Just six months to go: let’s party

I picked up this clanger from Alan Anderson on Facebook.

Note date of the story: December 4 2009.  Onya, Pen.

 

penny_sackett1

THE planet has just five years to avoid disastrous global warming, says the Federal Government’s chief scientist.

Prof Penny Sackett yesterday urged all Australians to reduce their carbon footprint.

Australians – among the world’s biggest producers of carbon dioxide – were “better placed than others to do something about it”, she said.

“Australians can make an enormous contribution, so why would we not rise to this challenge and this opportunity,” she told a business conference in Melbourne.

Prof Sackett refused to comment on the failure of the emissions trading scheme to be passed by the Senate this week.

She said her role was as an adviser to the Government and not a commentator on public policy, but she did not deny her appointment a year ago was a political one.

Asked to explain data that showed the earth had been cooling in recent years, the trained astrophysicist acknowledged air temperatures had levelled during the La Nina weather pattern, now nearing an end.

“But next time someone talks about cooler weather, ask them if they are talking about the temperature in the small amount of atmosphere above the surface of the earth or the great mass of heat retained in the world’s oceans,” she said.

“When scientists talk about global warming, they are referring to the temperature of the whole earth and most of the heat is stored in the oceans, which have not cooled in 10 years.”

The professor said even if all the world stopped producing carbon dioxide immediately, temperature increases of 1.3C were unavoidable.

If the earth’s temperature rose 2C, she warned, there would be risks that were “difficult and dangerous”.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

62 Responses to Just six months to go: let’s party

  1. Infidel Tiger

    Time’s up fraudsters.

  2. C.L.

    THE planet has just five years to avoid disastrous global warming, says the Federal Government’s chief scientist.

    LOL.

  3. George Brandis thanks for NOTHING

    Face, meet egg.

  4. Infidel Tiger

    In any other age Henny Penny would be in high care with electrodes attached to her bonce.

  5. Gab

    “We’ll all be rooned. Before the year is out”.

  6. evcricket

    You know this means “5 years to act” not “the planet will be destroyed”. But keep interpreting it in the way that makes you feel safest.

  7. Mike of Marion

    Is she still pulling about $400K pa out of the public purse?

  8. Frank

    A subtle head tilt there too.

  9. Craig Mc

    Oops. Shoulda picked a less falsifiable date Penny! Most climate scientologists have learnt to predict DOOM by the end of the century, or TRAGEDY for some remote location Joe Public will never personally visit.

  10. Des Deskperson

    ‘Is she still pulling about $400K pa out of the public purse?’

    She’s been replaced by former ANU VC Ian Chubb and I think the remuneration has increased slightly, I’ll check and get back to you.

  11. MT Isa Miner

    Infidel Tiger

    #1356431, posted on June 23, 2014 at 8:53 am

    In any other age Henny Penny would be in high care with electrodes attached to her bonce.

    Gerbil Warning is a Equal Opportunity Fraud.

    Why shouldn’t women who love a crackpot theory as long as their friends do too get into the act? Why shouldn’t she get paid close to half a million for spraying homone induced insanity over the rest of us? You aren’t one of the missovaryannists, are ya, I.T.?

  12. Greigoz

    You can’t really blame her. The Labor/Greens Government filled the Climate Change trough with filthy lucre, and the hogs bellied up.

  13. MT Isa Miner

    George Brandis thanks for NOTHING

    #1356428, posted on June 23, 2014 at 8:50 am

    Face, meet egg.

    Yeah, mate, good nickname. Thanks for nothing, George. Thanks for 18C and the rest of that crap act and thanks for opening your legs to the Jewish lobby who doesn’t occupy the West Bank anymore for NOTHING. Don’t ever call George a political whore , he’s not political, he’s just a slut.

  14. Alfonso

    Shudder….. Pen knows she’s making up the 5 year thing but apparently in the interests of the political outcome she doesn’t care.

  15. egg_

    Gaia/ManBearPig is a Socialist with 5 year Central Planning?
    Who’d've thunk it?

    ManBearPig is hiding in the ocean, after all – Oz Chief Sciencematist said so!
    So there!

    More News at Eleventy.

  16. cohenite

    That this person is on the public teat is just more salt in the fucking wound. 5 years the dumb bint says; from now; she was saying the same fucking thing in 2010.

    The word idiot is no longer effective in describing what some humans are saying and doing.

  17. incoherent rambler

    I think some show trials to prosecute the scamsters is appropriate at this time.

    (something like the the sheep dog trials)

  18. egg_

    The professor said even if all the world stopped producing carbon dioxide immediately, temperature increases of 1.3C were unavoidable.

    So better to manage the resultant change (IF it ever occurs), as most have been advocating, rather than imbibe snake oil?

    Banana and sugar cane growing in Sydney could be beneficial?
    Think of all that lovely biofuel.

    P.S. What’s Pen done to minimise her foot print – how’s the Gen III Toyota Pious going?
    Or does an ‘eco’ Maybach better suit her set?

  19. Mr Rusty

    SACK IT!

    But I bet they haven’t and she will today be earning buckets of taxpayers money and sprouting the same nonesense.
    Grow a bloody pair you Liberal lamoids.

  20. Bruce of Newcastle

    If you plot satellite temperature since this day in 1996, exactly 18 years ago, the trendline is dead flat.

    Do the same for one decade and the trend is noticeably down. Now you can play with endpoints and etc, but CAGW certainly isn’t going to magically spring into life in the next six months.

    Perhaps CO2 climate sensitivity is much lower than the activists IPCC scientists say it is?

  21. Gab

    Sackett resigned from the Chief “Scientist” role in 2011. She runs her own consultancy now but not sure if she is still employed by the ANU.

  22. Dr.Sir Fred Lenin

    Ooooh you people are misogynists for critisising the cheif “scientist”. She had to retire on a massive taxpayer funded pension! Wonder if ghe bought a $ 2 m . Seaside home like her old (and I mean OLD) boss,the berloved choolya,another feminazi fraud!

  23. Roger

    Australians – among the world’s biggest producers of carbon dioxide
    That would be because we’re one of the few developed nations not to utilise nuclear power, which in countries which have it provides anywhere from c. 20% – 70% of energy requirements, thus impacting quite significantly on CO2 emissions from conventional coal fired electricity generation. Yet the Greenies never seem to mention that (and they don’t mention natural gas, either); instead they get excited about windmills!

    And another thing – is this estimation of our giant carbon footprint offset by the giant carbon sink that is Australia’s grasslands after a particularly wet summer in the tropics? I seem to recall scientists postulating that the inland vegetation growth prompted by the last big wet seasons here in 2010 & 2011 contributed significantly to lower worldwide temperatures. Of course, that’s assuming CO2 is the driver of climate change…

  24. Tim Neilson

    Notice how she tries to dismiss the temperature pause by:
    (a) starting by referring to claims of a “cooling” trend;
    (b) referring to the “global warming” as being about the “great mass of heat” retained in the ocean; and
    (c ) solemnly averring that the oceans “have not cooled” in 10 years.
    OK, so the oceans “have not cooled”. How is that evidence in favour of the “global warming” hypothesis, given that humans produced ever increasing amounts of CO2 over that time frame and atmospheric CO2 levels continued to climb?
    Dumb as a box of rocks, or disgracefully duplicitous? (Or both?) In any case, it’s a disgrace that taxpayers were funding her.

  25. A Lurker

    Nostradamus was better and more accurate with his prophecies.

  26. Gab

    Australians – among the world’s biggest producers of carbon dioxide

    Another lie. Australia produces only 1.2% of global CO2 emissions.
    China emits 28.5% of global CO2.
    USA produces 15%.

  27. Leo G

    “When scientists talk about global warming, they are referring to the temperature of the whole earth and most of the heat is stored in the oceans, which have not cooled in 10 years.”

    So what about the science which holds that 99.99% of the Earth’s heat content is in the mantle and core, with the core temperature possibly as high as 6000 Kelvin?
    What’s Penny’s rationale for excluding the core, mantle and crust from “the whole earth”?
    Moreover, when competent scientists talk about warming they are referring to heat exchange processes and global warming would refer to global heat exchange processes- not simplistically to the temperature of the whole earth. In the 21st century they are most likely to be referring to average global air temperature at the earth’s notional surface.

  28. pete m

    She said 5 years to avoid warming and temps of 1.3 degree rises were already locked in. She did not say do nothing and in 100 years we face ruin. Clearly action need now or in 5 years it is too late and climate chaos will rule. All lies.

    She said oceans retain warmth – lies. Tell it to argo.

    Poor scientists cannot find the warmth, so first is was oceans, then is was upper troposphere, then it was masked by cloud cover or volcano soot, then it was there but lower sunspot activity masked it, then then then etc. Lies and more lies.

    Fact is the genius climate scientists have got the feedbacks wrong, the aerosol forcing wrong, temp measurement adjustments wrong and linear response wrong. They have not accounted for this global climate having an amazing feedback control mechanisms including vast ocean and cloud / storm activity.

    How many billions have been wasted on this shit so far?

  29. C.L.

    Another lie. Australia produces only 1.2% of global CO2 emissions.

    No no.

    Per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita …

  30. Mr Rusty

    Sackett resigned from the Chief “Scientist” role in 2011.

    Good.
    And she should never ever be allowed to hold a taxpayer funded position ever again, unless it is occupying a jail cell.

  31. Andrew

    SACK IT!

    But I bet they haven’t and she will today be earning buckets of taxpayers money and sprouting the same nonesense.

    Fortunately she resigned in 2011. Questions for the unqualified nutjobs (she’s an astronomer specialising in exoplanets, and knows less about cli fi than the average Cat) who believe the heat is hiding in the deep oceans:
    1) Does that constitute a negative feedback?
    2) Does that mean AGW proceeds at 0.0001% as fast as the models predict, given the oceans’ 10^6 times greater heat capacity than the atmosphere?
    3) If “ocean acidification” is a real thing (i.e. the process of becoming ever so slightly less alkaline, although never reaching the “acidity” of tap water), then does that mean AGW should be further proportionately reduced to reflect the CO2s that end up in the water and keep out of the air?

  32. Infidel Tiger

    Per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita …

    Unfortunately we are beaten even in the per capita stakes by such luminaries as Qatar, Trinidad and Tobago and the Falkland Islands.

  33. notafan

    Obviously after that speech the Abbott government were too embarrassed to have a Science Minister.
    Luckily she resigned, as she was actually the Chief Wrongologist.

  34. Tex

    It’s kinda like Bob Ellis making climate predictions

  35. Crossie

    Another lie. Australia produces only 1.2% of global CO2 emissions.

    No no.

    Per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita, per capita …

    They have to go this device to get the answer the yep want and then fail to let that be attached to their argument.

    Besides, so what? Most everywhere else would be even higher if they could afford it. What’s more, Australian conditions of long distances between population and production centres account for most of it.

  36. The children of Ellis (see Sinc’s little letter from a cranky chap) are thick and fast this morning.

    Well, thick, anyway.

  37. cohenite

    She said oceans retain warmth – lies. Tell it to argo.

    Correct ARGO which started measurements around 2004 has found these results.

    The alarmists typically present charts showing the increase in Ocean Heat Content in Joules instead of temperature. NOAA for example puts out a graph showing the increase in OHC over the past 55 years as 10^25 Joules. It sounds huge, enormous, the world is going to blow up! But when you convert Joules into temperature the increase is 0.09C which is statistically indistinguishable from nought.

    This lady Sackett is either a liar or a goose.

  38. Des Deskperson

    The Chief Scientist has an annual total remuneration of $460,800. That’s the same as the Director of the Bureau of Meteorology and more than the Information Commissioner and the Commonwealth Onbudsman, both on $435.00.

    The latter three run medium to large sized organisations and the last two have significant statutory responsibilities. On the other hand, judging by his website, the Chief Scientist doesn’t do much at all, puts out a few papers and makes the odd submission to Parliamentary inquiries. I suspect that his supervisory and management responsibilities involve bugger all.

  39. Gab

    The Chief Scientist has an annual total remuneration of $460,800.

    On the other hand, judging by his website, the Chief Scientist doesn’t do much at all, puts out a few papers and makes the odd submission to Parliamentary inquiries. I suspect that his supervisory and management responsibilities involve bugger all.

    Mark Scott does even less and gets paid $678,940. (Or is it $800,000?)

  40. Roger

    Another lie. Australia produces only 1.2% of global CO2 emissions.
    Yes, but she said “Australians”, so it’s on a per capita basis, which is more or less correct… except it’s like comparing apples and oranges when you calculate the per capita CO2 output of citizens of countries like Australia which generate most of their electricity through firing coal with citizens of developed countries which have a combination of nuclear, natural gas and hydro. Intellectually dishonest, I’d say.

  41. egg_

    The Chief Scientist has an annual total remuneration of $460,800.

    That oughta buy a whole lot of Prius piety, or should that be Hybrid Lexus SUV bulldust mobiles?

  42. Gab

    Makes not one bit of difference, this per capita schtick, when the total output per country is the more pertinent and accurate measure. The Leftards only choose to base their lies on per capita because it suits their emotive “arguments”.

  43. egg_

    Intellectually dishonest, I’d say.

    The name of the CAGW game.

  44. Ripper

    The Japanese IBUKI satellite which measured emissions in just about real time showed that Austraslia was a net carbon sink.

  45. James of the Glen

    Sackett might have resigned as Chief Scientist (now we have someone totally unqualified to give advice on climate physics) but still has the money handed to her for this infamous advice.
    Let her be called forth by the Federal Government to explain her totally wrong prediction, gross alarmism and dismissal of what other astro-physicists were/are publishing. A Senate Inquiry would be a start.

    Coincidentally, the infamous Dr James Hanson (of GISS) predicted that the perimeter highway of Manhattan would be under water by…2010.
    And whatever happened to those 50 million “climate refugees” who would be wandering the world by …2010?

  46. Roger

    The Leftards only choose to base their lies on per capita because it suits their emotive “arguments”. Well…yes! But we have to be sure we’re refuting the right nonsensical argument.

    The name of the CAGW game
    Which is regime change: replace parliamentary democracy with totalitarian Socialism.

  47. Roger

    It just struck me how lying for the cause is a feature of the two totalitarian systems presently vying to destroy the West: Socialism and Islam.

  48. PeterF

    Wasn’t there an article somewhere about “fright bats”?

  49. egg_

    Wasn’t there an article somewhere about “fright bats”?

    According to numbzzz, if the windmill blades don’t get ‘em, their (additional) transmission lines will?

  50. .

    evcricket

    #1356434, posted on June 23, 2014 at 8:58 am
    You know this means “5 years to act” not “the planet will be destroyed”. But keep interpreting it in the way that makes you feel safest.

    So we haven’t acted. The planet doesn’t get destroyed? What happens next?

  51. Grandma

    Gosh, according to Professor Hackett I must be dead now, and I didn’t notice…….

  52. .

    ev

    What happens next? The Event Horizon?

    I’m kind of bored so my inquirin’ mind really wants to know.

    Is this like Dr Strangelove? If I’m like Buck Turgidson, am I better staying in bedwith my personal assistant than meeting with President Merkin Muffley?

  53. egg_

    So we haven’t acted. The planet doesn’t get destroyed? What happens next?

    evcrickets chirping?

  54. Fisky

    Notice how quickly Leftist hoaxes are going down now? “Global warming” lasted only 3-4 years but of course it’s taken longer for political systems to re-calibrate and weed out the Green waste.

    It took decades to discredit Communism by contrast, although the CO2 hoax itself was really just the rehabilitation of Communism.

  55. Fisky

    Coincidentally, the infamous Dr James Hanson (of GISS) predicted that the perimeter highway of Manhattan would be under water by…2010.
    And whatever happened to those 50 million “climate refugees” who would be wandering the world by …2010?

    Oh they’re coming…in next five years!

    Leftists love five-year timelines, but not as much as they enjoy erasing public memory of the previous five-year timeline.

  56. Aristogeiton

    evcricket
    #1356434, posted on June 23, 2014 at 8:58 am
    You know this means “5 years to act” not “the planet will be destroyed”. But keep interpreting it in the way that makes you feel safest.

    Get back to your bong, clown.

  57. Penny Sackett failed in her job. During a radio interview, she said she knew of no peer reviewed papers refuting the AGW hoax.

    This was after attending a meeting with then Senator Steve Fielding where she was handed the weighty NIPCC report which contained pages of peer reviewed papers. Either she didn’t look at this, and therefore was derelict in her duties OR she lied.

  58. I wonder if these predictions were factored into her share portfolio and superannuation fund choices.

  59. nerblnob

    we are beaten even in the per capita stakes by such luminaries as Qatar, Trinidad and Tobago and the Falkland Islands

    Wake Up Australia! Must try harder.

    I love these deadlines. The more you tell people that we’re fucked if we don’t do X by X date then the more they’ll shrug their shoulders and go, ” Well, we’re fucked then. Too late to do anything now – you said it yourself. Another drink?”.

  60. Strip her retrospectively of all her honours and qualifications and demand repayment of salary.

  61. .

    PS

    So we haven’t acted. The planet doesn’t get destroyed? What happens next?

Comments are closed.