Australian Academy of Science: Nation faces climate doom

Australian Academy of Science:

Full report here. Everybody should read it.

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


    • Dahls ChickensMEMBER

      “An estimated 160,000 to 250,000 Australian properties are at risk of coastal flooding with a sea level rise of 1 m by the end of the century.” I thought you’d be on board with this Reusa. Think of the future mega-boom for elevated properties!

    • Ronin8317MEMBER

      It’s all Fake News!! There is no Global Warming because Trump said there isn’t, and whatever Trump says must be true!!

      • I’d be a little more trusting of what scientists say about their area of expertise than what a shonky real estate developer does….

      • It no wonder there are climate deniers when we get served that properganda BS. That isn’t convincing anyone but the already converted.
        Quote ‘There is no doubt about the consequences of climate change’. I can tell you the a way too many variables in the weather to be sure of anything. I know my little pocket of victoria has never been so green at this time of the year so if this is climate change then bring it on. How that for science.

        • ChinajimMEMBER

          Yeah 🤔 umm, it’s not science! 😃


          Here’s some science: it’s called La Niña. Check it out.

          • Missing the point chinajim. There is not a model in the world that could ever come close to pretending to know what will happen if the world warms another degree. Its just insulting that treat us like school kids and there the all knowing teachers when they have know idea what will happen. Did you know that the Chinese model of climate change predicts that Australia will receive more rain and in the parts Australia need it most. 10 percent more rain over all and 30 percent more in western nsw. Theirs isn’t the only model that predicts that. So hmmm….. thats science.

  1. “Swift action and decisive leadership”

    Bwahahahaha! Good f’n luck finding any of that in Scummo no matter which way you go in. Or the rest of them.

    Homo sapiens var. ignoramus
    Dominant group that dwell on Earth today. Both willingly and unknowingly ignorant sub-categories exist.

  2. Sea levels have been rising in a linearly since 1850 (and of little ice age), just a slight rate increase since 1980s.

    Anyway a warmer, less dry, much greener Earth is a much better Earth.I want the wonderful Cretaceous back 😉


      Many are aware of a great ‘re-set’ that is in the works presently and wrongly conclude it’s economic in nature.
      The frenzied (and pointless) activity to protect economies and ‘wealth’ the world over belies the terror that is advancing towards us.
      Abundance is no more and scarcity will soon define all of earth’s systems including what has supported us until now. Vertebrate creatures (we’re one) will have a particularly difficult and ignominious chapter as we ignored nearly every warning signal just so we could continue our ‘progress’.
      {The Means by Which COVID-19 Could Cause
      Extinction of All Life on Earth}

  3. I wish it was hot and dry today, trying to pour a 100sqm driveway in this endless rainy sh$t weather

    • I realise you are not a member, but convention decrees that all statements of that type are to be appended with the acronym FKN

    • Iron HorseMEMBER

      Feel for you Swampy. In southern Adelaide we have had a block of 3 weeks at least of absolute cracker weather – 26 to 32 degrees, and NO wind. It’s been more like Spring than Autumn which is great for getting out on the bike. I am putting this in my memory bank for when we are in the depths of winter…
      Good luck with the pour.

  4. I only read the recommendations … there’s no mention about reducing population growth, the primary driver of increasing emissions. Nothing about Australia’s mass Third World immigration ideology.

    Someone put this in the comments a few weeks ago and I think it’s a good read;

    “This means that the coming solar minimum is going to be not only a grand solar minimum, but perhaps the worst one since the Maunder Minimum in the 1600s. One would expert this to have been front-page news, but outside of the scientific community this information is virtually unheard of and little understood. One must ask – why is this the case? The simple answer to this question is that the solar predictions destroy the current scientific and cultural narrative of ‘Climate Change’ in the form of warming.”

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      The author asserts that nobody is accounting for solar cycles in climate change predictions, but offers zero evidence to support that assertion.

  5. The biggest problem from CO2 is that it eventually becomes impossible to properly ventilate a building, and cognitive performance declines from just about 750ppm of CO2. As we add more to the atmosphere we need to ramp up our ventilation systems (if you are even lucky enough to have one) which uses even more energy.

    There is no alternative but to cease the burning of fossil fuels immediately.

    • You do realise that your bedroom is often at over 3,000ppm ? I worked in greenhouses that were maintained at 1,200ppm no issues, current levels are far from optimum.CO2 fertilization is repairing our damages

    • David WilsonMEMBER

      What drivel, we breath in CO2 at the rate of 415ppm and exhale 40,000 ppm.
      In an average meeting room full of people CO2 levels ramp up very quickly from 415 ppm to over 1000 ppm.
      As an aside during past ice ages CO2 levels have been 5 times higher than today , well blow me down it should have been a heat wave!
      If CO2 levels were to fall below 150 ppm we will all die, why because we will starve to death as plant life will die.

  6. Display NameMEMBER

    I dont discount that climate is changing or that Australia has royally trashed our environment but… Patrick Frank a scientist from Stanford has a paper out that suggests the General Circulation Models (Climate Models) have a key input to the models that has significant error in its value. The error bars on this input then propagate through each years calculation to the point that an estimate of +3 degrees from the model has error bars of +=15 The estimate in useless.

    I have read a few attempts to discount his paper but am not convinced as yet. Many people appear to misunderstand the difference between accuracy and precision. Its worth a read. Lots of discussion on web, and Patrick has been on a couple of dozen web sites defending his paper.

    • Cynical snake

      I’ve found time has done a good job of exposing the accuracy or otherwise of climate scientists models.

      • Yes. The limitations of the climate models and the uncertainties in the key variables were discussed quite explicitly in the AR4 back in 2007. Then, the tone somehow became more alarmist in the AR5 published in 2014, despite the finding that the total annual anthropogenic GHG (excluding water vapor) emissions have continued to increase over 1970 to 2010 with larger absolute increases between 2000 and 2010, and yet the global temperature increased the least between 2000 and 2010, when the GHG concentrations rose the most.

        You can download them from the IPCC site ( The total reports are each over 1000 pages long, but the relevant chapters are Chapter 8 of the AR4 and Chapter 9 of the AR5.

        It could be that the AR5 was written over a few years preceding to its publication in 2014 and the above finding was not yet available for inclusion back then. The AR6 is due to be published this year, so we will see what they will have to say.

  7. bolstroodMEMBER

    Well that certainly broght out the Deniers and shills of the Fossil Fuel lobby.
    This from 2017
    We can look away, deny the evidence, but itwill still keep happening.
    Just as the East coast of Australia is drying out this appears on the BoM
    A 7 day moving barometric chart, run it and see what is coming to NSW monday.
    Get that concrete pour done Swampy.

  8. turvilleMEMBER

    Seriously – just a random number pick of 3c – complaints about excess rain and then it will be another complaint about some hot days. The “great southern land” – where there is a big move towards renewable energy (factually happening), appropriate timeframe to closure of fossil fuel generating plants (keep the lights on). What does Australia need to do (more) to get temperature reduction when countries like China and particularly India (completely different model to China and light years behind) continue to pollute and report fictional data!!

  9. rob barrattMEMBER

    Theme from “Jaws” here bolstrood.
    My house purchase in Iceland has just gone through. Phew! Seriously though, my understanding of the climate model is that it’s got more integral signs in it than I’ve had hot dinners. Nobody can accurately predict what would happen if any one of the key variables were to change. (that by the way does not reduce to denial or even scepticism).
    Besides, I’ve got some money riding on a large asteroid coming your way soon….

  10. bolstroodMEMBER

    Hi Rob,
    “No one could accurately predict what would happen if any one of the key variables were to change.”
    perhaps not, but we are going to find out.
    I do not know much about scientific models, but I can “look out the window” so to speak, and I see 50% of the GBR has died in the past 4 years, that we have had the worst drought since white settlement , the hottest weather on record in the past 3 years, accompanied by the most destructive wild fires . All this was brought to halt only by the biggest floods since European sttlement.
    If 99% of flight engineers said a plane you were booked to fly on had a 50% chance of crashing, would you get on the plane ?

    • If 99% of flight engineers said a plane you were booked to fly on had a 50% chance of crashing, would you get on the plane ?

      It would depend if they were speaking to me as honest flight engineers, or as paid shills for a railway monopoly funded by Bill and Melinda’s fake charity.

      • Kermit The Frog

        Let’s ask the fossil fuel industry how much profit they make each year, and work out what their motivations are. Is it enough to motivate them to carry out a surreptitious campaign to sow FUD. We should also ask them how much of that profit comes from taxpayer subsidies. And when we’ve done quizzing them we should ask the politicians if they’ve been offered lucrative positions on the boards of these companies after they’ve retired from politics. I’m sure they’ll be totally honest with us.