Each week the pond waits for a new episode of Pluribus to drop, a yarn about a hive mind constantly trying to get a poor old Carol (Rhea Seehorn - closely related to the defiant Karens of the world), to join the hive mind, in blissful defiance of reality.
The pond has kept on turning up because it's a refreshing twist on a genre that has long fascinated the pond, ever since the days of the pod people (celebrated with Donald in the pond's masthead).
It also seems a vaguely familiar plotline, because each day the pond visits the lizard Oz hive mind.
This hive mind tends to be nastier, handing out hand grenades willy nilly, with the latest victim in Victoria ...
Newspoll: Liberals take lead as frightened women flee Allan Labor
Victoria’s new Opposition Leader Jess Wilson has surged to a commanding lead as preferred premier while female voters abandon Labor’s Jacinta Allan in dramatic polling shift
By Anthony Galloway
It's a feature of this hive mind that assorted incarnations are required to double down...
Whether it’s Brad Battin’s crime crusade or the switch to Jess Wilson that’s made the difference, one thing is clear: Jacinta Allan is in trouble.
By Anthony Galloway
Victorian political editor
Yes, butt, billy goat butt, Dame Slap was on hand to not just give those bloody feuding Victorian females a serve, but also to take a snap at hapless Susssan and all the Lib womyn assigned the job of bailing out the men ...
Via the Brittany Higgins scandal, we’ve witnessed the PM reach a new low in disrespect for women and a sisterhood ignore the ugly truth.
By Janet Albrechtsen
Columnist
Does it ever occur to Dame Slap that constantly elevating Linda is the direct proof of her inerrant stupidity?
It's got so desperate that The Saturday Paper launched an editorial ...
Oh that's enough, that's more than enough, that's way beyond the valley of the pond's taste for narcissism.
You certainly won't find this kind of determined bitch from hell in Pluribus ... even its heroic Karen, author of crappy bodice rippers, shows a kindlier heart...
What drives this member of the hive mind on, with the relentless addiction to all things Higgins?
Being Freudian a moment, the pond suggests it has something to do with Dame Slap backing the wrong horse in the Lehrmann matter, followed by endless vindictive baying and howling in the search for some bizarre form of vindication.
It's off to the archive for anyone wanting to follow all that ...
Meanwhile, for some strange reason, after yesterday's big splash, cricket seems to have drifted from the hive mind's attention.
Who knows why the reptiles suddenly stopped caring?
Instead the lettuce was reported to be in for a torrid time ...
‘Get Bowen’: Ley goes on attack
Ley launches fightback plan to ‘get Bowen’ and save leadership
Sussan Ley will target Chris Bowen as a ‘weak link’, champion budget repair to deliver personal income tax cuts and play hardball on Labor’s EPBC in a critical final parliamentary week of the year.
By Geoff Chambers and Sarah Ison
It seems that hapless Susssan is following the onion muncher's hi-vis road to success...
But enough already of surveys and the hive mind's current obsessions, the bromancer was on hand to explain how delightful, what fun it is, to take an interest in the end times... and the reptiles gave him a bloody big splash early on in the weekend to seal the deal ...
Only the bromancer, only a hearty 11 minutes serve of him channeling the hive mind ... it's what those in search of a "Ned" do for a substitute, at least for those born with a plastic spoon in their mouth, those who know the north side of their town faces east and the east faces south ...
And the reptiles so loved that uncredited flag-waving collage, they repeated the sight of the gesticulating Sussssan at the head of the yarn ...
The header: Liberal’s net-zero stand makes Australian politics interesting again, Andrew Hastie’s brand of conservatism may be just the ticket, but does he have a taste for the daily combat of national leadership?
The caption: The Coalition decision to abandon net zero was an epic victory for the likes of Andrew Hastie and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price.
For those wanting to follow the bromancer's links, the entire rant is up at the (intermittent) archive.
The pond never bothers with the links, because they almost invariably lead to another unappetising part of the hive mind.
And the reptiles seem to have forgotten to bold the bromancer's sub-headers, so the pond has boldly emphasised them to help the errant reptiles out.
The pond is a caring student of the hive mind.
Highlighting the sub-headers means that sensible visitors to the hive mind can simply scan them and get the gist of the bromancer's singing of the overly familiar hive mind song ...
To summarise all these lyrics: how climate science denialism is the way forward.
Then, adding to the sturm und drung, state Liberal leaders in Sydney and Melbourne were deposed.
