rss
94

How climate deniers delivered for Maurice Newman

Print Friendly
maurice_newman

Maurice Newman

Maurice Newman, head of the Prime Minister’s Business Advisory Council, does not accept the science of climate change or the necessity of decarbonisation, and has added to a sizable collection of op-eds in The Australian with another piece. He ends it with this:

“While the debate over the RET and Direct Action shows all sides of politics remain hostage to the climate change cartel, an ABC radio poll asked: “Is the IPCC right that on current fossil use ‘projec­tories’, we are heading for a global warming of four or five degrees by century’s end?” The result? Of 3101 votes counted, 91 per cent voted no, only 9 per cent yes. Enough said.”

This is the poll he cited. It was one of a number of questions posted by the ABC.

resize

The poll received about 2,500 more votes than ABC Radio’s other polls. This is why. He got the help of the climate denier network.

This is a small selection of tweets, blogs and Facebook posts asking members of the climate denial community to vote in the poll. Enough said?  

RenewEconomy Free Daily Newsletter

Share this:

  • MikeH

    An aggressive national and international effort from the climate trolls and they only managed to mobilise 3101 people?

    That says a lot. When Reddit banned a handful of climate cranks and their sock puppets, climate trolling almost disappeared. The flat earth numpties are not as popular as they like to believe.

  • Megs

    The crime is on the record. History will judge.

    • Bob Sydney

      Yeah, the crime of fraud perpetrated by leftards and costing trillions to world economies and the deaths of millions in 3rd world countries. As usual the socialists are to blame, like China, like Russia, like Germany (Hitler was a national socialist)

      • wideEyedPupil

        leftards. so mature. so convincing.

      • Reco2

        Is that why Hitler is considered to be far Right and a pro capitalist dictator in Germany? Why are Republicans so dumb?

        • His Excellency

          Hitler was a far-left and anti-capitalist dictator of Germany. By the way, his Nazi Party teamed up with the Communist Party of Walter Ultbritcht in Berlin to conduct a transit “strike” in 1932 in order to destabilize the moderate Weinmar Republic.

          • Reco2

            Really, is that why the pro capitalist and rightwing dictator Adolf Hitler was allied with the German conservative party called the DVNP- Hitler also invaded the USSR-the dream of rightwing cubans who love fascism-thank god Castro defeated them!

          • His Excellency

            Hitler eliminated all opposition parties, including the DVNP. What was the full name of the Nazi Party in Germany? It was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or NSDAP. That was a left-wing, anti-capitalist party. Goebbels once said that his party “needed to become more Prussian” and even “more socialist”. By the way, until Operation Barbarossa, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union acted like allies. They invaded Poland from opposite sides, leading to the beginning of World War II. Nazis and Communists have also collaborated in many other times as well. For instance, in 1932, future dictator of East Germany, Walter Ulbricht, urged his fellow Communists in Berlin to join forces with the Nazis and stage a strike against the Berlin transportation system, which they did. After the war, the East German STASI also employed many Nazi criminals to serve as spies for the GDR, the dream of radical left-wing Chileans who loved Communist totalitarianism. Thank god Pinochet stopped the Brezhnev doctrine in Chile.

          • Reco2

            Here is a quote from the Jewish virtual library that annihilates your lies:

            “After World War II, many people in Germany’s Western zones of
            occupation, and in the United States, also argued that businessmen, even free
            enterprise as a system, were responsible for Hitler’s rise, his wars of
            aggression, and his crimes against humanity. In 1947 and 1948, the communist
            countries watched with bemusement as the United States, the preeminent
            capitalist country, prosecuted dozens of executives of three of wartime
            Germany’s largest companies for war crimes and crimes against humanity. In the
            dock were directors of the Krupp and Flick (steel and coal) companies, both of
            which had built weapons of war and had employed forced labor, and board
            members of I.G. Farben, the chemical and pharmaceutical giant that had run a
            synthetic rubber factory at Auschwitz. During the trials at Nuremberg, the
            American prosecutors were careful not to portray the proceedings as attacks on
            the market economy, but rather as attempts to punish individuals who
            had committed crimes. Nonetheless, it was clear that they had established a
            strong link between German industry and all aspects of the Nazi economy and,
            more specifically, between German business and the crimes of National
            Socialism.”

            http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/gindustry.html#6

            Jewish virtual library describes Hitler’s rightwing government as pro capitalist and that is good enough for me. The Right hate Jews so they are sure to deny it!

