Australian Cities Safe From Rising Sea Levels

We Don't Even Make "Imperiled" List

It's not good news for a half billion or so other Earth dwellers, but a new report reveals that Australian cities will be safe from the allegedly apocalyptic destruction apparently coming from climate change induced sea level rises.

Cities around the world are facing the danger of rising seas and other disasters related to climate change.

They include Dhaka, Bangladesh; Buenos Aires, Argentina; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Shanghai and Tianjin in China; Alexandria and Cairo in Egypt; Mumbai and Kolkata in India; Jakarta, Indonesia; Tokyo and Osaka-Kobe in Japan; Lagos, Nigeria; Karachi, Pakistan; Bangkok, Thailand, and New York and Los Angeles in the United States, according to studies by the United Nations and others.

More than one-tenth of the world's population, or 643 million people, live in low-lying areas at risk from climate change, say U.S. and European experts.

Most imperiled, in descending order, are China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam,
Indonesia, Japan, Egypt, the U.S., Thailand and the Philippines

But no Sydney or Melbourne on the list. Not even Adelaide.

I get the feeling, however, that the WorldWatch Institute, who released the details above, might just have a special report coming for Australian cities, seeing as we didn't make the main lists.

They wouldn't want to make us feel left out.

Stop Climate Change, Live Like They Did In The 1950s

It's a scary thought. But one that would make John Howard happy. To rein in climate change, we should go back to the lifestyles of the 1950s, which we know Howard regards as the Golden Age of all Australian history. He's been trying to take us back to the '50s since the 1970s.

Kenneth Davidson explains why, in mind-numbing detail, a return to the 1950s could save the world, or something. But here's the key guff :

Living in a 1950s world of energy consumption? Terrifying? Politically impossible? Even for the few million people who might win the lottery to survive at the poles at the end of the century in the disastrous wake of the softer option, it will sure beat the alternative.

A few million at the poles? If all the ice melts there will be room enough up there, and down there, for tens of billions of people. You could fit the entire world's population of today (6.4 billion people) into medium density suburban housing and fit everyone into the state of New South Wales, and still have room enough left over for a few parks. With swings.

Australia may well mostly be on its way to becoming one massive desert by the time monumental migration to the south and north poles takes place, but then we can always come back to Australia when the climate changes again.

In a few centuries.

Global Warming's Forced Vegetarianism Conspiracy Exposed

As the Herald Sun's Andrew Bolt has repeatedly warned us, the threat of global warming is just one big Leftoid conspiracy to turn Australia into a nation of hair shirt wearing, bicycle-riding, lentil consuming, sun worshipping hippie delusionists, living in perpetual darkness while begging for salvation in front of home shrines to Bob Brown and Tim Flannery.

And now here's further proof - an article in the Sydney Morning Herald (!!!) that reveals how Australia will be forced to cut back on pollution in the decades ahead, thereby cutting greenhouse emissions.

But amongst all the crazed extremist talk of using less electricity, increasing energy use efficiency, and reducing the kinds of pollution that retard children's brains, there is this landmine of totalitarianistic social change that threatens to undermine the very fabric of Australia's meat-eating heritage :

AUSTRALIA could cut its greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 30 per cent by 2020 without relying on clean-coal technology or nuclear energy, but it might have to sacrifice its aluminium sector and produce less beef, says a new analysis of the country's emissions.

To achieve the 30 per cent cut, more controversial measures such as...a 20 per cent cut in beef production to reduce the effect of methane from cattle (will be needed).

Man the barbecues, arm yourselves with tongs, guard your sirloins.

We look forward to more on this shocking conspiracy aimed at forcing Australians into becoming a nation of veggie crunching, water saving, clean air breathing, solar power using Flannery worshippers from the always reliable Andrew Bolt, Rupert Murdoch's anti-global warming alarmism alarmist.

It's refreshing to know that the likes of Bolt's Herald Sun, and its parent media portal, news.com.au, will never get caught up in promoting the Great Global Warming Leftoid Conspiracy like the SMH.

Remember, first they come for your V8s, then they come for your plasma wall screen TVs, then they come for your steak sandwiches.

Key Howard Ally Ramps Up The Fear Factor On New 'Asian Invasion'

Liberal senator Bill Heffernan is looking decades into the future with his talk of a new climate change driven 'Asian Invasion' and proposes the mass development of underpopulated northern Australia as a mechanism to deal with the problem :

"Without being alarmist, it would be better for us to do it than letting someone else," he told the (Bulletin) magazine.

"We're not talking tomorrow, but in 50 to 80 years time. If there are 400 million people who have run out of water – Bangladesh or Indonesia – well, you've got to have a plan."

Senator Heffernan said northern Australia was a soft entry point in security terms.

"If we go to the level of climate change that science is predicting, where you're going to have 50 per cent of the world's population water-poor and you're going to have the Arctic melt and rising seas, it will be a very attractive proposition."

Heffernan's comments follow the warnings raised by federal police commissioner Mick Keelty, who said climate change posed the most important and looming national threat to Australia's security, a threat worse than international or regional terrorism.

Keelty's claims were hosed down by defence minister, Brendan Nelson, who wants the Terror Threat to remain at the forefront of Australians minds when it comes to the things they should fear.

John Howard, at first, said that the threat of terror was also much worse than the climate change induced mass migration scenario posed by Keelty, before being advised by his staffers that recent polls showed Australians were far more concerned with climate change than terror. Howard quickly rejigged his message to say that both terrorism and climate change posed "equal threats'.

It will be interesting to see if Howard finds a way to use the reality of climate change and the new 'Asian Invasion' scenario now being popularised by his close friend Bill Heffernan to go after the Rudd opposition. Perhaps he will claim that Rudd Labor is "soft" on dealing with the threats of mass migration that "will possibly result" from climate change?

Presumably Howard will steer clear of associating himself with a new fear campaign based around a climate change induced 'Asian Invasion', while refusing to rein in the likes of Heffernan, and other Liberal Party bulldogs who can be expected to capitalise on Heffernan's start.

Tying the reality of climate change to the bedrock century old popular Australian fear of being swamped by an 'invasion' of illegal Asian immigrants, and then claiming that Labor would do nothing to stop such an 'invasion', just might be the new Tampa-style fear and smear election issue the Howard government has been looking for.

Andrew Bolt Outraged By Media 'Hyping' Of Climate Change Threats

Except When His Own Newspaper Is Doing It

Andrew Bolt is outraged, outraged dammit, by the ceaseless hyping from the Australian media when it comes to reports on how climate change will effect Australia's future, and the dire warnings of coming climate chaos extrapolated from scientific studies. Why can't they restrain themselves from all those doom and gloom headlines?

But does he tell ever you that his own newspaper, the Herald Sun, and its Rupert Murdoch-owned parent company News.com.au is the biggest Australian campaigner and promoter of climate change fear and paranoia?

Of course not.

Bolt is always so very, very vague now on just who is 'hyping' climate change in the Australian media. He used to attack the ABC and Fairfax newspapers for 'hyping' the effects of climate change. That is, until Rupert Murdoch became the world's biggest promoter of raising awareness of "the clear, catastrophic threat" posed by global warming and climate change, and promised to "weave" the issue into the content of his media empire.

Yesterday Bolt headlined a blog post with this :

Even More Panic Over CSIRO's Less Scary News

He clearly means panic in the media in the reporting of the CSIRO's findings on how Australia is likely to be effected by climate change in the coming decades.

Bolt then writes :

Some old stuff, but the usual scary headlines follow, like this:

CSIRO warns of climate chaos

According to Google News, the only newspapers and media sites in Australia who used that 'scary' headline were Bolt's own newspaper, The Herald Sun, the sister Sydney newspaper, The Daily Telegraph and the main portal for Murdoch's Australian media sites, News.com.au.

Most non-Murdoch newspapers and media outlets used far more restrained headlines. But don't look to Andrew Bolt to tell you that fact.

News Limited's Brisbane paper, the Courier Mail went with this far more dramatic headline :

Aussie Climate In Hot Water

And Murdoch's Adelaide Advertiser served up :

Climate Chaos Warning

Not one of the numerous stories carried by Murdoch newspapers and websites, including the Herald Sun, followed Bolt's usual demands that "alternative views" be included in media reports on climate change to provide balance on the 'reality' of climate change, or if humans are really responsible for global warming.

Literally dozens of stories were published, without "alternative views", on the News Limited newspaper and website network. Bolt didn't even notice. Surely he can't be that ignorant?


"I've Done My Dash" - Andrew Bolt Admits Defeat On Global Warming

Bolt : "We All Love A Good Conspiracy"

The Changing Climate Of Andrew Bolt

Back In The Gutter Where He Belongs

Howard Opts For Climate "Shift" Instead Of Climate Change

Don't wait another day, Janette. Pillow your husband tonight. It's cruel to watch him disgrace himself in public like this any longer :

The prime minister, John Howard, said yesterday he believed the continuing drought was an example of "climate shift", not climate change.

"We are seeing what the experts call a climate shift and I do think we should keep our heads about it."

Experts do indeed occasionally refer to "climate shift", but not in a good way. You'll often find the words "climate shift" used for even greater doom-and-gloom effect than "climate change" (see links below). Maybe he should have gone with "climate rejuvination" instead.

President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, the leaders of the UK, Russia, China, Indonesia, nearly every PM or president of the European Union, all now officially recognize the 'reality' of climate change and have announced their intention to do something to stop it, eventually.

But not John Howard.

No. He recognizes the reality of climate "shift" instead.

The news that Howard has embraced 'climate shift' will no doubt delight Andrew Bolt and Tim Blair, but the 70% of Australians who view climate change as posing "clear and catastrophic threats" to the future of their children, and grandchildren, and are sick to death of Howard's procrastination on bringing our energy supplies out of the 19th century, will hear the PM and mutter "WTF is that old bastard on about now?"

Did someone actually advise Howard to do this? Or has been eating mushrooms from the cow paddocks again?


UPDATE : John Howard probably thinks rebranding 'climate change' as 'climate shift' will help him reshape the national debate and draw attention away from the overwhelming international recognition of the reality of climate change now unfolding. It's like referring to 'civilian casualties' in Iraq as 'unexpected non-combatant weapon encouters'. Call it what you like, they're still dead, and the Australian climate (not weather) is undergoing a dangerous, costly and food-shortage producing transformation.

Howard should have done some basic Googling first :


World Health Organisation : Climate Shift Linked To 150,000 Deaths, 5 Million Illnesses Per Year - Figures Expected To Double By 2030

CSIRO : Climate Shift Linked To Greenhouse

Climate Shift Is Australia's Biggest Security Risk

Climate Change Tops Terror As Chief Security Risk To Australia

Australian Federal Police commissioner cited the fallout from apocalyptic levels of climate change as the greatest security threat to the nation in the coming years. Far worse than anything terrorists can unleash.

The threat of terror, whilst real, takes a backseat to the destruction, death toll and tide of human misery that may be wrought in the region by massive crop failures, rising sea levels and all the other horrors of cataclysmic climate change.

From The Australian :

....Keelty described how climate refugees "in their millions" could create a national security emergency for Australia.

...he described a scenario in which China was unable to feed its vast population.

Law enforcement agencies would struggle to cope with global warming's "potential to wreak havoc, cause more deaths and pose national security issues like we've never seen before", Mr Keelty said.

"It is anticipated the world will experience severe extremes in weather patterns, from rising global temperatures to rising sea levels," he warned.

"We could see a catastrophic decline in the availability of fresh water. Crops could fail, disease could be rampant and flooding might be so frequent that people, en masse, would be on the move.

"Even if only some and not all of this occurs, climate change is going to be the security issue of the 21st century."

Mr Keelty said the implications for China were especially alarming. By 2040, with global temperatures surging towards a predicted 3C rise, and sea levels up 50cm, the land available in China to grow grain and rice could be reduced by 30 per cent.

"The mass displacement of people, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, could create a great deal of social uncertainty and unrest in the region.

"In their millions, people will look for new land and they'll cross borders to do it."

Prime minister John Howard actually went with 'no comment' when he was asked about Keelty's comments on Tuesday.

Foreign minister, Alexander Downer, tried to claim that Keelty was talking about threats that would take a century to become reality.

The seas won't rise three metres tomorrow, Downer said on Lateline.

But that's not what Keelty was claiming.

Downer, as usual, avoided the substance of the argument and went for the false, but sensational distraction.

Ignoring the looming threats posed by climate change has become a trademark of the Howard government. As with most of the pressing issues of real importance to Australians, Howard and key ministers, like Downer, like to be seen to be doing something, but in reality are leaving it up to someone else, long after their gone, to deal with the challenges they preferred to dismiss as unworthy of their precious time.

Keelty also said that the coming carbon trading market will be rife for corruption, and police will have to become involved in its regulation.

Carbon Cops for real then?

Howard Government Has Left Australian Unprepared For The Global Turmoil From Climate Change

Keelty : Climate Change Will Make Border Security The Most Important Australian Policing Issue Of The Century

The Professional Idiot Admits Defeat On Global Warming

"I've Done My Dash..."


After months of pretending that little had changed at the newspaper and the media company he works for, anti-global warming alarmist, Andrew Bolt, has finally admitted defeat off the back of a massive eight part 'Saving Planet Earth' campaign, with poster liftouts for the kids, in Sydney's Daily Telegraph. A campaign soon to be replicated in Bolt's own newspaper, The Herald Sun, which he likes to point out is "Australia's biggest selling newspaper".

Ever since his boss Rupert Murdoch announced that "climate changes poses clear, catastrophic threats" in early May, Bolt has been slowly degrading the sharpness of his attacks on those who claim to be fighting the rise of global warming.

No longer does Andrew Bolt lash out and call the likes of Al Gore and Tim Flannery deranged and mentally unstable and peddlers of fiction, as he did not so long ago, for their calls to combat climate change. How could he? His own boss has joined the campaign.

Murdoch said he would use his worldwide media empire to spread the message about combating climate change, and seeing as he control 70% of Australia's newspapers, News Limited can now claim the title of being Australia's largest reaching, and most influential, anti-global warming campaigner.

Before Rupert Murdoch converted, Bolt used to call Gore, Flannery and other CC campaigners frauds and liars. If they weren't mentally ill, they were "hysterical". Or they were falling victim to "the "warming faith", "the irrational faith", or the "new apocalyptic faith".

Here's Bolt on May 3, referring to global warming as :

"...a religion that already shows signs of falling apart."

Here's Bolt on Thursday, May 8 :

"I repeat, it’s a religion, and with that old-time hook - Repent, for the end of the world is nigh..."

True believers in global warming and climate change were, according to Bolt, all a bunch of "cultists" and, my personal favourite, they were busy promoting "the most superstitious pagan faith of all".

But then Rupert Murdoch delivered his "Clear, Catastrophic Threats" speech on May 9, and Bolt began to tone down the attacks on the "warming faithful", clearly because Rupert Murdoch had become one of them.

Now the Sydney Daily Telegraph has launched its massive 'Saving Planet Earth' campaign - with a similar campaign to soon begin in the Melbourne Herald Sun - Bolt is facing up to his corporate responsibilities, where blinding hypocrisy is clearly worth less than eight pages of ads in a Sunday liftout. But Bolt goes down with plenty of whining :

"How thrilled I am that one of the papers in our News Ltd family is campaigning to save the world from this shocking global frying that will start any time soon..."

Back in the days when Andrew Bolt didn't have to curb his opinions, or rein in his ranting, global warming campaigners were "planet wreckers". Now he calls them "planet savers".

How infuriating it must be for Bolt to see the "inspiring words" of his arch-enemies of reality, Tim Flannery and Al Gore, featured so prominently, without criticism, at the forefront of News Ltd's full blown climate change campaign.

Flannery? Gore? Even worse, soon to be federal Labor environment minister, Peter Garrett, was online the Daily Telegraph's live blog "discussion" of the day.


Andrew Bolt has admitted defeat :

Face facts: There’s no place now for my kind of petty carping....who might employ me now that I’ve done my dash.

Seniors Weekly?


Tim Blair, columnist with the 'Saving Planet Earth' Daily Telegraph, once warned Tim Flannery and other global warming proponents to stop scaring children with fear campaigns based on (in Murdoch's own words) the "clear, catastrophic threats" posed by climate change.

In particular, Blair warned those climate change true believers to "stay away" from his nieces, and fulminated over the teaching of global warming in schools.

The Daily Telegraph now devotes web resources pages and newspaper liftouts to teaching students the very same kind of Flannery approved "fear campaigns" that Blair and Bolt once railed so vehemently against.

News Limited is even linking up with a 'cool' mascot to 'get down' with the kids on ways of conserving energy : Ollie!

Will Blair now warn of the "alarmist" climate change fear campaigns of his own newspaper, and debunk the 'Saving Planet Earth' series? Particularly now the Daily Telegraph is pumping stories he once mocked about polar bears turning into cannibals due to the effects of global warming?

Yeah, right.



Regardless, Murdoch columnists struggling with their boss's embracing of all that they hate has become a very, very entertaining spectator sport, with plenty more fun to come.


The Changing Climate Of Andrew Bolt - Betrayed By Murdoch Over Climate Change

Bolt Anticipates Terror Attacks In Australia So Howard Can Showcase His "Vast Experience"

Back In The Gutter Where He Belongs

China Demands US-Australia-Japan APEC Meeting "Be More Transparent"

China's President Hu Will Sign New Energy, Natural Resources Deals With Australia

This story from the China Post claims that China's President Hu Jintao will be signing new deals for energy and natural resources - read Australian coal and uranium - when he visits Sydney next week.

But those deals are unlikely to feature any significant commitments from China when it comes to climate change, as government ministers have recently claimed.

Australia is now a "main supplier" of energy resources to China, with trade between the nations reaching more than $33 billion in 2006 alone.

But, as expected, China is unhappy with the controversial 'closed door' meeting between the leaders of Australia, Japan and the United States, which is expected to focus on the United States' plans to locate infrastructure for its global missile shield across the region.

Australia's foreign minister, Alexander Downer, repeatedly states that Australia is not helping the United States to "contain" China, but China doesn't believe him. Nor should anyone else.

story continues below....
---------------------------

Go Here To Read The First Chapters Of Darryl Mason's New Online Novel 'ED Day' - The Story Of Sydney After The Bird Flu Pandemic, And How 300 Survivors Begin To Build Their New Society

--------------------------
story continues....


China's Assistant Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai said of the United States-Australia-Japan security meeting being held during the APEC summit :

"It is our view that such a meeting should be more transparent," Cui said.

This will be the first trilateral security meeting for the three nations, but China has apparently been rebuffed from having observers sit in on the meeting.

China is already kyboshing any talk that there will be major breakthroughs on the climate change front during the APEC summit.

Which should come as a surprised to prime minister Howard.

Or at least, that news should come as a surprise to anyone who believed Howard when he said he expected there would be significant progress with China and the United States on climate change, thanks to the APEC summit.

China still believes that the United Nations should take the leading role in the fight against global warming, and Australia and the United States should endorse UN plans that have already won praise and support from most of the EU.

Will President Bush Cancel His Sydney APEC Visit To Deal With Iraq And Iran?

Howard Claims Climate Change Will Be Top Priority At APEC - But China And US Already Downplaying Any Major Progress

Downer Rattled By 17 Year Old's Questions On Climate Change

Aggressive Politician Verbally Attacks Teenager


You can read a blog here to learn more about the Australia-Korea Energy Forum, which brought together Australian and Korean students to talk climate strategy, and saw them visiting Kakadu, and the Ranger Uranium mine, amongst their many adventures. They then winged it back to Canberra for the Talkback Classroom debate, which resulted in Alexander Downer making a complete fool of himself, and allegedly directing unsavoury comments towards the Korean students and the insistent questioner Alex Meekin.

Climate classroom debater, and student, Tina Pahlman explains what happened during the 'Alexander Downer Incident' :

...we didn't ask everything we wanted to and Mr Downer tended to speak far too much on things other then our direct questions----we never mastered the cut in technique...but all in all I think the audience was engaged we had Downer on the edge of his seat and we raised some important issues...

What a sad, pathetic man Alexander Downer is.

From news.com.au :

Age is no protection when Alexander Downer is in a combative mood.

ACT student Alex Meekin got a taste for the thrust and parry of political life when he took the foreign minister to task over climate change during a session of Talkback Classroom at the National Museum of Australia today.

The Narrabundah College student was part of a panel grilling Mr Downer on energy and raised the minister's ire on a number of issues.

Mr Downer at first batted the tricky questions away, diplomatically sidestepping whether he agreed with climate change sceptics in the Government like Finance Minister Nick Minchin.

Mr Downer's tolerance started to slip when the 17-year-old asked about the moral imperative involved in addressing climate change, suggesting there had been similar economic arguments against ending slavery 200 years ago.

"We're not trying to have some sort of polemic debate," the minister said.

...when Alex questioned whether Australia could have much impact given its refusal to ratify Kyoto, Mr Downer hit back: "It sounds like your questions come from a familiar source".

"A source I'm very familiar with, I'd say they've written them well for you," the minister said, suggesting he thought the questions were supplied by Labor.

Talkback classroom producer Stephen Cutting said the students had been briefed by a variety of sources, including Mr Downer's office, Labor, the federal parliamentary library, business and industry.

"I think comments like that underline the effectiveness of how these kids learn the issues, they've met with many experts, they've been briefed by everybody including Mr Downer's own office," he said.

Downer refused to answer genuine questions from concerned teenagers. Teenagers concerned about how climate change will impact on their lives and the lives of their future children. They wanted to know if Downer's government are really committed to trying to control the growth of global warming. They wanted to know if Downer, as foreign minister, accepted the reality of climate change.

The students wanted straight answers, but Downer refused to answer. He didn't "bat" the questions away. He refused to answer them.

Instead, Downer tried to smear a 17 year old as a Labor stooge, and accused him of not writing his own questions.

Downer owes Alex Meekin, and the other students, an apology. And he still owes them truthful answers to their very valid questions.

So just how paranoid is Alexander Downer these days? Utterly.

Few Australians know how widely disrespected Alexander Downer is on the world diplomatic stage. Particularly in Asia. Diplomats can often be seen rolling their eyes or laughing to themselves when Downer enters a room. Others visibly tense up in his presence, or grit their teeth in grim smiles.

Downer is widely viewed as rude, impertinent and absolutely arrogant. He bullies Pacific nation leaders, and dismisses the concerns of Central and South East Asian leaders over Australia's involvement in the BushCo. missile defence shield, all the while demanding they do more to "fight terror".

Prime minister John Howard is not the only Liberal federal politician now shifting into meltdown mode after seven months of appalling polls. Downer has become a snow man in the sunlight.

Downer's woeful performance at the students' debate is another in a long string of embarrassing public spectacles, including his recent appearance on Lateline, where he was clearly drunk, slurring, and repeating himself.

Really, what sort of federal politician can't take a few hard questions from a 17 year old student without starting to whine, sulk and then go on the attack?

The sort of politician that is increasingly sad and pathetic and knows he will soon lose his job.

The sort of politician that is Alexander Downer.

There will be many a loud cheer sounding in embassies and parliaments across South East Asia when they learn, after the election, that they no longer have to tolerate Downer in order to keep up good relations with Australia.


Downer On Lateline : Drunk, Slurring, Repeating Himself

December, 2006 : Downer Expresses 'Sympathy', Then Urges Fijians To Stage Resistance Against Well-Armed Military

Downer Okays Uranium Sales To India - Formation Of Asia Pacific Alliance To Contain China Moves Closer To Reality

Downer And Howard Spattered By 'The Blood Of Iraqis' In Cartoonist's Christmas Card

The Changing Climate Of Andrew Bolt

Betrayed By Murdoch Over Global Warming, The Bolter Now Pulls His Punches

By Darryl Mason

Andrew Bolt, of Melbourne's Herald Sun, and a self-titled blog, finds himself in an interesting and career-stalling quandary. For a few years now Bolt has found great success in railing against the occasionally exaggerated predictions of climate change activists, and has filled hundreds of columns and blog posts with demands that the "debate" over global warming be more balanced.

How balanced?

For almost a year, Bolt demanded that the theory that solar activity be considered as responsible for climate change, instead of human generated carbon emissions. Let's just say the 'Blame The Sun' theory hasn't exactly set the scientific world on fire, particularly after the hopeless documentary that Bolt championed, The Great Global Warming Swindle, got an airing on Australian TV.

Bolt simply didn't believe that global warming of the kind promoted by scientist Carl Sagan in the mid-1990s was a reality, and often barked about it all being a huge scam, a cult, a new religion.

Bolt still rails against climate change true believers. Well, sort of. Then again, not really. He's now clearly lost his enthusiasm for the battle against the generally accepted truth that climate change is real.

There's a bevy of very simple reasons for why Bolt has toned down his attacks on all those who accept the reality of global warming induced climate change. John Howard backs it as policy shaping fact, as does President Bush, and virtually every major world leader. But most important of all, Bolt's own boss, Rupert Murdoch, backs climate change reality so devotedly he is reshaping his entire world media operations and content around spreading the message that climate change is real and the world must unite to fight it.

Murdoch has stated that climate change is now beyond debate, and it's time to find solutions. Being a good Murdoch employee, Bolt won't mention his boss's embrace of carbon trading and had next to nothing to say about Murdoch's May 9 acknowledgement that climate change was real, and that the debate had now shifted, at least as far as Murdoch and most of the Western world is concerned, to finding ways to solve the problem, and even stop its worst effects from becoming a terrible, centuries long reality.

Bolt spent years haranguing any scientist who dared to say our future prosperity and viability was in peril from climate change. But Bolt clammed right up when Rupert Murdoch said this :

'Climate change poses clear, catastrophic threats."

Murdoch told his employees and stockholders that would use his worldwide audience of hundreds of millions of people, on five continents, to look at the problems of climate change as "exciting" and he promised to "weave this issue into our content, make it dramatic..."

In the next season of Fox's '24', special agent Jack Bauer will leave the terrorists alone long to somehow fight climate change. Presumably the bad guys this time will be heavy polluters, or perhaps there will be some Bond-esque bad guy using HAARP-type technology to speed up global warming to claim the mineral and energy riches of the melting Arctic.

Whatever the storyline of '24' is, Murdoch will use the show's popularity to ram home the threat of climate change, and the overwhelming need to do something about stopping it. Jack Bauer will do his bit, but it is also likely there will be extensive promotions tied into the new series telling Americans how they can be like Jack Bauer and help stop climate change.

The '24' website is already pumping Murdoch's message to the masses, and Jack Bauer himself, Keifer Sutherland, is pre-empting the focus of the new series by appearing in public service announcements on behalf of Rupert's mission to save planet Earth from "clear, catastrophic threats".

Will Andrew Bolt rail against Fox Television falling victim to the global warming "scam"?

Of course not.

You only have to leaf through The Herald Sun, which carries Bolt's columns, to see how heavily the Murdoch promise "to weave this issue into our content" is already being fulfilled.

Has Andrew Bolt whined and wailed and demanded more debate in the pages of his own newspaper, in opposition to the stand taken on climate change taken by Rupert Murdoch?

Of course not.

Bolt only takes pot shots at the easy targets.

When Rupert Murdoch gave his now famous speech on May 9 about acknowledging the reality of climate change, and announced his plans to restructure all his media operations to reduce News Corp's carbon footprint, Andrew Bolt claimed that he wouldn't be cowed and he would continue to hammer the 'Climate Change Is Real' crowd for being a bunch of gullible drogues.

But Bolt has been cowed, of course. And it only took a couple of weeks, punctuated by a Bushesque five week long holiday.

When Bolt now writes about the climate change "preachers" he chooses his targets very, very carefully. He says little, or nothing, about the Howard government's embracing of climate change as an election issue, or President Bush's proposals to reshape American industry and the economy to become more 'green'. And he certainly does not attack Rupert Murdoch.

For years, those trying to warn of the very real dangers and threats of climate change were called mentally ill by Bolt. If they weren't mentally ill, they were "hysterical". Or they were falling victim to "the "warming faith", "the irrational faith", or the "new apocalyptic faith".

Here's Bolt on May 3, referring to global warming as :

"...a religion that already shows signs of falling apart."

Here's Bolt on Thursday, May 8 :

"I repeat, it’s a religion, and with that old-time hook - Repent, for the end of the world is nigh..."

Here's his boss, Rupert Murdoch, on May 9 :

'Climate change poses clear, catastrophic threats."

Yeah, we all had a great laugh over that one.


Sometimes, when not being particularly creative, Bolt referred to what Rupert Murdoch was in the process of embracing as "the global warming scare".

True believers were all "cultists" and, my personal favourite, they were busy promoting "the most superstitious pagan faith of all".

As Rupert Murdoch cranks up the anti-global warming promotions and campaigns through his TV shows, newspapers and cable stations across the world, Bolt now calls those fighting global warming merely "preachers" and "planet wreckers", which is so comic as to be all but harmless.

When he's particularly hepped up, Bot might even lash out with a claim that some anti-global warming advocate is an "Alarmist". But that's about as far as Bolt will go these days.

He might truly believe that climate change is some vast left-wing conspiracy to help clear cities of pollution and create new energy industries, but Bolt is not going to accuse his own boss, Mr Murdoch, of being insane and hysterical and a member of a superstitious pagan cult.

Bolt clearly wants to keep his very well paid job, and if he has to tone down the rhetoric, stifle his conspiratorial beliefs and swallow his pride and dignity to do so, then that's exactly what he will do. Over and over and over again.

Bolt must be thanking all the gods that his beloved prime minister, John Howard, is only a few months away from losing the election.

When Kevin Rudd takes control of Australia, Bolt will be re-born. No longer will he have to play along and praise the prime minister at every turn, and make silly excuses for hundreds of very clear and obvious failures of judgement and downright open deceit of the Australian people, as Howard did again and again through the years Bolt has been writing and blogging for Rupert Murdoch's once firmly pro-Howard Australian media.

By the end of the year, Bolt will likely have a whole host of federal Labor politicians in power to attack and smash and trash and flail, and he will finally be able to let go of the 'Global Warming Is A Superstitious Pagan Faith' nonsense, just as Murdoch now wants him to.


Andrew Bolt Attacks : "Hating Howard To Death"

Rupert Murdoch's Speech, May 9 : "Climate Change Poses Clear, Catastrophic Threats"

Andrew Bolt Anticipates An Australian Terror Attack So Howard Can Display "His Firmness" In Dealing With The Aftermath

Australian Military "Unlikely" To "Pressure" Other Countries To Change Carbon Emissions Policies

Not Yet, Anyway

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute has issued a report explaining how the Australian military will likely become engaged in dealing with the results of a rapidly changing climate in the Pacific and South East Asia in the coming years.

The military may find itself engaging in more relief missions and disaster recovery work within Australia, and the region, and there may be a need to also "defend" Australia's borders against expected flows of "climate refugees" once a number of Pacific islands go under, or widescale water and food shortages force people our way.

More cyclones, extreme weather events, bushfires and flooding will also need the resources of the Australian military, and the report urges the military to think about the kinds of gear and equipment they will need to deal with such work in the future. In short, start buying more trucks than can drive through five feet of water and pick up some more rubber dinghies while you're at it.

Nothing all that new in all this, but clearly these are important events and situations for the military and its related agencies and policy boards to discuss and plan for.

But here's the bit that really caught my eye :

...the paper said it would be unlikely the Australian Defence Force (ADF) would be deployed to pressure another nation to change its carbon emissions policies.

Wow. Has that even been under discussion? That the Australia's military might be deployed in the future to "pressure" another nation into lowering its carbon emissions?

Close down those coal-fired power stations, buddy, or we're sending in the troops.
Which raises the very interesting question : If Indonesia was found to be in violation of its allowed carbon emissions quota in 2026, and the EU and the North American Union demanded it shut down 56 coal-fired power stations to get those emissions levels down, would those who support the war against climate change also support going to war, actual war, to make sure Indonesia met its targets?

Anti-Oil & Anti-War activists could find their children growing up to become Anti-Climate Change But Pro-War.

Of course, the carbon emissions produced by the military during any such intervention to force a neighbouring country to lower its emissions would need to be factored in. Naturally.

John Howard Suddenly A Global Warming True Believer...And So Is George W. Bush

Howard Commits To Carbon Trading, Emission Targets And The Reality Of Climate Change

So John Howard has finally, officially recognised that climate change is going to cost Australia a lot of money, houses and jobs in the decades to come, and that his absolute stubborn refusal to set up a carbon trading system has already put us behind many other industrialised nations of the world.

Howard huggers are mortified that their glorious leader has fallen victim to the "global warming hysteria". But he hasn't, of course. Howard has just finally relented to the four year old calls from Australia's biggest corporations to get on board the carbon trading world currency wagon, and awoken to the reality that if Australia doesn't go along with the rest of the world they will punish us brutally with trade sanctions and boycotts sometime in the future.

Howard has, as always, a not-so-hidden agenda in his announcement yesterday that his government will actively pursue setting up a carbon trading system and also eventually set emissions caps and targets. The not-so-hidden agenda is that Howard will use his sudden "I'm A Believer" status to push nuclear power, at the expense of a new industrial age of nationwide renewable energy rollouts. We also now learn that Howard can over-ride the states and force them to take nuclear reactors, even if every single person in that state doesn't want such a thing.

Here's the news.

From the ABC :

The Prime Minister's carbon emissions task force says a trading scheme could be up and running by 2012, and efforts to cut emissions will lead to higher energy prices.

John Howard received the report of his task force yesterday, but has not made the findings public.

The ABC understands the report recommends a cap and trade system, in which polluters are issued permits and trade them according to their emissions.

Companies could buy pollution permits if they cannot keep their emissions under a certain level.

The report says the system would take four years to develop.

Setting a carbon price would be up to the market, and instead of recommending a target of greenhouse gas reduction the report simply urges the Government to take a cautious approach.

It says the setting of goals should be done with great care and more research.

But for consumers there is a sting in the tail.

The study warns cutting emissions has a cost: higher energy prices.

Ahh, yes. Higher energy prices. All those pensioners living in the dark so they can afford to feed their cat have had it far too good for far too long.

It should come as no surprise that Howard has basically allowed the corporations that use the most energy and produce the most carbon emissions to shape the next few decades of Australia's involvement in carbon trading and emissions reductions. The beauty of a system designed by the biggest energy users and carbon emitters is that they won't actually have to use less energy or reduce their emissions, not in the short term anyway. They can pay their way through their climate changing 'pollution'....or that should, You Will Pay Their Way.

They will set the agenda, and the public will pay. It's that simple.

They have billions invested in their companies and projects, you see, so you can't expect them to lose even one dollar while this slow but steady transformation of how Australians get their energy takes place.

To be clear. The biggest carbon emitters and energy users will not lose one single dollar. But you, yes you, You Will Pay.

Nobody is even trying to deny it.

From 'The Australian' :

THE Coalition has signalled its willingness to accept a long-term target for cutting greenhouse gases as John Howard readies today to receive a task force report on emissions trading.

As Labor attempted to trump the Prime Minister yesterday by promising to create an emissions trading system by 2010, Mr Howard last night gave his strongest indication yet that the Government was prepared to adopt a target to cut emissions.

"If we move towards an emissions trading system, that will as a necessity involve a long-term target of some kind," Mr Howard said.

The Coalition has long resisted setting targets for cutting greenhouse gases, criticising Labor for adopting its target of a 60 per cent reduction in emissions by 2050 without detailed analysis of its likely effect on the economy.

Mr Howard's signal that he was now prepared to adopt a longer-term emissions target came only hours after playing down the prospect in parliament.

Only hours? It used to take weeks, if not years and months, for Howard to backflip this spectacularly.

Soon he will be down to backflipping in minutes, and then seconds.

By the time the election rolls round, Howard will be backflipping on policies he hasn't yet announced yet.

Opposition leader Kevin Rudd has had a pretty good idea, for weeks, of what the prime minister is going to announce this weekend, about how his government will deal with carbon trading and emissions reductions, and Rudd knows the public is with him instead of Howard on these issues.

So Rudd jumped the gun on Wednesday night and announced the first stages of his own anti-climate change policies, and successfully managed to steal most of Howard's momentum :

John Howard's expected announcement of a carbon emissions trading scheme has been gazumped by the Federal Opposition who last night outlined their own plan.

In a series of statements, Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd said a federal Labor government would increase the use of green electricity in government buildings and hand $50 million to geothermal companies to develop "hot-rock" technology.

John Howard will today receive a much-anticipated task force report on climate change and is believed to be poised to announce a long-term target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions as early as today.

Mr Rudd said a Labor government would lead by example, using its enormous purchasing power to drive markets for cleaner and greener goods and services.

All commonwealth buildings would be forced to meet the five star mark of the Australian Building Greenhouse Ratings - including Parliament House.

He said Labor would aim to power the House with entirely renewable energy.

"Every year the commonwealth government spends hundreds of millions on energy to power its offices and its operations, generating over a million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions," Mr Rudd said.

Labor's environment spokesman Peter Garrett said the funding for exploration of hot-rock energy would help the burgeoning industry over the hurdle of high costs for drilling rigs in the current mining boom.

Geothermal or hot-rock energy is produced by drilling deep wells into naturally hot rocks, cycling water through those wells to heat the water which then drives a turbine.

"Geothermal energy holds the promise of being a renewable energy source with zero greenhouse gas emissions that can operate 24 hours a day providing critical baseload power for Australian homes and industries," Mr Garrett said.

So what brought all this on? What made Howard change his mind about climate change, when only a few months ago (hell, even a few weeks ago) he was denying it was even a reality, and mocking those who feared for their families' futures, and the future prosperity of Australia?

It was the polls, of course, and perhaps some 'international influence'.

Howard had lost at least half of his voters to Rudd over climate change in a matter of months. The vast majority of Australians believe climate change poses a far bigger threat to their lives, and livelihoods, than terrorism.

That was shocking news to Howard & Co. After all, they had spent hundreds of millions of dollars since 9/11 trying to scare the living shit out of all Australians about the potential terrorists in their midst, of whom, few if any, so far have be proven to anything more than a bunch of racist, fascist idiots who talk big into police-bugged telephones.

But Australians grew bored with all that Howard fear-mongering about terrorism, when nothing exploded. They clearly preferred Al Gore-style fear-mongering about climate change instead.

And so John Howard learned in the most brutal way just what will be the decisive election issue later this year when Australians cast their vote.

But Guess Who Else Just Became A Climate Change True Believer?

Of course, Howard's change of heart and mind on climate change has nothing at all to do with this equally spectacular, and spectacularly sudden, reversal from President Bush :

President Bush, seeking to blunt international criticism of the U.S. record on climate change, on Thursday urged 15 major nations to agree by the end of next year on a global emissions goal for reducing greenhouse gases.

Bush called for the first in a series of meetings to begin this fall, bringing together countries identified as major emitters of greenhouse gases blamed for global warming. The list would include the United States, China, India and major European countries.

''So my proposal is this: By the end of next year, America and other nations will set a long-term global goal for reducing greenhouse gases. To develop this goal, the United States will convene a series of meetings of nations that produce the most greenhouse gasses, including nations with rapidly growing economies like India and China.

''Each country would establish midterm management targets and programs that reflect their own mix of energy sources and future energy needs,'' he said. ''In the course of the next 18 months, our nations will bring together industry leaders from different sectors of our economies, such as power generation, and alternative fuels and transportation.''

Welcome to the Change Climate Change Party, Mr Bush and Mr Howard.

You're a bit late, but they'll probably still let you inside. After all, per head of population, Australia and the United States lead the world in pumping out the carbon.

In less than twelve hours, both Bush and Howard gave their thumbs-up to the eventual rollout of the new world currency : global carbon trading credits.

And the Howard and Bush backflips have arrived just in time for this weekend's Bilderberg meeting, in Turkey, which brings together 100 of the world's most powerful and history-making leaders of politics and industry, where climate change and carbon trading will be front and centre of the future-altering agenda. An agenda that few journalists for the mainstream media have ever reported on, despite Bilderberg meetings being held every year for more than five decades.

Surely it's all just some huge coincidence. Right?

November, 2006 : How Howard Left Australia To Go Begging On The New World Carbon Trading Economy

Government And Opposition's Climate Change Policies Now Take Centre Stage Of Federal Politics - Much To Howard's Regret

Lateline : Howard And Rudd Step Up Climate Change Debate

Peter Garrett Reveals Labor Unlikely To Produce Carbon Trading Plans And Emissions Targets Before Federal Election

Australia's Corporations Lobbied Howard For Four Years For Introduction Of Carbon Trading

The Seven Tests Of An Effective Carbon Trading System For Australia

Australia's Emissions Barely Matter On A World Scale, But If We Don't Play Along A Trade Boycott Would Hurt

Howard Can Force The States To Accept Nuclear Power Plants, Whether They Want Them Or Not

Key Media Global Warming Denier Can Barely Believe John Howard's Triple Double Backflip On Carbon Trading

LP : How To Talk To A Global Warming Skeptic

John Quiggin : A Climate Change Round Up

Allegations Surface That ABC Was Pressured Into Screening "Discredited" Documentary Debunking Global Warming

Further proof that if you whine long and loudly enough, and you happen to write for the Rupert Murdoch media, you can get pretty much whatever you want.

Global Warming "Truthers" Andrew Bolt and Daily Telegraph opinion editor Tim Blair led the thinly populated parade of those demanding the ABC screen a documentary that supposedly debunks the "myth" of global warming.

That the ABC hadn't already screened The Great Global Warming Swindle, the likes of Bolt and Blair would have you believe, amounted to a conspiracy to censor "the debate" about whether or not severe climate change is a reality, and whether or not humans are responsible for global warming.

Now ABC programmers have reportedly caved in to "pressure" from the ABC board of directors to screen the British documentary in July, not long after the Howard government delivers its own long awaited report into how it plans to deal with rapid climate change:

The program caused controversy when it was aired on Britain's Channel 4 in March. Eminent scientists and some of the scientists interviewed later accused the documentary makers of using fabricated data, half-truths and misleading statements.

The ABC science journalist and broadcaster Robyn Williams, who advised the TV division not to buy the program, told the Herald yesterday the director of ABC TV, Kim Dalton, had intimated in a conversation that he was under pressure from the board on the issue.

"Kim implied on April 16 the board had pressured him into it … that is what our inference was from what he said and did [in that conversation]," said Williams, who described the documentary as "deeply misleading" and "part of the school of total bollocks science journalism".

A reporter on the ABC's Four Corners program, Jonathan Holmes, who took part in that conversation, said: "My impression was whether you call it pressure or some kind of indication from the board or members of the board or a member of the board that he [Mr Dalton] should look at the documentary and consider running it."

Mr Dalton denied he had come under any influence from the board or that he had spoken to any of its members about the program.

Asked whether he thought running a program that had been shown to include falsified data would damage the ABC, Mr Dalton said: "I don't think it will at all. It will affect our credibility in a way that shows where there are areas of public importance that we will provide the forum for them to be discussed."

The rights to screen The Great Global Warming Swindle had reportedly already been snatched up months ago by Channel 9, who then sold them on to ABC, presumably at a tidy profit.

It should make for a moribund night's viewing. The only way the screening of Swindle could be made even more perfect for the Boltists is if the ABC pulled it's top rating comedy show, The Chaser, off air to make way for it.

The Great Global Warming Swindle has been available to view, for free, on the internet for months, and it makes its case about as convincingly as the documentary it is supposed to counter - Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. Pretty unconvincingy.

Both documentaries push their politically weighted barrows right up to your face and dump a load of factoids and graphs, and demand you must believe it all, or be doomed by your own ignorance.

Just like An Inconvenient Truth, The Great Global Warming Swindle is light on facts, and big on clever editing, questionable statistics and opinion. Both documentaries lack overwhelming and cohesive scientific evidence to back up their claims.

It's a shame that both documentaries can't be screened together, on the same night. At about 3am.

If The Global Warming Swindle is an example of the kind of documentaries the ABC-haters think should make for a good, informative night's viewing on the national broadcaster, they need to get out more.

Here's global warming cult-buster Andrew Bolt recently showing the sort of valuable insight he is famous for :

"...the chances of you seeing The Great Global Warming Swindle on your TV are pretty low."

Not if you have mates on the ABC board and you use a blog and newspaper funded by the global warming "cultist", and frequent flier, Rupert Murdoch, to whine on and on about how not screening the documentary amounts to censorship and proof that the ABC is infested with cursed "Lefties".

The truth is the ABC probably would have shown The Great Global Warming Swindle anyway, had Channel Nine not first secured the rights to screen it in Australia.

But mounting a media campaign to "pressure" the ABC into screening the documentary allows global warming skeptics, like Bolt, to claim a victory for his followers.

So why is this doco repeatedly claimed to be "discredited"? George Monbiot attempts to debunk the debunkers of the Swindle :

The problem with The Great Global Warming Swindle, which the ABC plans to screen and which caused a sensation when it was broadcast in Britain earlier this year, is that to make its case it relies not on visionaries, but on people whose findings have been proven wrong. The implications could not be graver. Thousands of people could be misled into believing there is no problem to address.

The film's main contention is that the rise in global temperatures is caused not by greenhouse gases but by changes in the sun's activity. It is built around the premise that in 1991 the Danish atmospheric physicist Dr Eigil Friis-Christensen discovered that recent temperature variations on Earth coincided with the length of the cycle of sunspots: the shorter they were, the higher the temperature. Unfortunately, he found nothing of the kind. A paper published in the journal Eos in 2004 reveals that the finding was the result of incorrect handling of data. The truth is the opposite: temperatures have continued to rise as the length of the sunspot cycle has increased.

Cherry-pick your results and choose work which is outdated and discredited, and anything and everything becomes true. The twin towers were brought down by controlled explosions; homeopathy works; black people are less intelligent than white people; species came about through intelligent design. You can find lines of evidence which appear to support these contentions and professors who will speak in their favour. This does not mean that any of them are correct.

The first time I recall seeing the "sun causes global warming" theory anywhere was on the Russian 'news' site Pravda, a site where you can also find stories about how the moon landings were faked, how communities of wolf-boys live happily in Siberian forests and reports on how the Russian Army fought against UFO invasions.

Of course that doesn't mean the "Blame The Sun" theory of global warming isn't true. Just as it doesn't mean that the Russian Army didn't really go into battle against UFOs.

Believe whatever you want. But don't throw a hissy fit when the majority of the public don't share your beliefs.


Now that the ABC has shown it is not scared to show documentaries chock-full of "discredited" claims that "question the accepted truth", viewers should look forward to seeing some other widely discredited documentaries, like the ones that question the truth about the Holocaust and the myriad of conspiracy theories surrounding the events of 9/11.

Hell, there are docos on the internet that claim President Bush and his dad are members of satanic human sacrificing cults. Why not screen one of those on the ABC as well?

After all, as Andrew Bolt so succinctly puts it, showing the other side of a widely accepted truth is "not a spoof, it's debate".

Howard Spends More On Industrial Relations Propaganda Than National Security Awareness

Australian Public Furious Over The Millions Howard & Co. Waste Praising Itself Through Relentless Advertising

The John Howard government is quickly spiralling into a pit of no return over widespread public outrage centred on the vast amounts of taxpayer money being spent on government propaganda.

The outrage yesterday was centred around a second, probably more expensive, series of advertisements trying convince the public that changes to their working conditions and pay are good for them. This new campaign comes after an earlier advertising blitz by the government that tried to sell us the same fantasy, at a cost of some $60 million.

But the majority of the Australian public made it clear, months ago, that they don't like 'WorkChoices' and no amount of flashy, wall-to-wall propaganda is going to change their minds.

Howard seems absolutely mystified about this reaction, as though he can't comprehend that Australians know when they are being fed outrageous lies and spin. After 11 years, and more than $1.7 billion worth of government propaganda, or 'awareness campaigns', it appears the vast majority of Australians have now fully woken up to Howard's use of taxpayer funded advertising to attempt to shape the minds and guide the opinions of the people.

It's clearly not working anymore.

The Australian government finally realised last week that the 'WorkChoices' brand name it gave to its widely unpopular industrial relations reforms is absolutely worthless, and had to be dumped.

So they decided to rename the program of reforms, as though they believed the Australian public would think it was all something new and different, instead of the same reheated degradation of their working lives.

From the rage and disgust being vented across talk back radio, letters to the editor and thousands of blog comments, it is clear that millions of Australians are insulted by this latest Howard trick.

In just seven days, the Australian government will have spent more than $4 million of taxpayers money on advertising new changes, and a new name, for its beleaguered reforms of the Australian workplace. That is, the reforms of the reforms that only two months ago they said would not change at all.

In comparison, the Australian government spent only $4.8 million over 16 months in advertising related to national security.

Wasn't terrorism supposed to be the greatest threat to the Australian public? If the government's rampaging advertising splurges are to be believed, it now considers its own workplace reforms to be the greater threat.

Or at least, it believes the public widespread rejection of the reforms is the greatest threat to the government's existence, and chances of being re-elected come November :

A Senate estimates committee heard yesterday the Government would spend $4.1million of taxpayers' money on a single week of advertising about its plans to introduce a fairness test as part of its Work Choices laws, while it had spent $4.8million on a 16-month campaign on security.

The spending revealed "quite a lot" about the Government's spending priorities, ALP senator John Faulkner said. He calculated the IR ad spending would cost $28,472 an hour.

The attack came as John Howard rejected Labor's criticism of the Government's $111million spending on advertisements, accusing Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd of hypocrisy.

And the wasting of taxpayers money doesn't end there. The Howard government is now planning an 'awareness campaign' related to climate change that will shake more than $50 million out of the taxpayers.

$50 million to tell us about the reality of climate change? Are they out of their f..king minds?

Or will the 'climate change campaign' be something else altogether? Yet another publicly funded exercise in the government patting itself on the back?

Of course it will be. Haven't most of the government's advertising campaigns been, either directly or indirectly, a way of shouting to the Australian public "Lookit! We did good! Lookit! Thank us! Praise us! We trieds real hards to be good! Lookit!"

Whatever happened to just shutting the hell up and getting on with your job? It used to be the Australian way.

Howard & Co, however, just can't stop talking about how great a job they think they've been doing, all the while ignoring the obvious fact that Australians now work harder, and longer, than they have in a century, and this is one of the chief reasons why the economy is doing so well right now.

Not according to Howard & Co. It's all because of them, and they won't let you forget it.

The remarkably sensitive Howard government needs all the praise it can get, even if it has to praise itself. At the expense of the taxpayers of course.

Australians are clearly sick of the government wasting their money like this, and, quite bizarrely, the use of taxpayers money to fund political advertising may now likely be one of the more controversial issues of the coming federal election. This is, of course, the time when the government spends more money than usual on advertising.

How will the Howard government counter Labor claims and piles of proof of the money they've wasted in the past 11 years on advertising?

Perhaps with another round of advertising. Yes. That's the ticket. Another $50 million worth of ads telling us why they don't waste our money on advertising.

The rising tide of absurdities and ironies now dragging the Howard government down into the deepest, darkest depths grows larger by the day. And this time, they won't be able to ad-spend their way out of trouble.

The Australian public are well and truly onto them now. And they're bloody pissed off about it.

As they well should be.


UPDATE : A rough estimate, by my reckoning, says the $50 million the government intends to spend on self-praise over its alleged plans to combat climate change would outfit more than 3500 Australian homes with a pretty decent solar power set-up, and a rainwater tank.

3500 homes on solar and rainwater for the cost of a Howard government ad campaign that will tell us nothing we don't already know, or can't find out for ourselves, if we're interested enough to want to know more.

3500 homes!

Ahh, you can only dream they'd spend the money in such a practical way.



More Outrageous Howard Splurging Of Public Money : $540,000 To Renovate A Dining Room - Cancelled After Public Airs Its Disgust

Howard Admits Coalition Faces Annihilation At Federal Election - Says He Has No More "Rabbits" To Pull Out Of His Hat

A Small Slice Of The Public Opinion On 'WorkChoices' And Howard's Changes To The Australian Workplace - Sad Tales And Horror Stories

Howard Splurges $20 Million On Maintaining Two Homes When He Only Needs One

Rudd Promises To Restrict Government Spending On Advertising Campaigns

Melbourne Has Driest 12 Months On Record

Climate Change Predicted to Hammer Victoria In Coming Decades

Melbourne has just experienced its driest twelve month period in the 150 years since such records began being kept. Less than half the yearly average amount of rain fell. This is now, according to reports, the 10th year in a row that Melbourne has experienced below average rain falls.

While Melbourne gradually runs out of water, climate change looks set to hammer Victoria in the worst way in the coming decades :

An alarming new report on the impact of climate change in Victoria has warned of risks to some of our most basic services and necessities — including water, electricity, transport, telecommunications and buildings.

The report, obtained by The Age ahead of its release, says water supplies and major infrastructure will be "acutely vulnerable" to climate change in coming decades, even if greenhouse emissions are cut steeply.

...the report found that by 2030 power, telecommunications, transport and building infrastructure would also be at much higher risk of damage from hotter days, bushfires, storms and floods.

Key risks highlighted include:

* Higher water, energy and telecommunications bills to cover the growing damage to infrastructure across the state.

* Worsening water shortages, as temperatures climb and rainfall is reduced.

* Power blackouts and potential fatalities during heatwaves.

* Coastal buildings and infrastructure, including ports, being hit by storm surges.

* Less water for hydro and coal-fired power plants, and more erratic wind generation.

* Longer and more frequent telecommunications outages from stormier weather, potentially hampering emergency rescue and clean-up efforts.

The report cites scientists' predictions that by 2030, average daily temperatures across Victoria will rise by between 0.5 to 1.5 degrees, compared to 1990 temperatures, and by up to 5 degrees by 2070.

Project leader Paul Holper told The Age that Victoria's climate was likely to change dramatically over the next few decades, and that "we have to plan as if we'll be living in a different country".

"I've been working in this field since 1989, and it surprises even me how strongly climate change has begun to affect us already," said Mr Holper, who co-ordinates the CSIRO's Australian Climate Change Science Program.

As population grows, average temperatures are predicted to keep climbing while rainfall is cut, putting water supplies under more pressure. Potential solutions nominated in the report include catching and re-using stormwater, or "costly, large-scale and politically sensitive infrastructure developments such as desalination plants or dams".