web analytics
The Standard
Advertising

Unassailable Evidence

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, July 8th, 2009 - 100 comments
Categories: climate change - Tags:

Tim Naish

Tim Naish

Inaugural Lectures are very traditional University events; held these days to permit outstanding researchers to present an overview of their work to the wider academic community and public. Last night Prof. Tim Naish delivered a clear and decisive verdict about human induced climate change; the evidence is unassailable.

Held in the very formal surrounds of the Hunter Building Council Chambers, the room was full to what I would guess it’s capacity of 400-500 people. His presentation wove together threads of the science, his own career, acknowlegement to those who went before him, and the numerous mentors and colleagues whom all modern researchers depend on. Modern science is a very complex business, while the rare lone genius occasionally contributes ground-breaking insights, the vast bulk of progress these days is made by teams of people supporting each other, and all standing on the shoulders of those who went before them.

Starting with the Scottish mathemetician James Croll (1870) who was the first to deduce and calculate what are now more popularly known as the Milankovitch (1930′s) cycles, Naish gave a brief introduction to the naturally occuring Ice Ages and sea level changes that accompany them. The next major figure referenced was Sir Nicholas Shackleton (1937-2006)a pioneer in the use of mass spectrometrty to determine changes in climate as recorded in the oxygen isotope composition of calcareous microfossils. Using ocean sediment cores, his team convincingly demonstrated that oscillations in climate over the past few million years could be correlated with variations in the orbital and positional relationship between the Earth and the Sun. However even late in his life, Shackleton realised that the underpinning ideas of his work were only theoretical, that corroborating physical evidence was still required.

Tim Naish’s PhD work (1980′s) studying sedimentary sequences in the Wanganui basin provided that evidence. The Wangaui basin is a 5km deep depression in the earth’s crust that has been filled over millions of years with erosion material from the continuously uplifting Southern Alps, material that is driven north up the West Coast by part of the Great Oceanic conveyor currents to form layer upon layer of beach material in the basin. Within that record is embedded clear evidence of numerous dramatic sea level changes, often in the order of 50-100m, that exactly correlate with Shackleton’s records. Subsequent work has detailed a precise and robust sequence of almost 100 such oscillations going back millions of years.

After working for Bob Carter for a number of years, Naish joined GNS (Geologic and Nuclear Sciences CRI based in Seaview Lower Hutt and closely attached to Victoria University), initially as a petroleum geologist. Very quickly he became involved in various Antarctic drilling programs, the first at Cape Roberts. This last summer he was the Science Team leader for the ANDRILL project, an ambitious and successful core drill sited on the Ross Sea Ice shelf. Essentially the drill penetrated 80m of floating ice, 800m to the sea bed, and then another 1000m into the sedimetary layers beneath. (This alone was a remarkable technical tour-de-force and currently a world record.)

Most such core drills only recover about 40% of the potential record; but a specialist New Zealand company has pioneered innovative techniques allowing them to recover 98% of the material, greatly enhancing the quality of the data that can be derived from them. In the 2007-2008 season the team’s sedimentoligists identified 60 cycles when ice sheets or glaciers advanced and retreated across McMurdo Sound, dating back at least 5 million years.

Now for the takeaway message.

Over the last 3 million years the Earth’s climate has undergone at least 60 naturally driven Ice Age cycles, each accompanied by major changes in sea level. As the temperature changes, so does the CO2 level. Over very long time scales it is apparent that the Earth is gradually cooling, but the amplitude of the cycle changes is of the same order, ie the peak warm period are almost as warm as it was 3 million years ago, before gradually sinking back into the next Ice Age. Critically it is vital to understand that the warm peaks of this natural glacial cycle always coincide with a peak CO2 level of not more than 300ppm.

Normally these changes take place over many tens of thousands of years. Human’s however have taken CO2 from about 280ppm pre-Industrial to almost 400ppm in around 100 years. In geological/climatic terms this time scale is less than an eye-blink, it is a massive, virtually instantaneous, shock to the system. The last time the Earth’s climate had this much CO2 in it was about 3 million years ago, when the climate was 5-6 degC warmer, there was no ice at either pole, and sea level was about 100m higher than present. The major reason why this has not already happened is that the oceans represent a monstrous thermal mass, and the time lag for them to respond will be in the order of many hundreds of years, but respond they inevitably will. And it is the warming oceans that melt the Antarctic Ice shelves.

The ANDRILL sediments clearly show that during the warm periods the Antarctic oceans were full of algae blooms and the sea temperature was at least 5 degC. No ice existed in Antarctica during these warm inter-glacial periods. None at all.

There are two Antarctic ice shelves. The Eastern Ice shelf (EAIS) is by far the larger, grounded mostly above sea level and considered relatively stable for the foreseeable future. The West Antarctic Ice Shelf (WAIS) is totally different. Much of it is grounded at depths of 1-2km below sea level.Therefore it is peculiarly exposed to the effects of warming oceans in a potentially unstable and difficult to predict fashion.

The current IPCC’s mainstream predictions of 0.5m sea level rise by 2100, and exclude melting of the Greenland and WAIS because at the time of publishing they considered the science around them too uncertain. The ANDRILL work has greatly reduced one aspect of that uncertainty. Alone the linearly projected melting of the WAIS will add another 0.5m of sea level rise to the IPCC figure. A total of 1m rise by 2100 is now considered a mainstream prediction in the community.

Worse still Naish and his colleagues are now faced with clear evidence that the WAIS does not necessarily melt in a linear fashion, rather it is prone to highly unstable events that could lead to massive breakups, potentially adding up to 3.2m of average sea level rise in quite short periods of time. And due to the way the earth’s gravitational field works, that average rise would not be distributed evenly over the earth’s surface; in some places like North America the rise could be up to 4.0m…within our, or our children’s, lifetimes.

In the longer run, CO2 over 400ppm commits the climate to a complete loss of the WAIS, Greenland and EAIS, totalling a sea level rise of about 100m. The evidence is now unassailable; a firm commitment to Copenhagen later this year is our last chance to act. Failure will bring only our grandchildren’s condemnation.

(And yes I took the train into town.)

100 comments on “Unassailable Evidence”

  1. lprent 1

    Great post. Makes me feel like I was there.

    So they have established that the WAIS breakups tend to be rapid. That is news. Should cause some severe changes in the ultra-conservative IPCC projections.

    We’re at 380ppm CO2 or there abouts now, ie 25% above what we have seen for millions of years, and the rate of increase is accelerating. We seem to have filled the CO2 buffers. My bet is that we will get a pretty sudden phase change at some point pretty soon.

    Hottopic had a post the other day about Nick Smith’s response to the science. Pathetic doesn’t even start to describe what I think of it.

  2. MynameisJack 2

    Nick Smith is a psycho pill popper.

  3. Marty G 3

    MNIJ. Enough of that. Contribute something substantial.

  4. outofbed 4

    What a fantastic post Red
    As the other elephant in the room is population growth
    it would appear that the Planet is about to sort that one out me thinks
    I wonder and worry what sort of world my future Great Grand children will live in.
    I will cycle to work today I think

  5. Shona 5

    Thanks for such a comprehensive explanation of WTF global warming is really doing to our fragile planet. Wish I’d been there ,once again I have cause to regret my choice to live provincially.Now to spread this info to local deniers.And petition the plonkers in the Beehive.

  6. Doug 6

    I find it interesting that two sedimentary geologists who worked so closely together can have such different conclusions on AGW.

    It is unfortunate that Bob Carter has hitched his star to denialist camp and in so doing is destroying is hard won scientific credibility, even to the point where he has turned his back on basic statistically analysis.

    See http://tamino.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/embarrassing-questions/

    It’s embarrassing

  7. RedLogix 7

    Tim mentioned Bob Carter with respect. He made it clear that while their professional opinions are very different, he is still happy to acknowledge the opportunities and experiences that Bob made possible for him.

  8. Ag 8

    I’m not sure what lectures like this are supposed to achieve.

    You can present all the evidence in the world, on the topics of 9/11, Barack Obama’s birthplace and climate change, and a large number of people will still believe in outlandish conspiracy theories. Any reasonable person was long ago persuaded that ACC is most likely occurring.

    The problem that faces governments now is how to eliminate the political influence of the deniers, and I don’t think that can be done by rational argument, not because there aren’t rational arguments in favour of ACC, but because deniers aren’t rational. That seems to me to be a much greater problem than proving that human caused climate change is occurring.

  9. I think the threat of US trade sanctions – which formed a part of their climate change response legislation – will do a lot to force NZ into action. Even the deniers seem to accept that it would be economically disastrous for NZ to do nothing, largely because of the impact on our Clean Green image.

    • Jasper 9.1

      Yes, our clean green image…

      Which is just that. An image portrayed to the world where in reality our waterways are dying, our native fish and eels are disappearing, our frogs are all but gone and rubbish abounds on our foreshore and seabed.

      Yes, our clean green image leaves a lot to be desired.

      As for Naish, good summation of the facts. What’s not explained is whether the pull of the moon will have bigger effects on the rise of the sea level in some areas, more than others. Tis not just the Earths tilt that affects where the rise may be more pronounced.

      I saw a movie some time ago that centered around Antarctica being the basis of the third world war given all that land that will be made available when the ice disappears. Overcrowded nations want a piece of that oh so nice Pie that’s already divided the antarctic territory – but much of the pie for some nations is largely only over ice, under which is ocean, not land. Not much use for resettling some citizens

  10. Pat 10

    I don’t think Climate Change Deniers are the problem. It seems to me that it is mis-directed to have an on-going effort to convince people that human-induced climate change is happening.

    Where the emphasis should be is on showing HOW changes like Emissions Trading Schemes will arrest the effects of climate change. I think there is a general skepticism that charging a farmer in NZ for his cow farting will save the habitat of the polar bear. I know this is a very simplistic example, but the point is most people accept what the problem is, but aren’t yet convinced by the proposed solutions.

    • jarbury 10.1

      It’s like the challenge of actually reducing our emissions by 2020 by anything at all, considering they’ve increased quite a lot in the past 19 years. We certainly aren’t going to achieve anything by continuing with the transport policies Steven Joyce has initiated over the last few months, or by building Gas Power Plants as Gerry Brownlee has made possible again.

    • lprent 10.2

      Personally I’m less concerned with saving other species habitats (important as that is) than I am in maintaining my habitat. The little bits of climate change in the last 10k years have been notable for causing vast migrations – that look like invasions. I’m especially thinking about the Mongols and the Vikings.

      Imagine those happening with nuclear weapons.

  11. Zaphod Beeblebrox 11

    The ‘tragedy of the commons’ scenario, where nobody has any motivation to do anything individually but we all do collectively points to the fact that action when it comes will come from a global initiative.

    The question will be then- what to do with those who free ride off the actions of the majority?

    Assuming a global consensus has to be reached to avoid our grandchildren living an impoverished existence, it is pretty obvious that economic sanctions (or even military ones in extreme circumstances) will be used. If the US, China, EC, and the rest of the G8 decide something has to be done who will be able to oppose them?

    Small countries like NZ will need consider this.

  12. To know the truth, the important activity is investigation; neither “denial” nor “belief” can be relied upon if the facts are unclear. The article is a good one, and the good professor appears to be doing good work, but on my reading it presents no evidence at all of causality.

    It only assumes, as many of the comments seem also to do, that CO2 causes and has caused the temperature increases, or part of them, or something it’s unstated, and so it’s unclear.

    To repeat: Prof Naish has presented no evidence of the causes of the present warming. In that regard, it is inconceivable that a gas (anthropogenic CO2) that constitutes only about 0.008% of the whole atmosphere is capable of governing the Earth’s climate.

    Thus it is incredible that so many shriek “the end is nigh” on such slender evidence.

    Cheers,
    Richard Treadgold,
    Convenor,
    Climate Conversation Group.

    • Maynard J 12.1

      Did you find it inconceivable that CFCs could affect the ozone layer?

      Do you find it inconceivable that such a tiny part of the atmosphere could have such a great impact?

      Your methodology is identical to those who deny the holocaust happened (where is the list of all six million Jews? The biggest I have seen is 30,000. It is inconcievable that so may died). I am NOT suggesting there is a moral equivalence between the two, but to use such discredited methodology is disgraceful.

      Not to mention you are damning an academic based upon an omission of evidence from a report of a presentation by a third party. Harldy doing yourself any favours on the credibility front.

      • CFCs affected the ozone layer, did they? I don’t know much about that. You are incorrect to say I find it inconceivable; I find it incredible.

        I didn’t mention the Holocaust.

        What methodology? I simply observe no evidence presented in the article for the present warming. It’s a true statement. I damn nobody.

        • Maynard J 12.1.1.1

          “CFCs affected the ozone layer, did they? I don’t know much about that. You are incorrect to say I find it inconceivable; I find it incredible.”

          Well thanks for clearing that up. Perhaps you should get in tune with the natural world and the ability of us folk to mess it up a bit more. It is an interesting example; in truth, I assume you are joking that you are not aware of it.

          No you did not mention the holocaust, I specifically said that you did not. I said you are using the same methodology of holocaust denial, which can be summed up as “one tiny part of a theory might not be true/is unproven = the entire theory is clearly false”.

          I was interested in your comment that antropogenic CO2 is 0.008% of the atmosphere and is too small to govern the climate. Seemed a simplistic statement so I thought I would find an example for you. Say I accept that quantity you specify, if not the outcome. Follow the below, if you will:

          Earth’s atmosphere is 5.1480×10(18)kg
          Sulfur ejecta from the 1815 Tambora eruption was 10×10(11)kg
          Seven orders of magnitude less.
          That is probably less than 0.0000001%, my computer’s calculator will not get it. Greater that eight decimal places anyway.

          Do you know what that tiny quantity of sunfur did? It caused the year without a summer. So your theory that we are not pumping out enough ‘stuff’ to affect the earth’s climate is clearly a simplistic assumption to say the least.

          Your website says you are all about facts – yet you fail in the simple analysis of a basic fact, you cannot understand its import. The phrase ‘credulous fool’ springs to mind.

          • Richard Treadgold 12.1.1.1.1

            Thank you, Maynard, for taking such trouble to reply.

            I assume you are joking that you are not aware of it.

            No, I said I didn’t know much about it. I’m also not convinced, though, that we caused much harm; for all our efforts, the ozone “hole” is still there, waxing and waning every year. Seems natural enough to me.

            Your “Holocaust” point is unclear, inconsistent and inappropriate.

            Good work on the volcano analogy, it’s interesting in its own way. But a colourless gas doesn’t react to sunlight in the same way as a dark, dusty, aerosol, does it? In that, your analogy breaks down right away, as the two substances are totally different from each other. You cannot refute what I said about CO2 on the basis of how sulphur particles behave. Oh, and carbon dioxide is 0.008% of the atmosphere by volume, not by mass (whatever difference that makes).

            “Credulous fool”? LOL. I suggest you pay more attention to what I write, not what you imagine about me. Use real intelligence: refute what I say.

            Cheers.

            • Maynard J 12.1.1.1.1.1

              You said: “it is inconceivable that a gas (anthropogenic CO2) that constitutes only about 0.008% of the whole atmosphere is capable of governing the Earth’s climate.”

              I showed that a substance several orders of magnitude less DID govern the earth’s climate. I accept that the substances are different, though it is possible the difference in orders of magnitude of difference could make up for that difference. Surely based upon such a concept you would be more opento the idea that CO2 could have an effect?

              Regarding Ozone, a man-made substance has a massive effect on part of the Earth’s atmosphere. There are plenty of examples, it is foolihs to think that we are too insignificant to have an effect.

              Out of interest, have you got a reference for the figure of 0.008%? I wonder how accurately one could compile cumulative Anthropogenic CO2 emissions for the last couple of centuries.

    • Sam Vilain 12.2

      The article is a good one, and the good professor appears to be doing good work, but on my reading it presents no evidence at all of causality.

      You’re barking up the wrong tree; directly supporting the AGW hypothesis was not the focus of his talk. It was more about showing how the geological record gives a very good picture of what has happened in the past, what this tells us about the dynamics of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet melting today, how much sea level rise that might contribute in the future, and how quickly.

      Now go run back under your denialist rock. Shoo! Shoo!

      • directly supporting the AGW hypothesis was not the focus of his talk.

        Perhaps not; I cannot comment on that. But the focus of the article certainly was:

        a firm commitment to Copenhagen later this year is our last chance to act. Failure will bring only our grandchildren’s condemnation.

        The science presented by Prof Naish is undoubtedly sound, and in accord with your summary of it. But (again) he presented no evidence as to the cause of the present warming. If the ice is melting, that says nothing about why it melts. So Copenhagen is unlikely to affect it.

        Cheers.

        • RedLogix 12.2.1.1

          I do not believe that I have at all misrepresented Prof Naish at all. He made it perfectly clear that excess human CO2 emissions were a major and potentially dangerous driver of climate change. While it is true that the focus of the lecture was around sea level change and it’s relationship to the Ice Ages, there was no question as to the underlying theme.

          If the ice is melting, that says nothing about why it melts.

          The Antarctic ice is melting because the oceans around it are warming. I would have hoped this assertion to be fairly non-controversial.

          • Richard Treadgold 12.2.1.1.1

            I do not believe that I have at all misrepresented Prof Naish at all.

            I don’t think I said that you did. Or are you also Sam Vilain? Even if you are, I still did not say that you misrepresented Naish.

            Prof Naish may well have made clear that “excess human CO2 emissions were a major and potentially dangerous driver of climate change”, but he did not, as quoted in the article, reveal any evidence for it.

            The Antarctic ice is melting because the oceans around it are warming. I would have hoped this assertion to be fairly non-controversial.

            Perhaps, at least as far as some of the coastal ice is concerned. It does not refer to the interior. But of course the implication is that the ocean has been warmed by anthropogenic CO2, and that is not in evidence.

            Cheers.

            • RedLogix 12.2.1.1.1.1

              Perhaps, at least as far as some of the coastal ice is concerned. It does not refer to the interior.

              The WAIS is of course grounded well below sea level, therefore it is all potentially exposed to the warming oceans. Moreover once the buttressing effect of the coastal ice shelves is gone, many of the interior glaciers will flow more rapidly.

              Over and above all this is the evidence of the ANDRILL cores, demonstrating that during the peak of the inter-glacial warm periods the WAIS has fully collapsed, the Antarctic oceans were full of algae blooms indicating sea temperatures over 5 degC, and sea levels were in the order of 70m higher than now. This strongly implies that EAIS must have collapsed as well. All this when the CO2 content was only 300ppm.

              But of course the implication is that the ocean has been warmed by anthropogenic CO2, and that is not in evidence.

              Prof Naish was hardly attempting to prove the AGW proposition; that has already been done by others. It was assumed as a given, and judging by the warm reception he was given, accepted as true by most of those 400-500 attending last night. What he was actually presenting was evidence of the consequences of our collective failure to act.

        • Sam Vilain 12.2.1.2

          But (again) he presented no evidence as to the cause of the present warming. If the ice is melting, that says nothing about why it melts.

          Mr Treadgold, the causes of the current warming are well known. We know the cause and we know who dunnit. That is taken for granted by Professor Naish, because unlike yourself he agrees with the consensus position. No doubt he reads peer reviewed science journals rather than whatever it is you read.

          He doesn’t need to demonstrate the causal link for every part of the scientific consensus position when he talks just for the benefit of denialists like yourself. He is just presenting his research and fitting it into the established consensus. To do otherwise would have detracted from his admirable inaugural lecture. It would be to speak outside of his field of expertise – something he was extremely careful not to do.

          Speaking outside of their field of expertise is the sort of thing you expect from climate cranks, not reputable scientists. I would hold that it is the very definition of reputable for a scientist, to only speak with authority about that which they have researched, and to investigate serious challenges to their findings, retracting or revising them if invalidated. If you don’t, you can expect to join the list of “cranks”.

    • lprent 12.3

      The short answer is that you need to do what I did and learn some science. In my case a BSc in earth sciences.

      Even do some 6th form physics. They will introduce the concepts of scattering, the effects of the third law of thermodynamics. I’m pretty sure that they deal with teh effect of positive feedback on steady state systems.

      Your statement makes absolutely no sense to anyone who does know some science. The problem is that even arguing with you makes no sense.

      I’ll propose an experiment for you (in the interests of experimental science). Get into a decompression unit and pump in an atmosphere without CO2. I predict that you’ll find that your body ‘forgets’ to breath through lack of CO2 to trigger the breathing response. I’d suggest that you don’t ignore it – you will die in your sleep (probably improving the species).

      Then ask yourself how such a ‘trace’ gas can have such a strong effect on you…

      • Yes, thanks for the advice, Iprent. I have done a little science. And well done, you; any degree takes effort.

        Which statement, exactly, makes no sense? I repeat that it is inconceivable that a gas (anthropogenic CO2) that constitutes only about 0.008% by volume of the whole atmosphere is capable of governing the Earth’s climate.

        If the climate is governed by positive feedback we’d not have made it this far and I suspect you know that.

        The experiment you propose moves the simile from thermal dynamics to chemistry, which is misleading. I agree that in chemistry minuscule quantities can be telling. But not in heat movement. There’s just not the mass required in 0.00008 of the atmosphere to DRIVE (my emphasis) the climate. At least, you’ll have to prove it to me.

        But I thank you for proposing it, for the experiment would confirm how vital carbon dioxide is to life itself, and yet we are in the process of calling it “dirty” and “banning” it. Stupid.

        Cheers.

        • Pascal's bookie 12.3.1.1

          “I repeat that it is inconceivable that a gas (anthropogenic CO2) that constitutes only about 0.008% by volume of the whole atmosphere is capable of governing the Earth’s climate.”

          Thanks for repeating this Richard. It shows that you take care with words, and consider them. A trait to be respected, generally speaking. Although of course sometimes people that take great care with words do so not for reasons of clarity, but obfuscation.

          I’m not sure what you mean by ‘governing’, but I’ll assume that you are not setting up some sort of strawman and mean something like:

          “… it is inconceivable that a gas (anthropogenic CO2) that constitutes only about 0.008% by volume of the whole atmosphere is capable of having the effects on the Earth’s climate that the AGW hypothesis would suggest.”

          Something like that at any rate. ‘That CO2 driven AGW is inconceivable because CO2 is such a small part of the atmosphere.’

          There are a number of problems here. CO2 is not the only problematic gas, so I’ll assume you are using shorthand. More importantly of course it is absolutely conceivable. It is the position taken by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists, and supported by the overwhelming majority of published research on the subject.

        • Sam Vilain 12.3.1.2

          There’s just not the mass required in 0.00008 of the atmosphere to DRIVE (my emphasis) the climate. At least, you’ll have to prove it to me.

          Heh, love this. Did you know you are disputing the most empirically testable part of the theory? Why, it was in 1859 that John Tyndall first proved via experiments that COâ‚‚ was an important gas in the atmosphere for absorbing infrared radiation.

          May I stand on the shoulders of giants, and refer you to the 1932 paper The Infrared Absorption Spectrum of Carbon Dioxide. Martin, P.E., and E.F. Baker. Physical Review 41: 291-303. This paper was specifically reviewed by Smith, R.N., et al. (1968). Detection and Measurement of Infra-Red Radiation. Oxford: Clarendon.

          There is an excellent discussion of this topic in The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect, should you care to actually read scientific literature.

  13. gingercrush 13

    So is The Standard or at least some of its authors adopting something similar to the Greens in that they want a 40% cut in emissions outside agriculture and a 20% cut in agriculture emissions. And what is Labour’s position on emission targets?

  14. Pat 14

    The great irony is that the National government is best placed to settle what is probably the two most controversial pieces of legislation – the Seabed and Foreshore Act and an Emissions Trading Scheme. The far Right can bitch and moan about a centrist Key, but they are hardly going to vote him out. And the Left are hardly going to veto any reasonable legislation that addresses these two issues.

    Unless Goff takes Trotter’s advice and reaches out to Labour’s natural coalition partner, NZ First. Personally I think Goff would rather chew off his own arm rather than extend it to Winston.

    • Maynard J 14.1

      Of course he is best placed – hard to get these things done from teh opposition and it is easy to stump up with a weakened ETS when you do not really think it will be of any use.

      And Winston? What are you (well not you, Trotter I suppose, I do not know what he said at this point) getting at there, that Labour is naturally xenophobic, nationalist etc? Not sure I see the connection he would have made – what is it? The best thing Goff can do is oppose where National does something that is in contradiction to the actions Labour would take in identical circumstances. Weakened ETS – call for a stronger one. Hardly need Winnie for that.

      • Pat 14.1.1

        Trotter ruminates on Bowalley Road. Google it.

        • Maynard J 14.1.1.1

          I was being lazy and hoping for a precis ;)

          • Lew 14.1.1.1.1

            MJ,

            Here you go, then: “Winston Peters represents the new coffee-coloured NZ, and Labour should join forces with him to defeat the baby-roasting Nats and the spit-turning Hori Tories.”

            L

  15. GC Martin 15

    Nice item RL. Well explained. Thanks..

    Like Doug above my brow beetled some at mention the carter stable, but as he says Naish went one way, Bob the other—yet, seemingly, so stubborn with it!

  16. Professor Naish’s talk provides the following facts:
    Over the last 3 million years there have been 60 naturally occuring ice age cycles.
    During the interglacial periods CO2 atmospheric levels do not rise above 300 ppm.
    As temperature changes so does CO2.

    No Causal relationship is established between increasing temperature and CO2 and this must be established before any deductions on the effect of increasing CO2 concentrations above 300 ppm can be made.

    It is indeed unfortunate that “Doug” should label Professor Bob Carter a denialist, having studied under Prof Carter I can state that he is a scientist first and foremost and if scientific evidence points to man-induced global warming he would be the first to support actions to mitigate its effects, the fact that he does not support such actions should give us all pause to consider the facts.

    • Gareth 16.1

      No causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature?

      So, you are not aware of the radiative behaviour of CO2? That this has been measured with great precision, modelled accurately, and theoretically explained down to the quantum level. Perhaps you are also unaware of the fact that we started to understand CO2′s role in warming the planet as early as Fourier and Tyndall in the early to mid 1800s?

      If we didn’t know all this, heat-seeking missiles wouldn’t work.

      They do.

      Bob Carter may once have been a good scientist – and may still be, when he sticks to his speciality – but when it comes to the science of climate his efforts are little more than lies and propaganda.

  17. Greg 17

    Temperature leads or follows?

    I thought that previous ice-core data showed that the climatic temperature increases preceded the increase in CO2?

    What did Naish’s core data show? or did he not have good enough resolution to determine this? The article seems to completely omit this crucial point of causality.

    • RedLogix 17.1

      Greg,

      The lead or follow argument has been discussed in many places. Plenty of detailed explanations can be found. But put simply, global temperature and atmospheric CO2 are mutually coupled together. In other words, causality between these two variables does not run one way, but both ways.

      This means that in a naturally driven Milankovitch orbital cycle, the temperature is changing because the amount of summer radiation arriving (particulaly in the Northern Hemisphere where the major ice sheets grow) varies. If the temperature changes then the CO2 content follows exactly, with a small time lag of some hundreds of years. The effect is well known.

      But this does not mean that causality only runs from temperature to CO2 content. Equally if the CO2 content was forced to change (which does not occur naturally in the absence of human activity) then the temperature will be forced to follow… with exactly the kind of small time lag that we are observing.

      The physics exactly supports this mutually reinforcing ‘positive feedback’ mechanism. And as an engineer who works with feedback loops all the time, this kind mutually coupled model is pretty much bread and butter stuff.

      • lprent 17.1.1

        The problem with positive feedback loops (as a programmer I work with them all of the time as well), is that they are pretty damn dangerous. Unlike a negative feedback loop which self-corrects, a positive feedback loop tends to spin out of control pretty damn fast once it gets past some limits.

        If you look back in geological time (another hat) you can see lots of evidence of this. In particular having continental areas drift into the polar regions causes ice ages like the one we have been in for the last 40 odd million years. The buildup of ice causes world temperature to drop. It also starts severe glacials based on solar insolation and probably volcanic outgassing. We get warm periods due to the same.

        All of those natural things are irrelevant in this case, because we are making a warm period warmer. A *LOT* warmer. This will cause climate change. In some areas it will get cooler due to sea and air current changes. Most areas will get warmer. Some will get more water and some get less.

        The point is that there will be severe climate change.

        Severe climate change does nasty things to farming. Crops fail and people starve. Not to mention land going under water. Wars get started.

        Our civilisation was built on climate stability. I don’t think that it could survive a 5C change upwards (or downwards) in temperature. I don’t think that it can stand 2C

  18. RedLogix:

    Prof Naish was hardly attempting to prove the AGW proposition; that has already been done by others. It was assumed as a given.

    So, finally, you agree when I say that no evidence for the current warming was given. Good.

    [lprent: You just walked into troll territory with that statement. That was not what he said at all. Claiming 'victory' is a style of 'debate' that we do not tolerate on this site. It starts pointless flamewars. Read the policy. Banned for two weeks. ]

    [deleted]

    • Well, that was unexpected. Harsh, too. I just read the policy. No warning, then?

      [lprent: Not for that particular tactic. It is usually a precursor to flamewar outbreaks. ]

      [deleted]

      This is the first time I’ve been here and I’m not impressed with your welcome.

      [lprent: The rules here are pretty loose and leaves a lot of room for debate. The penalties tend to the draconian to assist people in self-moderation. You either get used to them or leave. Check your e-mail. ]

  19. Bob D 19

    I have to agree with Richard Treadgold and Peter Gunn. Look carefully at what is being presented. The statement is made “As the temperature changes, so does the CO2 level.” This is true – it has been known for many years that temperature drives CO2, not the other way around. So something drives up the temperature, and CO2 follows.

    Now there is suddenly a logic jump. We are told “In the longer run, CO2 over 400ppm commits the climate to a complete loss of the WAIS, Greenland and EAIS, totalling a sea level rise of about 100m.” How did that just happen? ‘Temp causes CO2′ has morphed into ‘CO2 causes temp’! Not only that, we are even given a quantitative value of 400ppm.

    How was this done? A simple technique of logic swapping, using this correct but logically irrelevant statement: “The last time the Earth’s climate had this much CO2 in it was about 3 million years ago, when the climate was 5-6 degC warmer”. Very neat, but actually nothing has been proven. The earth was hot. CO2 was high. We know CO2 follows T. So what? It doesn’t follow that if CO2 rises, temperature rises. Al Gore produced the same rabbit out of a hat in his movie. Watch it again, you’ll see where he does exactly the same thing. You simply cannot deduce that CO2 drives temperature using the geological record.

    In reality the only basis for CO2-induced warming comes from Arrhenius’ initial and purely theoretical calculations, and most people (including the IPCC) quote the 1896 paper where he calculated (crudely) that a doubling of CO2 will cause about a 5-6 deg C increase.

    However, by 1906 he had access to the black-body laws, and he re-worked his theory as follows (from the German): “I calculate in a similar way, that a decrease in the concentration of carbonic acid [CO2] by half or a doubling would be equivalent to changes of temperature of -1.5 C or +1.6 C respectively.” (Svante Arrhenius, 1906, Die vermutliche Ursache der Klimaschwankungen, Meddelanden frÃ¥n K. Vetenskapsakademiens Nobelinstitut, Vol 1 No 2, pages 110)
    Note that even this is once again a purely theoretical hypothesis and has never been proven in the case of the Earth’s atmosphere.

    In other words, the oft-quoted 5 or 6 degree rise for doubling of CO2 is not supported even by the father of the theory. Only by inventing unproven and unquantified “positive feedbacks” due to water vapour can any hope of runaway warming be maintained.

    Also, where is the fabled tropical tropospheric hot spot? It wasn’t mentioned in the article, but AR4 clearly shows its expected presence in chapter 9 (fig 9.1). However it remains strangely elusive in the real world. Without the hotspot, the theory is in trouble. Even Ben Santer admits this.

    And someone needs to explain how the oceans are storing thermal energy while both their temperature and the atmosphere’s temperature continue to decline.

    Every year we see temperatures falling as CO2 rises. The current temperature fall in NZ is 0.2C per decade, since 2001. That’s a FALL of the same magnitude as the RISE is supposed to be (according to the IPCC AR4). For most of this year we have been below the long-term average. And that’s in essentially ENSO-neutral conditions.

    The question has to be asked: Why would people strive so hard to create this apocalyptic scenario, and never accept that there is any doubt? What is driving this need for a catastrophic future? The physics don’t support it, and neither do the observations of the planet’s past or current climate responses.

    ‘Unassailable evidence’? I’m not so sure.

    • Sam Vilain 19.1

      My, what a lot of tired old talking points.

      This is true it has been known for many years that temperature drives CO2, not the other way around. So something drives up the temperature, and CO2 follows.

      They are co-dependent variables in equilibrium. Influence one, and the other changes.

      In reality the only basis for CO2-induced warming comes from Arrhenius’ initial and purely theoretical calculations

      This is simply not true; refer to the earlier link I posted for more references to the vast research in this area. It took until people looked at precise absorption spectra in low pressure that this was understood. Circa 1930s-1950.

      Also, where is the fabled tropical tropospheric hot spot? It wasn’t mentioned in the article, but AR4 clearly shows its expected presence in chapter 9 (fig 9.1).

      You’re so far off topic it hurts. Ok, so you’ve pointed to some prediction of the global climate models. Great. So, er, I suppose you’ve got some data to back up your challenge? You’re lucky enough to get fisked, but I’m not going to do your digging for you.

      Every year we see temperatures falling as CO2 rises. The current temperature fall in NZ is 0.2C per decade, since 2001.

      There hasn’t been a decade since 2001 yet.

      Why would people strive so hard to create this apocalyptic scenario, and never accept that there is any doubt?

      It took the world over a century to accept it, by now there really is no doubt.

  20. RedLogix 20

    Evidence must exist; evidence cannot arrive from the future.

    Projections of the future are always based on knowledge of past behaviour. In the past whenever the planet’s CO2 content is sustained over 300ppm for any significant period of time, the polar ice all melts, the sea level rises 70-100m higher than today, and the global temperature is 5-6 degC higher than now. Negative cloud feedback seems to have not prevented this from happening.

    There is your evidence of past behaviour, and from that future predictions can be made. But projections are never proof, and those who demand proof of future AGW warming before acting, are indulging in a dishonest prevarication. You demand the impossible to obfuscate your real desire for ‘business as usual’ inaction.

    So, finally, you agree when I say that no evidence for the current warming was given.

    None was needed. Prof Naish’s specialty is the history of sea level changes as correlated to past climate change. All science is built upon the work of others; and in a 1:20hr lecture it is not required to demonstrate every piece of science from first principles.

    Yet I can understand your bafflement. If I were to attend a lecture on say, a new type of semiconductor, but I obdurately refused to understand or accept the basics of quantum mechanics… then I am sure the lecture would be a waste of time for all concerned.

    There is a crank constituency who can be found to vociferously denounce almost any fundamental premise of modern science. Mostly they are ignored because no-one cares. Unfortunately in the case of AGW they get an audience because many people with no science background, and deeply addicted to their motor cars, want to believe the happy nonsense you are peddling.