            Conservatives and Nazis were ALWAYS ALLIES! They destroyed democracy and installed a murderous rightist dictatorship….still, the rightist grand alliance also invaded the USSR in case you have forgotten?

            Also, see anti Comintern pact-a grand conservative alliance!

            Thank god for Castro, he gave the fascists such a hard slapping in cuba that they have been sobbing about it ever since.

          • His Excellency

            You are in such denial. Communists have always been anti-Semitic. During the horrible Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the USSR forcibly returned Communist refugees to Germany. In the year leading to the Third Reich taking power, future East German leader Walter Ultbricht teamed up with Goebbels and staged a violent strike against the Berlin transit system. There is overwhelming evidence of Communist-Nazi collaboration in Germany and elsewhere before and during the first stages of World War II. In fact, there were so-called “anti-war” protests targeting the British military action against the Nazis from the invasion of Poland until Operation Barbarossa. By the way, the USSR eventually abolished the Comintern in order to finally join the Anglo-American alliance against the Axis forces. Watch Glenn Beck’s Revolutionary Holocaust documentary and read Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism book for more on the truth.

          • Reco2

            HIlarous, espeically when the founder of the Red Army had a Jewish background- Trotsky. Allende was of Jewish background like Gregor Gysi who was the leader of the German “Left” party.

            The Right were always anti semtic. The German conservative party banned Jews from joining their ranks in the 20s-30s-like their rightist comrades the Nazis they were as anti semtic as you can get.

          • His Excellency

            The GDR (East Germany) refused to recognize Israel and even send supplies to the Islamist and Baathist countries in the Middle East whose goal was to destroy Israel and, eventually, to continue the “job” that Hitler started. Many of those countries were inspired by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin Al-Husseini (who was Hitler’s closest ally in the Middle East), the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and a rabid Jew-hater and radical Islamists. Conservatives are defenders of Israel, while the left seeks to undermine it by siding with genocidal Islamofascist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Stalin persecuted Jews in the Soviet Union after World War II and the persecution continued well after his death in 1953. The Communist bloc and Its Islamists and Baathist supporters imposed the “Zionism is Racism” UN resolution in 1975, while it was the conservative West that passed the resolution revoking the Communist one in 1991. By the way, Capriles in Venezuela is also Jewish, yet he is a fascist simply for opposing the Communist takeover of his country?

          • Reco2

            The German conservative party in West Germany actually had an ex Nazi as their chancellor-a fact.

            LOL, you do not know what zionism is do you? Rightwing anti semites were massive supporters of zionism: Indeed, they used it to claim that German Jews, who had lived in Germany for centuries, were not really German and belonged in the middle east.

            An example:

            The Nazi authorities today decreed that the Zionist blue-white banneris the official Jewish flag and may be displayed under protection of the police throughout Germany.

            The decree is based on the flag law passed by the Reichatag at the
            Nuremberg session at which the anti-Jewish legislation was adopted. Jews
            are expressly forbidden by this law to display the German flag.

            “It is up to the Jewish nation,” the decree states, “to decide for
            itself which are to be the colors of the Jewish national flag, but until
            then the Zionists’ blue-white flag, together with the symbols of all
            the different Zionist groups, is valid in the Reich as the Jewish flag
            and as such will be enjoying State protection.”

            http://www.jta.org/1936/01/02/archive/zionist-banner-decreed-official-jewish-flag-by-nazis

          • His Excellency

            That is once again a conspiracy theory. The fact is that Hitler and the Nazis wanted all Jews dead, not just those who weren’t fond of Zionism. Also, Adenauer was never a Nazi. However, his Eastern counterpart, Walter Ulbricht, actively collaborated with the Nazis in Berlin in the Weinmar period, especially in the Berlin transit strike/riot of 1932. By the way, did you know that Hajj Amin Al-Husseini and the Islamists in the Middle East supported the Third Reich before and during World War II. In fact, so-called “Palestinian” nationalism is influenced by Nazism, Communism, Baathism and Islamism-four horrible dictatorial systems of despair.

