So before we buy a great green tax from Flannery, whose real expertise is actually in mammology, it may pay to check his record. Ready?
In 2005, Flannery predicted Sydney’s dams could be dry in as little as two years because global warming was drying up the rains, leaving the city “facing extreme difficulties with water”.
Check Sydney’s dam levels today: 73 per cent. Hmm. Not a good start.
In 2008, Flannery said: “The water problem is so severe for Adelaide that it may run out of water by early 2009.”
Check Adelaide’s water storage levels today: 77 per cent.
In 2007, Flannery predicted cities such as Brisbane would never again have dam-filling rains, as global warming had caused “a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas” and made the soil too hot, “so even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and river systems … “.
Check the Murray-Darling system today: in flood. Check Brisbane’s dam levels: 100 per cent full.
All this may seem funny, but some politicians, voters and investors have taken this kind of warming alarmism very seriously and made expensive decisions in the belief it was sound.
lol, I wish the alarmists would make up their minds.
I remember when all of the drought predictions were being made, many of us skeptics said it was total bs. We said, if the world was indeed warming, then more precipitation would be expected, not less. We were called deniers for our trouble. Now, when we show record cold temps. Loons say more precipitation(<—-wtf???) would be expected with a warmer globe and that's why its snowing.
But at least the floods have allowed climate experts to discover the phenomena known as “drywet”, which is really quite similar to “warmcold”.
What you are saying is simply not true,we have all along said that while AGW, or whatever we are calling it today, I missed the morning press meeting, errr, we have all along said that while in some parts of the world AGW would cause damaging dry conditions, in others, possibly the same parts, AGW would also cause dangerous wet conditions. Just as with our predictions of less or more snowfall events, you deniers are twisting our words, trying to pin us down on one side of the fence, when in reality we are straddling it. You continue to unfairly point to one small prediction that may have failed, like less snow, then make fun of our response to the fluid situation of changing climate by pointing out we also predicted more snow, even if after more snow has been falling for a few years.
This shrewd and uncivilized behavior of pointing out our scenarios cover all bases, or at least will, when the weather factors continiously change, as if almost by some natural variation, must stop. You and your big oil, hmmm, I think I just misplaced my Gulf grant check, errrrr…. big oil collusion continuosly try to destroy the work of us honest climate scientists. Sorry for ranting, but you deniers are just so mean. I must get back to work on my papers and tweaking my models. Just as soon as we see what the weather events of this spring will be, we must work that in so that we have all along said that would be consistant with AGW, because we know you deniers will be there pointing out from every past article that we just haven’t released the information that those future weather events will be indeed consistant with our models and proof of a warming planet. We can only do so much with you deniers constantly hounding our settled science and making death threats and all that.
lol, very nice!
I’m sure Flannery has made some even more bonehead predictions and/or statements.. He is an Ehrlich-esque embarrassment to this country and it baffles me why anyone even listens to him, let alone be voted Australian Of The Year and appointed the head of a commission. If sanity prevails, he won’t be there long.