Hobart reaches all time record of 41.3 degrees: bushfires “on the run”


Outside Hobart (source: The Age)

Via The Age;

Bushfires are on the run in Tasmania, threatening rural hamlets in extreme weather conditions. 

The Tasmanian Fire Service posted emergency warnings for two large fires in the island’s south that broke containment lines. 

The Bureau of Meteorology said Hobart had its all-time record of 41.3 degrees at 1.53 pm on Friday, exceeding a 1976 record of 40.8 degrees, with hot and gusty northerly winds pushing the fires.

And so it begins.

Images from The Mercury (Hobart daily) below:






82 thoughts on “Hobart reaches all time record of 41.3 degrees: bushfires “on the run”

  1. john byatt says:

    Channel nine lead story.

    Catastrophic heatwave moves across Austrlia, qld next in line,

    If the new normal is catastrophic then we are going to need a new word for the future if we do not finally get it and act

    • crank says:

      Apocalyptic. Funny thing is that many denialists, the Christian ‘creationist’ sort, are, in fact, gagging for it, having been promised, as the song says of Noah’s ‘rainbow sign’, ‘..no more water, the fire next time’. Tra, la-la!

    • john byatt says:

      Not another climate change denying atheist?

      “It was bitterly cold on Wednesday in north India with maximum temperature in Delhi breaking 43-year record as the maximum temperature was a mere 9.8 degrees Celsius, 11 notches below normal.

      9.8C bitterly cold, that is a normal june morning temp her in Tin can bay, I am wearing a pair of shorts and t shirt,in that temperature.
      was that the best you could find

      bloody creationists

      • Matt M says:

        You are a prize winning hypocrite. Anyone who says anything you don’t agree with you just abuse. You are using individual weather occurrences as examples which doesn’t have a bearing on anything, yet if someone else does it the other way they are wrong. Get real.

        • Watching the Deniers says:

          Actually no. I don’t agree with what you’ve just written, but I don’t regard it as abuse. Poorly expressed perhaps. Re individual weather events: attribution is best left to scientists. I’ve not blamed climate change for the heat wave and fires. However, record temperatures and heat waves are in line with predictions made by scientists (i.e. they would increase in frequency and intensity).

      • john byatt says:

        So matt the boot on the other foot is a bit of a problem then?

        I have stated that the temperature of 9.8C does not click with me as bitterly cold a temperature south of Adelaide at over 45C I do see as extremely hot.

        There was no ” the other way” at all from Skeptical, it was a look squirrel

        9.8C I wear shorts and T shirt, that is not abuse is it,

        Warren Truss, leader of nationals and climate change denier
        Warren was brought up as a fundamentalist lutheran who regards the old testament as literal truth, this is the reason that he opposes climate change, it has nothing to do with his being right wing at all, millions of people of the right side of politics can and do accept the findings of science, creationists like truss cannot do that.

        Discuss if you like

      • Matt M says:

        John, the boot on the other foot seems to be the problem with you. You really don’t seem too smart, you have compared a temperature from India to here in Australia. A normal temp here is not normal for over there. Its nearly like saying 41 in Hobart, that’s nothing its 5400 degrees on the sun, they are not compatible. Calling someone an atheist or creationist could very well be abusing them as well as in other posts were you call people dumb.

        The old data from Australia is from far fewer stations than are used today and stations today are put in more extreme locations, this would skew the data to show hotter average temps when really nothing much has changed. I would believe this would be much the same as the rest of the world also. It would seem reasonable that they didn’t go to the lengths that they go today to get the readings from more and more extreme places.

        Why did you even carry on about Politics and religion in your post? You seem to have a problem with it.

        Skeptical didn’t need to show “the other way.” If you think that is what I meant you obviously don’t understand. He discussed his side which is an opposing view to yours but expressed in much the same way as you did in another article, but he is not allowed to do it like that because you don’t like it. It is very hypocritical.

