Climate change is not an accident

Written By: - Date published: 6:23 am, February 22nd, 2018 - 110 comments
Categories: climate change, disaster, Environment, pasifika - Tags:

Meanwhile,

The 2nd Pacific Climate Change Conference is on Weds – Fri this week. #pccc2018

110 comments on “Climate change is not an accident”

  1. cleangreen 1

    Thanks for your usual accurate summary of our “nuclear moment of our time weka,

    We are now “in the twilight of our own time”, where we will see all boardwalks and building all alongside our residential zoned sea fronts, that are now being inundated and flooded!!!!!!

    So why are private funding and public taxes being used for commercial building still going on?

    Like we we see in Napier along the “Marine Parade”- as 65% of all ratepayers money is still being ploughed into new beachfront attractions for tourists while the Napier City Council say it has no money for any residential improvements lake water services and road surfacing urgently needed projects?

    Council is negligent and reckless with using ratepayers money in this way, and will be mired in history by their gross reckless use of public money.

    “A ship of fools they all are”.

    • Ed 1.1

      Im starting to think Rupert and McPherson are right.

    • Lloyd 1.2

      Napier was raised over a metre last century by an earthquake. I would guess significant rises will occur every century or so. (anyone know of any scientific conclusions on this?). Wellington has definitely been rising in jumps for a long time. Kaikoura has also demonstrated it is a rising town.
      If this is the case Napier, Kaikoura and Wellington may be some of the few places in the world where coastal development won’t be under water in a couple of centuries. Any such development should however be Tsunami aware. What goes up may well be washed by giant waves immediately upon rising.

  2. cleangreen 2

    Agreed Ed; -, His words say to all don’t they?

    http://www.peoplesworld.org/article/we-are-dead-climate-change-and-guy-mcpherson/

    “KINGSTON, R.I. – Climate change is the sickness of our civilization, and the prognosis is bleak. For a while, Dr. Guy McPherson, professor emeritus of natural resources and ecology & evolutionary biology at the University of Arizona, was relatively optimistic. There was a time when he believed that, if modern industrial society were to suddenly cease to operate, the planet could be saved. Not any more, he says. Planet Earth is now in hospice, nearing the end.”

    • weka 2.1

      Guy McPherson is part of the problem. He’s advocating giving up at at time when we desperately need to be taking action. I don’t care what he *believes the prognosis is, what I care about is that humans start taking right action. He is working against that.

      He’s also not a reliable source for information. He pretends the science supports his view that it’s too late. It doesn’t. He should just be honest about his belief, but he misuses science and his position to promote doom. No-one knows yet if it’s too late. He is as bad as anything the denialists do.

      I wrote a post about the problems with McPherson’s proselytising,

      Climate change change vs scaremongering

      • patricia bremner 2.1.1

        Agreed Weka, We can always try new ideas. “Woe is me” does nothing.

      • One Two 2.1.2

        Stop voting then , Weka..

        Those who keep voting are also part of the problem…

        • fender 2.1.2.1

          Yeah if nobody voted carbon emissions would cease eh

          edit: could be a stern mod note coming your way, or worse 😈

          • One Two 2.1.2.1.1

            Impossible to know while those who vote are propping up the frameworks which ensure the status quo, eh…

            The way to find out is to collapse those frameworks…that can likely only be achieved when people stop voting and force the collapse..

            Voting ensures other options won’t have the chance to play out…

            Should be blatantly clear on the core problem fronts by now….

            • fender 2.1.2.1.1.1

              Good luck promoting your collapse, I’m sure no-one will vote for that.

              • One Two

                Geez that’s low rent, Fender…

                I’m not promoting it, and people are voting for collapse….

                The shifted timeline is just over the horizon, is all…

              • cleangreen

                Well that’s great ‘fender’ – you gave up without a fight? 2.1.2.1.1.1

                What else would you suggest then to save our planet?

                Your last comment had gotten a ‘stern mod note (or worse) 2.1.2.1

                Seems like you enjoy putting the boot in do you?

            • Draco T Bastard 2.1.2.1.1.2

              In many ways you are right. Those voting for the status quo are voting for the environmental collapse that it will bring about. That includes National, Labour, NZFirst, and Act voters.

              Which, as it stands, is more than 90% of the population.

  3. One Anonymous Bloke 3

    Thanks for this summary, Weka. That’s a stark warning from Tim Grafton.

    Not that it’s news per se: the re-insurers have been making this clear for years. As Cleangreen says, these obvious signals have been all-but ignored by local councils and the government.

    It’s hard not to be angry with climate deniers, especially those who’ve occupied positions of responsibility. As Grafton says, this is no accident.

    • You_Fool 3.1

      There needs to be legislation put in so that anyone damaged by Climate Change can sue those responsible for damages. It is the same as if I went and burned down your house!

    • weka 3.2

      “That’s a stark warning from Tim Grafton.”

      Yes, and the bits about real time causation, and having a Green Climate Minister, these are the things are going to push the next level of change. We should be ready politically.

  4. cleangreen 4

    Weka & Ed,

    Looking at the ‘clumsy manner that our regional and local Councils are approaching the Climate change effects in the way that we now see Napier City doing it wrong as explained above, it all just mirrors the same thing we all saw with the management of the sinking of the “Titanic” all those years ago doesn’t it?

    Human reactions to the forces of Nature and now the forces of overuse of human activity seem unable to react to climate affects and crisis today any better than in 1911 when the Titanic hit an iceberg.

    Now our ‘Titanic’ is nearing the end we still cant get away from our collision with another monster ‘ climate change iceberg’ today.

    • Pat 4.1

      Too easy to blame councils…look what happens when they try and make sensible decisions…..councils are representative

  5. One Anonymous Bloke 5

    Fatalistic hand-waving doesn’t help either.

    • cleangreen 5.1

      Just tell us what you “fanatic” right wingnuts will do to reverse climate change OAB?

      Oh of course you want to build new roads and use more trucks right?

      That will hasten our demise as you know it will.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1.1

        “Fanatic”.

        “Fatalistic”.

        One of these things is not like the other one. As for the rest of your comment, it’s contemptible drivel. Get a life.

        • weka 5.1.1.1

          You using the reply button would have helped in this instance. As would not upping the ante.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1.1.1.1

            I was mildly surprised that you didn’t include your usual moderator warning about denial and/or promoting despair in the OP.

            At the time I commented, three comments – from C/G and Ed, already fell into the category of promoting despair. C/G’s semi-literate response says it all.

            • weka 5.1.1.1.1.1

              I live in hope the commentariat will self-regulate 🙂

              Plus I got distracted by the garden this afternoon.

            • weka 5.1.1.1.1.2

              I just caught up with the comments. There’s no reason that other people couldn’t have rebutted those. Just saying.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                Yeah, I have limited patience for being abused and misrepresented, though.

                • weka

                  Right. So imagine what it’s like for the moderators having to deal with the abuse you dish out to other commenters.

      • weka 5.1.2

        OAB is many things but a RWNJ isn’t one of them, not even close. I would guess he votes Green and/or sits solidly to the left of Labour. Can we please try and be less reactive and take time to communicate with people well? We’re going to need those skills going forward.

      • fender 5.1.3

        Any fuckwit calling OAB right-wing should probably be given the rest of the year off, even if they only stumbled on this site five minutes ago, but especially if they’ve been around for a while. Fucking disgrace.

  6. Sparky 6

    No its not an accident. I was at my beach house in Foxton over Xmas and I have never known it to be so hot. Fans were sold out in Levin and Palmerston North and we tried everywhere. Reminded me of Sydney in the height of summer (lived there a few years).

    Maybe I bang on about the CP-TPP but I’m appalled given whats right in front of us all that any govt could dream of signing something so irresponsible in light of the obvious threat climate change presents.

    Really these govts should be bringing corporations to heel and making them accountable with stricter controls on polluting and emissions not signing cowboy deals that give them greater authority.

    Just goes to show how weak and ineffectual govt has become (or perhaps always was) and not just here in NZ.

    • jcuknz 6.1

      As you cruised around Levin-Palmerston using the cause, a cause, of our problem in your vehicle looking for a solution which to run also uses another contributor. Like Greenies travelling to conferences across the world …. it would be funny if it wasn’t quite so sickeningly short sighted.

  7. Bill 7

    I wonder how many people in Russia sat around waiting for that revolution – the storming of the Winter Palace as myth would have it – and so missed the revolution that was going on all around them up to that (supposed) historical marker?

    We know there are going to be fundamental changes whether we avoid two degrees or shoot through two degrees – ie, revolutionary changes. Is it fair to say the landscape of revolution is simply the psychological and physical actions that follow from a realisation that change is coming no matter what?

    How many people are missing it, I wonder? How many people are being reactionary?
    And how many are engaged?

    I mean, I know that’s pretty academic given it’s happening no matter what. It’s just that sometimes a given position will tend to work out better than another in times of huge change.

    In this case it seems we are faced with a revolution, that either we choose to be actors in and agents of or…. well, I don’t think either scenario ends well for any who might be waiting around for a Winter Palace moment, or harbouring some notion that simply being reactive will cut the mustard.

    • adam 7.1

      I’d say we should just stop – but some smug idiot will say why they won’t – so why bother.

      We lost, because moderates have too much vested interest in keeping the system going. They are making money, they are happy. Nothing is affecting them very much, so they have nothing to worry about.

      Why go to the effort to actually change anything, when your comfortable now. Everything is simply OK now.

      Until it all falls down, nothing is going to happen, and if we as a species are going to wait to that point – then we deserve it to happen.

      I’m a bit with cleangreen below, the problem is not those who think nothing is happening – it’s those who do know somthing is wrong and are doing nothing.

      • Bill 7.1.1

        No-one “lost”.

        There’s a revolution either way.

        The positioning for an intelligent revolution (ie – one we claim agency in) is much the same as preparing for one that we have no agency in (ie – one occasioned by climatic effects of AGW).

        As for the reactionaries, deniers, fearful and whatever else it is that may afflict others – they’ll be in a different position.

        I think for a brief moment on what their position will be, and it becomes obvious it won’t be viable. (Not saying what I’m working towards will be, but y’know, at least I’m applying whatever agency and intelligence I can for now, and it just might be the case that the scope for action or realising stuff increases with time.)

  8. cleangreen 8

    We are living is a dreamworld now.

    With those who don’t care what happens now.

    And those of us old now and fearful of what is being left for the children of tomorrow (mine included.

    I don’t care about the right wing at all now, as they will not even regard there is a problem.

    But we do so there is two sides here, those who are facing the truth and those who wont.

    The future will decide our fate of politicians sadly.

  9. CHCOFF 9

    Stackable relatively dynamic magnetic plates on the shorebeds around the New Zealand coastline to generate an abundance of free electricity, along with the shared sense of a population running on the energy of the tides, which may lead to a better adaptation/integration to the natural rhythms and forms of nature in mass societal structures and related issues, which ‘climate change’ is symptomatic of in modern civilisation.

  10. Robert Guyton 10

    Not an accident??? You mean…!!!!! Oh, Moses!!

  11. Greg #56 11

    So ex-Tropical Cyclone Gita caused all that freezing snow which fell over the South Island the past 3 days too? Nah, that’s right, it was a frigid, Antarctic, polar blast roaring up out of the deeps which no experts – and no churnalists – even noticed [looking in the wrong direction again]. But those of us who snowboard/ski, surf, fish, boat, fly, etc. sure did see it coming. And it hit us good and cold.

    Thank you, Ca-ca Change or Gugu Warming, or whatever it’s been re-branded as these days – I enjoyed yet ANOTHER snowy freezing ‘white’ birthday in February, high summer in NZ. Any so-called warming has definitely ‘runaway’… bye-bye.

    • weka 11.1

      afaik it was the low pressure that created the cold conditions, and this is a known phenomenon with cyclones. If you watched the wider wind patterns around NZ, Australia and the Pacific, they weren’t coming off the Antarctic. I was actually surprised about that, but I’m not a weather expert so I’d rather see what actual weather people have to say about it.