Amid the turmoil, national support for the Coalition fell to 26 per cent, while Pauline Hanson’s numbers soared to nearly 20 per cent. ABC personalities and Nine newspaper columnists fell over themselves lampooning the alleged incompetence, incoherence and factional divisions in conservative politics.
Beyond the ‘clown show’ narrative
They’ve unified their parliamentary party with their rank and file. They’ve taken the right decision in substance, as net zero is completely unachievable and ruinously expensive to attempt. They’re reflecting powerful international trends. And they give themselves a serious policy difference against the government.
Full speed ahead was the petulant Peta cry, and the bromancer put the hive mind into overdrive ...with a ride on the Canavan caravan, whereon could be found the likes of the pastie Hastie, the Price is Wrong, the lying rodent, and the Gunnedah denialist ...
Liberals have never done well imitating Labor on climate change. State parties that have tried to do this, like the West Australian Liberals, were reduced to phone booth representation.
The federal Coalition supported net zero at the last two federal elections and suffered catastrophic defeats. When they’ve made climate change an economic issue and combined it with reasonable efforts to reduce emissions proportionately to other nations, they’ve had success.
The Howard and Anderson endorsement
Howard doesn’t see doom or demise ahead for the Liberals. Instead, the new policy can create momentum: “I think they can win the debate, but it’s going to be hard. But you’ve got to fight for something.”
The pond kindly reminded the hive mind of the man who carelessly lost not just government, but his seat, Former Prime Minister John Howard has no doubt this was the right decision for the Liberals. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman
Speaking of the Gunnedah loon ...(please remember to say Gunny daaah) ...
“Rising energy costs and falling productivity lie behind a structural decline in our living standards. Renewables are more expensive and can’t deliver a sound economy. This is a very winnable debate for the Coalition.”
Winning the public debate: lessons from the voice
It’s an elementary but common mistake to take a polling snapshot and project that static picture on to the future as though it were immutable. I recall countless articles explaining why Republicans could never win again in the US because of the demographic shift towards Hispanics and African-Americans.
But what happened? Donald Trump, and many Republicans at state level, won a bigger minority of Hispanics, and to a lesser extent blacks. Republicans didn’t gain majority support in those cohorts but enough to win elections overall. They didn’t win these voters by becoming imitation Democrats. They consciously, purposefully, reached out to Hispanic and black voters. But their core policies stayed the same.
A tough approach to crime, to illegal immigration and to woke nonsense in education, among other things, had great appeal to Hispanics and blacks.
Net zero is not a direct replica of the voice referendum. But the people at Advance think support for net zero is actually weaker than support was for the voice.
Matt Sheahan, executive director of Advance, tells Inquirer: “Young people are not deeply committed to net zero. They are deeply committed to climate change and protecting the natural environment. They (the Coalition) would need to decouple net zero from protecting the natural environment.”
The other critical task is to show the true cost of attempting to reach net zero, which is why so few countries any longer even make a pretence of trying to do so.
What about low-engagement, low-information voters who don’t read newspapers or watch the evening news but who in the vaguest way have some impression that net zero is a good thing? Says Sheahan: “The voice initially sounded like a good idea to low-information voters. But once you got a message to them about it, they changed their minds.”
Keeping the dream alive, Support for net zero is actually weaker than support was for the voice, according to lobby group Advance. Picture: AFP
On, ever onwards with denialism, on with the coal matters, Canavan caravan ...
The unachievable reality of net zero
“I think the LNP will win this debate,” Canavan says. “Net zero is an absurd concept, international support is fading and the facts on the ground disprove what we were promised about net zero.”
Commentators rightly criticise the effectiveness of recent Coalition politics, but Canavan believes the Coalition, when united, can knock the government off kilter. He thinks Labor’s position too rigid: “They are lead-footed in being tied to an agenda that’s fast losing credibility.”
Labor is also tied to a performative theatricality of net zero that is just one degree separated from comic absurdity, as Chris Bowen abandons his energy mess in Australia to take up his temporary keystone COP assignment.
But getting the policy right is only the first step for the Coalition. Now comes the huge sustained effort necessary to win not only the net-zero argument but also the broader policy questions across Australian life.
The net-zero decision may yet be seen as a decisive moment of evolution in conservative politics, which enables the Liberal and National parties to move beyond merely managing the zeitgeist and instead actually proposing a serious approach to government grounded in contemporary conditions and conservative wisdom.
Almost no one in Australia even knows clearly what they mean when they say net zero. It means literally that the whole of humanity will not generate one ounce more greenhouse gas emissions than it absorbs through reforestation and the like. It is, literally, a nonsensical concept and there’s not a single nation on Earth on track to get there.
Just to hammer the message home, the Bolter was on hand to present the Canavan caravan, Nationals Senator Matt Canavan calls Labor’s emissions targets not “real” and all a “marketing slogan,” as their failures have been exposed. Mr Canavan told Sky News host Andrew Bolt the government uses a “form of words” to get the Labor Party re-elected, instead of “something they really believe in”. “Emissions over this government have barely changed.”
The bromancer was on fire, and on a 'Dan the man' roll ...
Even in energy it’s not possible to get anywhere near absolute zero. Renewables work when they’re a minor part of the grid, but if they’re too big a share their inherent unreliability is a big problem. As well, it’s necessary to build a vast amount of back-up.
As the Coalition’s Dan Tehan points out, other sections of the economy, such as land transport, agriculture and industrial production, are much more difficult and costly sites for big greenhouse gas reductions. This really can be achieved only by shutting down industries. Australia, like Europe, has already seen vast deindustrialisation as a result of soaring energy prices produced by net-zero policies. This is one reason the world is turning away from net zero.
Global shifts and strategic priorities
At the recent COP meeting in Brazil, the Chinese delegation suggested industrialised countries should achieve net zero by 2040 rather than 2050. There’s a perversely admirable, shameless chutzpah in this suggestion from Beijing, which now produces just under a third of global emissions. It would serve Beijing’s geo-strategic interests magnificently if the West committed economic suicide.
Could it possibly be a dinkum piece of hive mind denialism without the presence of the Bjørn-again one?
Of course not, why did you even ask such a silly question?
Coalition figures were repeatedly asked how they could stay in the Paris climate accord if they abandoned net zero, because the Paris Agreement mandates net zero by 2050.
Of course, the Paris Agreement does no such thing. It aspires to net zero some time in the second half of the century. Under the Paris accord China “commits” to net zero by 2060, India by 2070.
This illustrates the madness of the whole thing. Even if net zero were possible, the world cannot conceivably approach net zero without China and India. Australia is expected to deindustrialise now on the basis of actions Beijing and New Delhi might take in many decades. The gap between now and 2070 is longer than the gap between the Federation of Australia in 1901 and the end of World War II in 1945. More than 120 countries party to the Paris Agreement have not even submitted their interim targets.
As I’ve referenced before, The Economist magazine, in a definitive issue in August, called for the world to abandon net zero even as a goal because it’s totally unrealistic and is actually undermining sensible policy discussion.
Will there be a follow up with Tony Bleagh, of WMD fame, and Mr Clippy? Of course, of course, sang that horse Mr Ed ...
You’d never know this from the Australian debate, but the majority of global emissions are not covered by nations with even a notional commitment to net zero by 2050.
The US is out of Paris altogether. China and India, like many developing nations, have no 2050 commitment. These commitments are fantasy promises anyway. Nobody will reach them.
The story of Western Europe and Canada over the past few years has been retreat from the most expensive climate measures. Europe is negotiating its way out of banning new internal combustion cars.
It’s impossible to believe Beijing is remotely serious about any effort, on any timescale, to reach net zero. It has put prodigious effort into capturing global manufacturing. Most emissions reduction in Western nations has simply been the transfer of industrial production from Europe, North America and Australia to China. It will never voluntarily give that up.
When Beijing decided to cripple the Australian nickel industry, it backed a series of new coal-fired power stations in Indonesia to power high-quality nickel smelters. This perfectly illustrates the absolute priority for Beijing of strategic considerations over climate.
Time for a reminder of what the reptiles really love? Indeed, indeed, A coal-fired power station in China, a visual reminder that Beijing’s strategic priorities often outweigh climate concerns. Picture: AFP
Ah, a smog-covered landscape, enough to gladden the heart of any member of the hive mind ...
In parliamentary testimony, ANZ chief executive Nuno Matos said trying to get to net zero could be “the medicine that kills the patient”. These are extraordinary remarks. Australia is a tightly controlled oligopolistic economy, dominated by government and heavy regulation, with Labor and its institutional friends dominant everywhere. A senior business figure speaking so frankly indicates the extremity of the underlying situation.
The politics of climate change are moving decisively in the West. Trump won the US presidency and the popular vote while pledging to repudiate the Paris Agreement.
OK, Australia isn’t America. Take Britain instead. Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party is miles ahead in the polls. Farage, like the British Conservatives led by Kemi Badenoch, has pledged to abandon net zero. Add Reform and the Conservatives, and almost half British voters support parties explicitly rejecting net zero.