      • john byatt says:

        “The old data from Australia is from far fewer stations than are used today and stations today are put in more extreme locations, this would skew the data to show hotter average temps when really nothing much has changed.”

        well Matt, I am afraid that your are not a sceptic at all, that is pure denial, perhaps you have not realised that the global data sets are all in agreement and that studies have corrected much data from the past when as you say readings were less reliable, thus Cloncurry no longer holds the record for the hottest recorded temperature, something that the climate sceptics (creationist) party do not wish to acknowledge, If your statements are in accord with fundamentalist thinking as yours are then I will draw attention to that, I realise that you wish to separate religion from climate change denial, sorry i do not buy that

      • john byatt says:

        I have been active in debating the so called sceptics for many years in our regional newspapers and like Matt has done am often castigated for abuse and ridicule,
        I have replied to over 400 such letters and know the history of those who wish to present denial to the public through the letters colums.
        In every single case when my character is attacked is has come from creationists, how do I know that? because that had prior to the global warming newspaper debates been involved in evolution debates, not ten percent of them , one hundred percent of them. they think that they can shut you up by their childish appeal to a fair go,
        When it comes to deniers I am fair and just, a fair bastard and just a c****

        prisoners not taken.

        experience is a good teacher ,

      • Matt M says:

        It is quite ridiculous and childish to assume every climate skeptic is a creationist. All this shows is you are really stuck in your ways and won’t accept anything that doesn’t agree with you. If you think you can say 100% of people who attack your character are creationists from experience in debating evolution then I am afraid you really are showing your ignorance now. Of course the people who attack you about evolution are creationists you dimwit, evolution is completely against everything they stand for. Climate change skeptics come from all walks of life. You are the opposite of a climate skeptic, you are a climate fanatic.

        No amount of study could ever fill in gaps in such short term weather records because you can never be sure of what actually happened in detail, you can only get averages and estimates. I’m not a denier, I think climate change is very real, it wiped out many species in the past including many of the dinosaurs. I believe the climate has and will always be changing.

        If you go to the temperature reconstructions from thousands of years ago it is striking the rise and fall in global temps. We do not have a long enough accurate sample period of data to know for sure what is happening with the climate. It may well be getting hotter but the data shows that even today it is not as hot as it has been on earth.

        You don’t buy separating religion from climate debate? You are a fool. You would assume then that I am a creationist? You are dead wrong. It is very lacking to assume anything when it come to debates such as this. I very much acknowledge that Cloncurry does not hold the record, but this agrees more with what I am saying than you as the temperature measured was not accurate. How many more inaccurate measurements were taken before better equipment and standards were introduced?

        Global data sets will not account for temperatures in locations that aren’t being measured. Its like saying i will drive into town starting in a 50 zone and finishing in a 60 zone with a 100 zone in the middle all of equal size. Lets sample the data at each end. The average is 55, so according to this my average speed was 55. Now lets add data from the middle. Look out the average is now 70 it must be because the speed has increased right? Wrong you just sampled an area with a higher speed, much the same as what would happen as you introduced more stations in hotter areas and then included that data in the averages.

      • john byatt says:

        No Matt you missed the point, the same people who were debating evolution are now on the climate change denial gig, everyone who now writes attacking climate science in the papers had previously attacked evolution, not some of them, all of them.You claim not to be a creationist yet what you claim is in complete agreement with them .

        You are here displaying your ignorance of anomalies and how we can be confident that we cover most of the globe temperature wise, especially with GISS.
        i can understand why creationists in the climate change debate do not expose themselves openly,

        If you are not a fundamentalist then why not simply research how the global temperature is obtained and why we do not need to cover every square inch,

        You can then come back here and say “I now understand it”

        and pigs might fly

      • john byatt says:

        They leave a trail,
        another conspiracy theorist,
        at looking at the stunning temperature chart 2012 US

        mattb says:
        Sunday, November 25, 2012 at 16:42
        Bah… that chart is a hoax perpetrated by Nate Silver and a cabal of elite scientists and the UN.

        My gut tells me that the earth is actually cooling! And that feeling is backed up by my Vet, who joined with other Scientists and Doctors in signing a petition that Global Warming is a fake.


        Like or Dislike: 15 1

        I thought he accepted the warming?

      • Matt M says:

        So your saying that only the people who debated against evolution are the ones now against climate change? You are an idiot. Creationism is a stupid idea and one that really has no place in a modern world but you have this complex with thinking all those who debate climate change are creationists, which is absurd. So my claim that climate change exists is in agreement with them? Did you even read my post?

