Global warming induced asteroid fly-bys

One of the great things about the end of the year is the tendency of the media to do their nostalgia pieces on the year that was. While most of them are rubbish, there are some gems among them, especially the ones that deal with the sillier parts, and in particular, the more absurd claims of global warming frantics.

Even better and more idiotic than that, are the efforts of the liberal media ‘sophisticates’ who are ever anxious to show off their belief in the new trendy GW religion, with claims that everything bad is GW related.

Deborah Feyerick makes the effort here with a question of the ‘weather guy’ Bill Nye, about an asteroid fly by and whether it might be induced by climate change:

 This is somewhat like some of the movie scenes where the piss is taken from media anchors, except you just can’t make this stuff up. Note the deliciously threatening ‘only fifteen minutes from disaster’ statement from Nye.

 Warnings of near earth fly bys gives NASA a reason to feel relevant and scientists a source of government money to ‘study’ this phenomenon with an eye to finding a defense mechanism. This in turn gives the government a chance to appear to be doing something about it.

 The best chance we have at present seems to be Bruce Willis in his role in ‘Armageddon’ where he destroyed one, however thirty years in the drilling industry has made me a little skeptical of that possibility.

 The most you can hope for otherwise is that the good people of NASA will either not find an earth destroying asteroid, or if they do, will be able to issue you with a warning in time to give you the opportunity to kiss your arse goodbye.

Piers Morgan cops a beating from Brett Lee

Here is a bit of joy for non-liberals, non-Piers Morgan tragics, and non-CNN fans.

The Brett Lee Vs Piers Morgan showdown that was alluded to in a previous post occurred today. The origins of it was Morgan’s trenchant criticism of the English batsmen for being ‘gutless’ while facing the express bowling of the Australian fast bowlers, during the Adelaide test match.

Ian Healy of the commentary team covering the match, pointed out that Morgan had never played more than grade cricket and wouldn’t have a clue as to what facing up to bowlers of this quality involved. Retired Australian paceman, Brett Lee then issued a challenge, which Morgan accepted.

After being hit in the head by a warm-up ball prior to the event, he was hit by Lee in the back, twice in the ribs, once in the wrist, fell over avoiding another, and was comprehensively bowled:

Image: Morgan’s wrist after copping one from Lee.

It is doubtful that many Australians realized who he was, other than just another Pom. He was introduced as the most watched talk show host in America, which would have CNN creaming its jeans, however such a claim is wildly inaccurate unless FNC is excluded from the survey.

Brett Lee said he'd done a "public service" by inflicting a bit of pain, stating “he got hurt but he didn't get maimed, so that's a positive step.”

‘The Guardian’ calls for food rationing and more big government

Elitists in the halls of power in government, or in academia, think tanks, media, and elsewhere all share a love of deciding what is good and bad for us and what to do about it whether we agree or not.  Normally this involves the invoking of the good old “My will be done” clause of the authoritarian rulebook.

In Australia we have what former libertarian, John Singleton referred to as ‘the great aorta, which in its own way is the vessel that provides the blood flow to whatever the state uses in lieu of a brain, from the beating desires of those who think they know best.   They orta stop people saying, … they orta make a law to …, they orta provide more ……, they orta encourage the use of …, and so on.

In Britain, Zoe Williams of the Guardian is getting on the bandwagon of national wish lists with a call for the government to halt obesity by bringing back the sort of  rationing from the good old days of WW2: 

It's always presented as a happy accident, one of those cute paradoxes in which the second world war specialised, that rationing, in a bid to stop us starving, also stopped us getting fat. In fact, while obesity may not have featured in the planning, this isn't an accident: in order to be the kind of government that can effect that kind of public health improvement, you have to start by being the kind of government that cares whether or not your people are hungry. You have to be the kind of government that takes what people are putting on their tables every night as its most urgent and pressing business. 

At the end of rationing (which was incredibly unpopular, let's not forget – nobody enjoys being told how much bacon they're allowed) not only was there much less obesity, but other indicators of a nation's health – birth weight, infant mortality – also improved. At a recent Women's Institute history night, I saw for the first time a full list of what the rations actually were. 

