came across our site doing some research coming from this other domain but as I can see it has nothing to do with “incest”, guess its a mistake

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

Hopefully you can find the time to visit my site. I’ve learned so much from this blog.

the only thing that comes to mind is… “You shall reap what you sow”
Wishing you could sign that Kyoto Protocol NOW, huh mate?
Comment by some random guy — April 22, 2007 @ 2:38 am

WTF is this even supposed to mean ?
This drought predates the Kyoto protocol, just like the last one did and the one before that.

Why would anyone have preferred to have signed the Kyoto protocol ? Has anyone even floated a suggestion why ?

That plan to reduce expected CO2 emissions by 15%. That would have resulted in something different would it ?

That plan which would have imposed a cap that Australia has only exceeded by 8% without doing anything. That one ?

Yeah if only Australia had committed to trying to reduce their 2.5% of world CO2 emissions to 2.3% of emissions that would have really changed something in regard to global wind currents and the distribution of rainfall. Sure.

Clearly there’s no such ’scientific concensus’ on this issue as has been suggested. After all there are zero scientists of any persuasion on this planet who you can find suggesting that long term drought is in any way impacted by short term reductions in CO2.

Or perhaps the scientific consensus stands and it is just those who choose to misrepresent it for partisan point scoring is what’s split down the middle, right and left.

ps. Big kudos to the TP reader who suggested mass starvation and the destruction of Australia would serve as a good wake up call for America.
Best of luck trying to get those Republicans to stop making Americans look like a bunch of self-centred arseholes despised the world over.

i would be interested to know if there will also be a ban on
swimming pools, car washes, fountains, etc…
it seems to me that those things should be turned off
in order to provide the irrigation to the “food bowl”…
Comment by katy — April 22, 2007 @ 11:28 am

If Lake Michigan ran dry cutting water usage in Seattle wouldn’t change that now would it. This is a river supplying farmers in rural Australia. Household usage simply doesn’t rate compared to irrigation.

FYI all areas effected by drought have been under water restrictions for some years.

Junk science is not science. The tobacco industry produced report after report “proving” tobacco did not cause cancer. The reports were all junk. Fabrications.

I’m sorry, muckdog, don’t you believe your own senses? Don’t you notice the freak weather? The wild storms, blistering heatwaves, droughts followed by floods.

This climate change is not natural. Natural would take several centuries to change, this has happend in three decades.

Most disturbing was the study done on North American weather patterns after 9/11. It proved something as simple as air traffic does change the weather.

What has to be said is that industry was in denial about CFCs and produced plenty of junk science to back them up. Fortunately, Maggie Thatcher actually had a science degree and saw that the destruction of the ozone was real. Sadly, we have very few politicians with any real understanding of science.

And by the time we do admit that it’s true, it’ll be too late. There is a point of no return. And we are coming dangerously close to it.

The overwhelming majority of scientists are all on the same page on this issue to the extent that a peer-reviewed scientific article has not been published in any scientific journal that gives any legitimacy to the claims of the individuals you cite.

While the list might appear to be vast on first look, it is indeed EXTREMELY small compared when compared to the total number of scientists in the field. I can imagine who (i.e. which industry) might be behind the posting. I have tied quite a few “scientists” to oil industry, and Exxon has even openly advertised (recently) to pay $10,000 to scientists willing to back them to dispute global warming.

There will NEVER be 100% consensus on any issue throughout the world. Continue to be in the VAST minority (worldwide) and a minority (in the U.S.) when it comes to this issue. Being in the minority in opinion is quite often a noble endeavour. This is NOT one of those times. The ramifications of continuing to change our lifestyles to an ever-growing global population will bring chaos that is unimaginable to us.

I wish you were right about global warming skeptics waking up.

Even if Australia, and other parts of the world begin to experience
DRAMATIC and SUSTAINED effects due to global warming, the current crop
of global warming skeptics (for the most part) will not attribute it
to global warming. It will be due to God being angry at us/them, a cyclical pattern that will eventually reverse course, or some other reason that DEFIES all reason and logic.

They can and never are wrong in their own minds. Most of my family are of this ilk. They just can’t ever be wrong (on anything). Despite more and more evidence which cause rational and logical persons to change their mind. You know, the persons they call the “flip-floppers”. I call these people sane.

There is no scientific dispute.

Wrong. Scientists who have expressed doubt regarding the current scientific opinion on global warming.

Human made climate change is a fact.

Wrong again. Global warming is mostly due to natural processes.

There is no scientific dispute. Human made climate change is a fact. The only debate is over how fast it’s happening and whether it can be stopped. Australia’s drought shocks because it seems it’s happening a lot faster than we expected and with even nastier results.

Austraian’s are familiar with biological collapse. Rabbits, a serious pest, have gone through boom/bust cycles. It’ll be horrific when it happens to the humans.

Sorry Pete, but you’ve already lost the debate on global warming. Case closed. Now, go back to reading the bible . . .

Alarmist, nonscientific claims only serve to hurt the global warming movement.

Everyone would prefer a world without a planned economy, rationing, and protectionism. But that’s what we need to do to survive this crisis. And it’s what we’ve always done. In both World Wars, we did this. In colonial days, we did this. In Biblical Times, we did this.

It’s the Republican Right that sells us the idea we can have tax cuts AND fight two wars. It’s the Republican Right that sells us the idea we can break our dependency on oil AND drive SUVs, have airconditioned monster homes, and cheap irrigated food from the 4 corners of the world.

The Republican Right is the guy in the lifeboat hiding two Hershey bars in his jacket while the rest are sharing what meagre supplies are left. I curse him. And I saw Throw the SOB overboard.

Typical Karl Rove doublespeak.

Frank, the Bush administration has come far closer to a Soviet-style corrupt bureacracy than any before in history. Central planning is what the Bush administration is all about.

he asked me to point out that it was never the fundamental ideas of communism but the pre-extant authoritarian reflexes in russian society and the sclerotic lock of impenitrable beaurocracy on every aspect of life that led the project to disaster.

just think, “I made the decision. I don’t recall when the decision was made.” imagine, “the consensus view of senior management.”

no reason it can’t take us down just as abruptly one day. no reason at all.