Then came matters of key concern to the lettuce in the race to Xmas:
The leadership question: Ley, Hastie and the path forward
Ley, who started poorly as Opposition Leader, has done better than expected propounding the new policy. The net-zero reset has given her a second chance to make a first impression. But the feeling is she’s not a long-term leader. However, she’ll likely survive until the first quarter of next year at least. Politics is performance based. If she produces a big lift in the Coalition vote she’ll have a solid argument to stay.
The alternatives to Ley are Hastie and Angus Taylor. Hastie is a bigger risk but also potentially offers a bigger reward. Taylor and Ley are perhaps fatally compromised on arguing the new net-zero position with conviction because they’re associated with Scott Morrison’s appalling mistake in committing to net zero and Peter Dutton’s in sticking with it.
Hastie has been a long-term, passionate opponent of net zero. Says Anderson: “The Coalition has three people who can certainly prosecute this argument but they’re on the backbench.” Anderson means Hastie, Price and Canavan. It’s frankly absurd to have them on the backbench.
Hastie also offers a more evolved conservatism that places national sovereignty over globalisation, national security over free-market orthodoxy, national capacity over free trade and community solidarity over conventional liberalism. This is by no means a guaranteed formula for success, but it’s fresh, interesting and reflects today’s conditions and challenges.
Hastie is also younger, has an arresting personal story, movie-star good looks and recorded a big swing towards him in his own electorate in the last election. But he is untried at the most senior levels of politics. Most politicians are too tactical, not strategic enough. Hastie may be too strategic, not tactically adept. Does he have a taste for the high-energy daily combat of national leadership?
Never mind all that, have a snap of the flag-waving Price is Wrong ...Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, a vocal opponent of net zero from the outset, remains on the backbench despite her strong capacity to prosecute the Coalition’s revised climate policy. Picture: News Corp
There was just time for a final snipe at the ABC, and a celebration of the thoughts of the Gunny-dah inspired mob ...
One good thing about the Coalition’s new policy is that the ABC surely must now give some airtime to critics of net zero. It’s a genuine scandal that Gerard Holland, author of the Page Research Centre’s hugely influential paper, Delivering a High Energy Australia, hasn’t once been interviewed about it on any ABC program. What’s that if not institutional bias?
With the new Coalition policy on net zero, and with a fresh disposition for the Coalition actually to fight, our politics is newly interesting, actually about something important for a change. Stay tuned.
Why did the pond keep thinking this was all terribly lame?
A tired repetition of much that has gone before in the hive mind, a rote exercise of no consequence or substance?
Look, the pond isn't a spoilsport.
The pond does appreciate that the bromancer made only one discreet, very short mention of going nuclear, with nary a hint of SMRs in sight.
How about a new twist?
This came to the pond in a flash, while reading The New Yorker ...
It was just what the reptiles needed for a new distraction:
It used to be that drawing heat from deep in the Earth was practical only in geyser-filled places such as Iceland. But new approaches may have us on the cusp of an energy revolution. (*archive link)
By Rivka Galchen
Think of the possibilities... revealed in this sample from the close of the piece:
An energy future without hydrocarbons will require working flexibly with the many variables of resources, geography, and politics. “We can get maybe ninety per cent of the way with solar, batteries, wind,” Leah Stokes, a professor of environmental politics at the University of California, Santa Barbara, told me. “But geothermal is one of the things that can fill that gap.” Investment follows fashion—and geothermal has become fashionable—but it’s not only investors who appear confident about geothermal. Wagner called this “the moment when Ph.D.s meet M.B.A.s.”
The role of geothermal becomes easier to see when looking beyond the local noise of discussions in America. “You know, there’s this thing called the curse of abundance,” Agnelli Kafuwe, the principal energy officer for the Zambian government, told me. Typically, the phrase refers to countries driven into corruption and misery by their oil endowments, but Kafuwe was referring to Zambia’s seemingly boundless supply of hydroelectric energy, from power stations such as one at the Zambezi River’s Mosi-oa-Tunya, the natural feature known to most Americans as Victoria Falls. For many years, hydropower met practically all of Zambia’s energy needs, even powering its lucrative copper mines.