I concluded ruefully that they were so meagre (one egg a week, 50g of butter) that I don't think I'd bother eating, I'd just live on protein powder and alcohol. But that's not the point; when one discusses rationing, it's in the context of national circumstances so straitened that everybody simply had to eat less, because there wasn't enough. But the next stage of that logical process is never discussed – which is that it was a fear, really, for the poor not having enough that led to a policy for everyone. 

Circumstances weren't so dire that rich people would have starved, or even people in the middle: the concern was a) that scarcity would falsely inflate prices, so people who could previously afford to eat would be priced out; and b) that people would hoard. The hoarding point is interesting as it gives the lie to a narrative often tacitly peddled, that human nature during the war was better than it is now, more self-sacrificing, less demanding, more generous. 

But more important is that point about prices – all markets favour the rich. In times of scarcity, though, the poor are disadvantaged by an amount so stark that you can't count it. Whatever the price is, the entire point is that it will be too much for that group, so that demand is reduced and supply at the top can remain at normal levels. It's like a bully holding a boy's satchel 5cm higher than he can jump. That much was obvious in the 1940s, and you would hope it would be again today, unless 30 years of neoliberalism has totally hollowed out our sense of reason. …

It seems strange to base an argument for rationing to prevent obesity, (which is caused by plentiful food for the entire population) on scarcity.  The author seems to be making an argument for price controls, which accompanied the rationing of that period, making the accompanying black market profitable.

The entire column though is full of authoritarian dogma.  It rails against hoarding; the prudent stocking up of non perishable foodstuffs and products likely to be in short supply.

There is also the quaint belief that ‘markets favor the rich’.  An unfettered free market creates plentiful food to the point where surpluses are exported, and even the poorest can eat well.  In a rationing and price control regime, many products disappear from the shelves but usually will reappear from under the counter if the customer can come up with a suitable offer, or knows someone who has the product for the right price.

It is not the free market which favors the rich, it is the state manipulated ‘orderly’ market that does so while discriminating against those with limited means as an unintended consequence.

Then again, this is a writer who believes that the only reason people would object to rationing in times of plenty is the fault of 'neoliberalism' 'hollowing out' our dense of reason.  Yep, Zoe, they all need your own special brand of good ol socialism.

The Environmental Multinationals have lost their Way.

By Viv Forbes, Chairman,

The carbon Sense Coalition 

Many groups have much to lose as the theory that humans are driving dangerous and accelerating global warming is progressively exposed as science fiction.

Those in most danger are the multinational environmental empires and the politicians who have supported them.



Once upon a time the World Wildlife Fund was mainly about saving wildlife – now its pre-occupation seems to be how to destroy the coal industry in order to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is the gas of life, and the additional carbon dioxide is known to be fuelling the green revolution which has caused increased growth of all green things. WWF is thus now anti-green.



Greenpeace also has forgotten the green bit and is now more interested in saddling us with a tax on carbon, the key element of all life.



And instead of working for refugees, Oxfam was prominent among the dozens of “charities” acting more like stop-work agitators at the climate grabfest in Warsaw. (Yes it was a grab-fest – most of the attendees were there hoping to grab a big heap of cash from a few western bunnies for “Climate Compensation”.)



See: Green groups walk out of UN climate talks


And how do Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club accept the massive environmental destruction caused by thousands of bird-killing bat-killing wind turbines with their spider-webs of roads and transmission lines? The wind mania will collapse as soon as its subsidies disappear. Who is then going to clean up their mess? Will we see volunteers from FOE dismantling derelict windmills and rehabilitating their access tracks and transmission lines and towers?



Solar Panels Frying Birds Along Major Migration Path:


Wind Turbines slaughter rare birds: 

 Image Source: 

And why should these economic vandals be assisted by tax concessions while they spend much of their time and energy locking-the-gate on activities that could generate tax revenue such as exploration, mining, grazing, land development, irrigation, fishing, tourism and forestry? Green extremists have lost sight of their once-worthy aims to now become forces of pointless obstruction and destruction of all human activities.