        Of course the creationists attack evolution, it is the single biggest threat to their belief. This has no bearing on the climate debate. Yes creationists may debate climate change but no not all that debate it are creationists. That is like saying I’ve only seen Australians drink beer so therefore only Australians drink beer, a truly stupid way to look at things. You call everyone else childish and yet wont let this go. You are no better than the creationists.

        I am confident that we cover most of the globe temperature wise . . . now. We certainly did not 150 years ago, which leads to the problem of sample size. Without a large enough sample we have no idea if the have measured an anomaly or if it is something to be worried about. If we have been monitoring reasonably accurately for 100 years that means we have only done so for approximately 0.000000028% of the time the earth has sustained life (about 3.5 billion years of the 4.54 billion years the earth is old). You tell me if we have a good sample size to compare past trends accurately. Also any creationist would not believe the earth is that old.

        The way the global temperature is obtained is not very accurate either. Adjustments are made to the raw data to make it “make sense” or to adjust for changes of equipment or location but any adjustment begin made is going to interfere with the final output of the models unless it is extremely precise. We are looking for changes of fractions of a degree, if the equipment changes and the data has to be adjusted for this you can easily introduce false trends. You can easily find examples of data before and after adjustments have been made and you can clearly see that in a lot of them a warming trend is introduced that did not exist before.

        Climate change is something that will happen no matter what, the only way there wont be climate change is if there is no climate to change. Without a greater sample period and much more accurate measuring techniques I will not believe that the world is warming at an unusual rate. We just haven’t been looking long enough to know what “usual” is.

      • john byatt says:

        This is 100% in agreement with the creationists viewpoint on climate change mattb your ignorance and dismissal of proxy data , raw temp adjustments.paleoclimatology and data gathering reveals only your own ignorance. ignorance does not counter science,
        you now contradict yourself creationists do that.

        “Global data sets will not account for temperatures in locations that aren’t being measured”

        “I am confident that we cover most of the globe temperature wise ‘

        So which is it, by the way I am immune to insults, which is the last resort of those with no evidence to back their claims.

        You make stupid claims and can not back them with even one scientific peer reviewed paper, pure willard watts drivel.

        bloody creationists

      • Matt M says:

        Now you aren’t even making sense. How could I be in agreement with creationists when I say the world is 4.54 billion years old? Are you even reading my comments because it doesn’t look like it. I haven’t dismissed any data. All I have said is the raw data is adjusted, which allows room for interpretation and error.

        I used examples of palaeoclimatology in my argument earlier. You really need to start reading my comments. The problem with the proxy data is the resolution is too big. It is good for discovering long periods of change but not short term like we are experiencing now. Individual points on the graphs are separated by up to 300 years which inst the best for analysing short term temperature changes is it?

        I have not made any claims I have only put forward ideas that you reject on the grounds of “I don’t like them” like a 5 year old child.

        It helps that when you quote people you quote all of what they say. I said we cover the globe NOW, you know that important word I used on the end of the sentence there that changes what it means in context but you conveniently left out. We certainly did not cover the globe 150 years ago. Besides what I said still stands even the way you put it.

        The only reliable data we have at the moment is from core samples. These core samples show a cooling trend. We are still coming out of the little ice age which only ended about 150-200 years ago. Temperatures measured since then will show warming but that’s the problem, it’s about the same time we started to use thermometers to record temperatures and is also the period IPCC uses for its review on climate change. Go figure. We need to measure the temperature for at least another 150 years to get a proper understanding of what is happening.

        How about you discuss some of the points I have put forward instead of carrying on about creationists in every post like a rambling maniac. You are nearly arguing against yourself sometimes. The problem is you considered yourself above me from the start which is typical of an internet warrior such as yourself.

        You say I need to back my claims with scientific papers, yet you have not made a single point for discussion. Rather you have only picked small parts of my post you can use and turned it into a sign that somehow I am a creationist. Here I was thinking I could get a rational debate but sadly I have only got you.

      • john byatt says:

        So you do not even know the extent of the proxy data and the agreement of those , arguing from ignorance as usual, very in line with creationists that I debate

      • john byatt says:

        coming out of the little ice age, that statement is moronic.
        read up on forcings,

      • Matt M says:

        You are not worth my time and effort. Nice two paragraph reply, all it shows is the true depth of you stupidity.

  2. john byatt says:

    not good

    The worst of the fires so far is in Tasmania, where police are trying to confirm reports that one person has died in a bushfire that has isolated the Tasman Peninsula in the state’s south east.

    Fire authorities say at least 65 buildings have been destroyed in the small town of Dunalley.

    It is understood they include a primary school, petrol station and the RSL.

    • crank says:

      The number and intensity of mega-fires, in Australia and worldwide, has leaped upwards since 2000. Pretty hard to deny, but as it is a religious obligation, and those who don’t mind contributing to human auto-genocide seem to get some exotic psychic reward from it, I’m sure they’ll do so.

  3. john byatt says:

    map of fire


  4. mikestasse says:

    Yeah this had to happen as we plan to move from QLD to Tassie……

  5. With wind chill factor, it is minus 25 C in Halifax Canada, normally one of the warmest parts of Canada in January ( ie usually a little plus or minus 0 C.)

    So seeing the flaming red daily max temp map of Australia is particularly unreal – and worrisome.

  6. benjaminhaslem says:

    Hobart maxed out at 41.8C bettering its previous record high by 1.0C. Records date back to 1882.

  7. zoot says:

    I want to urge caution; let’s not get hyperbolic about this – it is still just weather.
    True, it is weather consistent with what we expect from global warming, but we should avoid the trap the deniers fall into of grabbing individual weather events and claiming them as proof of a change in climate. We know which way the indicators are trending.
    I think it is particularly sobering that this is just a taste of what “normal” will be, even if we restrict temperature rise to just 2 degrees C.

    • Watching the Deniers says:


      I’m not going to claim these events are linked to climate change – indeed, most likely not possible nor reasonable to do so at this point. However, all the sources (printed and those I know personally) pointed to the fact that this summer had the potential to be very warm and an elevated risk of bush-fires.

      Come March we will have a better idea.

      Your point is correct: extreme heat and fires are a foretaste.

    • Dr No says:

      Agreed. Every year some record somewhere will be broken. In a “normal” climate, the number of new records for warm temperatures should roughly equal the number of new records for cool temperatures. If the ratio is skewed in favour of warmer temperatures, then we know something is happening. I expect the Bureau of Meteorology to have these statistics at hand and may be able to comment.

    • crank says:

      Have to disagree. We have enough ‘weather’ events and the science to explain them, to safely describe this as ‘climate change’. Still fluffing about when we have clearing passed numerous ‘tipping-points’ is, in my opinion, a form of soft denial.

  8. john byatt says:

    Basically , deniers do come from all walks of life however they do not get onto blogs and expose their total ignorance and spread misinformation.
    It is more than likely than not that the person claiming scientific scepticism when they put up complete drivel like Matt are in fact fundamentalists.

    To deny climate change science you have to deny the authority of every single branch of science, who are the people who do that and then preach their crap on blog comments?


    • crank says:

      Dunning-Krugerites-the description is exact. Too dumb to realise just how stupid they are, but egomaniacal enough to imagine themselves geniuses. The ones behind the denial industry, who know the truth, are, in my opinion, clearly classical psychopaths, out-Bundying any Bundy, out-Eichmanning any Eichmann.

  9. john byatt says:

    mattb ” Also any creationist would not believe the earth is that old.”

    they do however when debating climate change, do you really think that a creationist on a blog would reveal that they believe the earth is only 5000years old ?, no, i have debated known creationists who will put up nonsense about climate change wiping out the dinosaurs and link to papers of paleoclimate studies that they ignorantly believe proves their point,

    So your point is invalid

  10. dcapit8 says:

    Speaking of conspiracy and paranoia – I saw a suggestion that the denial machine was paying for a weather data archive site where data would be fudged.

    That rang a bell in my noggin – the Weather Channel historical data is a mess!! Last year, Jan 1st to July 1st 2012, was extremely wet where I live, and March broke the all time record for precipitation… Weather Channel has a mere 5.4 mm compared to Environment Canada’s website, and press release, showing 145.6 mm total precipitation.

    And from Dec 2011 to April 30th 2012, Weather Channel shows “no precipitation”. I did sent an email to them but it came back “undeliverable”. Maybe it is just a mistake, but it has been up there for many months.

    See > http://www.theweathernetwork.com/statistics/temperature/cl1141455/cabc0257
    Env Cda for March 2012 > http://tinyurl.com/bfgyjky

  11. dcapit8 says:

    Oops, I meant “The Weather Network” , not “Channel”

  12. Richard Ryan says:

    I notice your silly little religious site gets heavily edited … just like IPCC reports … surprising? NOT! luckily, john byatt and the rest of you are like you are so people can see how loony you are

  13. Richard Ryan says:

    The reason that these bushfires get out of hand is because you Greens Party AGW crazies do not allow proper burning off and removal of fuel. YOU are the reason people die, just like Black Saturday. Total hypocrites with no life … sad that you need these doomsday forecasts to get excited. But keep it going, loonies … all you are doing is converting any normal people who had doubts to “deniers” and diverting funds away from proper environmental issues.

    • john byatt says:

      Another of your idiot strawman displays of ignorance, all states allow fire hazard reduction and even carry it out on an annual basis, You do not even seem to appreciate the size of this country, Where I live hazard reduction has been ongoing for the past 6 months,

      where is the doi of the paper that confirmed you as a denier?

  14. Richard Ryan says:

    You didnt answer my question John … do you believe in god and what church do you belong to? I think my assessment is completely accurate (of you) … hypocritical, closed minded, religious zealot dedicated to totalitarian World Government where your “superior” class rules all. Are you related to Hitler? Mein Kampf your favourite book? When would you like to start the public beheadings of the deniers? THAT would be a great kickoff the the New Crusades, wouldnt it now. I can see you getting an erection just thinking about it… And you are as ignorant as you are hypocritical – check local council rules re burning off (and then check the makeup of the councils). You are the murderers!

  15. john byatt says:

    ryan lives in alternative reality

    The Greens believe that living with bushfire threat requires a coordinated approach that includes:

    planning of housing sites to avoid development in risk prone areas;
    strategically planned hazard reduction, including controlled burning, where and when climatic conditions allow it to be done safely and where it is consistent with maintaining the ecosystem;
    education and community awareness programs to reduce the incidence of arson; and
    a well funded and managed fire fighting service which can protect human life and homes and contain the spread of fires.
    While recognising that controlled burning is only one form of bush fire risk reduction, The Greens have not been responsible for restricting its use. We are committed to an effective and scientifically based approach to hazard reduction, which takes into account the needs of both the human and natural environments.

  16. Richard Ryan says:

    Ah, apart from the Church of AGW, you are also a certified Greens member (what a surprise) … heres some of their lunacy:
    Because of you lunatics, people were not even allowed to clear fallen debris from trees from the side of the road back in 09 (let alone back burning etc) causing all those deaths. You so-called environmentalists cause more ecological and human destruction BECAUSE of your loopy policies.
    Why, oh why, johhny, do NONE of your AGW priests EVER debate the issues on public media? We know they did years ago and got embarrassed … now we just control and edit the distribution of our bullshit, eh? Make it more Doomsday
    And why, oh why, johnny, have so many proper scientists simply withdrawn from anything to do with IPCC – sick of having their papers edited?
    Eugenics was also a popular theory (although I suspect you still believe in it) but, when it was taken too far by your mate Hitler, all the “intelligentsia” quite quickly just forgot that they believed in it. Thats what will happen with this bunkum too and we will get on with gradually replacing our technologies as we have for thousands of years.
    I do note that you are anti-semitic also, johnny … but that goes with the Greens too, doesnt it? Do you have a League of Rights membership too? I’ll just have a little wager you do .. you’re just a bit “too” avid in your views … it all fits

  17. Richard Ryan says:

    come clean, johnny, we can see it … suspect that even your slighly less loopy friends here cringe a bit with some of your ravings … whats your LOR member number?

  18. Richard Ryan says:


    just some of the bullshit smashed …

  19. john byatt says:

    ryan only links a sceptic blog, no doi even mentioned but I will put up a post from C3headlines that reveals they do not have a clue

    “According to the latest NOAA sea level budget, global sea levels rose at only 1.1 – 1.3 mm/year from 2005-2012, which is less than half of the rate claimed by the IPCC [3.1 mm/yr] and is equivalent to less than 5 inches per century…The report compares sea-level rise calculated from two different methods: 1) satellite altimetry and 2) ARGO measurements of the steric [thermal expansion] component + GRACE measurements of ocean mass. The rate of sea level rise using the 2nd method [ARGO + GRACE] shows a sea level rise of only 0.2 {ARGO] + 0.1 [GRACE] = 0.3 mm/yr. Only by adding on a relatively large and highly questionable GIA adjustment [based on a model] of 0.9 mm/yr to the GRACE data do the two estimates come close to agreement. Following this questionable GIA adjustment, the ARGO + GRACE estimate is 1.1± 0.8 mm/yr as compared to the satellite altimetry estimate of 1.3 ± 0.9 mm.”

    Obviously C3 does not have a clue regarding what is being measured by NOAA here,

    let them simmer in their own ignorance

    • john byatt says:

      Song, Y. T., and F. Colberg (2011), J. Geophys. Res., VOL. 116, C02020, 16 PP., 2011, doi:10.1029/2010JC006601.

    • Richard Ryan says:

      wow…an amazing thing just occurred. john byatt made a comment without accusing ANYONE of being a creationalist
      Less surprisingly, he cherry picked (in the best traditions of doomsday alarmists) one tiny thing and even then did not address it.
      Its going to be much easier when we are all beheaded, no?

  20. Richard Ryan says:

    johnny, like the IPCC and other assorted alarmist loonies, never replies to anything that is not in his agenda.
    I repeat johnny, do you believe in god?
    what church do you belong to?
    do you believe in eugenics?
    do you believe that you are more intelligent than black people?
    are you a member of the Greens Party?
    Why, oh why, johhny, do NONE of your AGW priests EVER debate the issues on public media?
    And why, oh why, johnny, have so many proper scientists simply withdrawn from anything to do with IPCC – sick of having their papers edited? (couple of repeats there)
    why do you still spew out co2 yourself if it is causing doomsday?
    why are you a hypocrite?
    do you think Inconvenient Truth is accurate?
    do you believe the IPCC is never biased in the structure of their reports?
    do you really think the earth is hotter now than at any other point in history?

    Yes or No answers will do johnny … but it would be amusing to see evidence of public debate by your high priests such as Gore et al.

  21. Richard Ryan says:

    typical…no substance just “Death To Deniers” … gimme some of your meds (acid) and I might be in the same dillusionary state LOL

    • zoot says:

      Not a happy little vegemite, are you.
      Here’s a tip (no, don’t thank me): try providing something of substance before you demand substance from others.

      • Richard Ryan says:

        LOL us deniers are all glass half full people … not wallowing in dreams of armageddon like you religious freaks. And, come on zootie, you using the word “substance”? Thats like a dog meowing … or john byatt NOT using the word creationalist. You’re just joshing with us right?

      • zoot says:

        Oh Richard, once again your devastating wit has just demolished me. I don’t think I can go on. The impeccable logic of your thesis, the undeniable evidence you cite, your masterly grasp of the English language, it’s just all too much!

      • Richard Ryan says:

        well yes … not that a battle of wits with you is a fair fight (you being unarmed)

      • zoot says:

        They’re oldies but goodies folks. He’s here all week, tell your friends. The band will be back in a moment for your dancing pleasure.

      • Richard Ryan says:

        that would be band wagon … jump on if you’re a retarded sheep and you too can look forward to doomsday with the Great Nostradamus Seventh Day Adventist Mayan Ride To Hell … repent now. Application to zoot (not his real name) at the John (Baptist) Byatt Church of True Believers.

      • zoot says:

        Don’t forget to try the fish. And remember, happy hour finishes at 9 pm.

      • Richard Ryan says:

        actually, good name too … an old 70s rock n roll band that sort of faded away, much like what will happen to you doomsday prophets. Sorry, just keeping your lack of substance theme going (smooch)

      • zoot says:

        We’re sorry he’s not as funny as Richard Pryor, but you must admit he’s just as angry. What do you expect from a cut rate Adam Sandler wannabe anyway? And he is cheap.
        So drink up folks, time to go home.

  22. Richard Ryan says:

    what are you afraid of johnny? apart from armageddon of course, and black people and jews and civil rights … no answer confirms the answer really, doesnt it? how is the Queensland branch of the League of Rights going anyway? last I heard, they cancelled your membership because you were too loopy even for them … but luckily the Greens took you in

    • john byatt says:

      What does religion have to do with climate science? Radical religious activists promote the anti-science bills, in part, because they also seek to undermine the teaching of evolution – another issue that supposedly has “two sides”, so schools should “teach the controversy”. Now, you don’t have to believe that Earth was created in six hectic days in order to be skeptical about climate science, but a large number of climate science deniers also happen to be evolution deniers.

      What exactly is the theology of climate science denial? The Cornwall Alliance – a coalition whose list of signatories could double as a directory of major players in the religious right – has a produced a declaration asserting, as a matter of theology, that “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human contribution to greenhouse gases is causing dangerous global warming.”

      anti science equals fundamentalist christian, moslem and judaic right wing conspriacy theorists and OWG nutjobs.

      RR is certainly a nutjiob and definately on the same side as the creationists.

      get used to it Richard

      Surely he does believe the opposite, that only atheists are deniers,

      definately creation science advocate

  23. Richard Ryan says:

    cant answer straight questions, johnny … proof you have no substance at all. Rave on ad infinitum and it all means nothing – get in the witness chamber or fuck off you fraud

    • john byatt says:

      you are an unhappy little vegemite, links to a creationist answers in genesis site but still no doi nor any paper presented after 36 hours, the reality is that you do not have one, your whole denial is based on you own lack of intelligence and a conspiracy theory world view,

  24. john byatt says:

    I bet richard is converting a lot of climate change believers here with his cutting edge science and understanding that is 100% in line with the creationist viewpoint on climate change that is undeniable yet he still maintains that he thought of this OWG and other nonsense all by himself

    fourty hours and not one scientific reference,

    creationist troll who hates the world

    • Richard Ryan says:

      and john byatt simply refuses to answer very basic questions … johnny, just admit to us what we know … OR … answer the questions! nothing too hard really – unless you are an anti-semitic, racist, god-fearing zealot with a power crazed aryan view of the world. Stating the obvious really

    • Richard Ryan says:

      come on johnny … be good, be good, be good, be good – johhhhnnny. Oh hang on, its be GOD, be GOD … LOL. You can only have a superiority complex in cyberspace johnny coz we know what you really are

    • Richard Ryan says:

      johnny baptist, can you PLEASE tell us why you’re so obsessed with religion? seriously, your true believer colleagues are getting very worried about your creationalist rants … they are starting to think like me – that you are hurting the cause. Better come clean before they ditch you too, like the Qld Branch League. Quick … do something

      • john byatt says:


        The …………………,

        Dear Sir,

        While the message from Dr Markus Donat ( The Gympie Times Jan 9 ) is, that with the record Australian heat wave duration and temperatures we have now entered what might be called the new normal, the reality is that we are only in a transient period as we climb to ever increasing temperatures and heat waves, which will continue until we reduce our carbon emissions and allow the only home we have, our planet to get back into equilibrium, when the energy leaving the planet is in balance with the energy received.

        The reality is that we are now living the projections made thirty years ago by Dr James Hansen and without action his projections for the future are simply beyond our imagination.

        Future generations may well look back on 2013 and wonder at our stupidity in rejecting the scientific research over the past century when the outcomes were already staring us in the face, they will wonder why so many politicians could not throw off the yoke of their childhood religious indoctrination and accept that it is man who’s insane actions now controls the planet’s climate.

        I have seen the future written in the journals of physics, it frightens me and without action that future is catastrophic.
        Yet they still deny

  25. Richard Ryan says:

    Still won’t answer basic questions, johnny .. why? It seems to be the same with all you alarmist doomsdayers … never answer anything just stick to our story. Attack vigourously anyone who dares to question our (bullshit) “facts”.
    Seriously, even the cranks on this site think you’re a loony.
    NOTE not one of them has come out and defended you since I said that. Coz they think you’re a nutbag too. Don’t you get this?

    I’m going to send more people to this site to see how the true belivers operate and how nutty they are. Thanks for being you, johnny .. what a find you are

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: