Fighting Fake News with REAL 11/8/21; The Shovel, IPCC Report, Climate

In light of the latest IPCC report on climate change, it’s crucial we remember these four steps to avoiding a climate catastrophe. First, create green jobs. Investing in renewable energy could create millions of family sustaining, union jobs and build the infrastructure we need for marginalized communities to access clean water and air. Second, stop dirty energy. A massive investment in renewable energy jobs isn’t enough to combat the climate crisis. If we are going to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we must tackle the problem at its source: Stop digging up and burning more oil, gas, and coal.

 The Solutions to the Climate Crisis No One is Talking About | The Smirking Chimp

 

Q44. Who Would you like to blame for your current lockdown?

“Where The Fuck Was Scott Morrison For The Last Two Years?” And 7 Other New Questions Added To This Year’s Census

Government Confident It Can Fuck Up Moderna Messaging Before Doses Arrive

 

Yet, as the evidence has accumulated, and the new IPCC report reinforces it, Australia has carved out a name for itself as a global laggard — grouped with denialist authoritarian states like Russia, and Saudi Arabia.

And it has done so by re-interpreting the global climate evidence as just another domestic political argument – an opportunity for creating winners and losers and profiting from the electoral dividends yielded.

With the release of a terrifying IPCC report, Australia must face its wilful political blindness on climate

 

 It has been 26 years, 26 years of the wealthiest Australians, the billionaires, subverting Australia’s Parliament, their lobbyists calling MPs and their staffers, and donating to the major parties to help keep their loophole intact. Luke Stacey and Michael West report.

Pauline Hanson Buckles: billionaires beat Parliament again

Luke Stacey | August 10, 2021

Italy temperatures forecast to hit 48 degrees

The Coalition MPs denying climate change exists

 They remain Shtum as they do so often with their "never say sorry or I was ever wrong" policy. Unless of course if your Rupert Murdoch before a gov inquiry then do an Alan Bond (ODT)

Sky News has deleted more than 30 videos, including some featuring Alan Jones, Andrew Bolt and Rowan Dean, criticising public health advice on unproven COVID-19 treatments

  News Corp controlled broadcaster remained silent on Tuesday over its decision to scrub videos from its website that promoted drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 and suggested there was a political agenda as to why it was not being used.

Bolt, who has labelled the YouTube ban “frightening”, declined to comment on his employer’s decision to expunge some of his videos, saying this masthead was “trying to cement dissent and dissension”.

“Whatever I say, it is not going to come out in any way, if The Sydney Morning Herald can help it, to our advantage,” Bolt said.

The mass deletion of content, first reported by Guardian Australia, comes as Sky News boss Paul Whittaker prepares to give evidence at a Senate inquiry into media diversity on Friday, which is examining YouTube’s decision to suspend the platform. Executives from YouTube and former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, a vocal critic of the Murdoch-owned outlets, will also give evidence.

 

Sky News hosts silent as channel deletes unproven COVID-19 treatment videos

Andrew Bolt's Blog 17/3/15; Bevis and Butthead are back;Bolt's repetative lie; Lieberman FM Israel recognizes Palestinian citizens; Smearing the opposition media is Bolt's career not playing the ball; Formulaic Murdoch Media

 

 

 

Abbott’s recovery continues, despite all the media’s attempts to deny it

The windsock just keeps telling us all he's  the Oracle of Delphi Orifice maybe arse hole for sure.

This Orifice has now adopted Essential Poll as his  crystal ball as he no longer trusts the other two. The Essential poll allows Bolt  to, as he says, "imagine". The reality the government has just lost the university deregulation policy yet another failed major policy plank. That's the reality Bolt calls success.

  Study Finds Fox News Only Tells the Truth 18% of the Time

 Here is something you will never see reported by O'Reilly. A Fact-Checking Website Found That Fox News Murdoch Media Only Tells the Truth 18 Percent of the Time.

It's not exactly breaking news to find out that News Corp is mostly comprised of misinformation or flat-out lies. Anyone with even a shred of common sense can read their commentary and see that their columns are nothing more than a propaganda mechanism for the Liberal party.

A US survey of Fox News found only 8 percent of what they said was completely True. The other 10 percent was rated as Mostly True.A staggering 60 percent (50 of 83) of comments were found to be either Mostly False, False, or Pants on Fire.The other 22 percent were rated Half True. So in other words, pretty much nothing Fox reports on or comments about is 100% true, it's either spin, half true, partly true, or flat out lies. Only 18 percent has been deemed factual.
Bolt would dismiss the results as liberally biased lies.Because anything that's not approved by Fox News or some other right-wing media source is clearly liberally biased propaganda.

It's how conspiracy theorists manipulate their sheep. They perpetuate some kind of asinine conspiracy, then when it's completely debunked, they claim the information debunking it is all a part of the conspiracy. The fact is the other media outlets pay little or no attention to News Corp, Bolt or the otherdolts in the stable. They are too busy being professional.

 

 

Hating Abbott to death. UPDATE: Abbott haters are an Irish joke

Attack the media Abbott is surrounded by disloyal Australians who are suppossed to support him not deny him. It's all because the unfair media laws that doesn't allow fair and balanced reporting from Murdoch media . The vicious reporting needs to be stopped in its tracks . Adjectives Bolt applies are disgusting, viciousness & hysterical. He even drags  drag Gillard into the mix obviously not referring to Tony was an insult even then. What's the issue? Everybody's speaking about Tony and as the old saying goes any news is good news. However not when it comes to Tony it appears.

But the real subtext the money shot change the media laws  give Rupert a chance to save Tony.

"Which is really a fantastic piece of rhetoric, isn't it? Fox News, and other right-wing media sources, can lie as much as they want. Then if any other source debunks the nonsense they're spewing, the conservative media simply dismisses it as lies perpetuated by the liberal media.It's how conspiracy theorists manipulate their sheep. They perpetuate some kind of asinine conspiracy, then when it's completely debunked, they claim the information debunking it is all a part of the conspiracy.And that's exactly what O'Reilly and the rest of the right-wing media does." It's Formulaic Murdoch media

Unions NSW hijack Anzac Day

" Mrs Court said the Trade Union movement organised the first ANZAC parade as a fundraiser to help wounded soldiers in 1915.  The PVCU float in this year’s parade will be commemorating that commitment to our diggers."

Bolt wouldn't have a bar of that that the Unions actually organized the first ANZAC parade how dare they! Unionists shouldn't have been allowed to enlist fight or die for this country nor should have indigenous people after all they were only fauna.

Malcolm Turnbull picks a side

It's not what Rupert wants. Everybody is Left from where News Corp sits . The notion of fair and balanced news does not exist outside of the Murdochsphere which is small and only benefits a few. Beware should anybody disagree with him as all morality must fit his business model. The battle of influence now since Turnbull raised the possibility of change and with Abbott still holding the reigns. Rupert and his team will be demanding changes in News Corp's interest. Providing News and Information will only be a secondary occupation to changing the Australian Media Laws. Fairness what's best for Australia play no issue in this task it's a business and only business matters

 

Aboriginal spokesman agrees: it’s a “lifestyle choice”. So where’s the outrage?

Idiot's abound and they can't distinguish between the outrage over Abbott's language as distinct from the conversation about  who, how, when and why communities are to be closed.

 Abbott said it was a call to a conversation well whose been invited? When and where is it to be held. Why is it needed as no call seems to be being made about white remote communities. Most elders have acknowledged a conversation is necessary and are prepared so get on with it.  However there's silence from Abbott on that.

The Left now sounds just like the Islamist Right

Bolt is away or he is repeating his blogs. However if Islamists are right wing.

Let's hear  from the Foreign Minister of Israel Mr Lieberman and what he has to say about 20% of his own people. To be Palestinian "citizens" one must recognise a  State. It seems the Foreign Minister of Israel does along with Burnside If they are on the same page what page is Bolt on? He's obviously very confused.

"IBILLIN, Israel — Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s nationalist foreign minister, stared coolly at the Arab politician sitting at the opposite end of a glass table during a televised election debate.

“Why did you come to this studio, why not to Gaza, or Ramallah? Why are you even here?” asked Mr. Lieberman, who frequently calls Israel’s Arab citizens traitors and suggests that their towns be transferred to Palestinian control. “You are not wanted here; you are a Palestinian citizen.”

" A big difference between our society and an Islamist one is the capacity for self-doubt and open criticism. We believe that doubting something and subjecting it to scrutiny is the best way to get to the truth. That is the scientific method. Some alienated young people might misunderstand that diet of critical analysis as evidence of a weak and corrupt society compared with their idealised “pure” religious society that brooks no criticism and has all the answers."   Peter Costello

Imagine Bolt declaring a belief in "scientific method" Climate Change deniers believe in no such thing. Their arguments are entrenched in lies and the denial of 97% of professionals in the field. Costello is more than off the point. Americans and Australians find it easy to find Satan in Islam and promise to defeat him with the support of their god. Historically we stole "science" from the Arabs it was originally their intellectual property when we were running around in animal skins.

 

 

The West, slouching to Mecca

" Look at the bitter fruits of the hyper-freedoms we’ve granted ourselves after destroying our own faith and tradition. Can this dysfunction and rootlessness really resist Islam?"

Is Bolt the declared non Christian been hiding in the closet not wanting to reveal his Dutch Reform Origins? Hyper-freedoms have we been allowed too much freedom such as multiculturalism.

" Those are just symptoms of a crisis that was set off two centuries ago when Europeans made a wager on history: that the more they extended human freedom, the happier they would be. For him, that wager has been lost. And so the continent is adrift and susceptible to a much older temptation, to submit to those claiming to speak for God. Who remains as remote and as silent as ever."

What's strange is Bolt advocates the hyper-freed speech his focus. He railles against Section 18C. However whilst declaring himself non religious time and time again for him the individual competing in a free market is the ideal. He can't seriously agree he's wrong. That Islam is not the aggressor but the salvation from the breakdown of Christianity? 

  Michel Houellebecq is the author of the fiction Soumission  Bolt seems to suggests the book praises Islam yet he was taken to court for slandering it Further the book is fiction. Houellebecq said "in court he did not despise Muslims, but held contempt for their religion adding that like Christianity and Judaism it was based on “texts of hate”. The court dismissed the case against him.

Another lifestyle choice you pay for

 

• 40 per cent of children from jobless households on welfare by age 20
• 39 per cent of children follow parents’ footsteps and live off taxpayer
• 12 per cent of children under 14 are growing up in jobless families 

 The  Murdoch's use of statistics here are totally meaningless and are designed to shock.  Youth unemployment is the highest cohort. Underprivileged youth are the most likely to be amongst the highest unemployed. However the 40% quoted here is not descriptive of or anything to do with choice. It's a statistical avowl...meaningless.

The purpose  is to shock and draw attention away from the fact that there are 150,000 jobs and 750,000 unemployed so we have an article here suggesting that it's the fault of the jobless for their unemployment that their position is a "lifestyle choice" I'm sorry that's not a statistical avowl that's reality. 6.3% unemployment is a reality. Government job cuts is a reality. 457 visa rorting is a reality.

Coalition and Murdoch blame for poor lifestyle choice is an excuse.

 

The Fairfax agenda is plain, but its audience is small

Murdoch Hyena's typically instructed to shoot the messengers and ignore the message the last few weeks of Bolt's blogs have been just that. It must be because Turnbull is leaning Murdoch's way and they are his chorus. It's coming from Andrew Bolt whose Bolt Report has a rating of 62,000 the lowest and totally unprofitable show on  Ch10. Why is it there it's produced by Murdoch to simply run down his opposition not to provide any information. Look at this blog what information can be gleaned from it? It's telling Murdoch press readers not to listen to anyone but them as the world , Australia is being invaded by the left. It merely bays at shadows

 

 

Why are these politicians protecting this union?

Workers are entitled to associate as is business. Business in terms of dollars and sense costs the community more in terms of any crimes crimes committed yet is never blamed. Rogue Advisers are blamed for Banking's systemic rorting. Rogue Stockbrokers for Ponzi Schemes, Rogue Realtors for shonky development projects. It's billions not millions of dollars loss to ordinary Australians. Yet the focus is on the unions why? Because they just might get workers a $4 pay rise instead of a pay cut. 

Hairs stand up on the backs of necks to protect a contractor in a dispute but when thousands of people are ripped of by the banks what is it we here. "Get a lawyer." If severe treatment and examination is to be accorded  unions who   represents 1000s of workers why isn't the same level of investigation applied to banks,developers and stockbrokers. It's quite simple who needs the most protection.?

 

Furkan Derya not to laugh

 

The Bevis and Buttheads of  Murdoch media the Fratbrats who snigger away at any discovered humour but cry foul when Germaine Greer tells Julie Bishop to bare her tits. I bet they secretly sniggered at that as well but cried foul for the opportunity it provided to offend feminists

 

IPCC vultures rush to feed on Cyclone Pam

This blog is completely unsourced as the link to the IPCC statement does not work. However any advice to a nation whose housing has been totally blow away about building better housing shouldn't be mocked. It's common sense. Guess Bolt's worried about the Foreign Aid $5 mill we provided for 250 000 people. He finds it excessive for restoring grass huts.
 I'm pretty sure the IPCC did not attach one event to any scientific theory.

" Oh, and the planet’s atmosphere has not actually warmed for some 17 years." Bolt 

 2010 and 2005 are the two hottest years on record, and the warming trend continueThis outdated claim cherry-picks an unusually hot year -- for a period of time, 1998 was the hottest year on record. But two years have been hotter since then. NASA reported in January 2013: “With the exception of 1998, the nine warmest years in the 132-year record all have occurred since 2000, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the hottest years on record.” It is also important to remember what NASA reported in 2010: “global warming theory does not posit a linear, year-to-year increase in temperatures.”

 Citations:
1-http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-temps.html 2-http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/features/201002_coldsnap/

 

 

Covering up for Plibersek’s smear

Bolt provides no sources for any of his claims. The Australian, Chris Kenny, Greg Sheridan are all Murdoch stable mates. The hyenas of the right baying as they do, not because there is a real issue here but because it's the never ending necessity to malign all media other than that associated with News Corp like the 2GB shock jocks

These paid Murdoch mercenaries cover themselves with the backing of Murdoch's legal team so you will always find a get out clause to protect them from their spin. "A spokesman for Plibersek said that her statements “were in relation to a different matter” and not in relation to Chan and Sukumaran."

Just put Andrew Bolt where you see Bill'O'Rielly and you will get the picture

 

A rebuke of News Corp outrageous lies attempting to get readers to believe that IPCC and NASA scientists are now climate sceptics. This applies equally to Andrew Bolt who deficient of any logic on the suject

 
The ‘Cut and Paste’ section of The Australian on October 8 had the following headline:

So who’s in denial now about what the science is saying about global warming?

It was followed by the sub-heading:

Here at the sheltered workshop we’re enjoying reading the reports from NASA and the IPCC.

‘Cut and Paste’ was principally devoted to attacking my review of Paul Kelly’s Triumph and Demise. The plain suggestion of the headline and the sub-heading is that I am in denial about what the science is now saying about global warming and that both NASA and the IPCC have joined the ranks of the climate change sceptics.
In the age of the internet anyone can discover the current position of NASA and the IPCC on global warming in a matter of moments.
Here are some statements of the current position of the IPCC, all taken from the Summary for Policymakers of the first volume of the IPCC’s Fifth Report published earlier this year:

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amount of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentration of greenhouse gases have increased.

Each of the last three decades has been successively warmer at the Earth’s surface than any previous decade since 1850…

Ocean warming dominates the increase in energy stored in the climate system, accounting for more than 90% of the energy accumulated between 1971 and 2010 (high confidence). It is virtually certain that the upper ocean (0-700 m.) warmed from 1971 to 2010…and it likely warmed between the 1870s and 1971.

Over the last two decades, the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have been losing mass, glaciers have continued to shrink almost worldwide, and Arctic sea ice and Northern spring snow cover have continued to decrease in extent (high confidence).

And here is the current position of NASA. All of the following quotes come from its website:

Certain facts about Earth’s climate are not in dispute:

Sea Level Rise—Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.

Global Temperature Rise—All three major global temperature reconstructions show that the Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of the warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981…

Warming Oceans—The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

Consensus—Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.

It is one thing for The Australian to publish the opinions of dozens of people without scientific knowledge or capacity, like the stockbroker, Maurice Newman, who think they have a firmer grasp on the question of global warming than ninety seven per cent of climate scientists.
This is merely risible.
It is another thing for The Australian to try to lead its readers to believe that the climate scientists represented in the reports of the IPCC or at NASA are now climate sceptics.
This is quite simply an outrageous lie.
It is little wonder that The Australian is now waging a war against the Australian Press Council, the body empowered to expose unethical and unprofessional behaviour of this kind.

Andrew Bolt's Blog 5/11/14, Bolt a fart in a hurricane, Cate Blanchett reminded us today at the Whitlam memorial of the Cultural benefits Bolt recieved but the little he's repaid for having been a beneficiary. We know he passed through uni like a case of salmonella

 

 

The Whitlam funeral

Cate Blanchett's gave an inspirational memorial speech to Gough. It actually reminded us all of why Bolt is a fart in a hurricane. Why he adds nothing to our cultural landscape yet was beneficiary of Whitlam's largess and vision. His investment in the future of Australian youth not cut back. Though a university failure Bolt benefited from those years of government spending which saw no government deficit.

 

Lambie trashes November 11

Lambie makes a point out of need. The need of troops who fought in Afghanistan who now suffer from PTDS  and are homeless living in cars and sleeping rough. The walking dead  and living woundedwho the government no longer budgets for. They are dead in spirit discarded because as Bolt says they are of no use and are a disposable cost. Economic rationalism is all that counts are you profitable? Bolt's favourite movie is Soylent Green.

Warmist predicts “mass-death events” in 10 to 15 years

 Skeptics greatest lie.Worst case scenario's aren't predictions. Bolt would have us believe his cry of no warming for 16 years is entirely true when it's patently false however he continues to repeat it over and over again somehow believing we'll be convinced like the "down down prices are down Coles Ad". He really has no respect for his audience. Since records have been established the planet has warmed each decade.

Bolt heralds James Taylor as his heroic skeptic a lawyer found and accused of  defaming  organisations such as NOAA. Who he claims support his arguments Bolt used them falsely this week. Bolt supports Dr Spencer a noted plagiarist and researcher who has been caught out a number of times and has withdrawn papers he has published after peer group review. 

Bolt hasn't read the 116 page IPCC report most of which he wouldn't understand anyway he never will. The report was compiled from 100's of the worlds top professional intergovernmental climatologists but it's Bolt that has chosen to select a secondary & tertiary commentary from people like himself for his feeble anti-climate cry which is getting weaker and weaker. I have often asked but have never seen Bolt's answer  how much he has privately invested in fossil fuels? Nothing I'm sure maybe he is hoping their value will just keep falling and he still wont.

As for lighting up the lives of the Indian poor coal has been killing the poor of India and we can guess that Bolt and Abbott see that as an extra benefit for an overpopulated nation. Why is this government desperately wanting to lend billions of our dollars to Indian companies that are currently over stretched and whose likelihood of repaying the loans is as remote as planet Pluto

 

Republicans poised for control over Congress

Smaller government means increased security, defence, surveillance welfare policing,  sure doesn't sound small to me. ASIO,AFP,ADF, are departments that are recruiting aren't they? 

Australia is a leading light on this planet that can show the USA the way. Abbott is Moses says our Fred Nile of bloggers Andrew Bolt. Israel is the freest state on this planet according to Bolt.

Two Islamist groups boast of enslaving captured women

Sounds like the start to a joke about "two Aussies". However it's is a joke about one, Andrew Bolt. Stupidity is universal  Bolt you are a perfect example of it when it comes to the media and I presume in life generally. Yes these guys are as stupid as two bogans pissed on a Saturday night ready to party. Sucker punch someone and go slut hunting. They aren't Australians  as much as the guys in the video aren't Islamists. They can call themselves what they want but you give them the racial identity they crave for 1.6 billion Muslims don't. So what does that make you Bolt? I've no doubt when drunk your sons might be like that and when you were young your ego had you bragging you were a belly dancer's minder.  You weren't but you hoped somebody believed it. Just like the fwits in the video.

 

Five staff abandon Ricky Muir’s car

Bolt's mouth was wide open and his lower jaw was touching the ground when he heard this.  Politics is an ugly sport when you don't have the backing and the cast of thousands that the coalition employs. If one adviser leaves or is sacked in the coalition nobody ever hears of it and it's not worth reporting. However it's of deep of interest to people like Bolt. However  ex leaders of the liberal party who have quit the party for moral and ethical reasons get sparse attention. Hewson, Fraser, and..... Poor Ricky the beady eyed Bolts are watching you.

Why the Greens are soft on the Islamic State - and must be resisted, too

 "Communism, fascism, jihadism and even the eco-extremists - all are manifestations of a totalitarian instinct that appeals particularly to the vain, the selfish, the frightened, the romantic, the stupid and the thuggish."

 Bolt upright in front of a mirror talking to his reflected self or listening to it. In Psychology it's simply called projecting. 

As far as Q&A was concerned I did see Sheiks, Imams, women in hijabs and even young men who looked nothing like "converts" asking intelligent questions of George Brandis. Simple questions, questions that have been asked countless times that Brandis wasn't stumped by, easy questions. I doubt if anybody other than Bolt talking to himself in the above manner saw anything more or less in a pretty lame event?

As for Brandis any journalist would be hard pressed to believe that their freedoms haven't been reduced by the new laws. For the sake of security and our safety all our freedoms have been reduced. Government in this country has just got bigger because of that not smaller. However Bolt wont tell us that truth

 

 

  

Treatment guaranteed. Medical volunteers to be sent

 "A more responsible way of responding than the send-and-hope rush-rush" 

Bolt is the man by the neighbours pool watching kids drown ringing 000 for help telling the other  guests to stand back and wait even though they can swim. Bolt saying action needs to be done in a way that we are not legally compromised. Of course kids might drown or Bolt might have a heart attack trying to save them so there needs to be a Dr around as well as a lawyer, so wait.  Like that English guy our PM Bolt claims to be an Australian.

Have any of our SAS troops done anything to help save some 500 of our allies being butchered in Iraq?.  Oh that's not what we are there for is it. Not e to air drop desparately needed weapons or food it's not part of the contract that's taken months to sign. What was all that sabre rattling about....the polls!!

Bolt nit picks an IPCC ABC interview. He miss uses evidence (NASA) and old hat arguments to keep his denier and pro coal stand alive. Show us your Coal Investments Andrew Bolt. Show us the Money.

Claim:

LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: ... The United Nations’ climate change body’s new report says the scientific evidence is unambiguous about the warming of the planet .. The Earth is on a trajectory for warming of at least four degrees Celsius by 2100. That’ll mean more and longer heatwaves and storms and more species extinctions.

Alarmist.  Bolt is nit picking language . Then he drifts to some irrelevant history nothing about the Report to be found here.

In fact, the 4 degrees prediction is based on the report‘s highest estimate of the most extreme model of emissions and temperature sensitivity:

That extreme scenario does not predict “at least” 4 degrees of warming by 2100 but 2.6.
(Note, by the way, that even the worst IPCC prediction of sea level rises comes more than 99 metres short of the 100 metres that ABC science presenter Robyn Williams once suggested was possible and has never corrected.)

Claim:

LEIGH SALES:… I was joined earlier tonight by Lesley Hughes, one of the lead authors on this Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report…
LESLEY HUGHES, LEAD AUTHOR, IPCC REPORT: Well under a - what we call a business as usual trajectory - and we’ve already had about a degree of warming since pre-industrial times; we will almost certainly get another half a degree or a degree by 2030. Under a business as usual trajectory, the IPCC is saying 3.7 to 4.8 degrees by the end of this century.

False, exaggeration: I'm not sure what Bolt has discovered here it does say up to 4.8 degrees how is that an exaggeration of a worst case scenario? Very messy try at point making here.

Check the box. Under the most extreme scenario the IPCC predicts a rise of between 2.6 and 4.8 degrees.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: Well, we’re also seeing the ice caps melting, sea levels going up, coastal flooding increasing, we’re seeing increases in hotter, drier drought, hotter, drier heatwaves.

False:  Bolt is in fact false NOOA has taken issue with this as one pole is sea ice the other on land and both support warming.

Only one ice cap is melting. Antarctica, however, has had record sea ice, which has grown steadily since records started in 1979. The IPCC last year conceded “there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century” and past “conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated”.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: ... Here in Australia we’re suffering the effects of earlier bushfire seasons. 

Misleading: A pause in not "no warming" 2005 & 2012 broke all records. This has been explained

Last year’s early bushfire was an anomaly that cannot be attributed to global warming, especially given 16 years of no world-wide warming. Moreover, there have been many past examples of early bushfires in Australia, and last year’s fires had more to do with three years of good fuel-feeding rains that warmists claimed we wouldn’t get.

Claim:

LEIGH SALES: The report also acknowledges the pause in warming over the past decade, which is something that climate sceptics often point to.

False: Bolt's figures hav been proven to be false

The report in fact admits to not 10 but at least 15 years of a warming pause: “the rate of warming over the past 15 years (1998–2012; 0.05 [–0.05 to 0.15] °C per decade), which begins with a strong El Niño, is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951 (1951–2012; 0.12 [0.08 to 0.14] °C per decade”.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES:  ... But when we look at the global climate, the global climate has not stopped warming. About 90 per cent of the extra heat is going into the oceans and there’s been absolutely no pause in the warming of the ocean. 

False: JPL declared their findings did not throw suspicion on global warming

NASA last month announced: ”The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years… The temperature of the top half of the world’s ocean — above the 1.24-mile mark — is still climbing, but not fast enough to account for the stalled air temperatures.” Hughes’ excuse for the missing heat won’t wash.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: Well I’d say to them firstly that about - the latest survey is that 98 per cent of practising climate scientists are actually at one on this, so there is extremely broad scientific consensus.

False or misleading: This is a new report with even more scientists in agreement and more countries

The various surveys making this have have been comprehensively debunked. One is based on just 79 responses. Last years included as members of the 97 per cent climate scientists such as Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose all question the alleged consensus and say the survey authors ignored or misrepresented their work. In such surveys, the most that can usually be said is that scientists agree man has some influence on the climate, which is hardly controversial.

Claim: Bolt obviously thinks doctors are arrogant as well shamans should be asked for their opinion as well, Science is the only method we have to understand the world about us. Some do believe in the power of prayer

LESLEY HUGHES:… If you want to know about the climate, go to climate scientists.

Arrogance, refusal to admit mistakes:

In fact, climate scientists did not predict this warming pause. They did not predict record crop yields. They did not predict record ice in Antarctica. They did not predict fewer hurricane and cyclones. They did not predict a return here of dam-filling rains. And even the IPCC now admits that the climate models build by climate scientists are just not predicting the temperatures were actually getting: “For the period from 1998 to 2012, 111 of the 114 available climate-model simulations show a surface warming trend larger than the observations.”

Claim: We have just been declared a pariah by 120 nations that are doing something

LESLEY HUGHES: ... Australia is somewhat at odds with the rest of the international community.

False:

Australia was at odds with the rest of the world only when we had the world’s most punitive carbon tax, measured by tax raised per head of population. Most of the world does not have any national carbon tax or emissions trading scheme.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: ...There will be boundless opportunities from renewable energy.

False:  The costs are falling faster as we speak. Guess the Germans are techno ignorant. We have cut scientific budgets yet Bolt considers we are smarter...that's the definition of arrogance

Renewable energy from wind, solar, tidal or geothermal is in fact a cost, not an opportunity. That is why each sector is demanding big subsidies or taxes on cheaper forms of power.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: ... So, in my view, it’s our moral duty as people in a developed country to help the developing countries leap forward into development without making the same dirty mistakes that we did.

Hyperbole, misleading: Coal in fact is killing the Indian poor. There is a tax on it coal reduction is a primary goal that's not a hyperbole. Australia has gone into partnership with Adani his record of enviromental vandalism is on the record

Cheap, coal-fired power actually is the foundation of so much Western wealth and development, from which poor countries have also benefited - not just from the power but from the transfer of aid and technology, as well as from trade. China and India have in fact determined to increase their own emissions, because ending poverty depends heavily on coal-fired generation - and ending poverty is no “mistake”.

Claim:

LESLEY HUGHES: Absolutely. I mean, President Modi in India has said he wants to see a solar panel on every roof in India. Countries like Australia should be helping with that, not shipping coal off there.

False, hyperbole, ideological extremism:  Not at all true the cost of coal in India is cheaper than Australia. India's solar energy program is expanding and rapidly. We might be able to blackmail them in a deal with uranium. But we have signed world agreements against bribery

Modi wants India to have both solar and coal, and is in fact opening India’s coal reserves to foreign investors. Solar alone cannot come close to giving electricity to all Indians, especially not to all Indian businesses. Ending coal exports to India would hurt us and India both. If we don’t give India our coal, it will be forced to go somewhere else - and pay more.