And why should the CSIRO be funded lavishly by tax payers while they waste billions trying to prop up failing climate theories, models and scares?



The ice caps have not melted, the oceans are not overheating, sea levels are just fluctuating, the polar bears are thriving and the Sahara is regaining vegetation. It is foxes and cats that are destroying native wildlife, not drilling for gas. And real human pollution of the oceans, rivers and atmosphere gets little attention while green dreamers in parliament are focussed on maintaining the carbon tax.

Cartoon: Steve Hunter  
(PS. Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Gas and Big Government have been quite stingy lately with grants to Carbon Sense so Steve has not been paid. Send us some subscriptions or we will both starve.)



All manias unravel, and the climate mania has started down this road. Already supporters are jumping ship as the reaction accelerates.



Politicians too have played a dangerous game with energy supplies.



The icy tentacles of yet another cold winter are once again sneaking down from the ice-covered Arctic and causing shivers on the northern plainsof Europe and America.



Sometime soon, on a still winter night in Northern Europe, snow will drift down silently, covering the German solar panels with a cold white blanket, and quietly surrounding the motionless British wind turbines like skirmishers ahead of the invading vandals. Green power will fail, the lights will flicker, the heaters will go cold, and some people may start to recognise that reliable heat, light and power from coal, oil, gas and nuclear is humanity’s greatest asset after all.



Next morning, the BBC will report the record high temperature reached at Marble Bar in summertime Australia.



But later in the day, awkward questions will be asked in Parliament. 



And, at the next election, heads will roll.

Duck Dynasty star's suspension “fascist and Stalinist”; Camille Paglia

For those on another planet or who haven’t seen the show, Duck Dynasty is a sort of ‘reality show’ based on the lives of a real life family from the Louisiana bayous whose success is based on their production of duck hunting accessories.  The stars, the Robertson family, base their lifestyle around hunting and strong Christian conservative attitudes.

It is an immensely popular show with an estimated sixteen million regular viewers.

Patriarch of the show, Phil Robertson has been suspended from it owing to his views on what constitutes sinfulness including homosexuality, as expressed in an interview in GQ.  Some of his comments have been dropped from the article, but according to Katie Pavlich at Townhall included: 

GQ. What, in your mind, is sinful? 

Robertson. “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right. 

“We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?

This has caused consternation in GLAAD and other gay rights groups who believe that equality is not enough and demand universal approval.  They have successfully lobbied for his dismissal.

Lesbian libertarian, Camille Paglia has slammed the decision and the groups who demanded it as fascists, labeling it as Stalinist and a violation of free speech: 

“I speak with authority here, because I was openly gay before the ‘Stonewall Rebellion,’ when it cost you something to be so,” said Paglia. “And I personally feel as a libertarian that people have the right to free thought and free speech.” 

It’s unlikely that you need any background, but Phil Robertson Became the target of GLAAD and other one-track advocates for gay rights after his remarks in a GQ article reflecting personal views on the depravity of homosexuality and other Biblical sins went viral. A&E responded to GLAAD pressure by indefinitely banning him from appearing in future episodes of “Duck Dynasty.” 

That, according to Paglia, was a “fascist,” freedom-squelching move. 

“In a democratic country, people have the right to be homophobic as they have the right to support homosexuality – as I 100 percent do. If people are basing their views against gays on the Bible, again they have a right to religious freedom there … to express yourself in a magazine in an interview. This is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, okay? – that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades. It’s the whole legacy of the free-speech 1960s that have been lost by my own party.” 

Don’t look under any rocks for more ideological liberals to join Paglia in the Robertsons’ defense. Then again – the Duck Commander clan likely doesn’t need it. A Facebook page protesting A&E’s decision to yank Phil had received 800,000 “likes” by late Thursday – only a few hours after it first went online.

