Time to change your tune on climate change, Mr Bolt

MB has been a great admirer of Andrew Bolt’s exposure of Gladys Liu and his longer term fight to bring rationality to population growth.

But in another area, Bolt’s stubbornness refuses to adapt to changing circumstances.

For many years, Bolt denied that there were rising temperatures globally. Time has proven him comprehensively wrong:

These days he has moved from quantitative denialism to qualitative, like today:

This hysterical fear is astonishing. And it’s high time the adults took control and told these bawling children that there’s no climate emergency. I know, doubting the global warming scare is social suicide, but this hysteria is out of control.

  • CYCLONES are not increasing, but decreasing;
  • YOUR chances of dying from climate-related catastrophes have fallen 99 per cent over the past century;
  • GRAIN crops are not decreasing, but setting records;
  • LOW-LYING Pacific islands are not drowning — nearly half are actually growing;
  • COLD kills many more people than heat;
  • AUSTRALIA’S rainfall has not fallen over the past century;
  • OUR ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes says climate scientists don’t think global warming causes drought;
  • POLAR bear numbers are increasing, not decreasing; and
  • NASA satellites show the world is getting greener.

These are all partial analysis potshots:

  • decreasing frequency of cyclones is projected in most climate models that describe global warming;
  • obviously your chances of dying of anything are lower today than one century ago;
  • grain yields are impacted by all sorts of stuff;
  • volcanic Pacific growing islands does not preclude sea level rises;
  • fewer cold deaths do not justify a rapid rise in hot deaths;
  • it’s the distribution of rainfall that has changed in Australia. Less in south, more up north;
  • and?
  • a long term decline has improved in the last decade as animals adapt, conservation does its best etc;
  • owing to more carbon dioxide!

Mr Bolt is a smart bloke and obviously knows many of his points are at best sophist and deliberately misleading at worst.

Sure, hysteria isn’t going to fix it. But neither is hysterically hosing it off every time it is mentioned.

Global warming is happening. It is very likely caused by us. It’s simply good risk management to deal with it. Just as it is to expose Chinese Communist Party stooges in our Parliament.

It’s not that complicated!

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)


      • I watched the video and there is nothing in it to suggest she was a whore. Where did you your information from? All that aside why seek to denigrate someone who did some excellent work and who inspired many others in charitable work. It’s easy to find negatives if that’s your thing.

  1. reusachtigeMEMBER

    There’s good and bad in everyone. Mother Teresa become a saint for her charity work yet she forcibly converted the sick people she cared for and did a whole bunch of other dodgy things. Is she good or bad? Both. So when people say “I hate Bolt” or “I hate Trump” and then become polarized they close their minds to potential.

    I experience this at the relations parties. There’s quite a few horrible people (not me) there but jeez they go off. One lovely lady, we hate each other, but we can’t wait to have relations when we see each other because it’s oh so passionate. We’d miss out on that if we just closed off because of our hatred.

    I think you get the message.

    • That St Teresa example a bit rough mate… you cannot forcible convert anyone, especially if your <5ft high and weigh less than 45kg! She did her best with little she had. And did mighty things…

        • Seriously, you believe that rubbish and call that research?? Ignorance is bliss, it excuses looking away and doing nothing yourself. No amount of money would have gone far enough to treat what they attempted. They did the best with what little they could raise. Although she did subscribed to self reliance, and is recorded throwing a whole lot of donated mattresses into the street because it went against that principle, is a a little weird.

          That isn’t evil, that is quirky. When you engage is denigrating a generous (although I accept a little flawed/eccentric) soul like that, as an excuse for you to do nothing, is disingenuous. But I guess that is the normative these days.

          • I tell you what is weird, are the enormous number of odd balls that comment on this website. I have only recently returned having been off it for several years, granted I am retired, but where do these gentlemen live? What do they do for a crust?

          • So do I EP. HnH if you want to know what is really happening you go to the source documents which in this case is the climate gate IPCC emails.

            “Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause. I would like to weigh in on two important questions—
            Distribution for Endorsements—
            I am very strongly in favor of as wide and rapid a distribution as possible for endorsements. I think the only thing that counts is numbers. The media is going to say “1000 scientists signed” or “1500 signed”. No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000 without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a different story”.
            October 9, 1997: email 0876437553—— so much for consensus

            All the charts you posted show insufficient cooling between 1940 and 1979 the changing of the “blip” as its referred to in the email. I suspect the data is from the same source Tony Heller explains it well in his talk in Parliament showing the original documents before the changes were made to the data.

          • https://www.desmogblog.com/lavoisier-group

            “Climategate” was extensively investigated and no wrongdoing was found.


            Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct.[15] The scientific consensus that global warming is occurring as a result of human activity remained unchanged throughout the investigations.[16]

        • I watched the video and there is nothing in it to suggest she was a whore. Where did you your information from? All that aside why seek to denigrate someone who did some excellent work and who inspired many others in charitable work. It’s easy to find negatives if that’s your thing.


          • I think you’ll find she did many things that were not considered saintly. Christopher Hitchens spoke about many of them. If you’re not sure plenty to Google on the topic.

    • There is good and bad in everyone. And we learn to live, we learn to give each other what we need to survive, together alive.

  2. Other way round….CO2 absorbs Infrared Radiation, releasing energy in the form of heat. Temp therefore follows CO2 concentration.

  3. Narapoia451MEMBER

    It’s discussed in the article you just linked. 90% of the warming happens once the CO2 is released at the end of glacial periods. CO2 release is caused by but also amplifies natural warming.

    We are not at the end of a glacial period, in this case the warming is being initiated by the increased concentrations of CO2 and amplifying it. Surely even the staunchest deniers can agree that the climatic conditions are different now from the end of an ice age, but unless you are denying basic physics the mechanism by which CO2 traps heat is the same

    Like most denial tropes it’s more nuanced than how it is presented in sound bytes.


    As with most denialist tropes, it’s more nuanced than

  4. Narapoia451MEMBER

    Did you mix up the medicine bottles?

    You seem to think that physics is a left wing discipline, the left being something that triggers you clearly. If the right was not pretending science does’t exist then you wouldn’t have to listen to the left tell you about it.

    Since you brought it up, right wing governments have massacred their fair share and started the most destructive wars in human history – one of which directly enabled the rise of totalitarian communism. But it doesn’t sound like that is an issue for you.

    • You know like the Popular Judean Front. Or was it the Judean Popular Front I forget. Fascism had the charismatic leader. Communism had the system, the plan. It doesn’t matter what they were named. They were both totalitarian though. So yes arguably Lenin got us into this mess, but maybe it was the Jacobins.

      Have you thought for a second that maybe you are sexist, racist, pig of being?

    • Narapoia451MEMBER

      Are you getting confused about the way totalitarian governments use words? Do you think the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea is a democracy or a republic?

    • Narapoia451MEMBER

      I don’t even see how you made the connection from my question to what you just wrote. That is not a normal thought process.
      I get that you don’t understand what National Socialism is, but what does that have to do with Islam’s misogyny, or Islam?

  5. “LOW-LYING Pacific islands are not drowning — nearly half are actually growing;” – if he is deliberately wrong on this then he is just complete d1ckhd. If he really believes it because someone on google said it and did not bother to ask any geologist for an opinion before putting it out on his program then he is just plain stupid. Either way he is waste of time to listen to and especially if he is combination of both which is what I think.

    • Exactly. Just like Pauline Hanson claiming it’s all the suns fault because she read it on Watts Up With That.

      Actually I doubt that she read it. More like that idiot Roberts told her. She doesn’t come across as some who does much reading.

  6. I spent many years modelling much simpler phenomena than climate change using approaches ranging from differential equations e.g. Lotka-Volterra to neural nets e.g. ConvNets, LSTM and have a pretty good understanding of both theoretical and empirical challenges facing modellers. The certainty of climate modellers who claim that the temperature rises because CO2 emmission is just astonishing. The “hockey” stick graph was obtained by questionable application of principal component analysis and criticised by quite a number of experts.
    I would recommend watching this lecture by Judith Curry, the former chair of the School of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Tech.


  7. The whole climate debate is senseless. The debate should be against pollution in all its many many forms. But it’s not, and you know why? Because the solution to pollution is an inconvenient truth, which is the number of humans on this planet. Until, the so called activists and activist organizations start talking about population nothing will get fixed.

    • “the solution to pollution is an inconvenient truth, which is the number of humans on this planet.”..
      Um…..this isn’t a binary issue. The number of people acting inappropriately is the problem….not the number of people.
      If we all acted appropriately, the global population would not be an issue..

      • Acting appropriately has nothing to do with it. At our current level of technology, each person needs to consume a mega sh1ttonne of resources to maintain a western standard of lifestyle. Switching to reusable bags and solar power won’t change this, because, a crap load of energy and resources is required to produce those things as well.

        If you want humanity to be environmentally friendly at our current population, and more importantly it’s rate of growth. Be prepared to life a primitive lifestyle to achieve this.

        • I see your point, but won’t push any buttons here. It is a moot discussion; we are on the same page generally. If people won’t change…then absolutely there are far too many mouths to feed.

    • Nice to see someone else expressing these views! Still, real solutions to the population issue are even harder to come by or discuss..

  8. Drove past about a dozen activists puting up a huge banner about climate emergency over the Eastern Freeway this arvo. All the inbound lanes were slowing to a crawl to see what the f they were doing. We all had to accelerate back to 100 after that which put more carbon into the atmosphere (and into the activists lungs). I bet they all felt great though posting about their achievement on social media.

  9. I see what you did there…….

    High prices = less usage = better outcomes for planet = happy children forever…..

    • exactly, that’s however only one half of what I’m questioning. Since gas is used pretty much for heating only with planet warming speeding up gas will be needed less, thus downward pressure on its price.

  10. Sadly some think AGW is a regional issue and not global E.g. no such animal as regional solutions including immigration.

    • Ah, but “regional solutions” allow some to kick the can down the road a bit further and maybe make it to checkout time without having to actually do anything.

      The same behaviour is seen within the wealthiest cohorts who clearly believe their money will shield them from the negative effects – or at least hope it will do so long enough that they don’t have to worry anymore.

    • Spot on as always. The Europeans can’t solve their Central American immigrant issues focussing on regional matters.

      • Then some will tell you that colonialism is in the past, you had no agency, pass go with get out of jail card.

  11. The painful part of Internet forums is anynokd utter fkwit moron can post about sh5t they clearly know nothing about

    • Why b anynokd, tht is th best part of internet forums. You get to see the un-limitation of the only limitless thing in the world.


      Yes maybe we should leave this one to the overwhelming majority of systems scientists and physicists..

  12. Regarding the discussion on climate change I find it easier to start the following to see how much believers and deniers are aligned.
    . Is there excessive plastic waste in the environment
    . Are fish stocks dwindling
    . Would wales have gone extinct
    . Are the world’s forests under threat
    Are these and many other examples caused by humans? Even if burning down the entire Amazon would not contribute to climate change does that mean it’s okay?

    • Those things are generally not controversial because they do not require the acknowledgement that a global-scale problem exists.

  13. Jevons ghostMEMBER

    Do rising CO2 levels contribute to rising global temperatures? I guess so. What can we as individuals do about rising CO2 levels?Precious little in my view. So forget about the greenhouse gas thingo for a moment and consider what you as an individual can do to mitigate the progressive drying out and desertification of the Australian landscape. Just plant more trees. And get your local council to plant more shade trees in the streetscape. Small native trees like lillypillies, coastal hibiscus, plum pines, tuckeroos, brush box, prickly paperbarks etc etc. Filling the urban streetscape with small shade trees is eminently doable; planting a few billion or so in both urban and rural landscapes may be somewhat costly in monetary terms, but the longer term payoff has to be worth it. Trees promote retention of water and humidity in the landscape, cool their surroundings, including us, enhance groundwater retention, protect against erosion, provide windbreaks to reduce evaporation loss, enhance soil fertility, reduce soil salinity, provide shelter and food, including fodder in some instances, for animals, provide us with timber for value adding and if planted in sufficient numbers can favourably influence rainfall. And boy, don’t we need more of that. Get a deputation together and lobby your local MP about the need for farmers to be funded to repair their degraded farmlands by planting billions of trees, repairing erosion and restoring floodplains and wetlands. And in the process doing their bit to rehydrate the land by repairing the screwed-up water and carbon cycles. Better for all of us than harebrained schemes like diverting rivers inland. Blahblahblah.

    Oh, and there’s this. Worth a look I reckon.


  14. For anyone interested in climate change they should read ‘Mirrors and Mazes’ by Howard Thomas Brady. Whilst the climate is increasing some of the hysterical predictions are absolute crap. As an example IPCC’s sea level projection are mainly based on sea level data from Jason 3 satellite which data NASSA has said is imperfect and is currently working on new satellite. When things like this happen how much faith can we put in some scientific work.