But the country’s population grew rapidly, and in 2015 a severe drought hit, forcing Zambia to turn to diesel to make up the shortfall in hydropower. Mosi-oa-Tunya looked less like a world-renowned cataract than like dry, rocky cliffs. There wasn’t enough water to keep the hydropower plants running properly. Lengthy blackouts became common. In 2024, a new drought arrived—the worst in at least a century—and power was cut off for eighteen to twenty hours a day. As in many countries, the leadership had thought about geothermal in the nineteen-seventies but had lost interest; Zambia hadn’t needed it enough then.
In addition to copper mining, extensive salt mining occurs in northern Zambia. “These mining companies, they would drill down maybe fifty metres, and guess what comes up?” Kafuwe said. “Geothermal steam, of a very high, very good temperature.” The country’s mining history also meant that subsurface maps of its territory already existed—useful for planning geothermal wells. One former mining-company head, Peter Vivian-Neal, now heads Kalahari GeoEnergy, a company he founded after seeing an egg being boiled in a natural hot spring while he was on safari. The company has drilled exploratory wells, done flow tests, well tests, and modelling—it aims to have a demonstration power plant running soon. Vivian-Neal is optimistic that a successful demonstration will bring in more investment. “We could not have got to where we got today if my family hadn’t put in the money to start with,” he told me. “But I’m quite sure that the next person will find it easier. They’ll say, ‘Oh, yes, look, Kalahari has made this a success, therefore we’re going to make it a success, and we’ll do it even faster.’ ”
The header: Senate committee’s inquisition threatens free speech, Labor senator Michelle Ananda-Rajah and most of her committee seek to silence groups who dare question the wisdom of destroying Australia’s environment and energy systems in the pretence of saving the planet. It’s called tyranny.
The caption for that incredibly intimidating snap of power lines stretching off into the void: Labor senator Dr Michelle Ananda-Rajah, was locked in a robust exchange over climate science at a senate hearing.
The reason why the pond suggested geothermal to the hive mind is that it's incredibly hard to provide variations on the current talking points, and the unreformed seminarian is perhaps the least able at the job ...
There was a telling moment at one of its hearings in Melbourne. The select committee’s deputy chairwoman, Labor senator Michelle Ananda-Rajah, was locked in a robust exchange over climate science with Institute of Public Affairs executive director Scott Hargreaves and his deputy, Daniel Wild.
Ananda-Rajah: “Yesterday we heard 99 per cent of scientists now believe. The thing about science is it is contested until it is not. When consensus is arrived at, it is not contested any more.”
Hargreaves: “I completely disagree with that conception of science.”
Ananda-Rajah: “So you would be the outlier.”
Wild: “That is astonishingly authoritarian.”
Ananda-Rajah: “Certainly it is; that is how science works. It is contested until it isn’t. There is such an overwhelming body of evidence.”
Cue a snap of the villain, closely related to that solar Sauron, Michelle Ananda-Rajah during Question Time in Parliament House, Canberra. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Gary Ramage
The Ughmann, famous for his field research and peer-reviewed publications, would have none of that nonsense, and luckily had a book of quotes to hand (perhaps the same one as used by Our Henry):
Karl Popper, one of the 20th century’s most influential philosophers of science, argued that science progressed through falsification, not consensus.
Albert Einstein, the father of modern physics, warned that “no amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong”.
Richard Feynman, Nobel prize-winning physicist, insisted that science was “the belief in the ignorance of experts” and rested on relentless scepticism.
Thomas Kuhn, historian and philosopher of science, showed that scientific consensus often collapses suddenly.
But even this cast of giants is not beyond question. I would not want the senator silenced or censured in arguing her ideas, no matter how much of an outlier she is from mainstream thinking.
The problem is she, and most of her committee, would extend no such courtesy to those who demur from their dogmas.
They seek to remove the right to dissent from groups such as the IPA, the Centre for Independent Studies, and a host of regional community groups who dare question the wisdom of destroying Australia’s environment and energy systems in the pretence of saving the planet. Most are not arguing the toss over humanity’s role in climate change. They are disputing the public policy consensus on the solution.
This committee is investigating how false or misleading information about climate and energy spreads, who is behind it and how it affects politics, the media and public debate. It stands on the shaky foundation of a certainty that there is an unambiguous consensus on every element of both.
The IPA? A pathetic far right lobby group that did the work of big tobacco? And is so blinded by ideology and assorted fixations that it remains completely clueless?
Then came another AV distraction, a reptile speciality when times get tough, Global leaders and ministers from climate-vulnerable nations used the COP30 platform on Tuesday (November 18) to highlight the escalating impacts of climate change and reiterated calls for urgent global action aligned with the 1.5 degrees Celsius limit set by the Paris Agreement.
