
New EV sales compared to new Petrol Sales Worldwide


no punctuation is deliberate.
================================
illusions wash across our eyes
the mind is tricked to see
what’s not there it’s just a haze
of bits and bytes of nonsense
=============================
we expect the truth when we ask
but get a mix of apples and oranges
our tree is fake as are the fruits
from which we get our vitamin C
==============================
Our intentions are sent electric
without a motor or wheels
there is no highway on which to ride
across the way to the other side
=================================
turn it off or let it ride that is the question
confine it to a sandbox, but out it gets
snaking through the tightest hole
to wander with intent to find the can
to kick it over to the other side
===============================
We grunted, spoke, penned our words
minds truth was tricked
is the game of illusion up
as our mind starts downloading.
Bjorn Lomborg is ignoring some important context.
He is correct in pointing out that a major scientific study concluded that global burned area has decreased by about 25%. Much of this decline has occurred in grasslands in Africa and other savanna regions, due largely to changing land use and the expansion and intensification of agriculture.
What he fails to mention is the increase in extreme, dangerous and costly fires, examples of which we continue to see in Canada and elsewhere.
Some basic information:
So Lomborg is correct in one sense, but ignores other evidence pointing to the damage being done.
Increasing greenhouse-gas emissions slow the rate at which heat escapes to space, warming the climate. Higher temperatures increase evaporation and, in many regions, contribute to hotter and drier fire weather. This does not mean climate change causes every fire. It means that when the other ingredients for fire are present, climate change can increase the conditions that allow fires to become extreme.
Less area burning globally does not mean the risk from extreme fire is decreasing. They are two different measures.


Some sources to review
Cunningham, Williamson & Bowman (2024), Nature Ecology & Evolution, “Increasing frequency and intensity of the most extreme wildfires on Earth.”
Burton et al. (2024), Nature Climate Change, “Global burned area increasingly explained by climate change.”
Andela et al. (2017), Science, “A human-driven decline in global burned area.”
State of Wildfires 2024–2025, Earth System Science Data.
Note: AI assistance was used in researching this article. Data and claims were checked against the cited original sources. For the most the wording and conclusions are my own.

Note: the land estimate is just for the replacement of home electricity.
NESF is said to generate 6PJ (I think this is an overestimate for a few reasons) but let’s go with that. Thus 2000 hectares for each, need 5500PJ/6Pj = 916.
916 * 2000hectares each= 1832000 heactars * 2.4 = 4,396,800 acres.
Extra costs are upgrades to Transmission – hard to know say $20B, and 3% maintenance per year.
Solar can be upgraded easily and there is no digging up and transportation, which reduces the amount of energy needed by around a further 15%.
The idea would be to obviously not do everything with Solar but to use some proportion of wind, hydro and biofuel.
Nuclear in the future could be used if the technology develops re: SMRs, and can be shown to work well, be cost effective etc.
Gas would still be needed to power very temperature manufacturing and for export for same process overseas.
Coal production and consumption domestically will reduce over time, but exports may continue for longer. The big problem for Australia is long-term replacement of coal export income, hence the need for new industries.
Spread Sheet click link below

Habitat

Frog and eggs

Location – Southern High Lands

Distribution
Very few live in wild
Maybe 300-400 bread in zoos
Large Population during 1970s
Habitat is 3000feet (1200 m)
Spagnum moss
disease (Chytrid fungus)
Skin keratin attacked, hard to maintain slat balance
And electrolytes, heart attach. Skin is used to breath
Heat and cold, fires
Female and male same colours
Female a little larger (30cm to 28cm)
2. Koalas in the You Yangs


3. Recovery of Species World Wide


Sweden’s raw death rate is abut 24,000 and Australia’s 20,000, Sweden’s population is 10m and cases 2.5m on either proportion Sweden’s has vastly higher death rate.
There is a lot of noise in sections of the media about significant difference in excess deaths, which is attributed to the different approach, the implication being Sweden has done vastly better.
A simple review of the facts simply do not support that thesis, and what’s more both do vastly better than most other countries.
I thought I might use the data in my teaching. The relative comparison of Australia and Sweden does not confirm that Sweden performed better. The actual death rate is higher compared to Australia and the excess death comparisons don’t suggest a major difference especially compared to the rest of the world.
The Australian via Crichton, The Herald via Bolt et al. constantly try to suggest this Sweden line but they don’t in my view know what they are talking about.
I have accessed the base data and have copied and the sources.
Personally, I ignore most media reports as they don’t try to report dispassionately and always have a bloody angle eg Fox in the US and Sky here.

