Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
'The truth is that the do-nothing climate change sceptics offer no alternative official
body of evidence from any credible government in the world,' Rudd said in his Lowy
Institute speech. Then came my exciting name-check in Rudd's list of
those-who-must-not-be-heeded: 'Malcolm [Turnbull], Barnaby [Joyce], Andrew, Janet
[Albrechtsen]—stop gamblingwithourfuture.You'vegottoknowwhentofold'em—and
for the sceptics, that time has come.' Oh, really?
Fast forward to 2011, and it was the turn of Rudd's successor, Julia Gillard, to demand
Australians listen only to experts such as the Bureau of Meteorology, which three years
earlierhadactuallypredictedthelongdroughtwasournewnormaland'perhapsweshould
call it our new climate'.
We'd since had two years of devastating floods in Queensland, as well as floods in
New South Wales and Victoria, yet Gillard still insisted Australians trust the Bureau's
alarmists. 'I ask, who would I rather have on my side?' she said, 'Alan Jones, Piers
AkermanandAndrewBolt?OrtheCSIRO,theAustralianAcademyofScience,theBureau
ofMeteorology,NASA,theUSNationalAtmosphericAdministration,andeveryreputable
climate scientist in the world?'
Every reputable climate scientist in the world, that is, except those such as Professor
Richard Lindzen and Dr Roy Spencer who warned and warned again that the world simply
wasn't warming as the warmists predicted.
But arguments are settled by evidence, not a show of hands. As Albert Einstein
reportedlysaidinresponse to the topic
One hundred authors against Einstein
,disputinghis
new Theory of Relativity: Why 100 authors? 'If I were wrong, then one would have been
enough.' One fact can disprove even 1000 experts.
And that is what the layman must never forget: truth is decided by evidence, not
qualifications or a show of hands. True, the average climate scientist is far better equipped
than the average layman to understand where the truth lies, but facts sometimes speak so
loudly that even the greatest scientist can be doubted.
These include the Karachi moments—when what 'the experts' predicted has been
contradicted bytime andfacts. When welearned that whatever map aclimate scientist was
reading, it's brought us to the wrong place.
I've listed below twenty of those moments that give us not just a reason to doubt
the alarmists, but a duty. But let's first look at the biggest prediction of them all: that
the planet will heat dangerously and fast. This is the meta-prediction upon which all the
other predictions hang—about fast-rising seas, failing crops, melting ice caps, permanent
droughts, worse epidemics and mass extinctions.
In 2001, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
predicted a huge and rapid rise in global surface air temperatures thanks to man's
emissions, 'Projections using these scenarios in a range of climate models result in an
