Readers' climate change debate heats up

Jim Bland

Yarrawarrah

In response to Ian Ryan's recent letter regarding his admiration for MP Craig Kelly as a man who speaks his mind, I would like to ask this. Terrorists also speak their mind. Do you admire them? It takes a special kind of ignorance to respect someone only for speaking their mind. We must also ask ourselves whether the speaker is saying something intelligent, helpful or meaningful. Craig Kelly's words never satisfy any of these requirements.

Rebecca Page

Engadine

Ian Ryan declares that he is a proud supporter of Craig Kelly and seems to believe everything he says about climate change, bushfires etc., and any opposite opinion that disagrees with his is not sensible.

Try to remember that Craig Kelly has no scientific qualifications in climate or related sciences - just the same as virtually every other politician in the country.

My opinion, your opinion and Craig Kelly's opinions are just that - opinions.

Every citizen including Ian Ryan and Craig Kelly need to read the scientific data, available to everybody, on the internet regarding climate change and global warming instead of believing the talk back radio "experts" politicians and the print media who want you to think they are experts on the subject.

Peter Asplin,

Engadine

Why does Ian Ryan (letters, 22 January) write as if Craig Kelly isn't allowed freedom of speech?

If the Liberal party want to restrain him from misrepresenting the party line, that's their business, but otherwise he's free to spout his nonsense, and does so!

Ian himself is free to give a false portrayal of people who express concern about global warming when he suggests they "shove" their "ideology down the throats ...". It isn't ideology, it's what we are told by nearly every expert with thorough knowledge of climate science.

And if some want to believe those who deny the science because of their political interests, they must expect us to feel frustrated at their stopping progress towards solutions. We have the right to advocate for action we are told is urgent.

Ian and others should start paying attention to experts such as RFS leaders, scientists and economists instead of politicians.

Bruce Hanna

Engadine

I think that the most telling paragraph in Ian Ryan's letter (Leader January 22, 2020) in his support for Craig Kelly's stance on climate change was "2022 is still some time away, and it should be enough time for many to grow a brain".

I have to agree, Ian. In the time left before the next election, people in Hughes and in Cook will be able to grow a brain and realise that Kelly and his boss Scotty from marketing, are both dinosaurs and can vote them out.

I'm not sure what scientific qualifications Kelly has, but just general reading of any climate scientist's view of the change in climate across the world, should surely make him aware that it's happening--and it's happening at a faster rate than ever before.

Land management is certainly a factor in our recent bushfires. However, the retired RFS commissioners in all states tried to warn Morrison about the build-up of forest floor material and what should be done about it. No preventative action was taken.

Also, the mention of what can only be described as 'firebugs' and the 168 people charged or spoken to by police. No people have been convicted. All of that is 2GB, Murdoch inspired false information.

Ian criticises the Green mismanagement of forests (where are they actually in power?), Zali Steggall, Independent (I can't quite find the relationship to Ian's argument there), and the fact, in his mind, that "..because people did not vote for him, (it) does not give you the right to shove your ideology down the throats of sensible people". That's where you're wrong again, Ian. It's called Free Speech, and in a Democracy we have the right to say that we don't believe in Kelly's far right, climate change denialist views.

Kevin Gowen

Caringbah

If natural political selection was allowed to take its course, Kent Johns should have been our federal representative for the seat of Hughes, not Craig Kelly. Thank you Prime Minister.

MP Kelly's schtick as a coal advocating climate denialist are well know domestically, and now he's also achieved international notoriety defending the government's position regarding the current bushfire crisis on BBC morning TV. And become an international pariah in the process.

To the Liberal party branch members in Hughes, please find someone else with more moderate views to represent us in the federal parliament. If preselection is externally perverted again, making it a third time, and we're given MP Kelly as the Liberal party candidate, I call on the 'The Quiet Australians' of Hughes to stand up. If you can't bring yourself to vote Labor then at least cast an invalid vote.

John Gunn

I enjoyed the letter from Ian Ryan that was printed in the Leader of 22 January 2020.

I am also pleased that you allowed it to be published.