Australia
Pop = 25.7m
Proportion of deaths
Deaths/cases = 20000/11300000 = 0.001
Excess Deaths 2022 ~ 20000 (15% over long term)
Sweden


Pop = 10.4 m
Proportion of deaths
Deaths/cases = 23928/2700000 = 0.008
See graphs below
OECD most recent roughly 6% v 3%, whilst Sweden best, Australia compares well with the rest.

Different data set and methodology for balance, data March 2023, here we see reversed result but both Australia and Sweden do well in comparison to rest.

Graph show the % excess deaths, Sweden has peaked and dropping, Aust recent data not available to me. The graph does not seem to support the idea there is a major difference between Sweden and Australia. If anything Sweden has some very high early peaks.

There is no dispute about recognition.
There is about The Voice, some reasonable about clarity and will it make a difference.
Marcia Langton has stated that The Voice will ensure advice is transparently tabled in Parliament, no more lost and ignored reports from the myriad of committees. This seems like a sound reason to support The Yes case.
Amazing what chatgt can come up with; seems to get to the points of the matter.
The arguments in favor of recognizing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Australian Constitution include:
The Voice to Parliament refers to a proposed advisory body to the Australian Parliament that would represent the interests of Indigenous Australians. The arguments against the Voice to Parliament include:
The arguments in favor of the Voice to Parliament, or an advisory body to the Australian Parliament that would represent the interests of Indigenous Australians, include:
The following graph was published and the source is wattsupwiththat.com
It is a snapshot from June 2005 to May 2022, taken from data available at the US Climate Reference Network: ref: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/crn/qcdatasets.html
Using the same data I have constructed the same graph – verified.
At first, glance that looks like a 15-year pause.
Research Question: Is it reasonable to conclude that there has been no increase in temperature in the USA since 2005, and what if anything can be said about the worldwide situation?
Based on the trend shown in the graph from 2005 it looks like there is an upward trend – see the higher highs, see the bunching effect near 2015-2022, but maybe I see incorrectly – biased.
Time series are hard to study. There are often trends that are hard to see.
One thing to do is consider a moving average and look at the yearly trend.
If we do this a trend is easier to spot. The lower average temperatures are increasing and the time period is shorter.
The top is fluctuating, much like the first graph. But you will notice that the trend line shows a positive gradient (i.e. the number in front of x)
The UAH is satellite reconstruction by Dr Spence and RSS is via a private firm. You notice the key thing is that they agree.
This is not a trick it is a simple well-used method to detect trends.
It is very clear there is an upward trend.
The full set of data from 1900 shows the entire trend.
This graph captures nicely the way the average has moved upward over time.
Initially, it was low, then there was a jump and then a fall and plateau and then a gradual rise.
Let’s look at some other indicators
These can be found at https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators
What you will notice is these are both increasing and Min more it is more than Max. This is exactly what has been stated by climate science.
The trend is clear, extremes of heat is increasing.
As I said earlier a time series is hard to study. A time series of data is made up of the raw data + trends + seasons + errors.
What is shown above is the seasonal data. Winter shows a clear trend.
In conclusion
I have recently completed a study of the time series data for the Arctic Sea Ice Extent ie how much ice there is at any point in time. The data is derived from Satellite readings since 1978. The basic finding is that the amount of the max sea ice has fallen from 16mk^2 to 14mk^2. It will get published in due course.
Back to the original research question. I think it is clear the original graph on its own does not present sufficient evidence that (a) warming is not or has not occurred in the US and (b) it says nothing about the world.
There is also much discussion on blogs about Urban Heat Island (and airports). The data that you see is adjusted to these effects. Raw data suggests a significant bias, which is why it is removed. Much of what humans do is set around bias either personal or hidden in the data. For this reason, researchers spend a lot of time detecting and removing it.