With thoughts for poor Dunedin, a city already plunged into turmoil (we’re told) —due to false hypothetical statements from lemmings about impending severe effects of climate change, including rising air and sea temperatures, violent storms, dramatic sea level rise, and (oh yeah!) high ground water levels. Whatever.
GOD SAVE US ALL
Received from Mick Field
Fri, 22 Apr 2016 at 5:39 p.m.
### wattsupwiththat.com 22 Feb 2016 Tim Flannery: Firing Climate Scientists Breaches the Paris Agreement
By Eric Worrall
Tim Flannery, whose spectacularly wrong advice once helped panic Aussie politicians into wasting billions of dollars on useless desalination plants, now thinks firing CSIRO climate scientists will cause Australia to breach the Paris Climate Agreement.
“Cuts to the CSIRO’s climate modelling and measuring research will breach Australia’s obligations under the recent Paris agreement and will result in huge costs to the economy, a report by Australia’s Climate Council has found.
The report adds to a chorus of eminent bodies and individuals criticising the move, which the CSIRO made after almost no consultation with its own scientists or other research institutions.
Earlier in the month it was revealed CSIRO would be cutting up to 350 staff from climate research programs over two years. Over the following weeks, the organisation’s chief executive Larry Marshall explained that would result in a loss of about 50% of the staff working in climate modelling and measuring.
In a report titled “Flying Blind: Navigating Climate Change without the CSIRO,” the Climate Council said governments and businesses relied on the CSIRO’s climate modelling and measuring work to make billion-dollar decisions and if the cuts went ahead, would be relying on “guesswork”.”
Read more at The Guardian
In these days of automated weather stations and satellite temperature monitoring, its a little difficult to understand why you need hundreds of scientists to produce a few climate graphs – especially since parallel efforts are in progress in a number of other countries. Perhaps all the scientists are required, to help think up plausible sounding reasons why the historic rate of warming in Australia should be adjusted upwards.
Dunedin City Council Published on Aug 6, 2015 Dunedin’s Draft Environment Strategy for consultation
Mayor Dave Cull treasures the accessibility of Dunedin’s natural places and thinks we need to increase our awareness of the threats our natural places are under. Share what you treasure most about Dunedin’s natural environment, and what you think we need to change to protect, restore and enhance the things and places you treasure at www.TeAoTuroa.co.nz
Dunedin City Council
Te Ao Tūroa – The Natural World: Draft Environment Strategy
Dunedin’s natural environment is one of our greatest assets. We’re reliant on a healthy natural environment to provide food, shelter, water and clean air. Our natural spaces and unique wildlife are also a large part of Dunedin’s appeal to residents, visitors and migrants and the city’s economic wellbeing.
To ensure future generations inherit a healthy natural environment, we need to safeguard what we have, and strive to improve the health of our environment where it has become degraded. We also need to do our part to reduce our impact on the global environment, and prepare for the effects of climate change. Doing so will result in a better, more liveable Dunedin even today – cleaner water and air, awe-inspiring surroundings and experiences, healthier communities, and a more resilient economy.
Help set the strategic direction for Dunedin’s approach to the natural environment. Find out about the draft strategy and ● provide feedback by 31 August.
A workshop for stakeholders, interest groups and members of the public to discuss the draft Strategy will be held from 5:30pm Monday 10 August 2015, Dunedin Public Art Gallery, Octagon, Dunedin.
█ To register your interest in attending the workshop, please email policy @dcc.govt.nz by Thursday 6 August 2015.
[date surpassed] ● EMAIL AND TURN UP ANYWAY !!!!!
The Draft Environment Strategy, titled Te Ao Tūroa – The Natural World provides direction on how we, as a city, will protect and improve our natural environment for current and future generations. Te Ao Tūroa builds on the continued stewardship and guardianship by many people and organisations over the years. It identifies our environmental strengths, the environmental challenges we face, and opportunities for partnership.
█ A short chain of correspondence was forwarded this morning. As far as I’m concerned Agenda 21 adherents with (fossilised) climate panic may fall off the Earth as soon as possible to good effect. Elizabeth Head-In-Sand, Site Admin
From: Calvin Oaten To: Jinty MacTavish Subject: Energy Date: 5 April 2015 12:56 pm NZST
I thought you might be interested in reading this article. Eighty four pages, but I suspect the gist of it can be got from reading the last maybe twenty, if time is of the essence.
Jinty, I know your aversion to fossil fuels and can understand the argument. But it seems to me that we desperately need to continue to use energy to ‘sustain’ present needs of food and almost every detail of present day living. That, until technology can replace it is totally reliant on fossil fuels.
To suddenly turn off the taps so to speak, would almost destroy society as we know it. Buying time is the only option as I see it and precipitate action would be counterproductive. This might come as a surprise to you but I do care for the planet as well, but also the people on it. I am just frightened that the current moves, ostensibly to ‘save the planet’, might be premature. It is not as if the perceived disaster of Co2 increase in the atmosphere is a proven model, yet. One of the aspects that have been touted is that of imminent sea rise and runaway warming. It seems at present that neither have come to pass according to projections. That they might is still based on theories that while they could become valid (who am I to know) have yet to do so. We must wait.
Another claim is that we will be subjected to more and more ‘climatic events’ of disastrous moment like cyclone/hurricanes of increasing intensity due to this inherent warming. That I question as I have done some research into the history of ‘events’ past.
In no particular order this is what I found.
● 1900 Galveston Texas. Deadliest hurricane in US history, 8,000 killed, 145mph (233kph) winds.
● 1998 North American Ice Storm. Huge destruction.
● 1780 Great Hurricane of the Antilles. 20,000 – 22,000 deaths, winds probably exceeding 200mph (320kph). It ran from 10-16 October. Six continuous days! There were two other deadly events in that 1780 season.
Now for what it is worth in 1780 the industrial revolution had not started, coal as an industry was in its infancy and oil far in the future.
Further, 1780 was firmly in the Little Ice Age.
Oil was just found around 1900 when Galveston was hit. 1928 was still pre intense fossil fuel exploitation.
Jinty, I only want to make the point that just maybe we are jumping the gun here in the demonising of fossil fuels relative to our way of life. Which is it to be, destroy, or buy time till viable alternatives become feasible? A serious choice which ought not be made on whims or unsubstantiated theories.
Here is the attachment as suggested.*
*‘Perfect Storm: Energy, finance and the end of growth’ by Tim Morgan, Head of Global Research, Tullett Prebon. -Eds
Read it, Bill McKibben is firstly not a scientist, he is a lobbyist or rabble rouser. That’s OK and I believe his heart is in what he espouses.
That doesn’t make it right or wrong, just his opinions. As I maintain all along it’s a matter of reason not emotion.
Notice of course there is absolutely no mention or consideration of the ramifications on society if his dreams were to come true even over the longer term. That is my worry, the “What now”, when the taps are turned down not off. First comes the shortages, next comes the cost increases, then comes the hardships for the poor and middle classes struggling to meet their power bills and put food on their tables. That, Jinty is what I am alluding to.
All before there has been shown a glimpse of truth in the speculations of disaster. That you as a public leader, will wantonly subscribe to these policies on the strength of your emotions without considering the effects on your constituents in real time disturbs me as does the whole pressure thing as manifested. It is developing into a sort of ‘mob cult’ movement and I see needless hardship down the track as the one-per-centers perversely destroy the lower and middle class life styles. In fact, one could be excused for thinking it was a type of conspiracy centred on the United Nations plans for world government. Dismiss that as madness if you like but if you study the implications of the “Agenda 21” manifesto you might have cause to ponder just a little.
You not care to comment on my findings re weather events?
From: Jinty MacTavish To: Calvin Oaten Subject: Re: Energy Date: 6 April 2015 8:48:45 am NZST
Dear Mr. Oaten,
As I have previously commented, I do not wish to engage with you in correspondence on this matter. The reason being, we have previously explored the topic in detail, over a number of emails, with our differences coming down to the fact that I believe it immoral to sit on our hands whilst over 97% of climate scientists, all but a handful of the world’s governments, and international bodies like the United Nations, agree we urgently need to do something about the matter (and that if we don’t, we are consigning future generations to untold misery). You, on the other hand, prefer to believe the UN is running a conspiracy and that Agenda 21 is some kind of giant plot for it take over the planet, and hold onto the words of the very small minority of (generally fossil-fuel funded) scientists who continue to deny action is required. And then you tell me it is a matter of “reason not emotion”? Wow.
As such, as I have previously stated, I think our positions irreconcilable, and I do not think it worth my time or yours to continue to email back and forwards on the matter.
Link received Wed, 3 Dec 2017 at 2:52 a.m.
Message: For Toll read Cycle
[Or, ‘Madhead’ Daaave plays Dunedin like Monopoly. We lose.]
### newsbiscuit.com Dec 1, 2014 Stonehenge development: ley lines closed during 2015 while toll lanes added By Adrian Bamforth
The government has announced a radical up-grade to Britain’s dilapidated ley-line network with major closures on all lines and charges being brought in on certain routes when the network re-opens. ‘For years Britain’s natural mystic energy has been having to cope on an out-dated system,’ said David Cameron dressed in a rainbow baggy jumper wearing a large purple feather as an earring. ‘It might have been adequate for the Bronze Age when it was first laid out, but is entirely unsuitable to 21st Century new age Britain.’
Executive ley lines with controversial tolls are to be introduced in 2015, for those who do not wish to wait for their intangible cosmic earth energy. ‘It will mean demolishing Stonehenge…’ said the Prime Minister, but we are confident that the British people will understand that this is definitely worth it.’ Read more
QUIET STREETS and OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO SH1 SEPARATED CYCLEWAYS
### ODT Online Thu, 27 Nov 2014
Opinion: Your Say Why Dunedin needs (some) separated cycleways
Diane Yeldon raises some important questions. She aligns herself with the ‘vehicular cycling’ movement, which argues that the best place for cyclists is in among the traffic, obeying the same rules as all other road users. On this basis, she questions whether we really need separated cycleways.
As a cyclist I follow the vehicular cycling principles every day. I ride my bike in much the same way as I drive my car, claiming the space I need on the road, while trying to share the carriageway considerately with other road users.
On roads with low traffic volume, relatively slow speeds, and no heavy vehicles, this works well. But it requires a lot of confidence to ride this way on busy roads, when cars are passing at speed and there are trucks and buses. Read more + Comments