The comments Ian Ryan made were reflective of my own feelings, especially the second paragraph about being made to feel like 'an enemy of the state' if you have a different opinion to the 'climate change warriors'.

I am also proud that Craig Kelly is my representative in parliament.

I hope that he continues to speak out about climate change using facts rather than rumours.

Karen Macdonald

Well done to Ian Ryan for declaring he voted for Craig Kelly and proud of it, in fact 60% of the electorate voted for him. However you are supposed to be the silent majority, we do not have the time or patients to engage in a sensible debate with uneducated alarmists. Regarding them growing of a brain before the 2022 election, No chance.

Gary Stuart

Gymea

My problem is also if you have a different opinion to the climate change warriors who blame carbon for all the world's problem, then you are an enemy of the state.I do believe that there has to be some change to our habits and I think this will happen as a matter of course. But it's sounding like the alarmists are telling us if we do not act now we are doomed.Incidentally, most of the alarmists appear to be the young people in the world and some are blaming the "Baby Boomers" for the problems.For their benefit here are a few things that Scientists have predicted over the last 50 or so years which you may not be aware of:-In the 60's: Oil reserves will be depleted in 10 years In the 70's: Another ice age in 10 years....I remember that one In the 80's: Acid rain will destroy all crops in 10 years In the 90's: The ozone layer will be destroyed in 10 years 2000's: The ice caps will be gone in 10 years.None of these catastrophes happened.

D. Andrews

Menai

Dire environmental events appeared in earnest and across the planet by the end of 2019 have me a little worried. Yet denials, to bald-faced climate-change lies by the likes of Craig Kelly are breathtaking. Australia had continuously been on fire from winter right through to summer, but still the tabloids give the likes Kelly oxygen, ignoring our experts and peakScience bodies.These devastating fires had been modelled and predicted four decades earlier in a paper published in 1988 "Australian bushfire danger under changing climatic regimes" by Dr Thomas Beer (CSIRO). Storms are also predicted to become more intense.

As I write Shire residents are still without electrical power form 100 year old Gum trees falling on power lines during an intense microburst/storm of January 20th.Yet the warnings went unheeded. Opinion from the likes of Kelly, Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt that constantly denigrates expert science (if you repeat a lie often enough, some take it as Gospel) has been allowed to cause a disconnect between Australians and what has proved to be excellent science.Massive fires: tick. Storms: tick. Record temperatures: tick. Intense drought: tick. What else do you want them to get right?Begging the question is this climate denial driven by ignorance or by greed? Probably both.

I've concluded, Australians are generally "science illiterates". Kelly has no tertiary qualifications, Science degree,Doctorate or post Doc. His comments are at best opinion and while he is adept at tuning in on populist sentiment one should no more consult his views on climate change than you would the flat-earth society on the shape of our planet. Yet despite ever increasing accuracy, climate science has been painted as a"pseudo" science by the likes of Kelly using bogus arguments that latch onto small variability in predicted results, or taking data totally out of context, as being a reason to doubt the undeniable underlying science.

Let's say you have cancer, there are some that say "you'll be right, just eat mung beans". Would you really take heed? I'd put my faith in the best targeted therapy known to medical science, rather than some idiotic opinion. So, why the manic denial of climate science by some Shire residents?Perhaps it is a textbook stage of inner grief about the death of our environment? Yet there are so many more stages about a surprise death that need to be addressed: anger, bargaining, fear panic, guilt, depression,hope and finally acceptance.

Google tells us fossil fuel companies are obscenely rich. In 2018 their global revenues were around $US3.7 trillion. To put that number inperspective, about triple the entire GDP of countries like Australia. More than enough to buy the entire country, let alone a few Australian political-party favours. Coal is by far the planet's largest source of carbon-dioxide emissions. It is also Australia's second largest export.While Australia's industrial activities (arguably already extinct)contribute little to the planetary CO2 pool, it does export some 400 mega-tonnes of Coal to shores beyond Australia to be burned there. By doing so, the duplicitous status quo, who are declaring themselves to be vegan,are still happy to be supplying the global abattoir. Begging the question:to who's benefit?In 2017-18, fossil fuel companies donated $1,277,933 to the ALP, Liberal and National parties. This was up 32% from $968,343 in 2016-17 ($1.03 million in 2015-16). Yet given Australia's political party's penchant for "paper bags"stuffed with cash and pathetic political donation disclosure rules, the true figure could be an order of magnitude higher. I wondered: did these donations have an effect? If you consider: tax-based subsidies, direct contributions, concessional loans from the public purse to fossil fuel producers and in pathetic environmental laws, the answer was are sounding yes! Schmoozing of the Australia political class, according to none other than Origin Energy's CEO Gordon Cairns, at their political functions is "money well spent".