    • I’d like to reply, but I am told I am prevented.

      Cheers.

    • Moderator: For your change of heart, I thank you.

      RedLogix (now that I can reply):

      As Bob D points out below, there are severe problems in taking the article you reference as proof of the cause of warming.

      I don’t demand proof before action and you are wrong to assert without evidence that I do, but I do demand reason. So far, the amount of warming reasonably expected from increases in atmospheric CO2 is too small to be concerning.

      In addition, we know far too little about the climate even to explain the small 20th century fluctuations, which throws doubt on the culpability of CO2. Those, like the IPCC, who assign the warming periods to CO2 (and overlook the cooling periods) do so just because they cannot think of any other credible possibility.

      But a guess, however high a likelihood one places on it, is still not evidence.

      You’re right in pointing out that in a brief lecture one must leave some science as given, otherwise one would never move forward. However my first remark that the article contained no evidence for human-caused warming was correct, so I was puzzled that you and others seemed to contest it.

      You have, though, read too much into it, going off on a tangent about refusing to accept the basics and offering the ad hominem barbs of cranks denouncing scientific principles and peddling happy nonsense.

      In going for the man not the argument, are you not flirting with the site’s moderators?

      The point being that, when the evidence is inadequate, simply being presented with it multiple times does not improve it. You should accept that fact and try not to attack those who fail to grasp your excellent truth at first sight.

      Cheers.

  21. Maynard J:

    I showed that a substance several orders of magnitude less DID govern the earth’s climate. I accept that the substances are different, though it is possible the difference in orders of magnitude of difference could make up for that difference. Surely based upon such a concept you would be more opento the idea that CO2 could have an effect?

    Yes, but for only a short time and by a different process. They are not equivalent or comparable. Everybody from the IPCC up acknowledges that CO2 by itself will cause only about 0.6°C (I think) more warming by 2100. The rest is claimed from water vapour.

    CO2 has an effect on temperature; I disagree it is responsible for all the present warming. I am open to anything that is demonstrably true. Just demonstrate it.

    I don’t know about the accuracy of the anthropogenic contributions so I cannot argue with them. I am aware there is strong disagreement over the lifetime of CO2 in the atmosphere, ranging between about two years to several centuries. Anthropogenic CO2 is about 20% of total atmospheric CO2, which is only 387ppmv. Bloody tiny.

    Data on atmospheric constituents from Earth Fact Sheet, by NASA. Taken from http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/earthfact.html on 30 June 2009.

    Data on CO2 quantities and anthropogenic contribution from Gary W. Harding, taken from http://www.strom.clemson.edu/becker/prtm320/commons/carbon3.html on 30 June 2009.

    I think that’s what you need; I calculated the figure from that. One warning – you have to convert at some stage between mass of carbon and mass of carbon dioxide and I think the factor is in Wikipedia. Let me know if you need more info.

    Cheers.

    [lprent: Let through as it arrived while I was moderating.]

    • Draco T Bastard 21.1

      http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/13037.html

      Pagani says, “It is a stunning example of carbon dioxide-induced global warming and stands in contrast to critics who argue that the Earth’s temperature is insensitive to increases in carbon dioxide.”

      There you go, demonstrated.

      • Bob D 21.1.1

        Not a very convincing demonstration. The study (written in 2006) simply shows that 55 million years ago the temperature was high, and CO2 was high at the same time. Duh. They then make the staggering assumption that the CO2 caused the temperature rise! No proof is provided, and in fact the assumption makes no sense at all.

        To quote from the article:
        “However, scientists have not been able to understand just how much carbon was responsible for the temperature increase and where it came from.”
        That’s the problem, you see, when you get things backwards. If the CO2 caused the temperature increase, where did the CO2 come from? On the other hand, if the temperature caused the CO2 increase (it did) then it’s obvious where the CO2 came from – the oceans.

        • Draco T Bastard 21.1.1.1

          Unfortunately, it’s not the full study where, I would assume, they point out that all other means of natural warming have been eliminated (Solar and earths orbit). They wouldn’t be able to say the things they did in that article unless they had. It’s like Holmes says – “Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, then what remains, no matter how improbable, is the answer.”

          Your assertion that the temperature rose first is in error.

  22. Maynard J 22

    Two general thoughts on thise intent on disproving the relationship between CO2 and increased temperatures:

    It appears the proof you want is one that will most likely be provided when it is too late to do anything about it. What level of proof would be required for you to see the obvious need to take action?

    You argue that rising temperatures could have caused the release of CO2, not the other way around. What, then, do you propose as the factor for these temperature increases? In the absence of another geological, or other physical constant, CO2 remains the only valid cause, given it is present in increased concentration at every instance of global warming.

    If you argue that it does not cause the initial increase in temperature, but is a feature that sustains it, then in this case why does the factor that causes CO2 to maintain an increase in temperatures not apply?

    There are two ways of looking at it – why do you persist in arguing for the least likely?

    • Bob D 22.1

      “CO2 remains the only valid cause, given it is present in increased concentration at every instance of global warming.”
      We don’t have definitive data from 55 million years ago, so we just don’t know what the cause was. We can deduce this or conjecture that, but to state that we don’t know, therefore it MUST be CO2 is not scientific. And CO2 is present in increased concentration during warming periods because it’s a natural consequence of warming. The oceans give off more CO2 when they’re warmer.

      “If you argue that it does not cause the initial increase in temperature, but is a feature that sustains it, then in this case why does the factor that causes CO2 to maintain an increase in temperatures not apply?”
      I didn’t argue that at all. I said that something unknown caused the temperature to rise, and that caused the CO2 rise. I said nothing about CO2 then sustaining the rise. It may have had a minor effect, but clearly the main forcing that caused the rise in the first place happened regardless of CO2. When the unknown forcing was removed after 170,000 years, the temperature dropped again, and the higher CO2 concentration was unable to prevent it. Clearly the CO2 concentration has little effect on the climate as a whole.

      “There are two ways of looking at it why do you persist in arguing for the least likely?”
      It’s not the least likely, it’s the most likely. We know there is a correlation between T and CO2 in the geological records. We know temperature rise occurs before CO2 rise. We know warmer oceans produce more CO2. Ergo, it’s reasonable to suppose that temperature rise causes CO2 rise. What we CAN’T argue from this is that CO2 rise causes T to rise, simply because of the order in which they occur.

      So as I said, arguing from the geological records alone, you can’t make a strong case for AGW. All that’s left is models based on Arrhenius.

  23. RedLogix 23

    Bob,

    I spent much of my thirties running and calibrating infrared absorption instruments. Very precisely. We were primarily calibrating for water content, but the presence of other molecules was always apparent and had to be accounted for, even in quite minute amounts. So whenever I read someone who dismisses the existence of CO2 infrared absorption, something that I have frequently seen with my own eyes, I do tend to be rather surprised.

    The primary greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vapour (~60%), the secondary gas is CO2 (~10-25%), with methane and others contributing a portion. In the absence of all these gases the temperature of the Earth would be about -30degC cooler. Therefore we know that the greenhouse effect is, and always has been, a vital component of the climate.

    For some reason while infrared absorption by water molecules is considered by deniers a perfectly natural and legitimate thing that keeps the planet much warmer than it would be otherwise; yet when the same photons are absorbed by CO2 gas…. we get told “They then make the staggering assumption that the CO2 caused the temperature rise!”

    If you are going to tell me that CO2 infrared absorption has no effect, then you will also have to equally dismiss the same infrared absorption of the H2O molecule. You simply cannot have one, without the other.

    • John Nicol 23.1

      RedLogix,

      I believe you are misreading the comment regarding the influence of carbon dioxide on the global temperature. No one seriously questions the simularity between water vapour and carbon dioxide in warming the planet to the liveable level we enjoy, apart from the fact that withoput CO2 the planet would still obviously be warm enough to live brcause of the ffect of water vapour,but we would be without an essential sutainer of life, vizz CO2. What we claim is that increasing CO2 will not now cause a significant increase in temperature because the level of CO2 is already above a threshold of “saturation” in its warming effect.

      John Nicol

    • Bob D 23.2

      “So whenever I read someone who dismisses the existence of CO2 infrared absorption, something that I have frequently seen with my own eyes, I do tend to be rather surprised.”
      I’m not sure why you feel I dismiss the existence of CO2 infrared absorption; I certainly do not. We know that CO2 absorbs and then re-emits IR, as does H20 and other bipolar molecules in our atmosphere. Some of this IR escapes to space, while some is re-absorbed by other GHG molecules etc.

      However, it’s still quite a leap from there to catastrophic global warming.

      The issue has always been the quantification of the effect as it applies to our atmosphere. To date the IPCC has preferred a high sensitivity, and its models therefore show a high degree of warming due to increased CO2. A large portion of the warming is also due to water vapour ‘positive feedback’. Note that this is unquantified to date and is simply an assumption. This, together with the absolute value of the sensitivity to CO2, constitutes the weakest points of the IPCC position.

      The best way to judge the performance of the IPCC models is to check them against observations. There are two direct ways to do this. The first is the hot spot I mentioned before. AR4 is clear on this point – the tropical troposphere is expected to warm relative to the surface due to greenhouse gas effects, and should have shown a large hot-spot over the tropics by now (a magnitude of just less than 1C is shown in fig. 9.1). Trouble is there is no hot spot. In fact the region of interest has cooled slightly.

      The second measurable is surface or lower tropospheric temperature. This should rise according to a simple log law as CO2 increases. The IPCC AR4 suggests a rise of about 0.2C/decade. Note that AR4 was published in 2007, based on models run before 2001. However, since 2001 we have seen a decrease in the lower tropospheric temperature. UAH, which measures this directly by satellite, reports a -0.2C/decade trend since 2001. All the while CO2 has continued to rise.

      This immediately implies something is wrong with the models. They are based on a high sensitivity to CO2, and assume positive water vapour feedbacks. I submit that this could be their failing.

      My point in all this is that, contrary to some commentators’ opinions above, there is in fact plenty of room for scepticism on this issue of AGW. The evidence is far from ‘unassailable’.

      • lprent 23.2.1

        Or better yet, test the model against observations on the ground. The whole point about the greenhouse effect isn’t what it does in the troposphere. It is what it does on the ground and in the oceans.

        These show considerable warming in the arctic regions, especially as massive thinning of sea ice, increasing heat being adsorbed in the oceans, etc etc. (see http://www.realclimate.org) Conformant to the IPCC models except a hell of a lot faster.

        Sure the models are incorrect – every model always is. There is simply too much data to handle for anything except in aggregate – including for a single electron. Quantum theory is a probabilistic, not detirministic system. We left all of those old certainties about models behind at the start of last century. We leave that kind of certainties for those with religious faith.

        What you are doing is nit-picking. You are asserting that few little bits of the model are experimentally wrong – without bothering to link to the papers. I’m asserting there is a lot more of the models that are incorrect. However the overall models are holding up pretty well – just too conservative.

        Given the scale of the potential problem, there seems bugger all point in getting aa perfect model about the time we are 100 metres under water.

        • Bob D 23.2.1.1

          You say: “The whole point about the greenhouse effect isn’t what it does in the troposphere. It is what it does on the ground and in the oceans.”
          The IPCC AR4 spends the majority of its time on discussions regarding CO2 and its affect on the troposphere. The CO2 concentration is itself of course in the atmosphere. So is the water vapour that is supposed to amplify the warming. I’m surprised you discount it so readily.

          But since you wish suddenly to discuss only the ground and oceans, let’s look at what’s been happening there since the latest IPCC reports (AR4 and TAR).

          Regarding the ground, I’m not sure we have data for this. You see, ‘surface’ measurements aren’t actually in the ground, but instead they’re 1.5m above it, in (you guessed it) the lower troposphere.

          For the oceans, however, we do have some temperature data, although sketchy until 2003, when the Argo buoys were deployed. They immediately showed ocean cooling, and have done so ever since.

          Regarding ocean heat content, this has also been declining. See “Recent cooling of the upper ocean”, by
          John M. Lyman(Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, NOAA, Seattle, Washington, USA); Josh K. Willis (Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA); Gregory C. Johnson (Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, NOAA, Seattle, Washington, USA)
          A quote from JPL:
          “The recent changes in ocean temperature run deep. A small amount of cooling was detected at the ocean’s surface, consistent with global measurements of sea-surface temperature. The maximum amount of cooling was at a depth of 400 meters (about 1,300 feet), but substantial cooling was still observed at 2,500 feet, and the cooling appears to extend deeper.
          Lyman said the cause of the recent cooling is not yet clear. Research suggests it may be due to a net loss of heat from the Earth. “Further work will be necessary to solve this cooling mystery,” he said.”

          You say: “These show considerable warming in the arctic regions, especially as massive thinning of sea ice, increasing heat being adsorbed in the oceans, etc etc.”

          Regarding the Arctic, this region has long been known to exhibit cyclic variability. The NW passage was navigable on several occasions in the early 20th century. We really don’t have enough knowledge of the history of climate change in this region to make sweeping assumptions about the current situation. There was a low point in the summer melt in 2007, but last year it recovered considerably. Of course, melting Arctic ice doesn’t contribute to sea level rise anyway, since it’s floating.

          I’m not sure what you mean by massive thinning of the ice. A recent survey by the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polarand Marine Research showed different results. “The result is surprising. The sea-ice in the surveyed areas is apparently thicker than scientists had suspected. Normally, ice is newly formed after two years, over two meters thick. “Here were ice thickness up to four meters,” said a spokesman of Bremerhaven’s Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research.”

          You say: “Conformant to the IPCC models except a hell of a lot faster.”
          I have no idea what you mean:-
          The sea level rise has slowed dramatically, see “A new assessment of the error budget of global mean sea level rate estimated by satellite altimetry over 19932008″; M. Ablain, A. Cazenave, G. Valladeau, and S. Guinehut; Ocean Sci., 5, 193201, 2009.
          A quote from the Conclusions: “These new calculations highlight a reduction in the rate of sea level rise since 2005, by ~2 mm/yr. This represents a 60% reduction compared to the 3.3 mm/yr sea level rise (glacial isostatic adjustment correction applied) measured between 1993 and 2005.”

          The global temperature is falling at -0.2C/decade, the same rate it was supposed to be rising at according to the IPCC (UAH satellite data).

          The ocean heat content is falling at −0.35 (±0.2) × 10^22 Joules per year, see:
          “Cooling of the Global Ocean Since 2003″; Loehle, Craig; Energy & Environment, Volume 20, Numbers 1-2, January 2009 , pp. 101-104(4)

          In the Antarctic, the ice is growing at above-average levels, and has been for a while now. See NSIDC for the latest. So no hope for sea level rise from here either.

          And finally, you say: “…about the time we are 100 metres under water.”
          I presume you’re joking. Even the IPCC has a modest 58cm worst case sea level rise by 2100. To reach that 58cm, by the way, we’ll have to achieve an annual sea level rise of 6.2mm/yr, starting immediately, and maintain it for 91 years. Difficult to do when ocean heat is declining along with declining temperatures, especially as NZ’s current rise is 1.5mm/yr, according to NIWA.

          • Gareth 23.2.1.1.1

            The misdirection is great in this one, Luke…

            The NW passage was navigable on several occasions in the early 20th century.

            For definitions of navigable that include the three years it took Amundsen to make the first passage east to west in 1907. Other 20th passages were by icebreaker. For the last few years, people have been sailing through in yachts…

            I\’m not sure what you mean by massive thinning of the ice.
            It’s what the people studying the ice tell us, and I quote:

            scientists found that overall Arctic sea ice thinned about 7 inches a year, for a total of 2.2 feet over four winters. The total area covered by the thicker, older “multi-year” ice that has survived one or more summers shrank by 42 percent.

            .

            And ocean warming continues (see Levitus et al, 2009).

            The informal consensus on projections of sea level rise over the next century now runs around 1m. For a good overview of the science, instead of an argument from incredulity, see this weeks New Scientist.

            • Bob D 23.2.1.1.1.1

              “Other 20th passages were by icebreaker. For the last few years, people have been sailing through in yachts ”
              True, some did get help from ice-breakers. Some didn’t:
              St Roch, 1940 and 1944
              Also, from Wikipedia:
              “In June 1977, sailor Willy de Roos left Belgium to attempt the Northwest Passage in his 13.8 m (45 ft) steel yacht Williwaw. He reached the Bering Strait in September and after a stopover in Victoria, British Columbia, went on to round Cape Horn and sail back to Belgium, thus being the first sailor to circumnavigate the Americas entirely by ship.

              “In 1984, the commercial passenger vessel MS Explorer (which sank in the Antarctic Ocean in 2007) became the first cruise ship to navigate the Northwest Passage.

              “In July 1986, Jeff MacInnis and Wade Rowland set out on an 18 foot catamaran called Perception on a 100 day sail, West to East, across the Northwest Passage. This pair is the first to sail the passage, although they had the benefit of doing over a couple summers.

              “In July 1986, David Scott Cowper set out from England in a 12.8 m (42 ft) lifeboat, the Mabel El Holland, and survived 3 Arctic winters in the Northwest Passage before reaching the Bering Strait in August 1989. He then continued around the world via the Cape of Good Hope to arrive back on 24 September 1990, becoming the first vessel to circumnavigate the world via the Northwest Passage.”

              Remember, the Arctic region exhibits great cyclic variation. Don’t get caught out by looking at one or two year events and assuming the worst. On top of that, remember that during the Little Ice Age global temperatures were below average. From about 1850 onwards temperatures have been climbing slowly. It’s therefore not surprising that on average the Arctic is warmer than it was when records began in the middle of the 19th century. We would expect the NW passage to be navigable more often. The link with CO2 and man is however, tenuous at best, and certainly unproven.

              Here’s another interesting quote:
              “”It will without doubt have come to your Lordship’s knowledge that a considerable change of climate, inexplicable at present to us, must have taken place in the Circumpolar Regions, by which the severity of the cold that has for centuries past enclosed the seas in the high northern latitudes in an impenetrable barrier of ice has been during the last two years, greatly abated .

              ‘Mr. Scoresby, a very intelligent young man who commands a whaling vessel from Whitby observed last year that 2000 square leagues of ice with which the Greenland Seas between the latitudes of 74° and 80°N have been hitherto covered, has in the last two years entirely disappeared. The same person who has never been before able to penetrate to the westward of the Meridian of Greenwich in these latitudes was this year able to proceed to 10°, 30′W where he saw the coast of East Greenland and entertained no doubt of being able to reach the land had not his duty to his employers made it necessary for him to abandon the undertaking.

              “This, with information of a similar nature derived from other sources; the unusual abundance of ice islands that have during the last two summers been brought by currents from Davies Streights (sic) into the Atlantic.

              “The ice which has this year surrounded the northern coast of Ireland ( see footnotes1) in unusual quantity and remained there unthawed till the middle of August, with the floods which have during the whole summer inundated all those parts of Germany where rivers have their sources in snowy mountains.

              ” .. this affords ample proof that new sources of warmth have been opened and give us leave to hope that the Arctic Seas may at this time be more accessible than they have been for centuries past, and that discoveries may now be made in them not only interesting to the advancement of science but also to the future intercourse of mankind and the commerce of distant nations.’

              President of the Royal Society, London, to the Admiralty, 20th November, 1817, Minutes of Council, Volume 8. pp.149-153, Royal Society, London. 20th November, 1817

              Remember, in 1817 they were just coming out of the Little Ice Age.

          • lprent 23.2.1.1.2

            I’m surprised you discount it so readily.
            …since you wish suddenly to discuss only the ground and oceans…

            Wrong – please keep track of whom you’re talking to. I’m interested in observational effects at the ground level past and present. Never been that interested in physics which is why I did earth sciences for my first degree.

            The sea level rise has slowed dramatically

            Please use your brains… You’re talking about a punctuated system running on a long time scale. Of course you get short periods where the rate of increase slows. It doesn’t stop the process running. It just allows time for fools to do the ostrich thing.

            Sea level has many effects acting on it. In this case the two effects of major interest are thermal expansion and ice melt, the latter being potentially the larger. We get melt rises primarily when we get large ice masses melting off land. To date most of the ice masses melting have been floating. They make little difference to sea level.

            I presume you’re joking.

            Nope. The world has been there before when it has been iceless. At present I can’t see anything that would stop the CO2/CH4 causing a increase in energy retention and shifting us to something like a Cretacous climate. All I can see is questions about how long it will take.

            IMO The IPCC data is wholly out of date and blatantly optimistic in the light of subsequent research on Greenland and WAIS melt history.

            Which brings us back to Naish’s lecture showing that the WAIS disappears under the slightest climatic provocation. There is a hell of a lot of water stored on land there. Looking at the WAIS and Greenland data at present it looks to me like both of those are likely to go within decades. I can’t see anything that would stop that happening.

            Then we have you. As I said earlier. By the time that you think that the models are good enough to predict from, we’d be a 100 metres under water. Perhaps you’d better define what would convince you to shift to thinking that climate change is real and happening? Then we can look at that and decide you if are just a nutter?

            • Bob D 23.2.1.1.2.1

              Thank you for your gracious reply:
              “The sea level rise has slowed dramatically
              Please use your brains You’re talking about a punctuated system running on a long time scale. Of course you get short periods where the rate of increase slows. It doesn’t stop the process running. It just allows time for fools to do the ostrich thing.”
              However, that’s just my point. Look at this graph
              Sea level rise over the 20th century
              (Holgate, S.J. 2007. On the decadal rates of sea level change during the twentieth century. Geophysical Research Letters 34: 10.1029/2006GL028492)
              As the oceans have stopped warming and are now cooling, so the sea level rise has slowed. This is expected. What is not expected is a 100m rise in sea level. It took me a while to stop laughing at your seriousness on the whole 100m thing.

              Regarding land-based ice and ice shelves, read Zwally et al. (2005), who found that although “the Greenland ice sheet is thinning at the margins,” it is “growing inland with a small overall mass gain,”

              Another good read is Johannessen et al. (2005), who found that “below 1500 meters, the elevation-change rate is -2.0 ± 0.9 cm/year, in qualitative agreement with reported thinning in the ice-sheet margins,” but that “an increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 cm/year is found in the vast interior areas above 1500 meters.”

              Or maybe Howat (Science 2007): “Greenland was about as warm or warmer in the 1930′s and 40′s, and many of the glaciers were smaller than they are now. This was a period of rapid glacier shrinkage world-wide, followed by at least partial re-expansion during a colder period from the 1950′s to the 1980′s. Temperatures indeed were warmer in the 1930s and 1940s in Greenland. They cooled back to the levels of the 1880s by the 1980s and 1990s before resuming a rise in the middle 1990s. The recent warming is not yet at the same level as that of the 1930s and 1940s.”

              Of course we also know that during the MWP Greenland was warmer and less ice-covered than now. The Antarctic ice has been growing for ages. No worries there.

              The fact is that precipitation over the mass is the main driver of glacial growth. If a glacier grows, it eventually breaks up at the edges, often over water in the case where an ice shelf forms. This is entirely normal and nothing to worry about. What may be a worry is whether the central (land-based) areas of Greenland and Antarctica are continuing to grow in thickness, and whether any losses are “unprecedented”. I think it’s clear from the papers above that the cyclic growth or decline is nothing unusual.

              • lprent

                Bob D

                I notice that you avoided my question about what would change your mind. Makes all of the rest of your comments a bit pointless to argue about. You look like you’re just one of the oil company trolls. Quite simply you’re looking at the recent past to say predictions of the future of climate change are impossible. That makes you a probable dickhead in my estimation.

                You have to look back over time to what has happened in the geological record, and ask what would be required to make that happen today. Then look for precursors. Geologically, the problem is that climate is inherently unstable overall. It moves quite abruptly when its base input/retention conditions are changed.

                Most of the effects that you’re looking describing as proof that nothing is happening show exactly the opposite. For instance increases in precipitation on icesheet interiors cause increases in volume while reducing density. It doesn’t help your argument. What you should be looking at is the melt-water runoff rates. That gets expressed in glacier retreat from the icesheets when the interior gets warm enough. Retreating glaciers while getting increasing interior icesheet volumes is a bad sign – not a good sign. It tends to indicates that we’re likely to get a fast melt.

                I’d guess that you wouldn’t deny that there have been 50+M increases in sealevel within the relatively recent past (for a geologist). The holocene hotspot comes to mind. All that requires is a change in climate sufficing to melt significant ice. What people like me are saying is that we’re seeing ll the signs of a runaway movement in climate, eventually stabilising at some other semi-stable level.

                Because of the nature of the change and the political inertia, I suspect that we will get a full ice-melt over the next few centuries – ie 100+ metres rise in sealevel. A large chunk of it will be cause by people like you that keep saying “we don’t need to do anything because the models are inaccurate”.

                My point is that the models will always be inaccurate. So what? The science says we will get a significant climate change from what is happening. We cannot predict with 100% accuracy what happens with the weather next week, but we know what is likely to happen over the next year.

                So as I said before – explain why you are not a rigid minded dickhead who is locked into a single mindset and cherry picking the evidence to support your position?

                • RedLogix

                  For instance increases in precipitation on icesheet interiors cause increases in volume while reducing density.

                  My glaciology is confined to several lecture, but the best was on the side of Mt Brewster, near Haast Pass, overlooking the Brewster glacier…. nothing like the real thing to bring it all to life.

                  From memory you are quite correct, glaciers exhibit quite complex and sometimes counterintuitive behaviours. In the case of the high Greenland and Antarctic glaciers, increased precipitation is actually quite a bad sign, not only because the new snow low in density, but more importantly it is a symptom of warming temperatures in those regions.

                  Contrary to what most people imagine, when conditions are extremely cold there is relatively little snow. Heavy snowfall depends on warm moist air being lifted over underlying cold air quite quickly, but normally such moist air never makes it that far south into the interior of Antarctica, or the high plateau’s of Greenland.

                  The EAIS may be 3 million years old, so even if it accumulated a nett thickness of only 1mm of ice per year, that would still allow it to grow 3km deep. But above BobD quotes:

                  “an increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 cm/year is found in the vast interior areas above 1500 meters.’

                  In just a mere 1 million years that would a nett gain of 64km, clearly such a thickness gain cannot be sustained over long periods of time. It’s my guess that such rates only occur during relatively short warm portions of the total cycle.

                  As you said, Bob is quoting ‘evidence’ that undermines the very arugment he is trying to make.

                  • Bob D

                    It’s my guess that such rates only occur during relatively short warm portions of the total cycle.

                    Possibly you’re right, that the rates are higher in warmer periods. Nevertheless, they are what they are. They show currently increased ice mass in Greenland, in direct contradiction to claims of reducing ice mass causing increasing sea level rise.

                    Now for some background reading:
                    Are the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets in Danger of
                    Collapse?

                    The article is well-written and easily understood by laymen. For those too lazy to download it, here is a useful quote (pg 3):

                    A Glacier Budget
                    In general glaciers grow, flow, and melt continuously, with a budget of gains and losses. Snow falls on high ground. It becomes more and more compact with time, air is extruded, and it turns into solid ice. A few bubbles of air might be trapped, and may be used by scientists later to examine the air composition at the time of deposition. More precipitation of snow forms another layer on the top, which goes through the same process, so the ice grows thicker by the addition of new layers at the surface. The existence of such layers, youngest at the top, enables the glacial ice to be studied through time, as in the Vostok cores of Antarctica, a basic source of data on temperature and carbon dioxide over about 400,000 years.
                    When the ice is thick enough it starts to flow under the force of gravity. A mountain glacier flows mainly downhill, but can flow uphill in places. In an ice sheet the flow is from the depositional high center towards the edges of the ice sheet. When the ice reaches a lower altitude or lower latitude, where temperature is higher, it starts to melt and evaporate.
                    (Evaporation and melting together are called ablation, but for simplicity I shall use “melting’ from now on).
                    If growth and melting balance, the glacier appears to be ‘stationary’. If precipitation exceeds melting the glacier grows. If melting exceeds precipitation the glacier recedes.

                    Good, hopefully we’re now better informed on glacial flows. Remember – these things are cyclic over long periods. Some periods have increased growth, while others have decreased growth.

                    Now, RedLogix, you state that warming causes higher precipitation, which we know causes glacial and ice sheet/shelf growth, Therefore warming is correlated with ice growth. So why are you all so worried about shrinking ice? I should also suggest that the higher precipitation had to come from somewhere – namely the oceans. If precipitation=melt, no change.

                    I’ll repeat the quote I put in before, since everyone is studiously ignoring it:

                    Or maybe Howat (Science 2007): “Greenland was about as warm or warmer in the 1930′s and 40′s, and many of the glaciers were smaller than they are now. This was a period of rapid glacier shrinkage world-wide, followed by at least partial re-expansion during a colder period from the 1950′s to the 1980′s. Temperatures indeed were warmer in the 1930s and 1940s in Greenland. They cooled back to the levels of the 1880s by the 1980s and 1990s before resuming a rise in the middle 1990s. The recent warming is not yet at the same level as that of the 1930s and 1940s.’

                    “Returned to the same levels as the 1880s in the 1990s.” Wow. I see little correlation with CO2 emitted by humans.

                    • RedLogix

                      I should also suggest that the higher precipitation had to come from somewhere namely the oceans. If precipitation=melt, no change.

                      Because we also know that at times in the past (with CO2 levels not dissimilar to the present) that eventually the warming oceans become the dominant factor, that glacier melting accelerates and sea levels rise. We absolutely know that if all the polar ice sheets melt that sea level can be around 70-100m higher than now. We know this from past behaviour.

                      While it is very unlikely that the EAIS will completely melt , nor the Greenland glaciers fully collapse within the next few centuries, the WAIS is for reasons outlined above, is far more prone to a relatively rapid breakup, contributing up to 3.2m of sea level rise by itself.

                      Given that even 1m of rise in the medium term is going to cause huge difficulties and impose massive costs, there really is little to be lost by taking a ‘gamble’ on the science and the models and paying up front to reduce CO2 now.

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      Remember these things are cyclic over long periods.

                      Yes, clever, the climate is unstable – we know this already. This doesn’t negate human forcing merely emphasizes that the climate will change when conditions (such as increased greenhouse gases) change.

                      Some periods have increased growth, while others have decreased growth.

                      And some periods, like now, have glacial retreat.

                      “Returned to the same levels as the 1880s in the 1990s.’ Wow. I see little correlation with CO2 emitted by humans.

                      Wow, you managed to make that conclusion on one sentence from one set of data about one small part of the world?

                      From here:

                      Current estimates of ice mass loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet are between 150-300 gigatons per year. To put this in perspective, this rate of loss is at least twice or even three times as much as it was at the beginning of the 1990s, which means mass loss on the Greenland Ice Sheet has really been increasing in the past 15 years or so. A big part of this loss is coming from the outlet glaciers, which are thinning and calving into the ocean at a faster rate.

                      http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/images/temp-anom-larg.jpg

                      The world’s warming, the glaciers are retreating and the seas are rising. Solar activity has been proven not to have enough effect to make the changes that we’re already seeing (IIRC, the sun is actually cooling ATM) and atmospheric CO2 levels are nearly double what they were and CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. Doesn’t leave a lot of room for guessing.

                      As has already been said – you’re picking and choosing the data that justifies your prejudged position. I doubt if any evidence will change your mind as you’ve already made it up.

                    • Bob D []

                      Draco T Bastard
                      July 11, 2009 at 6:25 pm
                      I wrote a lengthy, boring and rambling reply to this, but forgot to save a copy and of course Murphy’s Law kicked in and the post failed, so it disappeared into the ether. Sorry but I don’t have the energy right now to re-write it all.

                  • Maynard J

                    I’ve seen Mt Brewster – climbed Armstrong next to it. Awesome :)

                • Bob D

                  I notice that you avoided my question about what would change your mind. Makes all of the rest of your comments a bit pointless to argue about.

                  Jump to conclusions much?
                  I wasn’t avoiding the question, it is irrelevant to what I have put forward as arguments against your assertion that you have presented ‘unassailable evidence’. Why you would feel that all the peer-reviewed references I have provided can be defeated because I don’t answer one off-topic question is beyond me.

                  However, if that’s how it works here, I suppose I can answer you.

                  In order to change my mind, I would require a reasonable measure of validation of predictions. This is how science works. You start with an hypothesis (man-made CO2 causes catastrophic warming) and you formulate a theory (quantify with maths if possible). This has been done by the IPCC supported by various peer-reviewed papers.

                  [At this point I should say that the support in places is not as strong as it appears. Several scientists have quit the IPCC in disgust at the manner in which the summary conclusions have been modified with respect to the original papers. This is all on the public record. But this is not a central concern, as we still have some steps to go.]

                  The next step is to use the theory previously formulated to make predictions. This is where the IPCC models come in. They have made few specific predictions that can be quantified, but two major ones I have already presented:

                  1) The tropical troposphere must warm faster than the surface, and form a ‘hotspot’. This is caused by water vapour feedback extending the troposphere beyond the CEL. Fig 9.1 is central to deducing what attribution is given to observed warming. It shows a very clear and obvious hot spot over the tropics if greenhouse gases are the reason for the warming.

                  2) The models predict a positive global temperature trend of about 0.2 C per decade. Most models also show an increasing trend further down the line.

                  As I stated above, neither of these predictions are happening. The opposite has happened – the troposphere has cooled slightly,and the global temperature since 2001 (TAR) has declined at -0.2 C per decade. This immediately implies falsification of the theory, and also the hypothesis. So in answer to your question, produce the evidence that these are happening, and that will make me think again.

                  You look like you’re just one of the oil company trolls.

                  Gotta run, the oil rig doesn’t run itself you know. ;-) Also, look up ‘troll’. You might also want, while you’re there, to examine the investments companies like Shell have in renewable energies ($1bn) and carbon trading schemes.

                  Quite simply you’re looking at the recent past to say predictions of the future of climate change are impossible.

                  Not at all, I’m looking at the theory predictions and trying to work out if they’re valid. They aren’t.

                  That makes you a probable dickhead in my estimation.

                  You’re welcome to your opinions.

                  • RedLogix

                    Bob,

                    I’m too pressed for time to go into much detail, but your first bit of misdirection has been dealt to here, and another primer article here.

                    In essence the ‘tropical hotspot’ is not the so called ‘fingerprint’, rather it is stratospheric cooling that is. And apparently that is what has been occuring.

                    Your second gem is known as ‘cherry picking’ the data, and is a totally dishonest tactic which disqualifies you from any serious discussion. The 8 years of data from 2001 is far too short a period of time to say anything meaningful about an underlying long-term trend.

                    • Bob D

                      In essence the ‘tropical hotspot’ is not the so called ‘fingerprint’, rather it is stratospheric cooling that is. And apparently that is what has been occuring.

                      I’m afraid not. You see, the whole “it’s the stratospheric cooling that matters” thing has only appeared after it became clear there is no hotspot. That’s not science, that’s politics. Have a look again at Fig 9.1 and tell me that a huge, almost 1C anomaly above the tropics shouldn’t be glaringly apparent.

                      The other problem you have with that approach is you are now contradicting Ben Santer, the man responsible for those models in the IPCC AR4 Fig 9.1.