The Ughmann turned to conspiracy theories ...
This is just the opening gambit. In June, the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights and climate change, Elisa Morgera, delivered a report calling on states to “defossilise knowledge” by criminalising what it defines as misinformation, misrepresentation and greenwashing by fossil fuel companies, as well as criminalising media and advertising firms that amplify it. It also wants bans on fossil fuel advertising, prohibitions on industry lobbying, and criminal sanctions for those deemed to obstruct climate action.
In the long tradition of the political maxim that says you should never hold an inquiry unless you know the result, the Senate committee chairman, Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson, declared his hand the day the Australian inquiry was born.
“For decades, vested interests have been waging a global war of disinformation against the clean energy transition, including environmental and climate legislation, and these vested interests have recently achieved significant political success in nations such as the US,” he said in a press release.
So, the conclusion has already been written and the committee’s majority is now just trawling for evidence to support its case.
Its agenda is clear: to rigidly define what can or cannot be discussed, and propose that laws be passed to silence dissent. Most of its members are also convinced that there is a vast right-wing conspiracy funded by dark offshore money that is fuelling community-level opposition to wind, solar and transmission projects in Australia.
Who could possibly think that News Corp is part of a vast right-wing international conspiracy?
Don't they just celebrate coal because it's the right, scientifically correct hive mind thing to do? New Hope Corporation's Bengalla coal mine in NSW. Picture: Mike Armstrong
Ah, there's nothing like an open cut producing a lunar landscape to warm the cockles of reptile hearts ...
And now for the big reveal. It turns out that the unreformed, unrepentant former seminarian is actually a huuge environmentalist ...
It is true that millions of dollars a year are pouring into the country through the Sunrise Project, but the committee majority is not interested in that because it supports their cause.
This cash is sprayed through a bewildering array of environmental groups, as long as they back the development of industrial wind and solar and oppose nuclear energy and all forms of fossil fuel. The result is a Faustian bargain that ensures there are few friends of the Earth in the NGO-industrial complex when the wilderness is bulldozed to grow a forest of turbines.
In full disclosure, I was at the Melbourne hearing to sit alongside one of the community groups that does defend the local environment, Rainforest Reserves Australia. I have reported its resistance to wind farms in north Queensland and formed a friendship with its vice-president, wildlife photographer and cartographer Steven Nowakowski.
Nowakowski has produced the only publicly available map of all existing and planned wind and solar farms in Australia. He was pilloried for exposing their massive footprint, despite it being meticulously documented. No government agency has produced anything similar. The day after the map went live Nowakowski’s computer was hacked and all of the thousands of data points that built it were stolen.
Why it must be part of a vast international conspiracy, as the reptiles cut to a distracting snap, Greens Senator Peter Whish-Wilson speaks to the media in Hobart in May, 2022.
The unrepentant ex-seminarian wrapped up proceedings with a declaration of war ...
When it was pointed out that Whish-Wilson opposed a wind farm in Tasmania, he argued that was different because he had been “campaigning relentlessly against fossil fuels – something I’ve not seen from Rainforest Reserves”.
Like all of us, Whish-Wilson lives in a world that is marinated in coal, oil and gas. There is not a single structure, appliance or object in the modern landscape that wasn’t made by, moved by, or built from hydrocarbons. So, alas, every member of the global opposition to fossil fuels is living a lie, and they can sustain their position only by lying to themselves.
In Australia the government’s blueprint for a wind-and-solar-dominated eastern grid to 2050, and beyond, demands enough gas to power 15 million homes. The system will not function without it. Yet Whish-Wilson, and many in Labor’s ranks, oppose gas.
Is it disinformation to point out that this is absurd? It is the definition of tyranny to be forced to agree with a fantasy.
The Senate is not engaged in an inquiry; it is running an inquisition. If politicians and bureaucrats get to determine what is true, then every Australian is one opinion away from being labelled a threat. It is hard to overstate how serious this is.
Now we are at war. This is no longer just a skirmish to keep the lights on, to protect our jobs, industry and our local environment. This is a battle for the democratic right to disagree. It is time to mobilise. Speak out. Support Rainforest Reserves Australia in any way you can.
As Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote, “The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie.”
The pond does hope that the reptiles wake up to geothermal soon.
How else will the plucky batter be able to stand up to the fierce head-high attacks from relentless windmill seamers and Sauron-loving solar swingers?
Okay, that was the detail, here's the immortal Rowe's bigger picture ...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.