Perversely most Australians benefit little from Coal mining. The Leader has reported on numerous occasions how it has also totally wrecked many streams and water courses in Sydney's south. Revenues from coal exports have fallen to 2% of GDP. Only 10% of Australian mines are Australian owned. Foreign interests own the other 90% which is also where most of the profits go.You can literally leave all of the coal in the ground with very little impact on the benefit/employment/livelihood of most Australians and make a big dent in the CO2 emission of our species. The losers will be coal miners their wealthy shareholders (some of whom control Australian media outlets)and the current major political parties, who for want of a better expression, are "on the take" (both majors take donations from the coal industry, then meet with their lobbyists. It would be incredible suggest the purpose of these meetings was to exchange scone recipes ).Apart from coal, Australia has an abundance of sunshine. According to Geo-Science Australia " The Australian continent has the highest solar radiation per square metre of any continent and consequently some of the best solar energy resource in the world". A team from UNSW has estimated for around $9 billion, a fraction of the cost of the NBN, enough thermalsolar plants could be deployed to supply 90% of the entire eastern seaboard energy needs: emission free Yet despite much government posturing about on-again, off-again 1.5 billion dollar "Clean Energy Flagship" programs, they only appear to have managed to keep rooms-full of Australian bureaucrats employed. Australia has but one thermal solar power station. A 9.3 MW facility that has been added to the Liddell coal-fired power plant in NSW. Here is the kicker....it is used topre-heat feedwater for the coal-fired power station. Rather like fornicatingfor virginity?The current tabloid-media driven/political landscape in Australia will be difficult to change, but, not impossible. Sadly, just voting for the Greensis the not answer. Eminent British scientist James Lovelock has long pointed out that any party that refuses to accept even the possibility of cheap,safe nuclear power (in the form of Thorium salt reactors) are hardly"green". Their social policies, would appear to trump those that actually deal directly with the environment....more the pity as their environmental agenda is actually very good. Liberal and Labour parties are simply too busy with political point scoring over real leadership and vision. Rather like children who bicker about whether to put up a no-smoking sign, unconcerned by their approvals of yet another coal mine or massive bushfire that has now destroyed much of the country's flora and fauna. Don't mention the word "nuclear" either, as both have deemed it to be where the map says " 'ere there be dragons" .Rome needs to burn a tad more before anyone will have the gonads to say"Nero (rhymes with Scomo!) it's a nice sounding violin, but what about the fires ! "Now for some interesting numbers. There are around 80,000 members of the Australian Liberal party, (current government ) and 16 million registered voters. Simple arithmetic tells us just one in 200 voters are actually party members that create policy and put up the likes of Craig Kelly to be pre-selected into parliament. Indeed, just half of one percent of voters determine who will be the actual individuals in our government.Absolutely pathetic. But also shows how tenuous the incumbent's hold on power really is.But, persuading , up until now, a climate-change denying Shire residents, to look for an alternatives that addresses real concerns in a practical way,may no-longer be that difficult.Over five million hectares of forest, including rainforest, have burned,the better part of two thousand homes lost and around one dozen lives were lost in the months leading up to the New Year of 2019/2020. These events will be literally burned into the memories of many and will be hard for the deniers and obfuscators like Kelly to ignore.They can be used to clarify in the minds of many on the real consequences of climate change and that the dangers of essentially doing SFA to address it,are clear and present. If government policy does nothing to address it going forward, it is time to change the government's make-up and thinking. People get the politicians they deserve. There is now a Facebook group,"VoteCraigKellyOut".Says it all really. Come the 2022 elections, surely we deserve better than him.

Sincerely

Peter Ward