          • Reco2

            The German Conservative party and the Nazi party voted to overturn the democratic constitution which gave Hitler dictatorial powers: enabling act of 23 March 1933. The Communists and the social democrats were barred- only his disgusting rightist comrades supported Pinochet.

            Reagan supported Islamists against the USSR in the 1980s(soviet afgan war)- Hitler supported Islamists against the soviets in the 40s. Nice try. LOL

          • His Excellency

            You can’t compare the two Muslim groups. Hitler supported Islamists like Al-Husseini engage in a campaign of anti-Semitism. Reagan supported moderate Muslims who were victims of both radical Islamists and Communist thugs. The main Conservative party in Germany was reluctant to support the Nazis’ enabling act. And by the way, both the Communists and the Nazis hated the moderate Social Democrats. Communists and Nazis staged a joint strike in Berlin in 1932 that turned into a riot against the coalition’s opponents. Nice try.

          • Reco2

            Taliban are not moderate Muslims you fool- in fact, you could argue that they were far more extreme then Al Husseini. Both Reagan and Hitler supported radical islam for the same reason- fight the USSR!

            Nazis and conservatives voted to ban the Communist party and barred them from the sitting because they they would have voted against the enabling act. There is actually footage of joint conservative and Nazi party rallies- LOL.

            Nice try

          • His Excellency

            Complete balderdash. Communists and Nazis held joint events like the Berlin transit strike of 1932, among other events. When the Nazis came to power in Germany, all opposition parties were banned. Reagan did not support the Taliban. He supported moderate groups in the Mujahideen. Al-Husseini and the Taliban are no different from each other. Once again, you are a revisionist because you don’t like to face facts.

          • Reco2

            Again your in denial, the German conservatives and the Nazis voted TOGEATHER to destroy German democracy in 1933- infamous enabling act!

            Indeed, members of the conservative party were part of Hitler’s cabinet you moron.

            Finally, Reagan and Hitler supported Islamic extreamism for the exact same reason! You are a shocking revisionist,

          • His Excellency

            Again, you are in denial. The Communists and the Nazis teamed up in Berlin to stage a strike against that city’s transit system. That strike turned into a riot. There were many cases of collaboration between the two. Also, when the Nazis took total power in Germany, they outlawed all opposition parties in the country. That included conservative parties. Reagan did not support Islamism. He supported moderate groups against a monstrous dictatorial empire bent on world conquest. Hitler, on the other hand, supported Islamism because he supported its anti-Semitism and its totalitarianism. By the way, did you know that your beloved Communist Cuba and its puppet regime in Venezuela are friends and allies of Islamofascist states like Islamic Iran?

          • Reco2

            It is you that is denial. You are denying that the German conservatives voted WITH the Nazis to terminate Germany democracy in 1933. Conservatives were even members of his cabinet you buffoon.

            Reagan and Hitler both supported Islamism for very similar reasons- for help against the USSR. The Muslim divisions were not deployed against the west- but the USSR and Tito’s partisans!

          • His Excellency

            More nonsense. All opposition parties were banned in Germany when the Nazis took power, that included the conservative parties. You ignore the fact that in the year before, Nazis and Communists teamed up to stage counterproductive events like the Berlin transit strike that turned into a riot. As for Reagan and Afghanistan, he was helping moderate forces fight against a monstrous Communist empire. Those moderate forces had no connection to the Taliban. Also, what do you mean Tito’s partisans? Tito did not like the USSR, which was why Yugoslavia never joined the Warsaw Pact. By the way, why do you ignore the alliance between Islamist Iran and Communist Cuba and Chavista Venezuela?

          • Reco2

            LOL, you are comparing a strike to the joint conservative-Nazi vote which destroyed democracy in Germany(enabling act).

            Reagan was helping radical Islamists who wanted to establish sharia law in their against the soviets- Hitler using the radical Islamist mainly for his own benefit. (fighting communism).

            Tito was against the Nazi puppet government of Ante Pavelic, who was a conservative lawyer, and the pro Nazi muslim devisions were mainly sent against him.

          • His Excellency

            Tito was also against the Soviet bloc and denounced Stalin’s aggressive post-war policy in Europe. That was why Yugoslavia joined the Non-Aligned movement. Reagan and Hitler had different goals. Reagan supported moderate factions in the Mujahideen against the invading Soviet army in Afghanistan. Hitler was allied with the Islamists because they shared his anti-Semitic hatred. After World War II, many Islamists and Baathists looked to the USSR for support. The USSR was even behind the anti-Semitic “Zionism is Racism” resolution at the United Nations. The so-called “Enabling” Act in Germany would had never even had a vote in the first place had other circumstances hadn’t taken place in the first place.

          • Reco2

            Reagan did not support moderate factions-he supported radicals who wanted to establish sharia law and wanted to engage in ethnic clenching. Islamists fought with Hitler again…..wait for it….the USSR!

            Sound familiar?

            You are right, if the conservative parties had not supported Hitler’s wicked rightist regime he would have been defeated.

          • Reco2

            Hitler and Reagan had the same aims when recruiting radical Islamist to their cause. You ignore the fact that both Hitler and Reagan teamed up with Islamists to fight the USSR. A known fact. They had strong connections to the Taliban.

            You still ignore the fact that Hitler and the conservative leader Hugenburg formed a coalition which lead the way to Hitler’s dictatorship. Funny that.

          • His Excellency

            Wrong again. No wonder you repeat revisionist propaganda. You support Communism, which is now allied with Baathism and Islamism. You ignore the fact that Communists and Nazis collaborated in Germany towards the end of the Weimar Republic and signed a so-called “non-aggression” pact that led to the invasion of Poland and the beginning of World War II.

          • Reco2

            Nazis were in a coalition with the conservatives(DVNP) who shared the Nazis hatred of the left and the Jews, members of the party even served in Hitler’s cabinet. The Nazis also invaded the USSR with 2 million troops, you think thats collaboration?

          • His Excellency

            The Nazis outlawed all opposition parties when they took power in Germany. Was the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact not collaboration between Communists and Nazis? Was the Berlin transit “strike” of 1932 not collaboration between the two groups?

          • Reco2

            “Of the more than 14,000 workers who voted to strike, only 1137 were in
            the KPD’s trade union organization RGO, and even fewer were in the Nazi
            union NSBO.”….LOL, that is your evidence?

            Funny how you ignore the fact that the conservatives and the Nazis allied togeather to destroy democracy during the famous enabling act vote…..very interesting indeed.

          • His Excellency

            The union strike was collaboration. And there were many more “workers” who were members of the KPD or the Nazis than the numbers that you posted.

          • Reco2

            Denial? Many members of the east german government were of Jewish backgrounds- that is a fact. Conservatives however have always been anti semtic. They even banned Jews from joining their parties. Futhermore, they often stripped Jews of their citizenship and told them to “get out” of Germany even though they had lived in Germany for centuries.

            Anti Comintern pact was a grand right-wing alliance filled with other anti Semitic governments- Indeed, one of the signatories was Horthy of Hungary:

            Former Hungarian President Denounces Anti-semitic Persecutions by Horthy Regime

            September 21, 1941

            LONDON (Sep. 19)
            Michael Karolyi, President of the first Hungarian
            Republic and leader of the Free Hungarian movement here, today deploredthe persecution the Hungarian troops are inflicting upon the Jews of Hungary and Poland.Denouncing the regime of Admiral Horthy, which “twenty-two years ago instigated the white terror by spilling Jewish blood,” he pledged the Free Hungarians will “do justice to both perpetrators of these crimes and their innocent victims.”

            Rightwing government of Crotia:

            Croatia Orders “Distinctive Marking” of Jews

            May 11, 1941

            The Croatian Government has ordered wearing of
            “distinctive markings” by Jews over the age of 13 and Jewesses over 12, on penalty of 10,000 dinars’ fine or imprisonment, the Zagreb radio
            announced today.

            etc.

            How can you say the Right are not anti Semitic?

          • His Excellency

            Many West German officials are also of Jewish backgrounds. So what? The fact is that many East German STASI members were former Nazis as well. I bet you believe that the oppressive Berlin Wall was justified. You are an a**hole and nothing more.

          • Reco2

            You have not named one! An ex nazi chancellor represented West Germany’s conservative party. That is a hard fact that you need to learn.

          • His Excellency

            A Communist collaborator (Walter Ulbricht) with the Nazis in the 1932 Berlin transit strike (which turned into a riot) was the East German dictator who founded the police state and ordered the construction of the hated Berlin Wall. That is a hard fact that you need to learn.

          • Reco2

            A hard fact is that the German conservative party and the Nazis destroyed Weimer Democracy. Funny how you ignore that fact, instead you focus on a strike rather than the parliament sitting where the Far right nutters terminated democracy. LOL You really are a revisionist.

          • His Excellency

            No. You are the revisionist. The Communists also played a role in the destruction of the Weinmar Republic. They hated the Social Democrats. And how many times do I have to keep reminding you that all opposition parties were banned after the fall of the Weinmar Republic? Anyway, why do Communist dictatorships also have only one party? After the fall of the Third Reich, the GDR forced parties to combine and form the Socialist Unity Party. Why do you ignore that as well?

      • Alan Baird

        Dear Bob, there are those who have (just) enough sense to remain silent and be thought fools and there are those such as yourself who spew invective and remove all doubt (that they are thought fools). Anybody who brings up Adolf Hitler claiming to be a socialist automatically loses the argument. If you have such a feeble grasp of history that you actually think that Hitler was a creature of the Left, while ignoring that he executed as many Communists as he could get his hands on then you are no better than the knuckle-draggers of the Tea Party who STILL triumphantly trumpet this idiotic notion. This is what comes from getting info from organs such as the Murdoch press and Macquarie radio. They simply WON’T criticise Tea Party idiots. They provide info free zones I’m afraid. But by all means read and listen to the above and dwell within your parallel universe. To clarify: if you STILL don’t understand, Adolf Hitler was a creature of the extreme Right. His ideals were MUCH closer to those of the “Liberal” Party, another splendid example of reversing the meaning of a name, just as you did. ITS real name should be Conservative-Reactionary. No wonder you’re confused. But then again, THEY must be too, unless they’re being downright mendacious. Which they are.

  • Marka

    is the number 5 bigger than the number 12? The result? Of 3101 votes counted, 91 per cent voted no, only 9 per cent yes. Enough said.”

    • Sally

      Good point.
      Several thousand people believing something don’t make it so.
      Look at all the millions who believe in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus.
      Mind you they have an excuse – they are kids, not allegedly mature adults.

  • SolarBusiness_

    The poll fudging is just one example of Newmans chronic confirmation bias. I checked on his other cited research and found that one research company cited doesn’t exist anymore (it seems) and the other report was based on interpolated data form 2003.

    http://solarbusiness.com.au/australian-government-clouded-by-chronic-confirmation-bias/

    • Bob Sydney

      And when you quote the 97% of scientists it’s just a number. Unlike the facts of this poll where you LOST 🙂

      • Catprog

        You mean the 1% of papers that think global warming is not happening?

      • Bruce Campbell

        Thats intensely silly.
        The 97% is based on a metastudy of 30,000 peer reviewed papers on climate by climatologists. Of those, 97% concluded climate change was real.
        On the other hand, a uncontrolled pop poll on a website was trolled by deniers. If it was trolled by anyone else it wouldn’t change the fact the poll is not something to base a decision on, let alone Newman citing it.

  • Maurice Oldis

    Maurice Newman is a sham posing as a respectable person of influence when,in fact he is a trash talker!

    • Bob Sydney

      And you are? Oh thats right a numpty with a keyboard

      • Alan Baird

        Scoialist? Numpty with a keyboard? Get your typos sorted… And quoting Mark Twain (Sam Clements) is a perfectly pertinent source of good ole common sense against the nostrums of the puffed up twats of the extreme right. Your mates regularly embrace the loonier aspects of religion and denigrate science. Birds of a feather flock mit demselfs! You should read Sam. Good value.

  • Ken Dyer

    Oh dear, in the case of Maurice Newman, one can only respond by quoting Mark Twain:

    In religion and politics(and climate change) people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing.

    • damocles

      er, you had better research Newman’s role in Greenpeace before you go any further. So far, all you have done is misapply a quote.

  • John McKeon

    “Galileo Movement”??? Perhaps Galileo Galilei is turning in his grave and shitting himself over the utter abuse of his good name.
    Maurice Newman and that “movement” … mmm … | :

    • Bob Sydney

      Leftard

      • Adam Gilbert

        Poe.

    • Bruce Campbell

      the Galileo movement are quite a well organised & connected denial group. They even brought ‘Lord’ Monckton over to assist them in spreading their word. It almost directly lead to Gina hiring Bolt & subsidising him his show on channel 10.

  • Chris Fraser

    Damn. That means there’s 2822 of them that can read …

  • Bob Sydney

    The leftards going into melt down because the rest of the world have woken up to their socialist scam 🙂 Cry me a river, I live off your scoialist tears

    • Ketan Joshi

      Can I just say that I relish your inclusion of a smiley face in this comment.

    • Bruce Campbell

      You mean the rest of the world that are implementing carbon pricing whilst we’re lone in dropping one?

      • Special Operations Executive

        Are you nuts? The US just had mid-term elections & gave the the Dumbocrats & your hero Hussein Obama their worst defeat since WW2.
        Republicans as well as quite a number of Dems are NOT in favor of ANY Carbon Tax or ETS. You think they’ll join anytime soon?
        Why isn’t your bogey AGW on the G20 agenda?
        You’re a denialist – you deny that most people have woken up to the scam.

        • Jarrah Keenan

          the one percent bought the US elections…as they have bought your intelligence. fool.

          • Special Operations Executive

            Strange comment seeing that Dumbocrats spent twice as much on the US elections as the GOP.
            But typical irrational comment from a Greenie dumb cunt who can’t argue a case but IMMEDIATELY resorts to bullshit claims & name calling.

          • Jarrah Keenan

            erm….”fool” doesn’t equate with your name calling. and the money doesn’t give any credence to anything. The 1% know how to get their agenda heard by FOOLS like you. I know which side of the fence i’d rather be on – the one of love, light and compassion rather than the hate filled hell that you live within.

        • Jarrah Keenan

          and the reason that Climate Change isn’t on the G20 Agenda is because our Dear Leader thinks that he has all the answers and that Australia doesn’t have to participate because…well….I guess because he (along the rest of his party) thinks we’re better than the rest of the world. We don’t need a carbon tax! Like we don’t need publicly funded health care or universities or pensions or social security. I find it interesting that the LNP are happy to slash all the stuff for the poor but a wealth tax? NO WAY!!! A wealth tax of just 1.5% would allow us to abolish the GST completely…..

          • Special Operations Executive

            Pulling crap out of your arse again?
            FYI. YOUR Carbon Tax got the arse last year from the Australian electorate in the biggest defeat that Liebor got in 100 years.
            Another election denialist.
            Your class warfare went out with your hero Joe Stalin. Your Communist philosophy is an epic fail.
            Suggest you go to North Korea or Cuba to live your dream Comrade Commissar.

          • Jarrah Keenan

            and what is your point? The Lieberals alternative is going to cost us a LOT more than the Carbon Tax – which was working. Now we have to explain to the rest of the world that our emissions have gone up by 10% in the last year. And the defeat? watch the next election. See how far Dear Leader falls….going to be spectacular! And while we’re at it – the RET…with it’s potential removal, we are looking at losing an entire industry worth billions and employing thousands! for why? because a few people deny Climate Change is happening?

          • CB

            As an American, Abbott to me seems like a Teabagging clown… Why is he in the Liberal party?

            Progressives in the States were very excited by your carbon tax, though from what I understand, there were holes in it big enough to drive a lorry through (literally, transportation wasn’t included, right?)

            You’ve got so much sun down there. You could be powering your own country and even exporting that solar energy… rather than digging up suicidal coal and selling it to the Asian Death Machine…

          • Alen T

            I understand the Koch brothers are somewhat influential in politics over there, now imagine an entire sector combining to launch a coordinated attack, and not to mention supportive biased media coverage from Australia’s major newspapers, i.e. Murdoch led news corp. so much anti-carbon price coverage that I’m fearing my newborn’s first words will be ‘axe the tax’. Our ETS did not cover all sectors, but it was a major step forward and othwise a textbook design.

          • CB

            It surprised me both that you dumped Julia Gillard and that the tax went down… We think of you as a bit smarter than that…

            I guess it’s reassuring in some bizarre way that we aren’t the only people on Earth to be infested with Teabaggers. For a while there, I thought we had the monopoly on that particular brand of stupid…

            Oh well… Good on you for taking that first step, and hopefully people will come to their senses and get rid of Abbott and the science denier clown show… We have a lot of work to do here as well, obviously.

          • Jarrah Keenan

            CB – you’re completely correct much as I hate to say it! Embarrassing to be reading about our Lieberal leader from a US perspective….and yes, we MUST do a lot more as far as all the “free” energy (read: sunlight and wind) goes….but we have to get rid of the “Coal is good for Humanity” thinking which infests this government. All they can see is the dollar signs!

          • Talis Mancer

            The “Liberal” Party in Australia is the Conservative party here and is full bore anti-Progressive. It was a vile move by PM Menzies to remove the word “liberal” from the Australian Political lexicon. It’s just part of the general and absolute dishonesty that defines the Party. I can understand why it would confuse Americans.

          • CB

            Ah, thank you! That was a very long time ago, 1950’s yes?

            I know I’m a Republican in England… I’m definitely not one in the USA.

            I’m tempted to lump UKIP/Abbott/Harper in with our Teabagging neofascists, but I don’t know quite as much about overseas politics as I do about politics here at home… I’ve heard Harper is actually fairly reasonable on many issues US Republicans won’t touch with a 10 foot pole, even though he’s a psychotic Climate Denier and tar sands zealot…

    • Talis Mancer

      Yeah sure…every climate scientist on the planet is out to scam you to keep their cushy jobs as opposed to those hard working oil billionaires who have nothing to lose. Child minds…just incredible.

  • Alen T

    This illustrates the overarching issue with CC denialism perfectly! We have 97% of expert world climate scientists agreeing on something, and here we have an individual in a high ranking advisory role proclaiming these experts are all wrong based on a poll that with all likelihood had less than 1% experts in this field partaking in the vote!
    The IPCC does not undertake its own research, but compiles evidence from 1000’s of scientists and publications to draw a conclusion on the issue. Claiming that they are all colluding together to misrepresent the truth would be quite amusing if it wasn’t becoming a widespread belief. Good to remember that a good number of these scientists are also employed by the universities around the world, and generally these are smart enough or aren’t in a habit of letting themselves get fooled by ‘made-up’ evidence and theories by their employees (well not for long anyway, especially with a well-publicised issue like CC). This line of argument is another clear example of how facts and well-established theories can only be argued against using fairytales and farfetched stories.

    • Pete Rimoldi

      The problem is they only compile research from scientist (allegedly) that agree with their preconceived views.

      • Alen T

        I think the problem is that people do not realise how much scrutiny is given to a scientist’s publication. Unfortunately scientists cannot make a claim without clear supportive evidence, otherwise their paper would not get published or would be very quickly retracted. Your ‘allegedly’ comment again implies major bodies and universities who publish these, have been out-smarted and played for fools. Remember, these are the same groups which produce our Doctors -whose hands we place our lives in.

        Common sense seems to be in short supply these days.

  • Steve Fuller

    one shouldn’t assume that 2820 ‘people’ voted no. Just one clever f^^^tard like Bob Melbourne, a computer and 2819 aliases will do the trick.

  • Neville Bott

    Reneweconomy comments are often informative and worth reading but recently it appears that this is now attracting the attention of denialist trolling campaigns.

    Successfully defending against this type of threat takes a great deal of time and effort that could be better spent on your excellent articles, the best support your readers can give would be to ignore the trolls in all circumstances until they can see that trolling here is a waste of time.

    • Pedro

      I agree with your first sentence. I also really enjoy the comments even if its a stupid slanging match. I find it almost incomprehensible that anybody could be a climate denier and reading their drivel at a minimum gives me some insight into some of the boronic thinking out there.

  • Reco2

    The Right think science is “witchcraft”-brain dead buffoons!

  • realheadline

    Could it possibly be that people are just too informed to fall for such an obvious and transparent political fraud? Control the weather/climate? You people can’t even control your own scam polls.

  • Bruce Campbell

    The issue isn’t that a uncontrolled poll was taken over by denialists. It happens from both sides about lots of topics. Its that Maurice Newman is using uncontrolled skewed polls to justify his anti-science stance.

  • damocles

    What a duplicitous and deceitful article. Or is it just ignorance on the part of the writer? The question was not posed along with other questions – questions are posed serially and once a new question, poll if you prefer, is asked, the voting on previous questions is closed.

  • Farmer Dave

    Great article, thanks Ketan. I find the psychology of people like Maurice Newman strange to the point of being disturbing. Is he suggesting that the existence of the majority in this poll is evidence that the IPCC is wrong? What possible relevance could the opinions of the drummed-up majority have to the reality of atmospheric physics? Is this in effect a philosophical statement from Newman along the lines of “There are no objective laws of nature, only opinion; there is no such thing as objective evidence, only interpretation”?

    If Maurice Newman were to be diagnosed to have a potentially fatal, but very treatable cancer (described as such on the basis of measured evidence, of course), would he then set up a poll of random people and decide whether or not to accept treatment on the basis of the majority opinion? I think not – I would expect that he would accept the objective evidence as to this particular tumour, and he would happily subject himself to the recommended treatment, taking comfort from the medical evidence on which the treatment regime is based.

    The fact that his thinking processes with respect to climate change are so far removed from the objective reality of science, an objective reality that I expect he fully accepts elsewhere in life, speaks to me of an extraordinary level of cognitative dissonance. It also tells me just how threatened he feels by climate change. Clearly, accepting the objective evidence of climate change would force him to totally change his world-view, and quite possibly repudiate his whole story about who he is and what he has achieved with his life. It can’t be easy being Maurice Newman.

  • ScreamFace

    Well then, an internet poll trumps scientific research.

    I did not know that is how these things work.

    I think it’d be neat if my wardrobe was a portal to a mythical land, vote yes to make this reality!

    • Talis Mancer

      Welcome to the Library of Alexandria redux!

  • johnnewton

    He lso cited a study at King Juan Carlos University which found green jobs trahed 2.2 non green jobs. Nine other studies have shown this to be total bBS See this

    http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/credit_for_trying_spanish_stud.html

    What i want to know is why is he and others allowed by the aPC to get away with total lies?

  • xmanflash

    Poll Deniers.

  • Zosha123

    I am a denier troll because I want science to say PROVEN before I condemn my kids to the Greenhouse Gas Ovens!

    • Jarrah Keenan

      so when will you say “i believe”? is it when the numbers go to 120%? when will you people UNDERSTAND that 99% is PROOF??????????????????

      • Special Operations Executive

        600 years ago the science said that the earth was flat. The sun revolved around the earth. Fool.

        • UK4football

          Interesting that you should think that:
          Eratosthenes even worked out the circumference of the earth about the third century BC
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

          The earth revolving around the sun?

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristarchus_of_Samos

          did you know there were elements of the church that still believed the earth was the centre of the universe (Geocentric model) even in the early 1900s?

        • Jarrah Keenan

          more fool you when the planet karks it. Consume, be silent, die. The mentality of the denialists.

  • Michael Rynn

    A warming 4-5 degrees over this century is not unlikely. Greenhouse gases like CO2 act as a global thermostat. In Ice age times the atmosphere CO2 was near 180 ppm, and global temperature was 4-5 degrees cooler, compared to our ‘normal’ of pre-industrial CO2 of 280 ppm. Now we are 120 ppm up from that, and still rising, with added other greenhouse gas effects. Our global thermostat is still being turned up higher, and we have still plenty of coal left to burn. The energy costs of getting that less available coal are also rising. Replacement of cheap oil by GHG intensive tar sands , shale and coal oil is an additional threat. Our global GHG thermostat is already set high to 4-5 degrees. Additional global heat energy balance flow will increase from loss of ice sheet albedo are on their way. Ocean warming and land warming have continued on at their average rates. Average land warming rate of 0.15 C per decade has potential to increase, since we turn up the thermostat faster than global energy balance can catch up. Clean up of sulphate pollution can add a further heat flow increase at any time. Methane and CO2 from melting northern permafrost will contribute more GHG effect. At this stage, with denial attitudes in the Australian government like that of Mr Abbotts business advisor, Mr Maurice Newman, 4-5 degrees is a mild forecast. AGW denial, and the federal government attitude to the RET is one extremely good reason to dump Mr Tony Abbott.