Weekend talk thread February 17 - 19

56 thoughts on “Weekend talk thread February 17 – 19”

1. 

   Matthew of Canberra

   February 21, 2012 at 8:19 am

   “But I thought the coal industry was doomed? Tony said so!”

   Saw a slightly crazed-looking post on a certain right-wing-ish blog this week, which basically came straight out and accused the liberal party of talking down coal stocks while investing their own money in them.

   No idea. Interesting theory. Presumably they have to declare this stuff?
2. 

   Sammy Jankis

   February 20, 2012 at 1:01 pm

   Finally! — Michelle Grattan has written an opinion piece about Gillard, Rudd and Labor leadership tensions. I thought the day would never come.
3. 

   Sammy Jankis

   February 20, 2012 at 12:27 pm

   Carbon tax fails to slow coal boom

   The impending carbon price has done nothing to deter investment in the coal industry, with spending on exploration surging faster than any other mineral commodity.

   Coal exploration spending in Australia leapt by 62 per cent last financial year as the industry dominated corporate activity in terms of both inbound investment and mergers and acquisitions.

   Investment in searches for new coal deposits reached $520 million, pushing it closer to rivalling iron ore and gold – both of which also grew significantly on the back of record high commodity prices.

   But I thought the coal industry was doomed? Tony said so!
4. 

   joni

   February 20, 2012 at 9:26 am

   Interesting post by Bolt’s favourite go-to scientist. Dr Roy Spencer explains the greenhouse effect and finishes with the following:

   “So, what does all of this mean for global warming? Well, exactly how much warming will occur from adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere remains an open question. The IPCC thinks the sky is the limit. I think there is evidence that it could be quite small.

   But while I am in general supportive of questioning even our most cherished and long-held scientific beliefs, I do not yet see a reason for abandoning the basic physics of the greenhouse effect.”

   So – Spencer does believe that there is (and will be warming) from CO2, he just thinks it will be less than the IPCC thinks. It might just be me, but it does seem that recently Spencer has been less than sure of his low sensitivity stance.

   http://www.drroyspencer.com/2012/02/more-musings-from-the-greenhouse/#comments
5. 

   SHV

   February 20, 2012 at 1:22 am

   “Showdown Inevitable” according to the SMH.

   Wow! Really? I’ll need to read this story! And I’ll need some hard facts:

   “..the warring parties believing..”
   “..said a source..”
   “..they believe..”
   “..a Rudd backer said..”
   “..Another was confident..”
   “..Mr Rudd has not ruled out..”
   “..source said..”
   “..it is understood..”
   “..YouTube..”
   “..swearing..”
   “..subtly accused..”
   “..Gillard adviser said..”
   “..Craig Emerson, implied..”
   “..Rudd supporters said..”
   “..Gillard supporter said..”
   “..Rudd number-cruncher said..”
   “..infuriated the Labor Premier, Anna Bligh.”
   Ads by Google
   Jesus Christ: Real Story

   Well that’s all you need to know, really. Obviously inevitable things are afoot.
6. 

   Liz A

   February 19, 2012 at 11:43 pm

   Oh my John Mashey @47, you’re here on PP!

   I’m a bit star struck that you have responded to my mere dabblings (by comparison) into the unravelling that you have done on the US denialist web of intrigue *blush*

   I do realise that the whole AU/NZ linkages are rather important in the overall web that is the international denialist “thing” (lack of a better word there, sorry), particularly when you look at the combined influence of Carter & Nova: they seem to be lynchpins in a lot of the pseudo science being pedaled on the internet as a whole. Your work is invaluable in helping uncover the twisted path that lies behind the funding of their outpourings (and that are constantly repeated on news.com outlets), so any inklings that you can glean are of interest.

   I have indicated that I believe (please note this is my personal opinion at this time, and has nothing to do with this PP blog) that the involvement of the IPA in the “climate denialist machina” that includes the washing of funds through the US via such entities as the Heartland Institute is more than merely circumstantial, however there is insufficient proof from the documents obtained to date to do more than implicate them by association. Until such time that the funding of this extremely influential group is laid to bare there will be little transparency of these issues in Australia.

   Unfortunately our Australian tax rules do not require the same stringent coda that apply to tax exempt status in the US. Here, all that is required is that the organisation be deemed “not for profit”, which is a far cry from the US charity status.

   The India angle is frankly a shocking one. We (www.illuminationsolar.com) have recently started doing business there and have found the country to be very open to the concepts of reducing energy poverty and carbon emissions, so to think that any Indian nationals are funneling funds for climate skeptics is a real surprise to me.

   Have you or your colleagues have sent a request to the IRS requesting some form of investigation into the funding and activities of Heartland? It would seem a worthwhile avenue to pursue.

   Regardless, I am chuffed that you have come to this blog in the far-flung corners of the world to offer your opinion / views, and please feel free to swing by any time you like! 🙂

   (PS sorry if I am stepping on your toes with that invitation Dave /Jeremy, I am not trying to usurp your role with that invitation, I am just a bit excited *squeee*)