                      He says the following:

                      ‘ Our paper compares modeled and observed atmospheric temperature changes in the tropical troposphere. We were interested in this region because of an apparent inconsistency between computer model results and observations.
                      Since the late 1960s, scientists have performed experiments in which computer models of the climate system are run with human-caused increases in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs). These experiments consistently showed that increases in atmospheric concentrations of GHGs should lead to pronounced warming, both at the Earth’s surface and in the troposphere. The models also predicted that in the tropics, the warming of the troposphere should be larger than the warming of the surface. However, most available estimates of tropospheric temperature changes obtained from satellites and weather balloons (radiosondes) implied that the tropical troposphere had actually cooled slightly over the last 20 to 30 years (in sharp contrast to the computer model predictions, which show tropospheric warming).”
                      -Fact Sheet for “Consistency of Modelled and Observed Temperature Trends in the Tropical Troposphere’, by B.D. Santer et al. International Journal of Climatology Oct 2008

                      Your second gem is known as ‘cherry picking’ the data, and is a totally dishonest tactic which disqualifies you from any serious discussion. The 8 years of data from 2001 is far too short a period of time to say anything meaningful about an underlying long-term trend.

                      Hardly. Read carefully. I’m interested in how well the IPCC models have performed since the model runs up to 2001, and I was replying to lprent’s question of what it would take to change my mind. There’s no point in looking back further, the models had the advantage of hindsight before that. Remember that for AR4 they also had the advantage of hindsight over TAR, yet they still predicted a +0.2C/decade warming, in spite of the cooling that had occurred since TAR.

                    • RedLogix []

                      Well having read the whole paper you quote from, I don’t read the same conclusions you are drawing from it. Again you cherry pick your information.

                      There’s no point in looking back further, the models had the advantage of hindsight before that.

                      Well no. You are misrepresenting how models work. The ‘advantage’ of hindsight is how they are calibrated. I mean I do this sort of thing for a living; modern process control models collect vast amounts of historic data and utilise it to create a tool that predicts the future of behaviour of the process.

                      Crucially what the model predicts is not how the dependent output variables are going to behave (reality is too chaotic for that), rather they yield useful information about the relationships between the input and output variables, allowing the engineer to sensibly react to changes in the process.

                    • Bob D []

                      The paper itself attempts to show that there is in fact a warming signal in the existing data sets, and isn’t particularly successful, considering they reach no definitive answer, and yet are looking for quite an obvious signal. I was merely drawing attention to how seriously he takes the hotspot issue, in contrast to those who now try to state it was a non-issue.

                    • Bob D []

                      I agree. I’ve done a lot of modelling myself (finite element, non-linear heat transfer, creep and creep-fatigue). I was fortunate enough to work under Prof. Nabarro. He was not the sort to allow modellers to get away with unsubstantiated claims.

                      The problem is that the climate doesn’t seem to lend itself well to this kind of modelling. I’m not sure where the problems lie, but I’ve noticed the IPCC doesn’t seem to share this view, and instead makes the following quite strong claims (AR4):

                      “There is considerable confidence that climate models provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate change, particularly at continental scales and above. This confidence comes from the foundation of the models in accepted physical principles and from their ability to reproduce observed features of current climate and past climate changes. Confidence in model estimates is higher for some climate variables (e.g., temperature) than for others (e.g., precipitation). Over several decades of development, models have consistently provided a robust and unambiguous picture of significant climate warming in response to increasing greenhouse gases.’

                      ‘Considerable confidence’, credible quantitative estimates’, etc.

                    • Draco T Bastard []

                      I’m interested in how well the IPCC models have performed since the model runs up to 2001,

                      And yet you’re still going on about one prediction that the IPCC model made? Out of how many? 10s, 100s, 1000s?

                      Can’t seem to find that global cooling you keep telling us been happening over the last few years either.

                    • Bob D []

                      Can’t seem to find that global cooling you keep telling us been happening over the last few years either.

                      It’s here.
                      The graph you linked to ends in 2007, for some reason. If you want a good detailed discussion about global temps and how well TAR and AR4 are doing, I suggest you try Lucia’s Blackboard. She’s neutral (like woodfortrees.org), and generally does good work. She describes herself as a ‘lukewarmer’, in that she believes in AGW, but not necessarily everything the IPCC puts out. I disagree with some of the things she writes, but then I can’t fault her logic on most things, and so far I have seen few who can.
                      One niggle I have is she often uses GISS or HadCRUT datasets, which are surface-based and useful only for historical purposes when looking at temps and trends prior to the satellite age. I dealt with this a bit in my long rambling post that the dog ate.

                      Here’s another graph comparing them. Note how the HadCRUT3v data consistently over-reads. Nearly everyone uses UAH for recent graphs, simply because it’s satellite based, reading constantly over the whole globe (except for two small bits over each pole). RSS is similar, also satellite based.

                    • Draco T Bastard []

                      Still can’t see a cooling trend there – I see one cold year and a year does make a trend.

                      http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/12/2008-temperature-summaries-and-spin/

                      You can get slightly different pictures if you pick the start year differently, and so this isn’t something profound. Picking any single year as a starting point is somewhat subjective and causes the visual aspect to vary looking at the trends is more robust. However, this figure does show that in models, as in data, some years will be above trend, and some will be below trend. Anyone who expresses shock at this is either naive or well, you know.

                      And as for dismissing and entire data set just because it was measured on the ground…WTF?

                      I’ll let you get back to Never Never Land now as it’s obvious by the way you discount data (you know, all that data that existed before 2001) that goes against your preconceived notions that you will never accept the truth.

                    • Bob D []

                      Here’s a better-looking graph for the whole satellite era.

                    • RedLogix []

                      Bob,
                      Note how the HadCRUT3v data consistently over-reads.

                      So what. Visually the correlation between the surface temperature record and the satellite record is very high, so while there is a small offset between the two, both records show the same underlying trend.

                      I’ll repeat this link in case you didn’t read it last time.

                      Open Mind

                      Pay attention, Bob Carter: THIS IS WHAT GLOBAL WARMING IS ABOUT. IT’S NOT ABOUT LESS-THAN-A-DECADE NATURAL FLUCTUATION, IT’S ABOUT THE INEXORABLE INCREASE FROM DECADE TO DECADE.

                      If you are sincere in your argument, get back to us when and ONLY when you have understood the data and conclusions in Tamino’s post.

            • Sam Vilain 23.2.1.1.2.2

              Bob D, you might “laugh” at 100m sea level rises, but at least 70m is possible in a +5⁰C world if the geological record is anything to go by. Just read the New Scientist article linked above by Gareth.

              I think it’s clear from the papers above that the cyclic growth or decline is nothing unusual.

              No, you misinterpreted them. The currently observed decline of the WAIS has not been seen in the last 3 million years or so. That was a part of the thrust of Prof. Naish’s talk. He shows strong evidence that when it warms, the sheet disappears quickly. This was supported by the cores that they raised from the sea-bed as well as modeling. How ironic that your repeated nonsense was directly contradicted by the original lecture.

  24. John Nicol 24

    While the author speaks of unassailable evidence, there is absolutely NO evidence in his findings that CO2 was to BLAME for the warming, simply that it coincided with, and,, as most other evidence shows, RESULTED from the warming. It is interesting to note that, in spite of the high resolution of his results, he does not mention the phase relationship (lag in time) between the CO2 concentration and the temperature which is absolutely critical to an interpretation of the results. He is obviously committed to a belief in global warming and interprets his results accordingly. This is his prerogative and I respect that, but it is inappropriate for others to claim the high ground on the basis of what has been stated in the article. Perhaps there are other important factors which have not been presented here and which do confirm Naish’s stance, but I would like to see them before taking his interpretation at face value. After all, one swallow does not make a summer.
    John Nicol.

    • lprent 24.1

      Perhaps you should try and find a paper that proves that CO2 does not absorb infra-red. That is the core of the argument. To date you have made assertions that it is inconsequential. Prove it with a link to something substantive. Please no unreferred ‘papers’. I have seen enough assertion without evidence papers from the CCD’s already.

      At this point I’d say that it is up to the deniers to prove their case rather than the other way around. They sure haven’t bothered to do it to the scientifically aware for the last 30 years that I’ve been following this debate for. It is only amongst the scientifically illiterate that they are still getting any traction (and a few old prof’s believing what they prefer to believe rather than evidence).

  25. GC Martin 25

    A friend whose been following this blog thread advises me that commenters Bob D and John Nicol are espousing – in both manner, matter and timing – the like of Emiliani.

    For which he suggests they (in particular) go see what turned up in 1966 to make aright.

    Whether scientists or not, they’ll surely need to clothe themselves in at least a little relevant and pertinent information to sustain their seemingly singular view/s.

    interesting A/S word — FRONTS – is it not.

  26. Bob D 26

    We seem to have run out of ‘Reply’ buttons, perhaps we’ve gone to too many levels. :-)
    Sam Vilain – “Bob D, you might “laugh’ at 100m sea level rises, but at least 70m is possible in a +5⁰C world if the geological record is anything to go by.”
    True, entirely possible. On geological timescales too. Certainly not in the next hundred years.

    “No, you misinterpreted them. ”
    Not at all. All the papers relate to Greenland. I was simply discussing ice growth and decline in general, and Greenland in particular, in response to lprent above.

    The WA peninsula has received a huge amount of attention in recent years, simply because it’s the only part of Antarctica exhibiting any kind of warming. The loss of ice is mainly due to regionally warmer ocean temperatures. Over the rest of Antarctica, the ice is growing, but we hear nothing of that. Sure, the lecture addresses a tiny part of the continent, but can one really draw conclusions from that about global warming? Especially when we know that it is exhibiting anomalous regional behaviour, unrelated to the global trends of cooling atmosphere and cooling oceans, and unrelated to the vast majority of the continent to which it’s attached?

    • Sam Vilain 26.1

      The loss of ice is mainly due to regionally warmer ocean temperatures.

      And why do you think that might be, Einstein?

      You think you can nonchalantly wave off the combined work of a huge team of scientists who have been there, extracted physical evidence, and made sense of it all. Lead by a scientist who has already correlated ice ages with Milankovitch Cycles with the geological record of the Wanganui basin, finally proving without a doubt the century-old question of what causes Ice Ages. If you had taken the time to study the findings you might have known there was already an answer to your supposed challenge. This “regionally warmer ocean temperature” is actually part of the global conveyor trade currents.

      This “Tiny Part of the Continent” you are talking about could contribute 3.3 metres of sea level rise, possibly in under 100 years. It’s something like 20% of the area of Antarctica – how can that possibly be called “tiny”? It hasn’t melted for over 3 million years and it is now melting. The chain of events between anthropomorphic COâ‚‚ release and this melt is basically inscrutable; if mankind had not released all that COâ‚‚, you would not expect the WAIS to be melting.

      Over the rest of Antarctica, the ice is growing, but we hear nothing of that.

      Well predicted by the climate models as a result of increased precipitation. However with sufficient warming even this cannot be taken for granted.

      I’m bored of tearing down your worthless parroting of climate skeptic talkpoints. You demonstrably have no substance behind any of your claims.

  27. Greg 27

    But what if the models were all wrong?

    How would we actually know they were wrong?

    How long would it be before we realised how wrong they were?

    Have we absolutely eliminated the possibility that the models are completely wrong? How could we “bet the farm” of the world’s economy on carbon trading, unless it was “risk free”? (Like a US treasury bond was the risk free asset the whiz-kids at the banks bet the world’s economy on with their Black-Scholes derivatives mathematics).

    And anyway, if I don’t want to be a part of such a bet, what is your moral imperative to force me to put such a bet on the models?

    • Sam Vilain 27.1

      Greg, science is all about establishing models – such as E=mc², F=½mv², etc. These are models, or formulae, which you test against observations and test. It is not sufficient to simply cry foul at the use of models; you must say which part of the model you believe to be in error, and back that up with observations.

      As such, it makes sense to make decisions based on the results of the model which has survived peer reviews. In reality, deciding not to trust them is the “bet”. And the associated gambler’s ruin won’t just ruin one person’s life…

      • Greg 27.1.1

        So are you saying that we cannot know if the models are wrong?

        That’s what I’m hearing.

        The models are purely an extension of the myriad of theories that make up AGW, just using a massive big computer to run the numbers, correct? Fundamentally, they are a hypothesis.

        And you are saying they are not falsifiable.

        Karl Popper had something to say about unfalsifiable hypotheses, namely that it is properly called pseudo-science.

        Until we can prove that the models are NOT wrong, they will remain pseudo-science. A good bet maybe, educated guess, no doubt, but still pseudo-science in the classical definition.

        It is not enough to prove that they are right 1001 times over, they must be proved to be NOT wrong.

        • lprent 27.1.1.1

          It is not enough to prove that they are right 1001 times over, they must be proved to be NOT wrong.

          Nope you’re wrong. If you did that there would be NO science. Because there are no models anywhere through science that are not wrong. They are all hypothetical and unproven. However they can act as working hypotheses with a high degree of confidence. We’ve built our civilisation on them.

          It is the usual science. Make a hypothesis. Crunch some numbers. Establish some predictions for things that are not currently known. People go and test those. Find variances. Adjust model/hypothesis.

          Repeat

          In science there are NO hypotheses of models that are not tested all of the time. There is no fully accepted wisdom. What you are demanding is the realm of the religious and utter faith.

          What there is are hypotheses and models in science that have stood the test of thousands of attacks on their predictions. They tend to be used as working models that provide the basis for attack. Looking for evidence that they are wrong, usually finding evidence that they are right.

          The problem that we have with the CCD’s here is that they don’t appear to understand that models are always wrong in some details. They might be incorrect on a particular small prediction without invalidating the model. Most of the time the CCD’s ‘proof’ of error is as hilarious as Bob D’s one above on icepack volumes – it helps validate the model.

          What you fail to realize is that the working theories that make up alternate models have largely been disproved. Their predictions were so far at variance with the experimental and observational facts, that they have been largely discarded as working frameworks. What is left at present is the greenhouse gas leading to climate change. Unfortunately that is the one that is standing the test of science.

  28. Greg 28

    How many “Anthropogenic Global Warming” models predicted cooling?

    http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/UAHMSUglobe.html

    It’s no longer a question of are they wrong, but how wrong are they?

    I’ve yet to find one with a validated turbulence model on long time scales, in fact it’s well-known in the numerical computing community that many GCM cannot even perform basic mass conservation successfully. … but hey it’s only the first-world global economy we want to destroy based on this paid-for-by-government fantasy science.

  29. GC Martin 29

    Regarding Bob D’s citation of Howat, 2007, and his cajoling in regard the above quoted assertions. Remarkable. I daresay most annoying for Howat who but a year later (September 2008) pressed the following. on the same topic of his own research and related matters..
    [ With thanks to Steve Bloom at comment 332

    COLUMBUS, Ohio The recent dramatic melting and breakup of a few huge Greenland glaciers have fueled public concerns over the impact of global climate change, but that isn't the island's biggest problem.

    A new study shows that the dozens of much smaller outflow glaciers dotting Greenland's coast together account for three times more loss from the island's ice sheet than the amount coming from their huge relatives.

    In a study just published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, scientists at Ohio State University reported that nearly 75 percent of the loss of Greenland ice can be traced back to small coastal glaciers.

    Ian Howat, an assistant professor of earth sciences and researcher with Ohio State's Byrd Polar Research Center, said their discovery came through combining the best from two remote sensing techniques. It provides perhaps the best estimate so far of the loss to Greenland's ice cap, he says.

    [GC Martin here: Facts: from Howat's website: "Many retreats began with an increase in thinning rates near the front in the summer of 2003, a year of record high coastal-air and sea-surface temperatures." ]

    Aside from Antarctica, Greenland has more ice than anywhere else on earth. The ice cap covers four-fifths of the island’s surface, is 1,491 miles (2,400 kilometers) long and 683 miles (1,100 kilometers) wide, and can reach 1.8 miles (3 kilometers) deep at its thickest point.

    As global temperatures rise, coastal glaciers flow more quickly to the sea, with massive chunks breaking off at the margins and forming icebergs. And while some of the largest Greenland glaciers such as the Jakobshavn and Petermann glaciers on the northern coast are being closely monitored, most others are not.

    Howat and his colleagues concentrated on the southeastern region of Greenland, an area covering about one-fifth of the island’s 656,373 square miles (1.7 million square kilometers). They found that while two of the largest glaciers in that area Kangerdlugssuaq and Helheim contribute more to the total ice loss than any other single glaciers, the 30 or so smaller glaciers there contributed 72 percent of the total ice lost.

    “We were able to see for the first time that there is widespread thinning at the margin of the Greenland ice sheet throughout this region.

    “We’re talking about the region that is within 62 miles (100 kilometers) from the ice edge. That whole area is thinning rapidly,’ he said.

    [GCM here: Howat says that all of the glaciers are changing within just a few years and that the accelerated loss just spreads up deeper into the ice sheet.]

    To reach their conclusions, the researchers turned to two ground-observing satellites. One of them, ICESAT (Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite), does a good job of gauging the ice over vast expanses which were mostly flat.

    On the other hand, ASTER (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer) does a better job at seeing changes at the steeper, less-flat margins of the ice sheet, Howat said.

    “We simply merged those data sets to give us for the first time a picture of ice elevation change the rate at which the ice is either going up or down at a very high (656-foot or 200-meter) resolution.

    “They are a perfect match for each other,’ Howat said.

    “What we found is the entire strip of ice over the southeast margin, all of these glaciers, accelerated and they are just pulling the entire ice sheet with it,’ he said.

    Howat said that their results show that such new findings don’t necessarily require new types of satellites. “These aren’t very advanced techniques or satellites. Our work shows that by combining satellite data in the right way, we can get a much better picture of what’s going on,’ Howat said.

