to get the
productivity‘arse-licker’ bonus and can go back to being proper public servants, i.e. ones that offer fearless advice instead of spouting the Howard party line.[Just Me if it’s so absolute then why do India and China want no part in it?
Why is there so much scepticism within the scientific community?]
Possibly because they see the Western world as the ones who have been pumping most of the CO2 into the air since the industrial revolution began, and feel agrieved that they should have to fix our mess. Yes, now they are beginning to get up there in terms of their current emission levels, but the cumulative damage has been done largely by the west.
Have to change my voter registration in a couple of months. Too early for the WA election? Kimberley should be safe without the extra vote. Must check with the AEC about legal requirements. Can do it online these days.
Ruawake, I’m all for alternatives that can provide power equal to or greater then that given by fossilised fuels.
Ruawake, I’m all for alternatives that can provide power equal to or greater then that given by fossilised fuels.
I’m with John of Melbourne on this one,
When the rising of the red peil is recognised and the individuals such as Al Gore are exposed as being a red menace we will rue the day that women were given the vote. The eastern block countries did not rise up, it was a cunning plot so they could infiltrate the democraic institution of our great western democracy. Climate change is clearly a left wing anti-christian ideology that is based on one simple premise. God is not in control. Clearly to any right thinking individual this must be and anathema.
When the anti capitalist running dogs are exposed the only great leaders left will be the right……..
John of Melbourne @ #5,
indeed, Nick Cave is cool.
That was Tex Perkins and The Cruel Sea – as a diehard Cave fan I gotta pull you up on that – goose!
John
So we are in agreement – now how do we pay for alternatives to be viable? Taxes – Govt. subsidies or an ETS?
You know it makes sense. 🙂
Just Me,
“His [James Lovelock’s] predicted curve of temperature calls for a cancellation of the warming effect by 1963, a cooling of 1 1/2 d C by 1970, of 4 d C by 1975…which suggests the start of an ice age well before 1980” (Gordon Rattray Taylor, The Doomsday Book, 1970, p 162). [I can’t do the centigrade symbol.] The author also quotes a Dr Earl W. Barrett of the Environmental Science Services Administration suggesting a dip in surface temperature from 15 d C to 4 d C (p 75). The author also canvases global warming. Remember, this is in 1970. He also says that there is no escape from a population of 7 billion by 2000, but there was.
Just Me if it’s so absolute then why do India and China want no part in it?
Don’t understand your question. I am not the one arguing for absolute proof.
And I think you will find that China, at least, is starting to take and act on climate change very seriously indeed. They have no choice, their water supplies are disappearing quickly, in large part due to climate change.
Why is there so much scepticism within the scientific community?
There is not, that claim is just another myth. Try looking at the actual number of peer reviewed science on this. It is overwhelmingly in favour of AGW. Don’t rely on what the MSM report, they are seriously misrepresenting the real situation with the science.
There is genuine debate in science over the details of the process, and exactly how it is going to pan out, but no longer over the basic fact of AGW and its seriousness and urgency.
If there is so much scepticism on the climate science community then you should not have any trouble finding a lot of serious examples of it in the peer reviewed literature. Not just one or two, but at least a few hundred, from genuine climate scientists with solid publication track records in recent times. Good luck finding them.
Should read:
Just Me if it’s so absolute then why do India and China want no part in it?
Don’t understand your question. I am not the one arguing for absolute proof.
And I think you will find that China, at least, is starting to take and act on climate change very seriously indeed. They have no choice, their water supplies are disappearing quickly, in large part due to climate change.
I’m with John of Melbourne on that one too.
Clearly there has not been any independant scientific consensus on whether it was in fact Nick Cave or Tex Perkins, Until all the Tex Perkinses have been run thruogh with an anti-left wing think tank and exposed as yet another picko anti christian immoral movement that harks back to the 1955 split I’m sticking to Nick Cave.
In fact it has to be Nick Cave as I read it in an Anrew Bolt article.
15 Chris – now I understand. I should have worked that one out. Oh well.
Thanks Optomist, I was wrong it is Tex Perkins 🙂
Now, now Bob mock me if you will but my views are legitamate.
33 Bob – LOL. Good one.
In Fact I wish people would stop mentioning China. For two reasons.
Firstly they are a pinko communist threat that is infiltrating our democratic institutions not to say the delicate minds of our impressionable children, but more worryingly as they have taken a far greater step towards sustainability than any other country, its called the one child policy. A one child policy is clearly an anti catholic/christian doctrine devised by the nasty anti-development growth Club of Rome, they
Chris Curtis
You are going to have to do better than 2 scientists. To remind you of what I actually said:
there was never any serious, widespread belief in the climate science community
There will always be a handful of dissenters, and incorrect predictions.
Also should point out that Lovelock is now one of those who says that AGW is now unstoppable and will cause an unavoidable major catastrophe for humans.
Ruawake, nulcear energy.
Ruawake, nulcear energy.
Not all Liberals happy with Dr Nelson’s current position on an ETS:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/08/2297977.htm
I have no problem with nulcear (sic) energy per se. The experience in other countries shows that when a nuclear generator is comissioned – wages in the area increase, life expectancy goes up, standard of living rises.
But despite this they will not be built in Australia – Chernobyl in the NIMBY. You get my drift. 🙂
Just me,
How many scientists do I need to find to justify the belief that global cooling was seen as a serious problem in the 1970s?
Ruawake sad I know :-(.
I just saw on CH10 news Nick Xenophon is keen for ETS.
Short term political gain, long term political pain for Brendan. Add Susan Jeanes to the list.
Bob Santamaria @ 33,
pissing myself laughing. That was priceless.
Early prediction: Labor and Rudd get a boost in the next Newspoll.
Early prediction: Labor and Rudd get a boost at the next election.
How many scientists do I need to find to justify the belief that global cooling was seen as a serious problem in the 1970s?
Well, the vast majority didn’t. How few do I need to argue that the global cooling claim was neither supportable nor supported by mainstream science?
If you are going to argue the absolute claim that the prediction of global cooling was made by at least one scientist, then you are correct, but in a pretty meaningless way.
Just because a small handful of scientists might have made that incorrect prediction, doesn’t mean that scientists and science broadly held that view, and it is unreasonable to try to discredit all climate science (especially the most up to date stuff) just because a small handful got it totally wrong 4 decades ago.