Happy third anniversary

Dear Leader’s carbon neutral energy policy

Courtesy of Samuel J over at Catallaxy Files comes this great find, exclusive footage of Kevni Jong Il announcing his new carbon neutral energy policy for Australia. (Slight language warning)

Classic! Best impersonation of Dear Leader that I have seen yet.

Funny thing is, it’s not too far from the truth!

Are these hacks for real?

Andrew Bolt has an interesting post this morning on Rudd cooling on global warming but it is his update on what the new Treasurer Chris Bowen that really gets my goat.

Bolt’s update clearly illustrates Labor’s hypocrisy and deceit when it comes to major policy platforms.

As usual Bolt nails it in one, so instead of trying to paraphrase a message that is so succinct I will just leave it to the Bolta…

I’m watching Treasurer Chris Bowen on Meet the Press telling us the carbon tax should go to meet “cost of living” pressures. Telling us that switching to world prices – now just under $6 a tonne – will cut our power bills, and that this is good.

I’m gobsmacked by the utter gall. Astonished that the reporters just nod at the latest version of wisdom from Labor.

This from the Labor Government which earlier:

– passed the carbon tax precisely to increase electricity prices and make us cut emissions,

– spent the last year claiming the carbon tax wasn’t actually a big deal in driving up power prices, anyway.

– swore Australia’s carbon tax wasn’t ahead of the rest of the world, and world prices would soon match it.

– insisted global warming was “the great moral challenge of our generation”, requiring a carbon tax set at a minimum of $23 a tonne to drive the cuts in emissions we needed.

All crap, from a party of liars.

This latest change dumps what Labor wrought just a year ago, at amazing expense and accompanied by massive government advertising. And we’re supposed to applaud its wisdom now that it’s proved an expensive disaster?

Labor are nothing but political weathervanes swinging with the wind.

Just as fickle and just as fleeting as the breeze that blows.

World’s highest carbon prices just got higher

The money shot is the collective smiles on the faces of Kev Jong Il and The Real Julia as the walked out of Parliament after securing the vote to legislate that what they promised would never be.

How many businesses have closed since the implementation of Labor and the Greens carbon tax?

How many people have lost their jobs?

How much has our power bills gone up?

The myth of finite resources

We live in a finite world.  That is not in dispute, but what is in dispute is the depth of this finite pool of resources.

Do we have enough to last us? How much is enough exactly?  Do we already actually know everything that we will ever know?

Well it depends on how you look at it doesn’t it, but I highly doubt it.

I’ve always argued that the whole notion of “renewable resources” is largely a furphy, merely a marketing term coined to make you feel better about using what we have been told is a finite resource.

People who worry about “peak oil” know absolutely nothing about the make up of our earthly home, nor the magic that is free market economics – the most adaptive force this planet has seen since… well, us.

In a free market system, prices signal scarcity. So as a resource becomes more scarce, it becomes more expensive, which incentivizes people to use less of it and develop new alternatives, or to find new reserves of that resource that were previously unknown or unprofitable.

As we are seeing with the recent boom in coal seam gas exploration and fracking of natural gas reserves once thought unreachable or uneconomical, the idea that we have already found all of the reserves of known resources on our planet is just incredibly naive.

This doesnt even take into account the full extent of unknown reserves of known resources, let alone the unknown reserves of unknown resources – resources that we currently, due to our current knowledge and capabilities, have no use for or understanding of their potential future uses.

This vid from LearningLiberty clearly illustrates this whole concept for those unfamiliar with how free markets continually drive our civilisation forward, changing the lives of millions each step of the way.  The old “everything that can be invented has been invented” idea just has no merit in free market economies.

Never listen to anyone to who says they care about the world, or the children of the future.  99% of the time they are lying and are just old fashioned rent-seekers, trying to con you with their glib marketing phrases like “renewable” energy.

Relax, enjoy your life, and stop worrying so much about things that will never happen predicted by people who have no idea of the amazingly adaptive power that resides within us all.

Now look, 17 years doesn’t constitute a trend… maybe 40 years will.

Now everyone knows the globe is warming right and that we are all going to die, right?

What? What do you mean the world hasn’t warmed for the past 17 years? That’s not what they have been telling us, is it?

No it is not, but now even the head of the IPCC has to admit this inconvenient truth, but with a kicker of a caveat… that the pause must last longer than the warming period that preceded it!

THE UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last “30 to 40 years at least” to break the long-term global warming trend.

OK, so we’re pretty clear on his position that 17 years worth of NO warming is not indicative of the fact that “global warming” is not happening.

But where did they come up with the idea that the world was warming?  From temperature measures (from disputable locations and data manipulation) that occurred over a time period of… wait for it…. of approximately 17 years in the mid  to late 1970’s to mid 1990’s.

So 17 years of slowly increasing temperatures is enough to suggest global warming, but 17 years of no warming is not long enough to contradict the global warming hypothesis. Okkkkkaaaaaay then. I want my cake, and I’m gonna eat it too! No amount of contradictory data will sway these green zealots from their civilisation destroying fundamentalism.

So let me get this right.  Prior to the late 1970’s the consensus was that the globe was cooling, not warming.

Then the consensus shifted towards the belief that the world was warming due to increasing CO2 emissions.

Now the evidence suggests that this period of warming has stopped, paused, ceased, plateaued, or whatever term you want to call it.

There is now also substantial evidence to suggest that global temperature is not correlated to CO2 emissions.

But now the climate gurus like Pachauri assure us that the amount of time that we have observed this new trend is now not long enough and we need to wait loooooonger, like say um 30 years.

That should do it.  We think.  We’ll wait until we get there and then we’ll decide if we want to move the goal posts again.

When will we wake up and begin to disregard their hyperbolic predicitions for what they are… useless predictions?

When will we learn to disregard rentseekers like Tim Flannery whose previous dud predictions, such as the rains in Australia would never fill our dams again or that the extended drought that we experienced was the new climate normal, have been completely debunked by actual reality?

When will we stop allowing them moving the goalposts?