    My sole addition to this information is to say that the commenters contraire evident on this thread have been indulging themselves in what is regarded elsewhere as manufactured debate. For more on this I’d recommend Leah Ceccarelli at Washington University.

    My postscript might be that Bob D in particular is faced not with a Howat so much as a Howzat! And the finger is straight plumb.

  30. I’ve noticed how commenters can be blocked by other commenters inputting at the same time as myself..

    In respect of Howat’s later publications of his work in Greenland – answering bob d’s cajoling reference to Howat’s output in science 2007 – I made an extensive comment last evening which did not appear here.

    Was it blocked or dispensed/disposed I don;t know for sure, but do see that the commenter mentioned almost continually commented over the period of my activity.

    Hence a wait – yes, the information for standard readers was important enough to take this trouble – before testing with this post..

    If it gets through then maybe in the ‘lull’ of early morning a retry will make it..

  31. GC Martin 31

    interesting a/s challenge word.. r/t .? maybe not as bad as thort.. huh.. mebbe worse.. whatever i’m out a while..

  32. RedLogix 32

    Test_2

Links to post

Important links

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Capture: Te Arai – The Veil
    Capture is pleased to present a selection of the work of Tia Huia Ranginui, a photographic artist from Whanganui. "'Te Arai' (The Veil) is a series of photographs of my daughter on our journey home from the Coromandel peninsula.Our journey...
    Public Address | 28-07
  • Adventures in the Anthropocene
    Science journalist Gaia Vince left her desk at Nature and spent two years visiting places around the world, some of them very isolated, where people were grappling with the conditions of what is sometimes described as a new epoch, the...
    Hot Topic | 28-07
  • The inflationary impact of road spend-ups
    It’s time for a quick round of everyone’s favourite game, Ask An Economist. Today’s question is: What happens when the government decides to spend up large in a growing economy? If you guessed that the answer is that it will...
    Transport Blog | 28-07
  • I did not order this – again
    I originally posted this back in September 2013. The passage of time is relentless, but some things, and people, don't ever seem to change....
    Imperator Fish | 28-07
  • Another 1945?
    Steve Richards (The Guardian, 28 July) is right to say (and Ed Miliband obviously agrees with him) that next year’s election will not, and should not, be decided by personality politics. So what is it that will determine the voters’...
    Bryan Gould | 28-07
  • Stuart’s 100: #1 Transforming the Motorway Ring
    Urban designer Stuart Houghton has set himself a personal project of coming up with 100 ideas for improving Auckland at the rate of one a day. He is Tweeting them here: @HoughtonSd  Discussing this project with Stuart he said that “I see the city...
    Transport Blog | 28-07
  • No deal
    Its official: National won't be cutting an electorate deal with the Conservatives this election. I guess they figured out that a Colin Craig - Winston Peters deathmatch in East Coast Bays might not go their way - or that snuggling...
    No Right Turn | 28-07
  • Earning that reputation XIV
    Another year, and the Remuneration Commission proposes another increase in MP's expenses. But the MPs don't think its enough: A review of expenses by the Remuneration Authority, which sets MPs' pay, is proposing the amount they are allowed to claim...
    No Right Turn | 28-07
  • Valid reasons to change the government
    If you were to rely on the six O’clock news for your daily intake of information you would be forgiven in thinking that the National party can do no wrong.So fleeting is their coverage of the government's numerous cases of...
    The Jackal | 28-07
  • National standards results 2014
    If ever we needed evidence of the corrossive nature of national standards it’s in the stories of teachers pressured to rank their pupils by their national standards results and then display each child’s ranking on the classroom wall. The Government...
    frogblog | 28-07
  • Jilted Revisionism
    Here is Colin Craig putting on a brave face this morning: "I'm reasonably negative about [electorate deals]. I've been quite critical of arrangements like National do with Act and United Future, because I'd like to think the voters get to...
    Polity | 28-07
  • More bullying from Nick Smith
    This morning Radio New Zealand reported on Nick Smith's crude attempt to bully Fish & Game into silence on water quality:Dr Smith met the Fish and Game Council in Wellington on 18 July, and four people who attended told Radio...
    No Right Turn | 28-07
  • Deep sea oil and love don’t mix
    Locals, surfers, Green Party members, dog lovers, beach lovers at Piha Yesterday we launched our plan to keep New Zealand beaches free from oil spills. With Piha’s world-famous waves crashing in the background, we stood in the local surf club...
    frogblog | 28-07
  • New Fisk
    Eight hundred dead Palestinians. But Israel has impunityOne of the oldest Christian communities in the lands of Christ has been destroyed as the Sunni Caliphate spreads...
    No Right Turn | 27-07
  • The male party
    Another election, and another National party list packed with men. This time though its getting some attention:National released its party list yesterday and if it gets 60 MPs into Parliament after the election, just 16 - 27 per cent -...
    No Right Turn | 27-07
  • Vacuous ravings in the Herald
    You know it's a slow news day with nothing in particular to attack the Labour party over when journalists in New Zealand undertake a bit of navel gazing. Much like their biased political opinions, most reporters are invariably prejudiced in...
    The Jackal | 27-07
  • Risible courtier watch
    I think there are a few interesting things going on in this John Armstrong piece sternly warning everyone about the disease of ‘gotcha politics’: It sure ain’t pretty. It sure ain’t enlightening. It is most definitely insidious. It is a...
    DimPost | 27-07
  • Risible courtier watch
    I think there are a few interesting things going on in this John Armstrong piece sternly warning everyone about the disease of ‘gotcha politics’: It sure ain’t pretty. It sure ain’t enlightening. It is most definitely insidious. It is a...
    DimPost | 27-07
  • Awful, powerful video on family violence
    This is one woman's video of daily-selfies-for-a-year. It is not for the faint of heart, and it is enormously powerful. The sign she is holding at the end is in Croatian. It says: "Help me, I do not know if...
    Polity | 27-07
  • A tale of two lists
    The National party list came out yesterday, and all the talk was of gender balance. National does not have it. According to Kiwiblog, if National gets 49% of the vote, is will have a caucus that is 71% male. At...
    Polity | 27-07
  • Bye bye, Colin
    National has all-but confirmed today that there no deal for Colin Craig in East Coast Bays, or for any other Conservative. This was the right thing for them to do, for one simple reason. All the stuff about Winston running...
    Polity | 27-07
  • Speaker: A true commitment
    In recent weeks, the Government has come out in support of a push for strangulation to become its own offence. One of a number of recommendations by an independent committee into family violence deaths, the Family Violence Death Review Committee...
    Public Address | 27-07
  • June 2014 Patronage
    The patronage results for June are out and like recent months the results are particularly good for the rail network. The June stats are also significant as they represent the end of financial year results for Auckland transport. The 12...
    Transport Blog | 27-07
  • iPredict Ltd2014 Election Update #28
    Press Release – iPredict The chances of a fiscal surplus in 2014/15 continue to plunge and are down to 50%, according to the combined wisdom of the 7000 registered traders on New Zealands online predictions market, iPredict. The forecast surplus...
    Its our future | 27-07
  • TPPA is a bad idea
    Press Release – Democrats for Social Credit Currently New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam, the USA, Japan, Malaysia, Canada, and Mexico are still negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Officially talks finished last August, but the reality is that they keep...
    Its our future | 27-07
  • Conference on Democracy, Ethics and the Public Good
    Press Release – Public Good Conference on Democracy, Ethics and the Public Good A conference is to be held in Wellington on 1 and 2 August with the aim of starting a NZ-wide discussion about the quality of our democracy....
    Its our future | 27-07
  • 2014 SkS Weekly Digest #30
    SkS Highlights Dana's Climate models accurately predicted global warming when reflecting natural ocean cycles examined a new paper by James Risbey et al that takes a clever approach to evaluating how accurate climate model temperature predictions have been while getting around the noise caused by...
    Skeptical Science | 27-07
  • Greens call for shipping lanes backed by Maritime Union
    The Maritime Union is backing the Green Party’s policy to implement compulsory shipping lanes for coastal shipping....
    MUNZ | 27-07
  • Government needs to get Fishing reform bill passed now
    The Maritime Union is urging the Government to push through the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill to protect workers from exploitation and abuse....
    MUNZ | 27-07
  • Womensfest at UOA
    Apologies for lateness!...
    The Hand Mirror | 27-07
  • Update on the Downtown Shopping Centre
    There’s a good article up on the Herald website today, with an update on what’s happening with the Downtown Shopping Centre. I’d suggest heading over there and checking it out. The article notes that “Precinct [Properties] expects to release images...
    Transport Blog | 27-07
  • Party Lists – Election 2014
    . . ACT Party 1. Dr Jamie Whyte 2. Kenneth Wang 3. Robin Grieve 4. Beth Houlbrooke 5. Don Nicolson 6. Stephen Berry 7. Dasha Kovalenko 8. Gareth Veale 9. Ian Cummings 10. Sara Muti 11. Toni Severin 12. Max...
    Frankly Speaking | 27-07
  • Party Lists – Election 2014
    . . ACT Party 1. Dr Jamie Whyte 2. Kenneth Wang 3. Robin Grieve 4. Beth Houlbrooke 5. Don Nicolson 6. Stephen Berry 7. Dasha Kovalenko 8. Gareth Veale 9. Ian Cummings 10. Sara Muti 11. Toni Severin 12. Max...
    Frankly Speaking | 27-07
  • I am still waiting for my cheque
    I have often said I wonder how some of the anti-science propagandists sleep straight in their beds at night. Lately this refers to various members of the local anti-fluoridation movement and their claims. Pity I am not the litigious sort – there...
    Open Parachute | 26-07
  • Yet Another National MP Spending Tens of Thousands of Tax Payers Money…
    The list of National MP’s whose arrogance is beyond measure, grows … “National list MP Paul Foster-Bell is defending a huge spike in his taxpayer-funded expenses as he campaigned for a seat selection. Wellington-based Foster-Bell’s spending increased from $7459 between...
    An average kiwi | 26-07
  • National Party Plans on Near-Starving Hospital Patients to Save Money
    Yes, the National Party continues destroying the Health system and now it’s patients with it! Article below from the ODT Warning over hospital food cutbacks Nutrition experts have warned a government cost-cutting team that patients could suffer malnutrition or even...
    An average kiwi | 26-07
  • Northcote Walking and Cycling improvements
    Auckland Transport are starting consultation tomorrow for a series of walking and cycling improvements to Northcote. All up there will be 5.2km of improvements from the intersection of Taharoto Road and Northcote Road through to the Northcote Ferry Terminal. Along with improving cycling facilities...
    Transport Blog | 26-07
  • Thankfully, Tories are ALWAYS wrong
    Back in 2008, 2009 and 2010, were we not assured, absolutely assured, that debt rising above 90% of GDP would send the economy into a deathly death spiral and lead to death?Indeed, ladies and gentlement, you had better hope the...
    Left hand palm | 26-07
  • 2014 SkS Weekly News Roundup #30B
    14 concepts that will be obsolete after catastrophic climate change Abrupt climate shifts in the past offer warning for future Changing human behavior is major factor in selling cleaner cars, curbing congestion China’s energy plans will worsen climate change, Greenpeace...
    Skeptical Science | 26-07
  • French Lessons
    Aux Armes Citoyens! Exacerbating Labour's current difficulties is the unfinished character of the rank-and-file's 2012 revolution. It was as if the revolutionary crowds of Paris, having torn down the Bastille, then decided to build it back up again!“APRÈS MOI, LE...
    Bowalley Road | 26-07
  • Most politicians don’t care about elderly
    Back at the end of June the New Zealand Aged Care Association ran a full paged advert in the NZ Herald concerning a number of questions they wanted politicians to answer. They also sent each party a letter outlining their...
    The Jackal | 26-07
  • I wish you all solidarity
    On Thursday night was my valedictory speech in Parliament – the last official word of my nearly nine years as a Labour MP. Valedictories are rites of passage.  Some of us will be remembered.  Most of us won’t, until we...
    Red Alert | 26-07
  • Billboards
    We drove out to Porirua today and back through the Wellington commuter suburbs: Johnsonville, Ngaio etc. There was a scattering of billboards around, almost all of which were TeamKey/National billboards. Here’s a picture of the cluster near to where I live on...
    DimPost | 26-07
  • Billboards
    We drove out to Porirua today and back through the Wellington commuter suburbs: Johnsonville, Ngaio etc. There was a scattering of billboards around, almost all of which were TeamKey/National billboards. Here’s a picture of the cluster near to where I live on...
    DimPost | 26-07
  • Reconcile this, please, Mr Coleman
    National’s Jonathan Coleman has some explaining to do. He has stated that: “Ministers had absolutely no knowledge of any pending FBI-NZ Police investigation.” The NZ Herald reports that Immigration NZ received a detailed briefing regarding the FBI’s interest in Kim Dotcom, ahead...
    Occasionally erudite | 26-07
  • Much to fight for in the Maori seats
    We all know it could be a fight to the death in the Maori seats this election, but it's startling to think that some candidates are borrowing money off their mortgages just to be able to stand at this election.It seems...
    Pundit | 26-07
  • A plea to all Labour Party activists
    Let's focus on being unfocused. Hey, maybe it will work....
    Imperator Fish | 26-07
  • Hosking hits back
    Greetings and salutations to you all. I’m broadcaster and National Party stalwart Mike Hosking and I just wanted to take a bit of time out of my busy Saturday eating Gruyère cheese and supping trim latte’s to speak on a...
    My Thinks | 26-07
  • The CRL and City Centre Office Shortages
    When the government finally announced they would support the CRL – but starting in 2020 – they listed two targets that would need to be on track to being met to bring construction forward. Rail Patronage to double to 20...
    Transport Blog | 26-07
  • A tale of two meetings…continued
    Last week I pointed out the marked difference between how many people are attending National's campaign meetings compared to the Internet Mana party's and thought a follow-up on how things are going is in order. Unfortunately for National thing's aren't...
    The Jackal | 25-07
  • Minister shouldn’t stop Fish and Game doing its job
    It seems that Conservation Minister Nick Smith has again been caught out interfering to allow more pollution in our rivers, the Green Party said today. Last year the Department of Conservation submission on the proposed Ruataniwha Dam was suppressed after...
    Greens | 28-07
  • Public deserves electoral integrity
    National's deals with spent political forces ACT and United Future will be met with a deepening sense of unease over the manipulation of MMP, Labour Leader David Cunliffe says."These parties have no electoral mandate and will return to Parliament only...
    Labour | 28-07
  • Out of control costs raise questions about National Science Challenges
    Amid strong criticism of the value of the National Science Challenges from some of the country’s senior scientists, new figures show administrative costs are skyrocketing while the level of investment in actual science remains a mystery, says Labour’s Innovation, Research...
    Labour | 28-07
  • Low build numbers and faulty repairs: what has Brownlee been doing?
    Despite being a man in a hurry new figures show just 2160 new homes, thousands fewer than needed, have been built under Gerry Brownlee in the last two years, say Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford and EQC spokesperson Clayton Cosgrove....
    Labour | 28-07
  • Joyce’s heavy hand stifling innovation
    The National Government should allow scientists and businesses to get on with innovation rather than allow Steven Joyce's heavy hand to direct it, Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman said today. Dr Norman was responding to reports today that several...
    Greens | 27-07
  • CERA spends almost $2m on 7000 flights
    CERA has spent $1.8 million on 7286 flights from Christchurch to Wellington in three years – a huge waste of money as Cantabrians still wait for solutions, Labour’s EQC spokesperson Clayton Cosgrove says. “Of course CERA officials do need to...
    Labour | 27-07
  • Nick Smith oversteps the mark yet again
    Nick Smith has yet again completely overstepped the mark as a minister – this time with a threat to muzzle Fish and Game if they don’t keep in line with Government’s views, says Labour’s Conservation spokesperson Ruth Dyson. “Nick Smith...
    Labour | 27-07
  • Georgina Beyer to stand for MANA in Te Tai Tonga
    “It’s great to have Georgie on board” said Hone Harawira, MANA Leader and Te Tai Tokerau MP.  ”She’s strong-minded, stands up to be counted, and has fought for the rights of those who haven’t had any – and won.  That...
    Mana | 27-07
  • Green Party launches plan to protect our beaches from oil spills
    The Green Party today launched its plan to protect New Zealand beaches from oil spills. The plan is the second component of the Party's environmental priority this election: Rivers clean enough to swim in again, and beaches safe from oil...
    Greens | 26-07
  • Auckland rail use spike shows need to start link now
    The Green Party today welcomes Auckland Transport figures showing rail patronage has soared by 23 percent in June from June 2013, demonstrating both the value of electrification and the need to immediately get cracking building the Auckland City Rail link."We...
    Greens | 25-07
  • Soaring rail use in Auckland shows need for rail link now
    The Green Party today welcomes Auckland Transport figures showing rail patronage has soared by 23 percent in June from June 2013, demonstrating both the value of electrification and the need to immediately get cracking building the Auckland City Rail link."We...
    Greens | 25-07
  • Puhoi-Warkworth decision doesn’t stack up
    The Board of Inquiry decision on the Puhoi-Warkworth motorway gives the green light to a project that doesn’t stack up, says Labour’s Transport spokesperson Phil Twyford. “Labour would spend $320 million immediately to fix the accident black spots, put in...
    Labour | 25-07
  • Key must stand Brownlee down during investigation
    The wise thing for the Prime Minister to do is ask Gerry Brownlee to hand in his transport warrant and to stand him down for the duration of the CAA investigation, Labour Leader David Cunliffe says. “It’s not good enough...
    Labour | 25-07
  • Puhoi highway won’t help Northland roads
    The draft decision by the Environmental Protection Agency to grant resource consent to the proposed $1.65 billion Puhoi motorway doesn't stop it being a waste of money, the Green Party said today. "The Puhoi motorway is an unnecessary waste of...
    Greens | 25-07
  • Green Party to focus on issues not sideshows
    The Green Party has launched its creative for the 2014 election; Love New Zealand. The Green Party campaign focuses on the issues where there is concern that we do not love New Zealand enough; our increasingly polluted environment, increased poverty...
    Greens | 25-07
  • Coleman must come clean about FBI briefing
    Former Immigration Minister Jonathan Coleman must come clean about when he was told the FBI was investigating Kim Dotcom, Labour’s Associate Security and Intelligence spokesperson Grant Robertson says. “Jonathan Coleman has previously said ministers were not aware of the American...
    Labour | 25-07
  • Regional economies need tailored plans
    News that up to 114 jobs could be lost from Fonterra’s Canpac plant in Hamilton reinforces the need for a government plan to build resilient regional economies, Labour’s MP for Hauraki-Waikato Nanaia Mahuta says. “The Canpac site has effectively responded...
    Labour | 25-07
  • Kiwis to get the final vote on amalgamation
    New Zealanders will get the right to have a final say on any proposed local body amalgamations, says Labour’s local government spokesperson Su’a William Sio releasing Labour’s Local Government policy today....
    Labour | 24-07
  • Dr Rajen Prasad’s Valedictory Statement
    Draft Hansard Parliamentary Record. Subject to correction. Bula vinaka. Namaste, Mr Assistant Speaker. Thank you very much. Tēnā koe. I am a lucky migrant and am privileged to have received as much as I have from this country for over...
    Labour | 24-07
  • Darien Fenton’s Valedictory Statement
    Nga mihi nui - kia koutou. I acknowledge all Members of Parliament I have served with and I do so without rancour or criticism. Over nearly nine years in parliament I’ve found that despite furious debate about political difference, most...
    Labour | 24-07
  • Immigation and Kim Dotcom – Harawira
    “I just got a call from National Business Review reporter, asking whether there was any contradiction between my thoughts on immigration in 2009 and now, particularly given MANA’s newly minted relationship with Kim Dotcom” said MANA leader and Tai Tokerau...
    Mana | 24-07
  • Nats to announce 2nd crossing without rail
    Labour Transport spokesperson Phil Twyford says it has been leaked to him that John Key will rule out a rail option when announcing an accelerated timeframe for Auckland’s $5 billion second harbour crossing next month. “I understand the Government’s plan...
    Labour | 24-07
  • “They put Maori centre stage” – Harawira
    “I’m sorry I can’t be at parliament for the valedictory speeches of Tariana Turia and Pita Sharples” said Hone Harawira, MANA Leader and MP for Tai Tokerau, ”but I’d like to add my own best wishes as they reach the end...
    Mana | 24-07
  • ACT trying to have it both ways on zoning
    ACT Party candidate David Seymour’s campaign against changes to school zones in the Epsom electorate looks hollow given his party’s commitment to the abolition of school zoning altogether, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “It’s disingenuous for David Seymour to...
    Labour | 24-07
  • Interest rate rise will hit the regions
    The latest interest rate rise will hit the fragile regional economies of  New Zealand and hurt exporters by putting more upward pressure on the exchange rate, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson David Parker.  “The regions are already hit by dropping  export...
    Labour | 24-07
  • Burning the flag or accepting the evil
    Burning the Israeli flag in Auckland in protest over the murder of innocent civilians in Gaza is nothing to be ashamed of” said MANA Leader and Tai Tokerau MP, Hone Harawira. “Calling for both sides to stand down when one side...
    Mana | 23-07
  • Photo op disguises abysmal failure
    John Key’s opening of four Housing NZ units in Bexley today is nothing more than an insincere photo op designed to hide the Government’s failure to rebuild the housing stock destroyed by the earthquakes, says Labour’s Associate Housing spokesperson Poto...
    Labour | 23-07
  • TAXPAYER UNION “outrageously stupid”
    Jordan Williams, Executive Director of the Taxpayers’ Union says a MANA billboard “appears to have been funded by taxpayers”, and calls it “an outrageous use of taxpayer money”. “But the only thing that is outrageous, is how outrageously stupid Jordan Williams was...
    Mana | 23-07
  • Green Party launches Solar in Schools policy
    The Green Party will help schools install solar and save money on their power bills by investing $20 million into solar PV systems in schools. The $20 million is expected to:Help around 500 schools install solar over three yearsResult in...
    Greens | 23-07
  • Extent of job losses at Invermay remain hidden
    Despite growing concern in the agriculture and science sectors, both AgResearch management and the Minister responsible are continuing to hide the true extent of job losses at AgResearch’s Invermay campus, Labour’s MP for Dunedin North David Clark says. “Science and...
    Labour | 23-07
  • Tōku reo, tōku oho oho, tōku reo, tōku mapihi maurea – MANA launches ...
    “MANA is launching its te reo Māori policy this morning ahead of the first reading of the government’s Māori Language Strategy Bill this afternoon”, saidMANA deputy leader and candidate for Waiariki, Annette Sykes. “MANA’s policy is based on a love...
    Mana | 23-07
  • Connectivity Upgrade to close digital divide
    Labour will close the digital divide with its Connectivity Upgrade to ensure all New Zealanders can be part of a growing, more connected economy and have the right to access quality broadband, Labour Leader David Cunliffe says.  “The digital revolution...
    Labour | 23-07
  • New parents deserve support – Labour will deliver
    ...
    Labour | 23-07
  • National refuses meeting with Maui’s advocates
    National has refused a briefing from a group of Maui's dolphins experts, whose research shows 80 per cent of New Zealanders want greater protection for the critically endangered dolphin, the Green Party said today.Dolphin campaigner Gemma McGrath and marine scientist...
    Greens | 23-07
  • MANA Tamaki send a challenge to Labour
    “Labour should set the agenda and purposely do something positively controversial once a week”, said MANA candidate for Mt Albert, Joe Carolan. “A good start would be for all Labour Auckland MPs and members to join the Justice for Palestine...
    Mana | 23-07
  • We must act to save our dolphins
    A new report makes it clear for the urgent need to protect Maui’s and Hector’s dolphins while arguing  it is clear that there is no need for further research, says Labour’s Conservation spokesperson Ruth Dyson.  “Labour backs the public call...
    Labour | 23-07
  • School told to manipulate national standards data
    Parents can have little confidence in the Government’s National Standards after an Auckland school was told to manipulate its data so it added up, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins. “Valley School in Pukekohe was advised in an email from the...
    Labour | 23-07
  • Regional economies must have tailored plans
    News that up to 114 jobs could be lost from Fonterra’s Canpac plant in Hamilton reinforces the need for a government plan to build resilient regional economies, Labour’s MP for Hauraki-Waikato Nanaia Mahuta says. “The Canpac site has effectively responded...
    Labour | 23-07
  • Auditor General slams Shared Services project
    The Auditor-General’s Office could not have been more damning about the 18 months spent on the Central Agency Shared Services (CASS) project at the Finance and Expenditure Committee this morning, says Maryan Street, Labour’s State Services spokesperson.  ...
    Labour | 23-07
  • Fonterra job losses a massive blow to Waikato
    The potential loss of up to 114 jobs from Fonterra’s Canpac plant in Hamilton is a massive blow to the Waikato region which has already lost hundreds of jobs, Labour says. Labour’s Social Development spokesperson and Hamilton-based list MP Sue...
    Labour | 23-07
  • Basin flyover decision an opportunity for capital
    The decision to reject the proposed flyover at the Basin Reserve must be taken as an opportunity to properly fund Wellington’s transport future and must not be used as an excuse to take resources away from the capital, Wellington Labour MPs...
    Labour | 22-07
  • National out of touch with the regions
    John Key is out of touch with regional New Zealand if he believes tinkering with council regulations will restore opportunities to small towns, Labour Leader David Cunliffe says. “While the regions are crying out for sustainable growth and job opportunities,...
    Labour | 22-07
  • Flyover rejection a victory for sustainable transport
    The rejection of the proposed Basin Reserve flyover by a Board of Inquiry is a victory for sustainable transport in Wellington and paves the way for other alternatives to be given a fair hearing, Wellington Labour MPs Grant Robertson and...
    Labour | 22-07
  • Reo Māori Policy Launch
    MANA will be launching its Reo Māori policy at 10am Thursday 24 July, at Matangireia (the old Māori Affairs Select Committee room at Parliament). We will also be addressing our concerns regarding the Minister of Māori Affairs Māori Language Strategy...
    Mana | 22-07
  • Basin Flyover decision victory for common sense
    The Green Party welcomed the Environmental Protection Authority's draft decision announced today not to allow the $90 million Basin Reserve flyover in Wellington to proceed."Both popular and expert opinion opposed the flyover. The proposal was expensive, unnecessary and would have...
    Greens | 22-07
  • Loss Leading could destroy Kiwi lamb’s reputation
    Meat companies that supply supermarkets and sell New Zealand lamb as a loss leader in the United Kingdom should lose their access to this valuable quota market, said Labour’s Primary Industries spokesperson Damien O’Connor. “Our reputation as a Lamb producer...
    Labour | 22-07
  • Ae Marika! 22 July 2014
    The big storm has gone, but the damage that it did and the saturation levels that it reached meant that smaller storms quickly overwhelmed roading, and water-flow systems again in the north. And although certain individuals are talking up the...
    Mana | 21-07
  • 2014 Roger Award nominations now open
    The Roger Award is for The Worst Transnational Corporation Operating in Aotearoa/New Zealand in 2014 Nominations are now open please visit the website to nominate the worst TNC in Aotearoa. You will need to include reasons why you think your...
    Mana | 21-07
  • Labour will revive the regions with new fund
    The next Labour Government will co-develop Regional Growth Plans for every region of New Zealand and will invest at least $200 million in a fund to create breakthrough opportunities for jobs and sustainable growth, Labour Leader David Cunliffe says....
    Labour | 21-07
  • Speech to Local Government New Zealand
    Speech to the Local Government New Zealand Conference 2014 Read our full regional development policy Download Introduction Early in my time as an MP I went for a long walk on a windswept Kare Kare beach with Waitakere mayor Bob Harvey. We talked...
    Labour | 21-07
  • Something Fishy About Nick Smith’s Game.
    NICK SMITH’S crude intimidation of the Fish and Game Council points to the bleakest of environmental futures should National be re-elected on 20 September. It is now considerably clearer than 60 percent of New Zealand’s lakes, rivers and streams that...
    The Daily Blog | 28-07
  • Key’s odd personal hypocrisy in Epsom, his kiss of death to the Maori Par...
    Aside from tricking Colin Craig into running in an electorate National can crush him in, John Key has announced three things in his election deals that are ill thought out. The first is his deal with the Maori Party. At a time...
    The Daily Blog | 28-07
  • Why it’s all over for the Conservative Party
    Whatever flirtations were made months ago to Colin Craig by National strategists, the polling must have come back showing them too much of their soft urban vote would walk if Key was in Government with Colin Craig.  The necessary inside muscle to...
    The Daily Blog | 28-07
  • Balance in the NZ Herald and has something gone terribly wrong at the Heral...
    So the ‘balance’ in the NZ Herald this year for the election will be… Guest columnists will include the acerbic Cactus Kate from the radical right, former Labour candidate Josie Pagani and broadcaster Mark Sainsbury. Right, so that would be...
    The Daily Blog | 27-07
  • Phew – National Party hubris seals strategy
    The National Party are bot listening to Matthew Hooton. Phew. Hooton has crunched the numbers and based on past polling National always drops 6 points come election day. National aren’t listening. Barging through the need to cut deals with all...
    The Daily Blog | 27-07
  • Noam Chomsky on the TPPA
    Noam Chomsky on the TPPA...
    The Daily Blog | 27-07
  • Unacceptable secrecy around labelling people terrorists
    It’s good to see the Sunday Star-Times attempting to get more information from government agencies about Daryl Jones, the Kiwi killed in a US drone strike in Yemen.  The paper is right to complain about the government’s refusal to provide...
    The Daily Blog | 27-07
  • A critical deconstruction of John Key – what’s behind the facade?
    Aspiring national leaders need a popular narrative of their rise to power.  Once in office, the narrative can be refined to fit the requirements of leadership and re-election.  Such is the purpose of John Roughan’s John Key: Portrait of  a...
    The Daily Blog | 27-07
  • Radio Live – off Mark
    The Top Marks lasted five weeks on Mediaworks radio station The Sound. This may have something to do with last being relevant in the mid-1980s when there were only two commercial FM licences in Auckland and they were on one...
    The Daily Blog | 27-07
  • Wellingtonians say ‘No!’ to Israeli aggression
    .   . Wellington, NZ, 26 July – About 600 Wellingtonians, and from further afield, met at the Cuba Mall Bucket fountain under a wintery sunny sky, to protest Israel’s continuing aggression in the Gaza strip, which – at the...
    The Daily Blog | 27-07
  • GUEST BLOG: Shasha Ali – I am an indigenous person but I will never call ...
    Yesterday was indeed a politically hectic day in Aoteaora New Zealand, especially if you are an activist that cares about both human and non-human animal rights. Protest actions were organised to demand an end to factory farming from about noon, and...
    The Daily Blog | 26-07
  • Pro-Israel, Pro-Palestine or ‘Pro-Peace’?
    Latest protest for people of Gaza in Auckland In the past couple of weeks I have heard a lot of people say that they are neither Pro-Israel nor Pro-Palestine; they are pro-peace. This is a stand that I respect. Everyone...
    The Daily Blog | 26-07
  • So we can’t feed the kids, the poor OR the sick now?
    Let me get this straight. We can borrow $10 billion in tax cuts over the last 6 years for the richest NZers, but we can not feed the kids, the poor or even the sick now? Revealed: Warning over hospital food...
    The Daily Blog | 26-07
  • Kim Dotcom has said it, Laila Harre has said it and now David fisher says i...
    Fascinating piece by David Fisher in the NZ Herald breaking down how many opportunities the Government had to listen to officials and stop KDC entering the country and concludes KDC should never have been allowed in… It prepared papers for the...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • You, Me and the GCSB Public Meetings
      The GCSB and TICS legislation rushed through Parliament by John Key represent the largest erosion of civil liberties this country has seen since the 1951 Waterfront Lockout. In the post Snowden world we now know a mass surveillance state operating...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • A feminist takedown of Whale Oil
    Whale Oil does it again. How many more times is he going to attack and discredit Tania Billingsley publicly? In a short blog published on Wednesday ‘Nothing to be sorry for‘ Whale Oil also known as Cameron Slater, is defending John Key...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • GUEST BLOG: Curwen Ares Rolinson – New Zealand First – We’ll Be Back
    Earlier this week, Bomber penned a missive which set out in some detail why he thought my people, New Zealand First, wouldn’t be making it back into Parliament later this year. Being a pugnacious, vindictive sort who’d never let such an...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • The changes teachers DO want
    “Oh you teachers, you just want everything to stay the same – what’s wrong with choice?  Bloody teachers.  Typical that you don’t want testing – trying to hide that you’re all useless. What about our poor kids?  Gnash gnash rant rant...” That’s...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • A feminist take down of Whale Oil
    Whale Oil does it again. How many more times is he going to attack and discredit Tania Billingsley publicly? In a short blog published on Wednesday Nothing to be sorry for Whale Oil also known as Cameron Slater, is defending John Key...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • On so called Labour Party ‘distractions’
    The right wing of the Labour Party are constructing a narrative that Labour need to stop chasing distractions and focus on the real issues that matter and not these silly GCSB, inequality, domestic violence, media bias, TPPA issues. It is...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • Selfies: Labour’s Electorate MPs are at it again
    IT’S A LITTLE TRIANGLE of grass at the corner of Rewa Street and Mt Eden Road, ideal for election hoardings. Wandering along Mt Eden Road last Saturday morning to our weekly appointment with the brunch menu at Orvieto, my family and...
    The Daily Blog | 25-07
  • Well, well, well – Jonathan Coleman did know about FBI interest into Kim ...
    Last years GCSB Town Hall meeting in Auckland Oh dear, the cover up and lies are starting to fall over now aren’t they… Coleman knew of FBI interest in Dotcom pre-residency decisionGovernment minister Jonathan Coleman knew the FBI was interested...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • Why You Must March Against Factory Farming This Saturday, 12pm
    The rally this Saturday is critical because this is the FIRST TIME IN NEW ZEALAND HISTORY that a major party has agreed to ban all intensive factory farming practices. The Labour party, the Greens, Internet-Mana, the SPCA, SAFE and other...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • Astronaut tweets photo of explosions over Israel and Gaza from space
      This is what a war zone looks like from space: From aboard the International Space Station, German astronaut Alexander Gerst tweeted this image as the station passed over Israel and Gaza in what he called ‘his saddest photo yet’....
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • When Firstline are focusing on flag burning rather than dead Palestinian ch...
    The IDF are butchering children in UN schools this morning and what’s the big issue on TV3s Firstline? Flag burning. How pathetic, and what a slap in the face to Mike McRoberts who is currently risking his life in Gaza...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • ‘Victim’ vs ‘Terrorist’
    ‘Victim’ vs ‘Terrorist’...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • Petition asking TVNZ to stand Hosking down as election moderator jumps to o...
    In just a day the petition calling on TVNZ to replace Hosking as the election moderator has jumped to over 2500, you can sign it here. The defence that the Right are trying to run here is that John Campbell...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • When the mainstream media go feral: the descent into sheer farce, according...
    . . It had to happen, I guess… The media pack-campaign against Labour Leader David Cunliffe has managed to  plumb new depths of absurdity. On TV3, on 24 July,  TV3/Tova O’Brien ran this report on their 6PM News bulletin, about...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • Coalition for Better Broadcasting: MIKE HOSKING FOR PM?
    Yes indeed. Mike Hosking is for the PM. And now he’s able to do even more as moderator (or should that be immoderator) of TVNZ’s election debates. Here at the Coalition for Better Broadcasting we feel it’s pretty safe to say that...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • The lie that “There is no alternative” to neo-liberal economic policies
    Supporters of President Maduro in Venezuela rally   Since the 1980s we have had drubbed into our heads that there was no alternative to the economic and social policies unleashed at that time. It even had it’s own acronym – TINA. The...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • A Kanaky tale of mining skulduggery and environmental courage
    Florent Eurisouké … still campaigning against mining. Photo: Del Abcede/PMC David Robie also blogs at Café Pacific AN EXTRAORDINARY story of mining skulduggery and a courageous struggle by indigenous Kanak environmental campaigners has been captured in a poignant new documentary,...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • UNBREAKING: The list of questions Mike Hosking will use in first TVNZ leade...
    “Good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the first TVNZ leaders debate being held live in the gloriously beautiful Sky City ball room. It’s such a beautiful building boys and girls, we are so blessed to have Sky City...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • Internet Party Party review
      I have been to A LOT of political party functions in my time, and they tend to be dull affairs at the best of times but what is happening with Internet MANA is something quite exciting. I went to...
    The Daily Blog | 24-07
  • Dear Seven Sharp – after learning Hosking will be the leaders debate ...
    I have to be honest, I had made the decision last night  to accept Seven Sharp’s hastily offered opportunity to appear on their show after I savagely criticised the bullshit whitewash story they did on John Key’s favourite far right hate speech...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • National refuses meeting with Maui’s advocates
    MIL OSI – Source: Green Party – Headline: National refuses meeting with Maui’s advocates Wednesday, 23 Jul 2014 | Press Release This is another reminder that the National Government does not care about the survival of the Maui’s dolphin National...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Message from CTU President Helen Kelly
    MIL OSI – Source: Unite Union – Headline: Message from CTU President Helen Kelly Dear MikeThere’s only 43 days until September 3, when voting in the General Election starts. The last day to vote is September 20.Thanks heaps for signing...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • MANA Tamaki send a challenge to Labour
    MIL OSI – Source: Mana Movement – Headline: MANA Tamaki send a challenge to Labour Posted on July 23, 2014 by admin in Joe Carolan, Press Releases“Labour should set the agenda and purposely do something positively controversial once a week”,...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • We must act to save our dolphins
    MIL OSI – Source: Labour Party – Headline: We must act to save our dolphins A new report makes it clear for the urgent need to protect Maui’s and Hector’s dolphins while arguing  it is clear that there is no...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • School told to manipulate national standards data
    MIL OSI – Source: Labour Party – Headline: School told to manipulate national standards data Parents can have little confidence in the Government’s National Standards after an Auckland school was told to manipulate its data so it added up, Labour’s...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Regional economies must have tailored plans
    MIL OSI – Source: Labour Party – Headline: Regional economies must have tailored plans News that up to 114 jobs could be lost from Fonterra’s Canpac plant in Hamilton reinforces the need for a government plan to build resilient regional...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Auditor General slams Shared Services project
    MIL OSI – Source: Labour Party – Headline: Auditor General slams Shared Services project The Auditor-General’s Office could not have been more damning about the 18 months spent on the Central Agency Shared Services (CASS) project at the Finance and...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Fonterra job losses a massive blow to Waikato
    MIL OSI – Source: Labour Party – Headline: Fonterra job losses a massive blow to Waikato The potential loss of up to 114 jobs from Fonterra’s Canpac plant in Hamilton is a massive blow to the Waikato region which has...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Basin flyover decision an opportunity for capital
    MIL OSI – Source: Labour Party – Headline: Basin flyover decision an opportunity for capital The decision to reject the proposed flyover at the Basin Reserve must be taken as an opportunity to properly fund Wellington’s transport future and must...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Indonesia: New President Widodo must make good on human rights pledges
    MIL OSI – Source: Amnesty International NZ – Headline: Indonesia: New President Widodo must make good on human rights pledges Indonesia’s new President Joko Widodo must deliver on campaign promises to improve Indonesia’s dire human rights situation, Amnesty International said....
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Communities in Sierra Leone turn their backs on female genital mutilation
    MIL OSI – Source: Amnesty International NZ – Headline: Communities in Sierra Leone turn their backs on female genital mutilation While activists gather in London to discuss strategies to tackle female genital mutilation, communities across Sierra Leone have been taking...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • The Gambia: Activists mark 20 years of iron-fisted repression
    MIL OSI – Source: Amnesty International NZ – Headline: The Gambia: Activists mark 20 years of iron-fisted repression The Gambian government must abolish the laws and iron fisted practices that have resulted in two decades of widespread human rights violations,...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • A blog from the front lines of Palestine: It’s time for a new narrative
    I don’t know if I follow trouble or if trouble follows me, but somehow I seem to have found myself near one of the world’s hotspots again. The difference this time is that instead of sitting in some obscure location,...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • GUEST BLOG: Michael Wood – The Path Ahead
    It’s well established that Labour has had a difficult couple of weeks. Getting back on to a successful path requires our focus to shift from looking inwards to outwards, heightened discipline, and inner conviction. While my assessment of New Zealand...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Employers liquidating companies to avoid paying minimum entitlements
    Across the union movement we have seen a number of documented cases now where companies are liquidating their business in order to avoid their legal obligations, in terms of paying the minimum entitlements to their workers. The most recent example...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • GUEST BLOG: Joe Carolan : Positively Controversial
    The protest in Auckland last weekend that the NZ Herald claimed was attend by only a hundred people. Labour should set the agenda and purposely do something positively controversial once a week. A good start would be for all their...
    The Daily Blog | 23-07
  • Forest & Bird supports Fish and Game’s freshwater advocacy
    The independent conservation organisation Forest & Bird is concerned over allegations the Fish & Game Council has been threatened over its advocacy for freshwater quality....
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • Time for Epsom to say “no deal”
    “Epsom voters will be disgusted by the deal announced today to try and once again gift their electorate to the ACT Party”, says Labour candidate for Epsom Michael Wood....
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • Petition for release the of seven Bah
    At the invitation of the Honourable Annette King the New Zealand Bahá'í community is presenting a petition to the House of Representatives asking the NZ government to demand the release of the seven former leaders of the Baha’i community in...
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • Capital gains in the capital city
    Victoria University will today be hosting a public debate on the merits of more comprehensive capital gains tax—a step which taxation expert Associate Professor Dr David White considers would be beneficial for New Zealand. Organised by student group Beta Alpha...
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • Te Kupenga supports efforts of anti-violence campaigner
    Te Kupenga Whakaoti Mahi Patunga – National Network of Stopping Violence Services (Te Kupenga) wholeheartedly endorses statements made by DJ, Kickboxer and Anti-Violence Campaigner Richie Hardcore this morning on TV3’s Firstline about the role of men...
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • iPredict Ltd2014 Election Update #28
    The chances of a fiscal surplus in 2014/15 continue to plunge and are down to 50%, according to the combined wisdom of the 7000 registered traders on New Zealand’s online predictions market, iPredict. The forecast surplus is now just 0.22%...
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • TPPA is a bad idea
    “Currently New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam, the USA, Japan, Malaysia, Canada, and Mexico are still negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Officially talks finished last August, but the reality is that they keep...
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • Getting privacy right in our data future
    Privacy Commissioner John Edwards welcomes the release of the New Zealand Data Futures Forum’s report....
    Scoop politics | 28-07
  • Conference on Democracy, Ethics and the Public Good
    Conference on Democracy, Ethics and the Public Good A conference is to be held in Wellington on 1 and 2 August with the aim of starting a NZ-wide discussion about the quality of our democracy. The conference is hosted jointly...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Paddock to plate, and smart roads possible
    New Zealand’s international brand and exports could grow significantly with the creation of a data sharing ‘eco-system’ according to a paper released by the NZ Data Futures Forum today....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Ngapuhi wants to overthrow Maori King
    Ngapuhi is planning a hui for the end of the year – organised by iwi leader David Rankin – in which the future of the King Movement will be discussed....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Housing warrant of fitness little help for sick children
    A housing warrant of fitness has been promoted as a way of preventing sickness among children in poverty. The attached report shows that such a regime would have little impact on health outcomes but would come at a considerable cost,...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Upcoming Fabian Events in Auckland
    Sue Bradford ’s PhD thesis, 'A major left wing think tank in Aotearoa—an impossible dream or a call to action?' looked at why no major left wing think tank has developed in Aotearoa and whether the left in 2010-2013 was...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Senior Citizens, Not Senile Citizens
    The Taxpayers’ Union is questioning the merits and costs of the “ No car? No problem! Getting around your community without a car” brochure, released by the Office for Senior Citizens. The brochure’s purpose is to explain to senior citizens...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • NZ Troops Hone Their Skills in Queensland
    Around 260 New Zealand troops are on a 25-day Australian-led warfighting exercise in Townsville, Northern Queensland....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Maritime Union backs Green Party call for shipping lanes
    The Maritime Union is backing the Green Party’s policy to implement compulsory shipping lanes for coastal shipping, announced today....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Auckland Council Bypasses Public, Ditches Rodeo Ban
    Auckland Council Bypasses Public, Ditches Rodeo Ban The Auckland Council has announced that they are abandoning the rodeo ban on council land, put into place in 2008. This was done with virtually no consultation, says SAFE, the animal advocacy organisation....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Tolley and Coleman urged to meet West Papuan visitor
    Ministers Tolley and Coleman urged to meet West Papuan visitor Police Minister Anne Tolley and Defence Minister Dr Jonathan Coleman have a rare opportunity this week to gain first-hand knowledge about Indonesian police and military activities in West...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Minister Right to Give Fish & Game a Serve
    Reacting to Radio New Zealand’s report concerning allegations that Conservation Minister Nick Smith warned the Fish and Game Council that it acts like a 'rabid NGO', Jordan Williams, Executive Director of the Taxpayers’ Union says:...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Government needs to get Fishing reform bill passed now
    The Maritime Union is urging the Government to push through a Bill reforming the fishing industry....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Ivory trade laws look set to tighten following petition
    A petition mounted by an Auckland schoolteacher has won the support of a powerful Select Committee and has moved the New Zealand closer towards a fully enforceable ivory trading ban....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Bilingual guide a demonstration of leadership
    “Waikato River Restoration: A Bilingual Guide” to the Waikato River that saw Tainui Waikato, Landcare Trust and the Waikato River Authority working together is a demonstration of rangatiratanga or leadership says Race Relations Commissioner...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Georgina Beyer to stand for MANA in Te Tai Tonga
    "It's great to have Georgie on board" said Hone Harawira, MANA Leader and Te Tai Tokerau MP. "She's strong-minded, stands up to be counted, and has fought for the rights of those who haven't had any - and won. That...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Q + A: Sir Bob Harvey
    SUSAN Sir Bob Harvey was behind the transformation of Norm Kirk, and one of New Zealand's most popular Prime Ministers. He also advised Bill Rowling, David Lange and Helen Clark, the latter as Labour Party President. Wild Westie a new...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Q + A: Rod Drury
    Xero boss Rod Drury told TVNZ’s Q+A programme what the political parties are offering at this election is ‘all too small.’ “There's no policy, all it is a bunch of incremental stuff. “All too small. What we want to do...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Q + A: Gerry Brownlee
    Transport Minister Gerry Brownlee Rules Out Fastracking Auckland’s City Rail Loop Transport Minister Gerry Brownlee told TV1’s Q+A programme this morning that he won’t be bringing forward an Auckland City Rail loop based on new figures showing...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Owen interviews Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey
    Lisa Owen interviews Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey Headlines: Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey suggests “we can move on some” changes to welfare for New Zealanders in Australia New Zealanders “brothers and sisters” who make “a massive contribution”,...
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • Flavell and Harawira on The Nation
    Lisa Owen interviews Maori Party leader Te Ururoa Flavell and Mana leader Hone Harawira Headlines: Hone Harawira says realistically his Mana Party can take three Maori seats, Te Ururoa Flavell sticks to prediction that Maori Party will win all seven....
    Scoop politics | 27-07
  • The Nation 26,27 July: Flavell & Harawira, Joe Hockey
    On The Nation this weekend…. With the Maori seats primed to play a pivotal role this election, Torben Akel reports from the key battlegrounds and meets the top contenders. Then the Maori Party co-leader Te Ururoa Flavell and Mana Party...
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Announcement of New Zealand First Candidate for Rangitīkei
    New Zealand First has endorsed Dr Romuald (‘Rom’) Rudzki as the candidate for the Rangitīkei Electorate in the 2014 General Election....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Labour Offer Len Brown a Hotel Tax
    The Taxpayers’ Union is slamming the Labour Party's plan to allow councils to levy new 'pillow taxes' and regional petrol taxes. Reacting to this afternoon’s NZ Herald report Jordan Williams, Executive Director of the Taxpayers’ Union ,...
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Cell phone evidence a first
    Cell phone evidence a first Evidence gathered solely from a cell phone has been used for the first time to convict a Hastings man for possessing child sexual abuse pictures. Michael Lawrence Worsnop, a 29-year-old orchard worker pleaded guilty to...
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • New Zealand Aid Worker Helping in Gaza
    A New Zealand Red Cross nurse working in Gaza says she has never experienced anything like the current conflict in her long aid work career....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Parking officers deserve safety at work
    The union representing the Auckland Transport parking officer severely beaten on July 17 says everyone has a right to go about their job without fear for their safety....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Caritas Aotearoa NZ to provide Gaza humanitarian aid
    Caritas Jerusalem is providing medical assistance, food and other necessities to the thousands of vulnerable people affected by the escalating conflict in Gaza, and Caritas Aotearoa New Zealand is contributing an initial $20,000 to support the humanitarian...
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • ALCP challenges parties to support Charlotte’s Web
    The leader of the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party Julian Crawford is calling on all other political parties to state their position on using cannabis oil to treat pediatric epilepsy....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Oxfam accepts cheque from Pacific Corporation Foundation
    Oxfam New Zealand has accepted a cheque for almost $1000 today from the Pacific Corporation Foundation toward recovery efforts in the Solomon Islands, following April’s flash flooding that left thousands homeless....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Draft report and decision – Pūhoi to Warkworth proposal
    The Ara Tūhono – Pūhoi to Wellsford Road of National Significance: Pūhoi to Warkworth section Board of Inquiry has released its draft report and decision....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • New Zealanders willing to pay tax to protect dolphins
    A report released this week shows a large majority of New Zealanders want Maui’s and Hector’s dolphins protected and they are prepared to pay for it....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Stop Smart Meters
    “The Democrats for Social Credit Party (DSC) wholeheartedly endorses the Stop Smart Meters campaign for a moratorium on installations of smart meters until the technology is proven not be a risk to health, and until home owners are given a...
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Maori Roll Electors Urged to Vote Strategically
    Voters enrolled in the seven Maori electorates must learn to maximize their influence by voting strategically, according to the Maori Party candidate for Te Tai Tokerau, Rev Te Hira Paenga....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Politicians Ignore Families’ Concerns on Street Prostitution
    Family First NZ says that politicians are ignoring the concerns of families, lack the will to take appropriate action, and are happy to drag the ongoing problem of street prostitution into the next parliamentary term....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Plunket celebrates Te Wiki o te Reo Māori
    Plunket is proud to celebrate Te Wiki o te Reo Māori (21-27 July), with Plunket people across the country among several thousand New Zealanders taking part and increasing their kete of knowledge in te reo....
    Scoop politics | 25-07
  • Coleman must quit or be sacked over Dotcom case
    Immigration New Zealand has done the right thing in distancing itself from Jonathan Coleman’s claims that ministers were not aware of FBI involvement in Kim Dotcom’s residency application, says the Internet Party. Internet Party leader Laila Harré...
    Scoop politics | 24-07
  • Auckland Councillors, Not Emperors
    25 JULY 2014 Responding to the NZ Herald report that Auckland Councillors have voted to keep their ratepayer-funded business class travel perks, and considered new rules that would have exempted councillors from Auckland City's parking charges, Taxpayers’...
    Scoop politics | 24-07
  • Cunliffe Looks Dodgy Lunching with Sex Offender
    Conservative Party Leader Colin Craig says that David Cunliffe's social meeting with a known sex offender while on holiday "looks pretty dodgy."...
    Scoop politics | 24-07
  • Taxpayers’ Union Back LGNZ Calls For Greater Transparency
    The Taxpayers’ Union is backing Local Government New Zealand’s calls for the Official Information Act to be extended to cover the Local Government Commission. Union Executive Director, Jordan Williams, says:...
    Scoop politics | 24-07
  • Lecture series to provide insight into 2014 election
    Could National’s refusal to reform MMP lead to the defeat of the government? Is the media providing voters with the information they require to make an informed electoral decision? What directions might John Key’s leadership take if he secures...
    Scoop politics | 24-07
  • National Rally Against Factory Farming
    Animal advocates and members of the public all over New Zealand will unite for a ‘National Day of Action Against Factory Farming’ Saturday, tomorrow 26 July in response to two recent exposés that showed horrific conditions on pig factory farms....
    Scoop politics | 24-07
  • Women in Politics Finds Support at Conference
    Women in Politics, a brand-new organisation for New Zealand women in political office, was met with overwhelming support at the 2014 Local Government New Zealand Conference held this weekend in Nelson....
    Scoop politics | 24-07
Images of the election
Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere