-
UKIP Comes Out Fighting
May 8, 2013 | 15 comments
-
What Will Britain Turn Into?
May 1, 2013 | 31 comments
-
His Queeg Moment
January 29, 2013 | 120 comments
-
High Marks for The Hobbit
January 10, 2013 | 23 comments
-
So, What to Do? Ask Lady Houston
January 9, 2013 | 39 comments
At Large
Rolling Stone Loses It
There’s a danger in getting kicked in the head by a kangaroo.
I am indebted to blogger Tim Blair for pointing out one of the most deranged pieces of science-fiction masquerading as journalism about Australia I have yet read, “Climate Change and the End of Australia,” by someone called Jeff Goodell in Rolling Stone magazine.
The article runs to nearly 7,000 ill-informed, panic-mongering words, but I will spare you all but the gist of it. It may stand as a neat, clinical example of eco-apocalypse-mongering, eco-nutty hysteria, bad research, and the eco-left’s divorce from cognitive reality.
Under the shrieking headline “Climate Change and the End of Australia” the article demands: “Want to know what global warming has in store for us? Just go to Australia, where rivers are drying up, reefs are dying, and fires and floods are ravaging the continent …”
It goes on: “I have come to Australia to see what a global-warming future holds for this most vulnerable of nations … “
Of all the world’s nations, Australia is the “most vulnerable”? More vulnerable than, say, Egypt, completely dependent on the Nile? Or Holland, much of which is below sea level and is vulnerable to floods? Or that darling of the ecological doom brigade, the allegedly sinking Maldives? The article goes on to invoke: “The sense that Australia — which maintains one of the highest per-capita carbon footprints on the planet — has summoned up the wrath of the climate gods is everywhere.”
Climate gods? In my years as science and environment roundsman for a metropolitan Australian paper, I thought I’d heard every conceivable specimen of ecological idiocy, hysteria, and junk-science, but climate gods are a new one. Somebody better get Richard Dawkins onto them. The talk of “per capita carbon footprints” is meaningless, since Australia has a very small population for its size.
“Australia is the canary in the coal mine,” says David Karoly, a top climate researcher at the University of Melbourne. “What is happening in Australia now is similar to what we can expect to see in other places in the future.”
Borrowing from Tim Blair, you mean, like the record wheat crops we are having at present?
Goodell also claims to be able to read Australians’ minds, claiming Yasi (a storm) “seems to embody the not-quite-conscious fears of Australians that their country may be doomed by global warming.”
Further, he claims “The Murray-Darling Basin, which serves as the country’s breadbasket, has suffered a decades-long drought, and what water is left is becoming increasingly salty and unusable, raising the question of whether Australia, long a major food exporter, will be able to feed itself in the coming decades.”
This is total nonsense. The rainfall patterns of Australia have been studied continually since the country was first settled, and farmers, as elsewhere, know to farm within certain rainfall lines. A few months ago I went up the Murray River on a paddle-steamer. From the beginning, the great problem for Australian farmers has not been to grow enough food but to find markets for their surplus production.
“The oceans are getting warmer and more acidic, leading to the all-but-certain death of the Great Barrier Reef within 40 years.”
The imminent demise of the Great Barrier Reef has been predicted with tedious regularity for more than a century. I’ve been there, too, and it looks quite healthy. It the oceans were getting warmer, this would actually promote coral growth.
“Homes along the Gold Coast are being swept away, koala bears [sic — they are not bears] face extinction in the wild, and farmers, their crops shriveled by drought, are shooting themselves in despair.”
Actually, farming conditions are the best they have been in 20 years.
About the Author
Hal G.P. Colebatch’s “Immram,” Counterstrike, is being published by Australian publisher Imaginites.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (41) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Hal G.P. Colebatch
More Articles From At Large
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/18/rolling-stone-loses-it
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
POST American| 10.18.11 @ 7:22AM
---And is everyone noticing
the latest urgency from EUGENICS
central CON-troll BBC viz a viz
the Lord ROT-child, Club of Rome
fabricated 'Climate Change'?
ALL this while the capstone saturates
the enviornment with plastics, fills the
skies with HAARP enabling Cadmium/
Barium oxide CHEM-trails and diddles
the very life out of the planet's DNA
with cross species hybridizations aimed
at bringing on inter-generational genocide.
I bet they even watch FUKISHIMA
live on CCTV while comparing their
micro-collators.
-----------Truly, the laughs are endless!
-------------------------TRULY---------------------------
Bill| 10.18.11 @ 10:34AM
It's that dang Tavistock Foundation. They're everywhere!
Bill| 10.18.11 @ 11:03AM
I know I like to compare my micro-collators with those of others while watching FUKUSHIMA on CCTV, only my local provider calls it "cable television." It's one of my favorite pastimes.
Occam's Tool| 10.18.11 @ 4:54PM
Et tu, Bill?
Bill| 10.18.11 @ 5:25PM
Your capstone post was obviously generated through your aluminum-foil pyramid hat by the Tavistock Institute.
Occam's Tool| 10.18.11 @ 7:30PM
I shore hope so. Sounds like fun! (Actually, Bill, my comment was to continue your joke---"wow! Another person to microcollate with!")
And now, turning to Ozzie news---The All Blacks beat the Wallabies, and now it will be the All Blacks versus France in the Final of the 2011 Rugby World Cup.
Gosh, who do I hate more---the Kiwis, who ankle bit us during the Cold War pissing off Reagan, and generally act like a bunch of Euroweenie scum despite being in the South Pacific, or the French, who are French.
I will probably cheer for the French, as the humiliation for the ABs losing will be Horriffic!
Bill| 10.19.11 @ 8:54AM
Well, OT, this is just another example of the FUKISHIMA Corp., probably working in conjunction with the Tavistock Institute, to drive disagreement between people where no disagreement actually exists. Up the All Blacks!
I can't say I hate the Kiwis; I'm more amused (perhaps bemused) by them. Their desire for pacifism is understandable; after all, they are just a tiny country without the means to defend themselves, so bending over for the ministrations of whoever has the odd desire to aggress against them ("Thank you, sir, may I have another?"), but Australia and the U.S. have been willing to help them without asking for anything, so I guess we asked for it.
Bill| 10.19.11 @ 8:56AM
Please add the words "is understandable" after the material in parenthesis. In addition to the problems of trying to be humorous through sarcasm on the net, writing compound sentences without being able to edit is problematic.
Bill| 10.18.11 @ 6:06PM
And you should have received your very own micro-collater from Lord ROT-child by now, so that your mind would be bent to the proper way of thinking about the FUKISHIMA Corp.
Jack von Bauer| 10.18.11 @ 11:41AM
Easy for you to say.
Redstateboy| 10.18.11 @ 8:34AM
I Read Enough!! I couldn't read more than a few paragraphs before becoming totally disgusted with the disengenious Left. Note... the Environmentalist (emphasis on mental) refuse to preface "Climate Change" with the words: "Man Made" - they've just dropped that little teeny-weenie tidbit from any conversation.. They just now take it for granted that everyone now believes it's "Man Made" so why even mention it right?? Wrong.. they don't employ the words: "Man Made" because research and polls confirm that many people have reservations about the "Man Made" part and That's why every enviro-wacko from the greasest Occupy Wall streeter to Hussein the Muslim King - never mention it anymore.
Choey| 10.18.11 @ 11:59AM
Shouldn't that be Mann-made?
bluecollarbytes| 10.18.11 @ 9:21AM
What a shame to have an Austraila with all its natural resources, and not having a clue what to do with it all.
Moe Blotz| 10.18.11 @ 10:11AM
Do the eco-terrorists down under blame the hulking road trains hammering across the Outback for much of the "pollution", spewing carbon and exhaust gases whilst splattering Wallabies on the roads?
Appleby| 10.18.11 @ 11:42AM
I have actually driven down the Stuart Highway from Darwin to Tennant Creek, and the number of Road Trains I saw could be counted on one hand. I also took the train from Perth to Sydney (3 days, and a wonderful journey) and saw what my sainted Daddy called "Miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles", not counting the odd animal and Japanese men riding bicycles (the new He-Man thing to do back in 1990).
Most of Australia is uninhabited and you could hide Area 51 five miles outside Sydney and likely nobody would notice. (The Mad Max movies were filmed within easy driving distance of major cities, I understand). Seeing the country has always been that way, I daresay that if the world does turn into Australia, the Aussies will teach the rest of us how to get along.
By the way, I found the men refreshingly 1950s gentlemen -- while sharing a cab from Darwin Airport with four gents, one asked if he could smoke and the driver said "That's up to the Lady" (that would be me) -- when I said I didn't mind, the smoking gent paid my share of the cab ride. If thats what we have to look forward to, bring it on!
I have to admit that I was cheering for the All Blacks on Sunday, and they won; but the Wallabies were tough and even the best team in Rugby EVER had a battle. I look forward to seeing them stomp the French on Sunday.
Occam's Tool| 10.18.11 @ 4:56PM
Dear Appleby:
There is apparently an open question as to whther or not a nuke was set off somewhere in the Outback at one time, mentioned in Bill Bryson's book.
Bill| 10.18.11 @ 10:33AM
"The sense that Australia...has summoned up the wrath of the climate gods is everywhere."
It is? I pay attention to the issue of global warming aka climate change, and talk to people, both in person and over the internet, and I haven't heard ANYONE mention "the climate gods." NO ONE is talking about "climate gods."
Come on, people. Try to be rational. Scientific. You know.
Rogue Elephant| 10.18.11 @ 11:59AM
That says it all, doesn't it? Climate gods: more evidence that AGW is a religion to these folks.
Jack von Bauer| 10.18.11 @ 10:35AM
David Karoly is the cuckoo in the Nut Cage.
GW| 10.18.11 @ 12:51PM
What doesn't follow is the correlation between the amount of CO2 a country burns and the effect climate change has on that country--even if AGW was basically a correct theory.
(The rest of this response assumes, for a minute, that the AGW theory is basically correct). For instance, even if Australia stopped burning fossil fuels, and other nations continued, Australia would be affected by climate change. Obviously once CO2 gets into the atmosphere, it doesn't just effect the country it was emitted from but the macro climate. Therefore, can Australia be blamed for the changing climate it has? Of course not. It only contributes 1% to its inevitable doom, assumedly not enough to matter. Furthermore, Canadians would welcome longer growing seasons and less snow. So Australia's loss may be Canada's gain. But, like Australians, Canadians don't produce enough CO2 to have an effect on their climate. Like Australians, they should just continue using fossil fuels (and the conveniences they receive from them) as ending fossil fuels will make no difference on the macro scale.
The left proposes world-wide solutions to the non-existant problem, but if AGW is correct the only solutions would be global, as the "problem" is global. But how would these solutions be formed? For instance, what amount of CO2 needs to be cut? It can't be 100%. Is it closer to 50%? Above that number? Or below it? Essentially, if a number could be agreed upon, we are left with the rationing of CO2 output. So who decides which peoples get to use energy and which peoples don't? Even if a global governance could be set up, how could CO2 laws be enforced? Why would I as an American obey these laws when I have no guarantee anyone else is? Are the Chinese? Are the Indians? The Europeans? My neighbor? It could never be shown that planet-saving CO2 rates are going on, so I would be rational enough to believe the world is still going to end soon. Therefore, I wouldn't be saving the planet but living in misery for no good reason.
Problems abound even if you accept the alarmist's radical claims. Global governance would never work (think about enforcing marajuana laws for instance), and seperate nations and individuals in particular can't be solely the problem--it'd have to be everybody.
Fortunately, the science is beyond pathetic. Forecasting climate models is like predicting the lottery, too many variables abound. Relax chicken little, the sky is not falling.
Seek| 10.18.11 @ 12:55PM
Rolling Stone's house libertarian, P. J. O'Rourke, left the ranch years ago. Their current star political analysts -- Tim Dickinson, Matt Taibbi and Jeff Goodell -- represent the triumph of hard-Left gonzo poses that occasionally resemble investigative reporting and reasonableness. At least Hunter S. Thompson (R.I.P.) was fun.
I subscribe to RS mainly because as a legacy subscriber, I get their publication for free. Whoopee.
Bill| 10.18.11 @ 1:17PM
I have concluded that Rolling Stone is at the mercy of the publishing gods and they aren't feeling very merciful these days.
Doctor Right| 10.18.11 @ 1:30PM
ROLLING STONE has been an absolute joke for years.
The magazine was founded as "anti-establishment", and it has morphed into the establishment's ultimate mouthpiece.
I haven't bought an issue since 1990, when they still talked (mostly) about music...
Anthony| 10.18.11 @ 1:46PM
Well put DR. Rolling Stone is just a manifestation of exactly what the Left have become, anti-establishment morphed into jackbooted totalitarians.
Oh what the timid, genteel bourgeois parents of the '60s generation spawned.
Bill| 10.18.11 @ 2:37PM
It's not the jackbooted totatlitarians that we have to watch out for; them we can just shoot and hang up in the city park by their heels, like any other tinpot Mussolini.
It's the OWS college grads, with their degrees in Ethnic Studies and Rhetoric and Communication, who will be certified as the public school teachers and who will teaching our children for the next 40 years.
Tomas| 10.18.11 @ 11:12PM
I stopped reading Rolling Stone decades ago over their dogmatic stance regarding the sanctity of Rock as a musical genre. They've done nothing but gone downhill since. Impossible to read such narrow-minded, self-important know-nothings. (Wow, three hyphenations in one sentence! Do I win an award?)
I can't help but think how many OWS backpacks are stuffed with this useless rag.
-
sinanju| 10.19.11 @ 5:08AM
Oh, perish forbid! I very much doubt that a single Occupier would so much as wipe their bums with Rolling Stone. RS hasn't been seen as "authentic" in a long time. Hipsters (when they bother to mention it at all) denounce it as a farcical rag that gives musicians and actors breathless, drooling, star-f***ing coverage in return for access. I stopped even bothering to flip through it on the newsstands when the Clintons came to town and RS went whole hog for them, determined to mold our little minds with outright propaganda. Last time I checked Maxim Blender was the people's choice.
I stopped even glancing at it after '98, back when they seemed to feature nude starlets and supermodels on the front cover every other week...
Seek| 10.20.11 @ 12:24PM
Rolling Stone has at least some good stuff every issue. It isn't what it used to be, but it isn't all bad either. What it does need is a change in management. Unfortunately, Jann Wenner isn't budging.
Can I add something? RS' Peter Travers may be the worst thing to happen to film criticism since Rex Reed.
solidground| 10.18.11 @ 3:51PM
The saddest part of this story is not that Goodell is obviously looney or a grandiose liar (or both), but rather that the people who read Rolling Stone will believe every word of his fraud--and proceed to preach it to all of their gullible friends and neighbors. Worse, Al Gore will rev up the deceit by incorporating it into his foamy-mouthed rantings. Thus are inviro fables and the preposterous legislation and regulation they generate perpetrated and inflicted upon society, culture and the economy.
Dave| 10.18.11 @ 5:32PM
Parents don't let your kids grow up to be Liberals.
Auger Well| 10.18.11 @ 6:30PM
Look, "climate gods" is a figure of speech. You do conservatives no favors by appearing to take it seriously. Geez.
Occam's Tool| 10.18.11 @ 7:32PM
OK, it's a figure of speech. Let's put this simply: anthropogenic global warming is bullshit, a problem not worth throwing billions at; unlike, say, destroying the spread of sharia law, which actually imperils the West.
POST American| 10.18.11 @ 11:18PM
----------------BOTTOMLESS LINE-------------------
----USURY and EUGENICS madman,
Lord ROT-child, ought to be put away
for life for defrauding the world with
the utterly BOGUS, self-aggrandizing,
EUGENICS mongering --ROT-child
world bank 'supervised' ---'Climate Change'
scam.
Dreamed up by the 'Club of Rome' and
first enunciated publicly by world USURY
kingpin ---Eduard de ROT-child, on behalf
of, among others, SACHS CO-Borg.
-----THIS IS CRIMINALITY on a truly, truly cosmic scale-----
Dan Mathewson| 10.18.11 @ 11:51PM
So, you will submit a petition to HM The Queen demanding that she lock up Lord Rothschild up in The Tower?
None| 10.19.11 @ 10:23AM
Hey, I'm sorry, I missed the part where you guys gave your scientific credentials in the area of climatology. Could you just go ahead and list those again? Thanks.
Skippy| 10.19.11 @ 5:48PM
I must have communicated poorly, so let me try again.
If humans are causing climate change through their activities, I don't care.
If AGW is absolutely true, I will never believe it as long as the current staff selling it is in place.
I would not believe a leftist if they told me my eyes were blue. I would find a mirror to check.
So don't fret if I refuse to buy the scam.
I never will.
skip| 10.21.11 @ 3:18PM
Is it okay if I refer to these 31,487 individuals at petitionproject.com?
Idiot.
None| 10.19.11 @ 10:26AM
"carbon-dioxide is both harmless and vital to plant growth." Tell you what, go ahead and fill up a room with it, spend ten or fifteen minutes in there, and we'll see how harmless it is. You can have all the plants you want with you.
play nice| 10.19.11 @ 3:50PM
None - I will do your the CO2 thing if you do my H2O thing.
Nemo| 10.27.11 @ 1:11AM
Idiot,. You can also fill a room with water and drown. Or eat sodium or chlorine and die, but sodium chloride is salt. Carbon dioxide in harmless in the atmosphere.
markenoff| 10.27.11 @ 1:22AM
In your posited situation it is not that CO2 would be causing damage or death, it would be the lack of O2 that would be problematic. Similar if you were to breath only nitrogen, the primary component of the air you are breathing now, you would pass out and then die but not because of the nitrogen, it would be due to the absence of oxygen.