      In the meantime, know that I don’t tolerate climate denial under my posts, so if you make denialist comments you will most like get banned now that you have had a warning (tbh, I can’t make sense of what your point is. Global warming isn’t about everything being hot all the time).

      • jcuknz 11.1.1

        What puzzled me as somebody with little or no knowledge of these things was the rise of my barometer as the storm [ Gita?] approached? WHY??

    • In Vino 11.2

      Greg, is 56 your IQ? Look at the warming temperatures at both poles, and don’t be surprised that much of the polar cold air is moving away from the poles, providing you with your little snowboarding or whatever thrill that you get with an unexpected cold snap. Disaster will soon follow, despite your ill-founded confidence.

    • So ex-Tropical Cyclone Gita caused all that freezing snow which fell over the South Island the past 3 days too?

      Yes, probably:

      But what’s up with all the snow? If the world is getting warmer, shouldn’t there be less of it?

      Not in many places, is the surprising answer. Snow requires moist air, and a warmer atmosphere holds more moisture.

      Although it also has to be cold to snow, it can’t be too cold. More than a few degrees below freezing, heavy snowfall becomes less likely because very cold air is drier and less likely to rise and form clouds.

      So in broad terms, a warmer world should mean fewer days of snowfall, but heavier snowfall on those days when it does snow. In very cold regions, towards the poles, there will be more days of snow, too.

  12. infused 12

    No one denies climate change. They refute how much impact humans have on it.

    You get some hot weather coming off Australia and suddenly ZOMG DEH CLIMATES.

    Nevermind that we’ve been measuring the temperature for only the last ~200 years.

    No one addresses the elephant in the room – population. We have too much of it. Address that.

    [Some people deny climate change outright. But there are different kinds of denial too – it’s not on humans, it’s not that bad, we will be fine and should just carry on and adapt like humans always do, and so on (plus we’re doomed). I consider denial under my posts to be anything that pushes a line that will stop people taking action.

    Also, not a great fan of derails. So sure, population, but that’s a big conversation, and I don’t want to have to wade through a bunch of arguments that have already been well covered elsewhere, so if you want to go down that track I suggest that you relate it to the post somehow, and that your comments are well constructed debate rather than just tossing out some reckons – weka]

    • In Vino 12.1

      Too late, Infused. Don’t want to offend Weka by spreading despondency, but we need a plague or war to cut world population by enough. Asking a few people to reduce their birth rate will not help at this stage.

      • BM 12.1.1

        Of course, we do, fewer people and fewer people breeding the better.

        But to say that is infringing on woman’s rights and you can’t have that.

        • weka 12.1.1.1

          see my moderation note above.

          • BM 12.1.1.1.1

            Last comment

            What’s more important to you weka? women’s rights and the right for any woman to be able to breed as much as she wants whenever she wants or climate change?

            • weka 12.1.1.1.1.1

              If you use language like ‘breed’ I’m unlikely to take your comment seriously.

              I suggest rereading the mod note.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.1.1.2

              False premises, a false dichotomy, and deliberate insults. Deep down BM knows he’s lost the argument. Probably some residual anger about losing the election too, and now Judith isn’t going to be leader either.

              • BM

                Mate, you’re losing your touch, feeble stuff.

                • weka

                  Do you want a ban?

                  • BM

                    Not really, but in my defence, I’m not the one bagging other posters,

                    • weka

                      I consider “Mate, you’re losing your touch, feeble stuff.” to be flaming. All it’s going to do is provoke a reaction. It has nothing to do with the post or the subthread and has no political content. That shit is just really boring from a moderator pov, and if it kicks off it’s easier to just move those people out of the conversation.

              • cleangreen

                100% OAB good call.

            • Lara 12.1.1.1.1.3

              FFS

              BM that’s just bloody offensive

              The fact is that whenever and wherever women are given cheap or free access to contraception and access to abortion on demand, and allowed the respect to make their own decisions on how to control their fertility, the birth rate drops.

              It’s now below replacement rate in NZ.

              So FFS derailing a conversation on climate change to have a go at women, call them breeders, and claim they’re the problem here, is really fucking offensive.

              And factually just wrong.

            • jcuknz 12.1.1.1.1.4

              Asking is no use … knowledge and belief is. Sorry Weka but it deserves an answer.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.2

          You’re wasting your bile: empowering women has already worked, we’re past “peak child”.

          • weka 12.1.1.2.1

            We need to be at steady state or decreasing population though, and sooner rather than later. Also, population should be based on local region and its capacity for sustainably supporting that population, otherwise we’re just expecting to use the resources of people elsewhere to support our lifestyles.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1.2.1.1

              use the resources of people elsewhere to support our lifestyles.

              I think that exploitation is part of the reason peak child didn’t happen sooner. The medical, social. legal and political advances of the last century were unevenly shared.

              These days, on the other hand, it’s heartening to think that “The Third World” has been consigned to history.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                …to be clear, the benefits are still unevenly shared, just that there’s been some improvement.

                • weka

                  Not sure I agree. If we are looking at NZ, I think we are using other people’s resources at a worse rate than say 50 years ago. That global measurements of poverty show an improvement in some areas doesn’t negate that. It’s still not sustainable (or fair).

                  “These days, on the other hand, it’s heartening to think that “The Third World” has been consigned to history.”

                  Has it? I’m still seeing it in many places.

                  • David Mac

                    Things are getting better, all boats are rising, but you’re right weka.

                    We still live in a world where Mums say ‘I had 3 kids because 2 will probably die.’

                    In a world with a sinking child mortality rate, this is an outlook that will create a global population bubble.

                    If all of the food on Earth was distributed evenly between all of us, I think most of us would be thinking: ‘I’m still hungry’.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      We still live in a world where Mums say ‘I had 3 kids because 2 will probably die.’

                      Have you registered what “peak child” means? Among other things, it means your opinion – as stated above – is factually incorrect.

                      For over a century, reality has persistently failed to conform to Malthusian notions. You’d think more people might’ve noticed by now.

                    • David Mac

                      Hi OAB, no I wasn’t familiar with the term. I Googled. I stand corrected, thanks.

                      “The term peak child came into common parlance after its adoption by the Gates Foundation, a charitable organisation set up by Bill and Melinda Gates. In his annual letter in 2014 Bill Gates attempted to ‘explode’ the myth that poor countries were not getting any richer. The letter drew on the work of an organisation called Gapminder which gathers statistical information and presents it in a digestible fashion. A key feature of the arguments put forward in the letter was the work of Hans Rosling, professor of international health at the Karolinska Institute, who argues that, due to improved health care and child life expectancy, birth rates are falling.

                      He says that contrary to popular belief, women start choosing to have fewer children once education and health improves to the extent that the women believe their children are likely to survive into adulthood. Because of falling birth rates there will never be more children in the world than there are today – we are at peak child. However, the world’s population will continue to rise due to the demographic lag.”

                    • One Two []

                      ‘Peak Child’ was adopted by the Gates Foundation…

                      Strong history of eugenics running through the Gates family…

                      Peak Child theory would fit well within such ideological bent..

                      Don’t fall for the ‘overpopulation’ fallacy

                      Foundations such as Gates and the ‘network’ push that meme hard, and strategize towards such goals…

                      Peak child…meh

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Hans Rosling gives very entertaining Ted Talks on the subject. Worth a look.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      @One Two.

                      Peak Child theory

                      It isn’t a theory, it’s an observation. An observation that you dismiss without even trying to understand it 🙄

            • cleangreen 12.1.1.2.1.2

              Yes weka,

              Trouble is we all are hyped by the Corporate media now who drums into the whole world that “progress” is all about increasing consumerism and that equates to more people so we are subtly being encouraged to have more children.

              We need to look back to the last generation and how they curtailed their population, (even after the war). Even the baby boomer generation (of whom I am one) did not vastly increase our population.

              During my growing up stage we all never had the “economic pressures” of consumerism expansion that we have now so i am un-easy about this.

            • jcuknz 12.1.1.2.1.3

              Thank you Weka I had not thought of it being relevant to one’s area.
              I have till now thought that we can accommodate those of other areas willing to accept our attitudes and behavior rather than them trying to alter us.

              Sad that somebody mentions eugenics the moment anybody talks sense about population

    • hey refute how much impact humans have on it.

      No they don’t. What they do is make a loud noise saying that they do while having no evidence to back them up.

      In the real world, it’s called lying.

      • Ed 12.2.1

        I r cmon it’s akin to being complicit in genocide.
        Those lies have helped ensure action to mitigate climate change has been delayed.
        And that delay will cause millions of human death.

        They are also guilty of ecocide. The extinction of species, the destruction of habitats are happening because of delaying action.

        We need a new set of Nuremberg trials for such war criminals.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 12.3

      “Peak Child” renders Malthusian arguments moot, even if Julian Simon hadn’t already done so.

      No-one has refuted the human impact on the greenhouse effect.

    • weka 12.4

      mod note above for you.

    • Macro 12.5

      No one denies climate change. They refute how much impact humans have on it.
      Only an ignoramus tries to refute the effect that humans have had on global warming. The fact is that every climate scientist over the past decade agrees that the effect humans have had on causing climate change is – all of it.
      https://www.skepticalscience.com/epa-debunked-pruitt-misinformation.html

  13. David Mac 13

    We are ever more becoming a society that lives in the now. Every year that passes it becomes harder to sell superannuation plans to 18 year olds. We struggle to make life plans beyond next month.

    Acting against climate change will grow like a snowball rolling down a slope when it starts to effect those best placed to make a difference.

    The centuries old adage still stands… for a little while longer: “Buy beachfront mate, you’ll get the best capital growth, they aren’t making any more.”

    The comfortable captains of industry will take action when the dog is snapping at their heels and the price of Takapuna beachfront properties are plummeting.

    Hopefully our lifeboat won’t quite of sailed.

  14. Lara 14

    I still see councils allowing subdivision right beside the sea. And people actually building houses right beside the sea.

    Clearly, too many people either don’t think the earth is warming, don’t care, or don’t think sea levels will rise in their lifetimes.

    I see no real political will to change, except from the Greens. And IMO even they don’t go far enough.

    And the older I get the more I think we get the government we deserve. Too many of us are just stupid or callous.

    The time is now. If we are going to avert total collapse we need to change right now. All of us, every day. And the change must also come from the top, from politicians and business. It can’t be just the small changes each of us can make within the current systems in which we live, because those systems often don’t offer real choice for change.

    • David Mac 14.1

      Hi Lara, I was intrigued to read a future insurer’s opinion today.

      “Hey buddy, you bought the place knowing sea levels were rising, your home theatre going underwater is not an accident, you had plenty of warning, it’s your problem not ours.”

      The well heeled are accustomed to not being touched by the things that weigh on most of us.

      Crap schools? I don’t care my kids go to AGS.
      Legal hassle, no worries, I’ll ring my high street eagles.
      Crap hospitals? Tough luck, suffer, I go private.
      Lost my job? That’s what income protection insurance is for.

      The shallow schadenfreude bastard in me is looking forward to the uninsured Westhaven berths going submarine.

      • Lara 14.1.1

        Where I live theres a wee subdivision right by the water, an estuary. Very close to a surf beach. The last sections to be built upon are less than 1m above the high tide mark. The lowest section barely 30cm above. And its right by the water, right there!

        And people are actually pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into building homes there. I’m amazed.

        I too have a shallow schadenfreude bastard inside me. I’m looking forward to watching as their homes flood. Because this is a special kind of stupid on display.

        But the thing I’m not looking forward to? The idiots screaming at council and demanding they build a sea wall to protect their private property. Which in effect means all of the rest of us in this small community will be paying for their idiocy via our rates bills. And that’s not okay.

        • David Mac 14.1.1.1

          Yes, it’s like buying a house next to AC DC’s rehearsal space and then lobbying council about the noise.

        • Lloyd 14.1.1.2

          It will be the local Council’s fault when those houseS flood.
          It always is.
          Sea level rise isn’t happening – its the Council’s fault I have to buy new carpet for my concrete floor slab at ground level beach-front house.
          (irony)

    • jcuknz 14.2

      “I still see councils allowing subdivision right beside the sea. And people actually building houses right beside the sea.”

      I thought that until I realised that councils would face endless court proceedings if they acted sensibly to stop redevelopment of threatened areas … such is the mad system we have set up to stop common sense ruling.

      • Sacha 14.2.1

        Which is why the councils were awaiting updated standards from central govt. The ones that got squished to preserve property values. Wonder where Nuck Smith will wash up next.

  15. Son of Don 15

    “The impacts of climate change are no longer subtle. They’re affecting our daily lives, sometimes in profound ways.”

    Very few would deny climate change, especially as scientists inform is Antartica was once a jungle

    http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/03/from-leafy-to-lifeless-tropical-rainforest-once-covered-antarctica/

    It’s the arguments that current weather events are a direct result of industrialisation is where the debate rages and will continue to do so

    • David Mac 15.1

      Yeah but nah. The discussion has moved on. The argument is ‘how damaging industrialism is.’ Not whether it is or not.

    • fender 15.2

      What a shallow article, here’s a better one on the same subject that goes deeper and includes an ominous warning for the blase bunch:

      “At present, there are 390ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere, a rise – caused by emissions from power plants, factories and lorries – from preindustrial levels of around 280ppm. This has already raised global temperatures by almost 1C. At its present rate of increase – around 2ppm a year – it will still take a long time to reach 1,000ppm.
      But we should take little comfort from that, added Pekar. “By the time we get to 500ppm we will start to see major melting of the ice caps.”

      “These changes took place over millions of years. However, we are now making similar changes in decades and have little chance to adjust. There are bad days ahead for the planet.”

    • One Anonymous Bloke 15.3

      current weather events are a direct result of industrialisation

      They occur in a climate where there are more greenhouses gases in the atmosphere – because we’ve been pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. That in turn means there is more energy in the system.

      100% of weather is affected by climate. There’s no “debate”.

  16. savenz 16

    So pleased (sarcasm) that rather than urgently working on this pressing issue for Kiwi’s and our countries flora and fauna, instead government and officials are focused on signing a noose around our necks with TPPA faux new version. Then a overseas trip around the Pacific apparently.

    Apparently this means some will be better off like wine growers like John Key, Fonterra which doubled milk productivity but failed to pass on to farmers in the previous decades (maybe the 8 million salary shows where some of the profits went and the millions of wasted money into international forays of farm owning in China and other countries), Silver Fern farms (50% foreign owned), and the billions going out from overseas banks will be business as usual – no new taxes!!!, as is building the luxury Hyatt in Auckland using cheap migrant labour as well as water bottling plants with our free water direct from the aquifer. Lucky them, they are the ‘winners’ and get that paltry ‘hopeful’ 1% gain.

    Unfortunately it does not bode well for the majority of people who actually live in the country who are locked into a dumb deal. They might want policy action on why wages are so low, why the basics seem to be getting poorer and poorer quality while the costs are rising, why our raw resources are being exported and more and more closures of plants that were doing manufacturing, why our welfare bills are rising, even weird things like lowest birth rates in decades in NZ but the schools, hospitals, roads and pollution are overflowing and need more and more money pumped in by local residents to support the corporates.

    It’s not industries job to train people or plan for skill shortages that was the ‘failed’ 1970’s model. Where’s the profit in paying people more, pay them less and make them pay for their training too is the new mantra so we can be competitive with the 3rd world.

    Why is our government obsessed with poor risk agreements and helping corporations that already export massive profits gain more?

    Some of Labour’s promises are not being met.

    They campaigned on NOT signing the TPPA and the new version fails to meet their own criteria as none of the estimations are proven and even then are just estimations from arrogant officials (government officials so competent on the housing crisis and others, sarcasm) that weasel words do nothing to change that.

    Labour campaigned on reducing immigration but apparently the migrant laws are unchanged in the new agreement. It was estimated that jobs will be lost with TPPA – so why would a government want to sign an agreement that loses local jobs and replaces locals with cheaper labour based on the concerns of multinational business who want more profit?

    Never mind, the neoliberal media laps up Jacinda and she gushes about how we stood up to the world 30 years ago with David Lange and the no nukes, and how climate change and poverty reduction is so important.

    Of course the neoliberal media is NOT going to ask where is the independently and carefully assessed research to show that TPPA is going to reduce climate change and poverty. Funny enough, nowhere.

    Remember the Metro article for the Greens, really helped with the voters, NOT. Media don’t vote and increasingly MSM does not influence voters at all but paints a biased picture that lobbyists paid for to keep the ponzi schemes going and voters extract blood come election time.

    It’s a win win for neoliberalism, when the voters sit at home next election and National limps in and is death to Labour as Labour is reminded every year that they are the ones who signed the agreements to profit the .1% and leave everyone else picking up the bill and deaths for all the climate change and poverty that those agreements are creating for everybody else.

    • cleangreen 16.1

      100% savenz,

      Corporates (1%) have the plan al in place to benefit from the effects odf climate change and are driving us to it as fast as can be done.

      We cannot get our Government to really take the bull by the horn but are satisfied to just play and fiddle (while Rome burns) so to speak.

      Governments are complicit with the effect made by Corporates to bring climate change on as quick as possible.

      So little can be done short of marching in the streets and onto parliament and rioting eventually but will TPP eventually have a chilling effect on this type of action?

  17. savenz 17

    PS Kiwis are obsessed with property, so woe betide any government when the flooding, landslides, natural disasters, James Hardie trucks and mining, eyesores and leaky and poorly built buildings and corporate homages like America’s cup harbour encroachment and Hyatt hotels continue to happen.

    Time to concentrate on what’s happening at home!

  18. Ed 18

    It certainly isn’t an accident when we have the news from the Arctic and still do not.

  19. Jackel 19

    The problems of today do not come with a tag marked energy or CO2 or demography, nor with a label indicating a country or a region. The problems of today are multi-disciplinary and transnational or global.
    The problems are not primarily scientific and technological. In science we have the knowledge and in technology the tools. The problems are basically political, economic and cultural -Per Lindblom (June 1985)

  20. Philg 20

    I lament the role that MSM has played in the betrayal of the public and failing to keep them informed. They rarely investigated or sought out the real news. It’s only gotten worse and that, in part, is what has lead to the current failing leadership, at home and abroad.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Membership: Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board
    The Governments of Australia and New Zealand have announced the membership of the Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board (ANZEIB) today. This is an important step towards implementing e-Invoicing across both countries to help businesses save time and money ...
    6 days ago
  • An end to unnecessary secondary tax
    Workers who are paying too much tax because of incorrect secondary tax codes are in line for relief with the passage of legislation through Parliament late last night. The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19, Modernising Tax Administration, and Remedial Matters) ...
    1 week ago
  • Chatham Islands pāua plan approved
    Efforts to reverse the decline in the Chatham Islands pāua fishery are the focus of a new plan jointly agreed between government, the local community and industry. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash says the plan was developed by the PauaMAC4 Industry ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Bill introduced for synthetics crackdown
    The Police will get stronger powers of search and seizure to crackdown on synthetic drugs under new legislation, which makes the two main synthetics (5F-ADB and AMB-FUBINACA) Class A drugs. The Government has today introduced the Misuse of Drugs Amendment ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Blasphemous libel law repealed
    The archaic blasphemous libel offence will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill today, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Coalition Government lassos livestock rustling
    New rules to crack down on livestock rustling will come into force following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Medieval law axed
    The ‘year and a day rule’ rule will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Further steps to combat tax evasion
    Further steps to combat tax evasion Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has announced New Zealand is expanding its global ability to combat tax evasion by joining forces with authorities in 30 countries and jurisdictions. Cabinet has agreed to add another ...
    2 weeks ago