For A&E, this is not a matter of freedom of speech; they have the right to hire and fire as they wish, on any pretext.

The real fascists in this are those who wish to muzzle any form of opinion that disagrees with their own, or disapproves of the cause they are advocating.  Unfortunately, it appears that they are winning. 

EU banning E-cigarettes

Anti smoking hysterics are constantly on the prowl looking for ways and excuses to place further bans on their favorite cause.  It almost makes you believe that they want people to quit the habit except for the fact that they attempt to ban just about everything that will help in doing this.

Their latest cause célèbre is the humble E-cigarette, which seems to be on the outer everywhere with the EU joining the rush to stop them.  The only resistance being offered is predictably, from the libertarian aligned UKIP:

Armed staff member stopped school shooter

Cartoon: By Glenn McCoy 

After the Sandy Hook School shooting tragedy, the NRA and others were roundly ridiculed for the suggestion that some of these events could be averted or minimized by arming teachers or other staff members.  Liberal policy makers love to cling to their ideas of gun-free zones making people safe despite mounting evidence that the opposite is the case.

The latest shooting at Arapahoe High School in Centennial, Colorado has vindicated the NRA and some of the saner commentators by virtue of the fact that the shooter killed himself when confronted by an armed staff member: 

… Robinson said that after Pierson entered the high school at approximately 12:33 p.m. Friday, near the student parking lot, he asked for the teacher by name. At one point, Pierson went into the library, where Murphy actually was located, but a janitor initiated a lockdown and Murphy was able to escape as Pierson entered the room. 

After that, Pierson set off one of the Molotov cocktails, setting at least three bookshelves on fire, investigators told KDVR.com. When an armed school resource officer entered the room, Pierson believed he was cornered and turned his gun on himself, Robinson said.  The entire attack lasted approximately 80 seconds and was captured by security cameras. …

It is difficult to ascertain what the result would have been had there not been an armed staff member present; the killer intended to shoot a teacher who had dropped him off the debating team, however he had fired randomly down a hallway wounding a female student.  It stands to reason though, that leaving the school to deny him his target saved the life of the teacher, and the armed resource officer potentially saved a number of lives.

The Gore effect rules

Cartoon: By Glenn McCoy 

The “Gore effect” is an amusing phenomenon (at least to climate rationalists), which seems to bring record cold weather, sleet, ice, hail, and extreme discomfort to GW frantics during events where Al Gore is present, or are called to discuss ‘dangerous’ global warming.  ‘Respectable’ or government-financed scientists dismiss it as just a hell of a lot of unfortunate coincidences.

Climate Depot has a list of events affected by it here. 

Now the weather is once again taking the piss during a conference in California by the American Geophysical Union.  The event during which many aspects of Global warming were discussed, was marred by records being smashed for low temperatures: 

… In a classic case of the Gore Effect, these global warming presentations occurred in a month seeing record cold in the city of San Francisco. Temperatures in San José fell to a record-shattering 30 degrees Fahrenheit--so low that it has caused deaths by hypothermia in the area. The cold also caused serious issues with black ice on roads, not something with which the usual Bay Area driver must contend. The cold weather was not limited to the Bay Area, however. Over 2,000 temperature records were shattered nationwide. 

The scientific community has faced increased problems in explaining the slowing of the global warming trend in the past several years when their numbers appeared to have predicted a much steadier increase. Even reports by the IPCC--a group present at the AGU conference--demonstrate that the globe failed to reach the temperatures expected due to carbon dioxide emissions this year, as well as how the benefits of an increase in plant life and crops from a steadying warming trend would outweigh the harm of climate change. Some studies have even speculated that humans have a much smaller impact on climate change than previously believed. 

The reality of such cold temperatures amid calls of potential disturbances thanks to record heat are certainly not ideal for climate scientists. However, what these record cold temperatures mean for climate change theorists is yet to be seen. Given that they occurred during this year's AGU meeting, we might expect a study by the fall meeting in 2014 that attempts to explain this precipitous temperature drop in the context of larger-scale climate change. …

Piers Morgan to get his head smashed, and its legal

Image: Mitchell Johnson bowling.

Non-liberal Americans should be in for a treat if they tune in to the Fourth Test of the Ashes series against the Poms in Melbourne, played from Boxing Day through to the 30^th of December.  After criticizing the English batsmen during the Adelaide test, serial blowhard Piers Morgan has accepted a challenge to face retired fast bowler, Brett Lee in the nets during the game.

The initial challenge was for him to face frontline quick, Mitchell Johnson, however Brett Lee who was a 100 MPH bowler in his day has issued a challenge which has been accepted: 

 England's batsmen have had all sorts of drama facing Mitchell Johnson but one of their cocky countrymen reckons he'd be up to the task. Piers Morgan, the former Fleet Street editor who is now a CNN talkshow host, may have bitten off more than he can chew by boasting about his ability to front up to express bowling. 

Morgan, a cricket tragic, said on Twitter on Sunday he would love to face Johnson and ''wouldn't back away'', imploring England's batsmen to ''grow a pair''. 

He won't have to face the frightening Australian left-armer but his social media skiting is set to lob him in the nets facing Brett Lee [Right]. The former Test quick challenged Morgan to front up against him at the MCG and Morgan has accepted. 

''Absolutely no way will Piers Morgan get in the nets,'' a sceptical Shane Warne said. ''He hasn't got the courage. He's all talk.'' 

Morgan, however, is not backing down. ''Oh, I've got the courage all right,'' he tweeted to Warne. ''Get down the nets in Melbourne yourself, and I'll hammer you, too. I've faced 90mph regularly in my net from a bowling machine. Never backed away. ...

It is to be hoped that Morgan stays true to form and bad-mouths Lee prior to the event, which should improve Lee’s speed and accuracy.  Watch for Morgan’s head and body being peppered.

Interestingly, cricket commentators had to explain to audiences who Morgan was as he is virtually unknown here.  A few who followed the Levinson Inquiry into phone hacking know him as the guy who was accused of unreliable testimony there, and Top Gear fans recognize him as the person who was punched out by Jeremy Clarkson.

The Obama self-promotional commemorative photos

President Obama has joined other quirky national leaders, and former ones with his habit of inserting his image into important events.  The moon landing was commemorated by the White House with a special photo of the President looking soulfully at the moon, the Rosa Parks anniversary with an image of him looking soulfully into the distance in the bus she refused to stand for whites in.  His latest effort is to commemorate the Pearl Harbour attack with a photo of himself looking soulfully into the distance at the Arizona Memorial at Pearl Harbour:

But he is not the only one.  Vlad Putin, probably one of the saner ones with image fascination likes to take his shirt off for photos.  Here is a gay one of him on a horse that looks ready for the knackers yard:

It is somewhat reminiscent of Sylvester Stallone's movies where the bad guys capture him and force him at gunpoint to take his shirt off, Sly of course, was always rather reticent of letting the public see his big muscles.

Another really odd one was the late Kim Jong Il of North Korea who liked to pose for pictures of himself looking at his nation's seminal achievements.  Here is a memorable one of him studying an empty bottle:

But when it comes to self promotion, you just can't surpass our own former numero uno Kevin Rudd, master of the 'selfie'.  Kev was so good that he could post selfies of himself taking a selfie; it just doesn't get any better than that.  Here is Kevvie in full Shakespearean "If you prick us, do we not bleed?" (or perhaps, "If i cut me ... ) mode, with his celebrated selfie of his great dramatic shaving cut:

The common thread in all of this is that these people are all authoritarian, all are self absorbed, all feel they are born to rule, and all are bloody idiots and screw-ups.

The Climate See-saw.

Cartoon: by Michael Ramirez
By Viv Forbes, Chairmam,
The Carbon Sense Coalition

Anyone who looks carefully at radiation science and the thermodynamics of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will come to the conclusion that carbon dioxide alone cannot cause a global warming crisis. Even sensible warmists know this. There is a warming effect, but it is tiny and getting smaller as carbon dioxide increases.



So warmists invoke “positive feedbacks” or multipliers, which they say will tip earth into runaway global warming.

Their theory is that an initial small warming will increase evaporation of water from the oceans and methane from the tundra. These two “greenhouse gases” will then cause more atmospheric warming, progressively expelling more carbon dioxide from the warming oceans. “Oceans will boil” claimed warmist leader James Hansen. They also claim that after a postulated “tipping point”, Earth will never recover its balmy equilibrium.



However, they ignore substantial negative feedbacks that act to moderate any tendency to excessive global warming. For example, evaporation cools water bodies and carries surface heat into the upper atmosphere where it dissipates to space. Extra evaporation also produces more clouds that reflect heat and cool the surface. Also methane oxidises and extra plant growth absorbs more solar energy, water vapour and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.



Moreover, the long history of the Earth reveals periods when temperatures and carbon dioxide levels were far higher than today but life flourished and Earth always returned to cooler times – sometimes an ice age. Earth’s climate oscillates like a see-saw, with periodic changes in cycles in the sun and the solar system keeping the see-saw slowly oscillating.



There is no evidence supporting the theory of a global warming tipping point.



Today we live in a comfortably warm climate cycle but in the grand climate cycles, the barren hungry ice is always waiting its turn. Global cooling is a far greater danger to life on Earth than global warming.



Every human alive today is descended from a long line of smart and adaptable ancestors. Those who stay smart and adaptable will survive future see-saws of the climate.



For those who would like to read more: 

James Hansen claims oceans will boil: 


Here’s some alarming forecasts, bravely also specifying dates



But a well-known Australian global warmist rejects the tipping point scares:



Climate Forcings and Feedbacks. It is a well buffered and balanced system:


Quiet sun, and increasing ice:


Even the BBC feels the chill:

Finally, modern man (and woman) practicing how to cope with the ice:

Leyonhjelm warns of dangers of VLAD Act

Image: David Leyonhjelm

In yesterday’s biker protest in Brisbane, the press seem not to have noticed the speech by Liberal Democrat senator elect, David Leyonhjelm who warned that the Queensland government were creating the sort of moral panic that has been used against minority groups throughout history.  David was the only politician who supported the right of recreational bikers to enjoy their rides without police harassment: 

“There have been moral panics about communists, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, homosexuals and Asians,” he told a gathering of more than 3000 riders and civil libertarians outside State Parliament.
 

“In most cases there is an identifiable group of people who are vilified. They are singled out as a group by the police and, fairly often, new legislation is aimed at them.
“And nearly very time the legislation makes things worse and we all lose a bit of our freedom.
 

“What the Queensland Government has done with this moral panic is more troubling than usual. 

“When it gets over its panic and moves on to the next bogey-man, we will be left with laws that can be used against anyone, to undermine fundamental liberties and damage the independence of our justice system.”
 

David says the LDP has quite a few motorcycle-friendly policies including the promotion of free footpath parking, no tolls, lane filtering, no front number plates and “refuge boxes” for motorcycles at the front of the queue in traffic.
 

“We basically want to create a positive environment for bikers, not a negative one,” he says.
 

He told the Freedom Ride crowd at Parliament House that the VLAD Laws created a very negative environment in which he predicted “a police officer will die”.
 

“If you are indeed criminally inclined and facing a mandatory 25-year sentence for a fairly minor crime like dangerous driving or fighting in public, and you belong to a motorbike club, you might as well go down for murder as for the lesser crime,” he said.   “The sentence is no different and there might be no witnesses.”


The Queensland Police Commissioner’s voluntary ride register so recreational riding clubs can avoid unwanted harassment by police also came in for criticism.
  “These laws have been sold to the public as highly targeted legislation, designed to tackle organised crime,” he said.
“The Premier says police will not harass or intimidate law-abiding riders, but riders have been told to ring a police hotline if they want to ride in groups or three or more in peace.
  “The reality is very different. Non-declared clubs have been raided, including the Vietnam Veterans, and there are numerous stories of innocent motorcyclists being stopped and searched without justification.”
He said the police and the motorcycle-riding public are on a collision course.
  “And they wonder why nobody comes to the aid of police when they are in trouble,” he said. 


“I’m never going to help someone who thinks it’s ok to pull me up, search me and threaten me with jail if I don’t answer their questions merely because  am riding my motorcycle in company with a couple of other people.” …

National protest on Biker laws

Queensland’s draconian anti biker laws have come under the spotlight today with thousands of recreational bikers, civil libertarians, and others protesting around the nation.

The largest was in Brisbane outside parliament house with over 2,000 people present to express their outrage at the VLAD Act, which has effectively marginalized and in some cases outlawed riding in company.

The Queensland organizer was Gabriel Buckley from the Liberal Democrats, who have consistently opposed laws which unfairly single out groups for prosecution for who they are, rather than on the basis of wrongdoing: 

RECREATIONAL motorcyclists are protesting across Australia on Sunday to show solidarity against Queensland's tough new anti-bikie laws. 

Queensland organiser Gabriel Buckley says the new laws, aimed at criminal bikie gangs, have resulted in the harassment of law-abiding motorcyclists. Mr Buckley said a primary concern was that the laws reversed the onus on proof for people accused of links to prescribed criminal gangs. 

"Some people are being pulled over three times on their way to work,'' he told AAP. "You can imagine why these guys are getting impatient with the government.”

Premier Campbell Newman on the other hand claims that the laws only target criminal gangs and offers the platitude that law abiding bikers have nothing to fear and should be patient as they are pulled over for unreasonable searches and aggressive questioning by police. 

IPC’s Roscam slams Abbott’s direct action plan

Image; Baloo cartoons

Curiously, in this day and age of big government economic planning, Australia’s major parties are on a bit of a fetish for what they refer to as market based solutions on climate change.  Normally this would not be that much of a problem if any of them had the slightest concept of what a free market is, but that is not the case.

Labor and the Greens believe that a carbon tax is ‘market based’ in that it increases the price of electricity and other forms of energy, along with products made with it.  Reductions in CO2 are made by forcing all but the wealthy to cut back on their comforts and shutting down industry.  This in turn creates more poor people who have to cut back on their energy usage.

The Liberals and Nationals on the other hand are pro business and believe that subsidies and make work schemes are ‘market based’ according to Environment Minister Greg Hunt. Reductions in CO2 are made by using taxpayer money to subsidise farmers to increase soil carbon, householders to install solar, and establish a 15,000 strong ‘Green Army’ to plant trees. 

That rumbling sound is Hayek spinning in his grave.

John Roscam, who heads up the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) has come out swinging on the issue of Abbott’s direct action plan: 

''I don't think we should have direct action because the Coalition hasn't explained what, if any, changes to the world's temperature it will provide,'' said Mr Roskam, who is the executive director of the Institute of Public Affairs. 

Asked whether Mr Abbott's earlier position on the science of climate change - namely, as he notoriously declared in 2009, that it was ''absolute crap'' - suited the PM better than direct action, Mr Roskam agreed. 

''Yes, and isn't it interesting how climate change gets people to say things they don't really believe? I've yet to be convinced that Tony Abbott is doing any of this for anything other than political purposes. I think he would be much better off, as any politician would, telling us what he genuinely believed.'' 

Mr Roskam makes no bones of his scepticism over human-induced climate change, and has campaigned through the IPA against any form of climate action.

Neither side is really into anything market based but rather, are pursuing social engineering schemes based on manipulating market mechanisms in order to skew the economy in a direction that they consider to be socially desirable. 

It is doubtful that the Liberals actually believe that this plan is going to achieve anything; they are not that stupid and in any case the aim is to achieve a one fifth reduction of the already miniscule proportion of CO2 emissions produced here, which is pointless.  Their real belief is that it is politically expedient to be seen to have some sort of inferred belief in human induced global warming and a need to be thought of as having an intent to be seen to do something about it.