Human Sacrifice to the Climate Gods
97% of Aztec priests thought human sacrifice was necessary to end bad weather.
Things are much the same today.
Climate skeptic Tony Heller of Real Climate Science has pointed out parallels between Aztec sacrifices to stop bad weather and the modern global warming movement’s efforts to appease the CO 2 gods. In 1450, Aztec priests encouraged people to sacrifice blood to the gods to end severe drought that was decimating corn crops. They ended up sacrificing thousands of people in a few weeks.
Heller quipped, “Like the Aztecs, many scientists believe that sacrificial offerings are necessary to stabilize climate. But there are some key differences. 1. Aztecs correctly believed that the climate was controlled by the moods of the Sun. Modern climate scientists have not progressed that far yet. 2. Aztec priests believed that only a small percentage of the population needed to be sacrificed, whereas the modern priests believe that everyone (except for themselves) needs to sacrifice.”
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change, Marc Morano, Chapter 16.
Fish kill shows Murray-Darling Basin Authority failure
by the Citizens Electoral Council
Numerous dead fish now floating down the Darling River and in the Menindee Lakes is more evidence that the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) has mismanaged the basin, as the CEC has long documented. So-called “environmental flows” since the MDBA’s notorious “Basin Plan” commenced in 2012 have flushed precious water into swamps and out to sea, and in the process caused riverbank erosion previously never seen. Now there’s no water left when it’s needed most! And the failure to build the Clarence River Scheme—which has been on the books in some form since at least the early 1920s—means that water from the flash flooding that hit the Clarence Valley in October 2018 did not get to flow down the Darling River.
Continue reading “Fish kill shows Murray-Darling Basin Authority failure”
Unreliable Energy
By Brendan Godwin
The inclusion of unreliable energy sources such as wind and solar (“The Unreliables”) in our supply grids is causing massive fluctuations in electricity dispatch costs from $50-$100/MWh to $14,000/MWh and up to $60,000/MWh in South Australia in the Jan 2019 heat wave (Judith Sloan The Australian Jan 29, 2019) and see the graph below. This ultimately falls on consumer bills. Additionally, the locations for all of these unreliable generation sites are far from current transmission networks and new transmission lines have to be built and footprint cost and capacity factors have to be taken into account. People pushing for “The Unreliables” don’t factor these costs into their costings and neither do government pricing models. Nor do they include all of the subsidies paid to “The Unreliables” plus the state royalties on coal that forced Hazelwood’s closure.
More Wind Power, Higher Prices, More Blackouts
The narrator is Rafe Champion. He has an honours degree in Agricultural Science, a MA in Sociology and a MSc in the History and Philosophy of Science. For some years he was a consultant with the Clean Waterways Programme in the Sydney Water Board. He is working with the Five Dock Climate Realists to produce a series of videos on the impending power crisis.
Climate Science and the Myths of Renewable Energy – Steve Goreham Video
Brown Coal Electricity
by Pat Lane, 2019
I have worked on the IT side of coal generation and mining in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley for many years.
The first time I visited a black-coal-fired power station, I looked around and asked “Where is everything?”
Continue reading “Brown Coal Electricity”
Time to Drain the Energy Swamp
The Australian electricity market has become a stinking swamp covered with a tangled net of treaties, laws, rules, obligations, prohibitions, targets, taxes and subsidies. The swamp conceals the rubble of demolished coal generators; another plant destined for destruction (Liddell) is gradually sinking into the green ooze.
The swamp is slowly claiming paddocks of subsidised solar panels that, at best, only work for six hours per sunny day. The scene is uglified by spec-built regiments of ailing wind turbines that are often idle, but sometimes whirling madly. To distract the gullible media from this mess, big diesel generators charge a gigantic battery which pumps water uphill and then lets it run down again. A garbage dump of dead lithium batteries fills a nearby gully and the swamp is fenced by locked green gates.
The stagnant water is stirred on sunny days by luxury launches carrying academics-with-models, green media evangelists, climate alarmists, emissions inspectors and power regulators. Speculative sharks constantly patrol the swamp snapping up every smelly subsidy morsel scattered by politicians in posh yachts fishing for votes.
Time to Crush the Green Ants
Beware the Yellow Vests, Green Shirts and Steel-Capped Boots
By Viv Forbes
20/01/19
For decades now we have watched Green-ants destroy Australia’s backbone industries.
Their incessant attacks on hydro-carbon energy have vandalised our electricity grid, destroyed heavy industry, inflated power costs and made blackouts inevitable.
Continue reading “Time to Crush the Green Ants”
Practical Management of The Darling River: Ten Steps
Practical Management of
The Darling River:
Ten Steps
by Ron Pike
Jan 2019.
The management of the Darling River and its vast catchment must be vested with ONE authority; not six or seven as is the present case. We can for now call it “The Darling River Authority” (DRA).
- The Darling River and its catchment must be removed from the MDB (Murray-Darling Basin) Plan. There never was any need for water from the Darling to be tagged for use in SA. Management of flows in the lower Murray can come from much larger and more reliable sources.
- The DRA must be legally bound to manage the water in the Darling system on the following basis.
- First priority for available water every year is maintenance of all of river flow in sufficient volume to supply all stock and domestic needs along with all Municipal requirements.In managing the quantum to be held in storage to meet this First Priority, at least two years supply of water must be accounted for in upstream storages, including delivery losses.
Continue reading “Practical Management of The Darling River: Ten Steps”