Every time there’s a drought, flood or cold day you’ll hear climate alarmists claim it’s all because of climate change. Well this study says there is no positive trend in the severity or frequency of natural disasters. That puts a bit of a hole in the “climate emergency”.
Study: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02243-9
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: My question is to Minister Watt. You said in your opening statement:
There can be no doubt that the severity and regularity of these natural disasters is a result of climate change …
I’ve got a media report that I’m happy to table—I’ve got 10 copies—and a study which I will table that found there is no positive trend of extreme weather events as a result of climate change. Given this scientific study’s finding that there is no increase in severe weather events because of climate change, there appears to be some doubt about your statement. Have you misled the committee with your opening statement?
Senator Watt: Whose report are you quoting from?
Senator ROBERTS: An Italian European Physical Journal Plus—a team led by Gianluca Alimonti from the Italian National Institute for Nuclear Physics and the University of Milan extended the analysis to include natural disasters, floods and droughts.
Senator Watt: Is that peer-reviewed data?
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Senator Watt: You’re sure?
Senator ROBERTS: Yes.
Senator Watt: Senator Roberts, I think we’re all very well used to you questioning the science of climate change—more usually in the Environment and Communications committee, but it’s good to see that you’re consistent and apply the same approach across different committees. No scientific expert has ever been able to convince you that climate change is real, and I doubt that I will have the ability to do that either. To give you one example, I accompanied the Prime Minister to visit a dairy farm in northern Tasmania after the recent floods. I won’t give the gentleman’s full name for his privacy, but it was a dairy farmer called Michael. Without any prompting from any politician, he recognised the increasing number of floods and natural disasters that they were having was due to climate change. But we all know—
Senator ROBERTS: So a dairy farmer named Michael trumps a scientific study? I want to know: on what basis did you make your statement and claim? What source—specific locations, specific publications—
Senator Watt: I’m not going to play your game. We know that no evidence will ever convince you that climate change is real. I have seen you ask the head of the CSIRO. I’ve seen you ask any number of scientists who present evidence of that. There are countless IPCC reports, comprising of advice from the best experts in the world—
Senator ROBERTS: Not one of those IPCC reports contains evidence. That’s a fact.
Senator Watt: and you reject all of them. So it doesn’t really matter what I say to you. You will continue with your climate conspiracies. There’s nothing I can do to help you.
Senator ROBERTS: I note your use of a label. Whenever people use a label like ‘denier’ or ‘conspiracy theorist’, it indicates they don’t have the data. You’ve just confessed that you don’t have the data. If you did, you’d be able to give me the specific location.
Senator Watt: I refer you to any number of IPCC reports, which you continuously choose to ignore and reject. I invite you to go and speak to any farm body—
Senator ROBERTS: Have you read the IPCC reports? I have. There is no specific location of any evidence proving that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut. I ask you to verify and validate your statement. Give me the specific location.
Senator Watt: I would be happy, on notice, to provide you with any number of scientific reports that back up what I’m saying. I will repeat that I could provide you with an infinite number of reports and you will never believe them. Everyone knows that. I’m okay. You don’t accept that climate change is real—that’s your right. But what I’m interested in doing is working with the farmers who are actually paying the price for climate denialism. I’m interested in working with the farm bodies that have been waiting for a government that believes that climate change is real and is prepared to put promises in place. I don’t have the exact figures to hand, but ABARES has provided reports that show that, due to climate changes over the last 20 or so years, the average farm profit or productivity—it’s one or the other—has fallen in the order of 25 to 30 per cent. They’re on later, and you can ask them about that as well. Do you know what? You won’t believe them either. I accept you just don’t believe the evidence. That’s okay, but I’m not going to get held back.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s not up to you to tell me what I will or will not believe.
Senator Watt: We all know your record.
Senator ROBERTS: What is up to both of us and every single senator and member of parliament is to come here with the empirical evidence proving that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut. You have never done that. None of your imputed sources have done that. I want, in each the references you provide, the specific location of the data on which you rely and the specific location of the framework that proves that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate. Science is not just about data; it is about data within a framework that logically proves cause and effect. I want that from you. For each of those references, I expect that from you. Otherwise, they’re not valid.
This rude response to your reasonable query about proofs of climate change sums up not only the people in our goverment but around the world. I notice that whenever an unacceptable question ,meaning against the current government narrative,is asked the recipient either obfuscates,refuses to answer or resorts to trying to demean the questioner. What has happened to robust debate and a willingness to view many sides of opinion. Do these ignorant and arrogant people really think that they have the right to their opinion only? The way to improve conditions generally is not to be one eyed but to listen and research all proposals to obtain a balanced view and then and only then reach a conclusion.
Are we paying megabucks to people such as this senator to rudely speak over differing ideas. No wonder our parliament has such little standing.
I would like to add that the number of planes taking puffed up parliamentarians from all over is a stark evidence of their non understanding of “climate change”,as how much pollution was added just by their flying in and out if Egypt for yet another talk fest with many many more to come. It is all double standards and more and more citizens are becoming aware of this. I despair of the intelligence if the great majority of our “leaders” who live at our expense to promote their own ideas thinking that will somehow place them among the rest of the uncompassionate “elites” who are attempting to create a world they see as advantageous to them. The truth is so often made up of a lie being told often enough.
I admire the way you are always calm,polite and reasonable in your demeanour. Well done!
Keep the pressure on, Malcolm. Anyone who says the “science is settled” does not understand science. Not only do these alarmist ignore a recognised report, but they use anecdotal observations from a farmer in Tassie to frame their policies…..we are doomed if we cant get rid of these nutters.
Well Minister Watt wouldn’t have a clue about the subject as he parrots the usual alarm. The IPCC acknowledges that there is no climate emergency. The nonsense about farm income I just that
Nonsense.
Agree with all you write Cynthia but you did forget to mention one small thing. Yes we do pay these stupid so called politicians a great deal of money to work for the people. They have forgotten their place and their job description. They are called public servants and have totally ignored this as they consider themselves above us apart from a few inside this corrupt government. I we the people should hold them to account and remove them and put some real Australian in there that do care about the people and not their own pockets.
I would also ask the question on how much cloud seeding has been done before these floods everywhere.
It would seem that our weather forecasters know well in advance what is coming. Is this because they have inside information from their source that they have planned our weather.
We must remember where the elites want to build their smart cities.
When they rehouse all the people to their smart cities they need somewhere for their cattle production, for the meat only they will eat.
Remember the old saying out of mind out of sight.
I believe the climate is changing ,as it has for billions of years,but I do not believe that we can do much about it..CC is one of the two greatest hoaxes ever inflicted on mankind.The money spent trying to change the climate would be far better spent repairing the damage from the natural climate change.
Malcolm, again, great questions, but again, the pushback from those that do not want a robust discussion. Sceince is about robus discussion & not being shut down because one may think/believe differently. Trillions of taxpayer dollars are going to be expended to potentially chasing a dream of ‘zero’ emissions. A few will profit significantly, while the majority will pay – no different to the ‘covid’ fiasco. With the ‘covid’ fiasco, science was shut down & only the most powerful entities were dominant. Same with the non-existent ‘climate change’. Profit & control by a few over many.
Climate change as promulgated is a fraud, I would suggest that it is the time to rethink whether the fiasco of the climate change activists is true
1. The First point is that there are cycles and periods within the normal weather system. For example, at the BC AD [ droughts in Turkey and Europe] change over period it was hot – the period +/-550AD was cold [ when Augustine came to the UK] – the period +/-1000AD was hot [ enable the Vikings to get to America} – 1400 -18800 was cold and included a mini ice age [ the Thames froze 28 times] we are now at the peak of a hot period.
2. The current La Nina situation is on track [ and can be directly associated with the table in point 3 as follows]. This could as history shows sit where it is for +/-30 years. And if one studies the fall of the Mayan culture the La Lina sat off the Mexican Coast for 30 years and was replaced by the El Nino which because of the latter’s dryness and lack of rain the culture fell into civil war and collapsed [ well documented.
3. The current rain fall situation and accompanying floods are not unusual. The Murray / Goulburn system has flooded in the following years;1860 [1870[1], 1916[2] , 1974[3] 2022[4] – with sundry floods in 1917, 1921 1934 1939, 1956, 1958, 1974, 1979 1975 1981 1993 and 2010/11, 2022[3].
So the climate changes as it has for 000s of years
The IPCC should be peered reviewed – time and time again their findings are questioned and even proved wrong – and nobody does anything about it apart from the UN who ram the IPCC results down ouir throats in order to progress the UN goals.
IT HAS TO BE STOPPED.
another load of cobblers there is NO weather change as they say there a change in weather as is usual weather changes ever day every hour
Like you i do not believe in their what an arrogant person this person is stick it up them please they are full of bovine droppings of the male type
Its anthropogenic climate change alright, but not who you think
Simple answer. NO! it’s all a fabrication, the very simple science experiments we did as primary school, proved the sun warms. Michael, is the leading scientist in the world. Again, give them to QMH,